Skip to comments.Anti-Smoking Nazi info needed...
Posted on 03/09/2005 1:33:14 PM PST by zbigreddogz
I need some help. I have a generally conservative friend who is completely convinced that everyone who goes to a smoke-filled bar more then once in their life is gonna die lf lung cancer, etc. And is working to get smoking in bars and resturants banned in my state :(
I've read studies that show second-hand smoke isn't nearly as harmful as the MSM tries to make it out to be, but I've been short of luck finding them online. Can anybody link me to them?
Last I heard, bars and restaurants were PRIVATE establishments. People who don't want to breathe smoke shouldn't go to the ones that allow it.
Follow some sage advice: You cannot use common sense to talk someone out of a position they didn't use common sense to get into in the first place.
She, Gabz, you ladies have any sources?
You might go to FORCES International evidence archives.
Some things are not curable. Even if you show your friend the kind of information you are seeking, it won't matter. The justification for the action might change, but trust me, it will continue.
Let me call you a WAAHHHHmbulance
I suggest going to the Penn & Teller "Bu115it" site
The most commonly quoted studies in arguing for the dangers of second hand smoke do not really support the dangers of second hand smoke.
There's a new study out today that claims second hand smoke contributes to breast cancer. This will of course be used to ban smoking on the streets and in all areas, such as apartments and motels where even those not directly in contact with the smoker might potentially, possibly, remotely be exposed to a whiff of smoke. It's going to get worse before it--well, it's not ever going to get better. Don't mention this study to your friend. It will only give him more ammo.
good one. I like that!
Ban campfires! Ban perfume! Ban all cleaning supplies! Ban wet dogs!
Well your quest is doomed...CNN is running today with the story of second hand smoke causing breast cancer.
I think I actually saw a commercial here in Canada that states that second hand smoke is more harmful than actual smoking.The commercial shows a mom smoking in the kitchen and the evil blue smoke floats to the living room where 2 innocent children are playing.(shock and horror all around)
I guess given their rhetoric in this commercial,the last scene should be the dad handing out the cigarettes to the kids,saying here let's fight the dreaded second hand smoke scourge...!
Just a tip: Your "friend" doesn't believe any of that nonsense anyway, he just doesn't like the smell of tobacco smoke. What does he do around smokers? Does he flee in panic, or grin and bear it, or stage a phony coughing fit? If he actually runs away from tobacco smoke as if it's radioactive then he's too stupid to be anyone's friend.
I am no extremest. All my grandparents died from smoking related diseases and my 36 year old sister is addicted bad. Smoking sucks!
The results were issued in typical junk science style via a quick-and-dirty slideshow presentation at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology (search). Six months later, the study still is not available to the public.
Slick junk scientists often choose the science-by-press conference mode of releasing results because they know their immediate audience likely will not be able to ask probing questions -- a tough thing to do when only sketchy details are hurriedly presented to people with no familiarity of the research conducted.
Many postings look more like a witch hunt than a scientific debate."
9-16-03 - Looking for a surer method of being ripped apart than entering a lion's den covered with catnip? Conduct the most exhaustive, longest-running study on second-hand smoke and death. Find no connection. Then rather than being PC and hiding your data in a vast warehouse next to the Ark of the Covenant, publish it in one of the world's most respected medical journals.
Dr Proctor said passive smoking could cause problems for asthmatics and there were people who did not want to be exposed to cigarette smoke but there was no scientific basis for a ban in public.
The world's leading health organization has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect. The astounding results are set to throw wide open the debate on passive smoking health risks.
Second Hand Smoke: The Evidence
Dozens of bar owners and representatives from casinos, restaurant industry trade groups and tobacco companies spoke during the two-hour open forum. Many of the speakers came to the forum from Canada, where several cities have passed or are considering totally banning smoking in restaurants, bars and bingo parlors. Most of the restaurant owners said they have lost or will lose up to 25% of their business if a smoking ban in enacted in their communities.
The argument that this is being done "for smokers' own good" is demeaning: our bodies are not government property. The argument that smokers cost society money is specious: about one third of us considerately die before cashing in on social security. The argument that smoke is harmful to others is nothing but a subterfuge: the risk of second-hand smoke exposure has been so outrageously distorted that it amounts to an outright lie.
In 1998 the link made by the EPA Report in 1993 between secondary smoke and cancer was thrown out in a Federal Court because the statistics were bent to support a predetermined conclusion and normal scientific guidelines were ignored.
THE EPA ETS FRAUD
THE WORLD HAS BEEN CHEATED BY THE ANTI-TOBACCO CARTEL
It may be politically correct to attack secondhand smoke, but it is not scientifically correct nor, in the Courts opinion, legally correct.
It doesn't matter, smokers here don't care. I have an eye condition and I can't go near smoke. This is not imaginary, I have a scar on my cornea and smoke is enough of an irritant to expand the scar causing a loss of vision.
I have had occasions where I couldn't go into a building because of the smoke. Last year I had to go into a Bingo Hall to get signatures on a nominating petition. I couldn't go in and had to sit outside in the freezing cold because I had the choice to freeze or lose my vision.
