Anti-Smoking Campaign Is Anti-Freedom

Toogood ^ | 11/9/03 | Alan Caruba

[Great Dane]

Make that (16). Sorry.

Oh, what the heck, have a smoke, it's said to clear the mind.

[Quix]

ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO BE PRAYERFUL PREVENTIVELY AND IN PREPARATION is helping dark times come along?

I think we construe reality very, VERY differently!

[Quix]

Interesting.

Some other smokers seemed to make easy enough sense out of it.

Perhaps you could consider taking personal responsibility for your logic circuits.

LOL

[Dante3]

I don't smoke. But I'm more concerned about the mind pollution taking place on primte time TV.

[Just another Joe]

You still seem to avoid the INHERENT "IN-YOUR-FACE" attitude, stance, body language, habit features of smoking.

IMO, there are two reasons for that attitude, one of which is really not a reason and the other could be.

One is that smoking has been accepted by society for a very long time and some people have a problem accepting change. I don't consider this as a valid reason for having that type of attitude.

The other reason is that smokers, for the last however many years, have been demonized to the point that many will treat a smoker as a second, or third, class citizen, not entitled to the same rights, liberties, or courtesies as any other citizen.
They are reviled, set upon physically in venues where smoking is allowed, called worse names than some mass murderers, have legislation forced upon them using junk science as a basis for said legislation, and even have television commercials that tell other people they are not normal everyday folk that feel, think, or have thoughts beyond, "Where's the next cigarette coming from".
This, IMO, is a reason for the attitude. It's kind of like, "If I'm going to get the results anyway I might as well play the part."
I'm not saying it's right but I can, at least, understand it.

I DO try my best to avoid the "IN-YOUR-FACE" attitude until, and unless, I am treated to that attitude by someone else.

When a small minority, the true anti-smokers, use junk science to force legislation, smoking bans, on another minority, smmokers, it is a blatant misuse of the legislative system.

[Quix]

The connection between smoking and cancer is not ALL junk science by A VERY LONG SHOT.

Some folks seem to have an immunity to cancer regardless of smoking for 90+ years. But that's certainly not true for the vast majority.

I have some sympathy for your points. But not the junk science allegation.

[Just another Joe]

The connection between smoking and cancer is not ALL junk science by A VERY LONG SHOT.

Correlative but not causitative.

But that wasn't the junk science I was talking about.
The junk science is about ETS causing any medical condition.

[Quix]

Is ETS second hand smoke? Not up on the latest jargon in the field by a long shot.

There are good studies showing significant correlations between second hand smoke and an increase in risk, disease and even early death.

[Just another Joe]

Is ETS second hand smoke? Not up on the latest jargon in the field by a long shot.

Yes, Environmental Tobacco Smoke.

There are good studies showing significant correlations between second hand smoke and an increase in risk, disease and even early death.

Can you point me to those? I have looked, read studies, and read abstracts until I'm crosseyed.
I haven't found one study yet that states an increased risk for anything that holds up to peer review.
The three largest studies done to date found no valid statistical increase in risk, disease, or early death.
One of these studies was done by the World Health Organization, one done by the US government, and one funded by an anti-smoking organization for the first 38 years of the study and then defunded when they found out it wasn't going to give them the results they wanted. It was funded for the last two years of the study by a tobacco company.

Of all the other studies I have seen it's about 20% that find ANY increased statistical risk for ANYTHING and 80% that find no increased statistical risk.

[Quix]

YOU SOUND more up-to-date than I am.

I haven't read that extensively in it for some time. And, I haven't examined the studies THAT exhaustively.

I just have an impression in my mind that the last 2-3 studies I looked at seemed rigorous enough to me.

Hasn't there been a twin's study comparing twins where one partner was reared in a smoker's home and one wasn't?

Sorry, I am not likely to devote the time needed to track down the studies currently. Too many other irons in the fire.

[Just another Joe]

Sorry, I am not likely to devote the time needed to track down the studies currently. Too many other irons in the fire.

Cool
If I can find it I'll post a list of studies and their associated statistical risk.

[Quix]

THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

BEST if you could find a study of the studies.

Thanks.

[Great Dane]

#38........ Apology accepted, and thank you.

[Great Dane]

That doesn't mean I consider smokers to be devoid of any human value. I just want their olfactory assaults controlled.

But sir, you can't have the whole wide world according to you, insisting on it is selfish.

[Great Dane]

There are good studies showing significant correlations between second hand smoke and an increase in risk, disease and even early death.

There are even more good studies saying, "It aint so."

[pageonetoo]

"Generally, the marketplace will ensure that when different people have different contradictory desires in how they are served, different businesses will emerge that serve people differently." But the anti- crowd doesn't believe in the marketplace. They feel they can control others behavior because it "offends" them. My mom smoked Pall Mall NON_FILTERED for more than 30 years, before stopping. She will be 81 in Feb. My dad smoked the stinkiest cheap cigars he could buy (el productos, being his favorites, and believe me, I can still smell them, forty years later). They wanted to smoke, and they decided to quit. Both decisions were their choice. I smoked cigarettes from age 14 through 28. I stopped, more than 25 years ago, because I wanted to quit. I started smoking cigars a few years ago (real stinky EXPENSIVE ones, like macanudo, etc), and enjoy one with a glass of good port wine, or just lounging out by the pool, with a soda. The marketplace allows choice. Unwarranted government control of the marketplace creates artificial barriers to ..." life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." This WAS America, but is quickly becoming ameriKa, because people like you don't like what I do! Sorry, but I suggest you go somewhere else, if you do not want smoke in your eyes! Otherwise, shut up, and pass the ash tray!

[pageonetoo]

My post was not directed at you, but at the party quoted...

[antismoker]

The incidence of lung cancer is about 10 times higher in smokers than in non-smokers. Possible this is only a coincidence.

Do I hear a pro-smoker replying to your post?

...chirp...chirp...chirp...

Guess not.

[Max McGarrity]

I think it's anti-freedom to insist that I breathe smokers smoke AT ALL. p>I agree. Fortunately no one has ever "insisted" that you do so.

I think it's anti-freedom to require me to give a portion of my hard earned money to support lung cancer and heart failure treatments because of a willfully chosen rebellion against health and common sense./i>/p>

Then you have a beef with bad drivers, fat folks and many others in this society, but not with smokers--the ONLY group that pays their own way and more.

I have also observed that most smokers tend more than a little to hold their cigarettes somewhat akin to folks who enjoy showing their middle finger in a certain posture.

This observation has led me to realize, finally--in my 56th year . . . DUH! . . . that there's more than a little chronic rebellion running around loose in most smokers, if not all.

And you want require me to aid and abet your life destroying, assaultive, addiction against my will?

Of course not. You shouldn't have to do anything against your will. It should be your CHOICE to enter or stay out of places where people who WANT to be there go to smoke and relax. At the owner''s discretion, of course.

And you think that's FREEDOM?

Sure do. I'd like to hear your explanation of how having a choice isn't freedom.

[Max McGarrity]

Well said. Seems to me rebellion is what created this country.