I had a great time in New York City this summer because I could go into any bar or restaurant instead of having to sit outside or stay in my hotel room. Not to mention that I didn't have to bring a plastic bag for my clothes that I would be taking home in my suitcase because they didn't smell like smoke.
Why take any risk you don't have to ?
I think any anti who tries to dismiss the findings of the U.S. Department of Energy labs at Oak Ridge, should be confronted with the question: "Are you saying that DOE researchers committed scientific fraud and that their findings on ETS exposure are untrue?"
Poor baby. Too bad you hang out with people who haven't discovered personal hygiene yet.
You are right. I post the links hoping a lurker can use them. But once someone hates a smoker, it will never change. Never ever. Plus, it gives them someone to pound on. I wonder who they would trash and bash if it wasn't for a smoker?
Plus, if this guy is that paranoid, he probably isn't much fun to be around anyway.
I also can't go out to any Irish Bars on my birthday, Saint Patricks Day, because again I risk blindness, so I get to stay home.
I'm allergic to many perfumes, many cleaning products, dogs & trees that blossom in the spring. Many air conditioners also cause problems for me. From my POV, they all suck!
Citing all the problems with all these studies won't matter to the press and anti smoking crowd when they begin to use the study to further restrict smoking. Some of these studies are even undertaken with the specific goal of obtaining a preordained outcome which is then used to terrify the public into accepting the preconceived solution. I expect to see the full court press beginning soon to further restrict smoking as a result of this study.
I don't give two cents. Let them ban the damn chit and be done with it. That way, I won't have to post any more threads on the smoking issue and I won't have to read garbage by all the so-call REPUBLICAN RINO'S in here!
Just remember: Once cigarette tax dollars aren't coming in anymore, you damn ANTI's dig deep and bend over. Cause they are coming after YOU!
Sounds like you have allergies, Claritin is a good drug and there are several others on the market that do not cause drowsiness. I take that because I also have allergies to pollen, grass, dust, cleaning products and a very servere allergy to cats.
Maybe something you like will be on the banned list next. Whatever it is I hope you enjoy being without it when it's gone.
Looks like you came to the right place. SheLion does EXCELLENT WORK!!!!!! I have bookmarked this thread. I thank you too.
You talking to ME? LOL! "I'm" the one that is trying to PROTECT the rights of the smokers. What makes you think I want it banned???
Thank you so much. I am seeing RED here.
This is one reason I stay away from the Yahoo Smoking Threads. The anti's over there are cruel, mean, vile and hideous.
I see enough of them in Free Republic who call themselves Conservatives. Go figure.
RINO'S and CINO'S
If you were standing out in the cold because of those pesky smokers, why ever did you need the plastic bag to keep the clothes that smelled like smoke away from the other clothes in your suitcase?
I don't give two cents. Let them ban the damn chit and be done with it.
"...Even worse are the smokers who walk off the train, take a deep drag of a cigarette, throw their butt onto the platform, and then re-enter the train, exhaling all of their smoke into a no-smoking train..."
Good luck trying to illustrate obvious inconsiderate behavior to hardcore smokers. They will go on and on about how tobacco smoke is just "another odor" and that it is absolutely no different than the smell of freshly-baked apple pie to others.
My other favorite is smokers tossing lit cigarettes out of their automobile sunroofs while I'm pedaling my bicycle or riding my motorcycle in the same lane. If it were a rare event, it wouldn't matter to me...but it has happened twice while on my bicycle and at least a half-dozen times on the freeway with my motorcycle.
While I don't think that courteous smoking should be banned, I do believe that associated laws (such as littering or causing hazardous driving conditions) should be enforced.
~ Blue Jays ~
There are some perfumes that cause me to go into coughing fits lasting several minutes on some occasions. And if I am around it long enough, my clothes end up smelling just like it! I say let's ban PERFUME!!!!!
Yes, I have some allergies, as wrote in one of my earlier posts. I have taken Claritin as a last resort, but I do not want to take it every day. I was on Seldane, until it was banned. Guess that makes me a tad bit gun shy. Besides, Claratin lessens my symptoms, but does not make them all go away.
Just an FYI: there is nothing better then a clean man with the smell of after shave and tobacco on them. I love it.
Some of the Men:
I see you're one of those inconsiderate bicycle riders who get in the middle of the traffic lane and pedal at top speed, 15 or 20 miles per. You might consider that you're pissing off the folks waiting for you to get over next time you get flicked with a butt.
Before I lost my site, I was able to go into a restaurant or club that had smoke. I would put my smokey clothes in plastic bags in my suitcase so they wouldn't stink up my other clothes or suitcase.
Now I can't go into a restaurant or bar that has any smoking, so I don't have to wrap up my clothes because they don't get stinky in the first place.
I know this is all fun and games for you, but I can lose my sight because of someone's addiction. I can go to very few restaurants and no bars in my state because of people's addictions. It's not funny.
Well, if they ban tobacco, then all the anti-smoking cry baby's in here will be hit next by the government. Be it banning something they enjoy or taxing it to high heaven. These people should be thanking the smoker's.
Just about every state in the Union uses cigarette tax dollars to balance the state budgets. If it weren't for smokers, where would the lawmakers get the money? Think about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.