Anti-Smoking Nazi info needed...

[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?

[Raycpa]

Why take any risk you don't have to ?

[SheLion]

Oak Ridge Labs, TN & SECOND HAND SMOKE 

Statistics and Data Sciences Group Projects

 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?"

[SheLion]

Quit! I hate leaving places where people smoke, clothes, hair.. everything stinks!!!

Poor baby.  Too bad you hang out with people who haven't discovered personal hygiene yet.

Quit! I hate leaving places where people smoke, clothes, hair.. everything stinks!!!

Poor baby.  Too bad you hang out with people who haven't discovered personal hygiene yet.

[SheLion]

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.

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?

[SheLion]

Anyway, just tell him the dna mutations which result in cancer take time so going into one smoke filled room is hardly going to do anything.

Plus, if this guy is that paranoid, he probably isn't much fun to be around anyway.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

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.

[GoLightly]

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!

[SheLion]

We were talking about this in email:

Re: http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20050309/1a_bottomstrip09.art.htm?POE=click-refer

 

Oh puhleeeeze is right.  Not even a month ago there was this study (from the article pasted below):

 

"No associations were found between breast cancer risk and exposure to household passive smoking"

 

Also, ACSH recently ripped into Samet on his air pollution study of 2000 at http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.479/news_detail.asp

 

With a follow-up column (like a Part II) that includes this:

 

"The weak Samet,(8) Pope,(9) and Six City(10) studies provide opportunities to show how the scientific community has been corrupted by the aggressive environmentalist political agenda."

 

http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.483/news_detail.asp

And finally, ACSH just released this at the beginning of the year:

 

America's War on "Carcinogens": Reassessing The Use of Animal Tests to Predict Human Cancer Risk:  The ongoing attempt to purge our air, water, and food supply of traces of any synthetic chemical that causes cancer in animals is suspect in itself, but it becomes even more absurd when one considers that nature abounds with chemicals (including those in the natural food supply) that cause cancer in animals.  The more we test both natural and synthetic chemicals on animals, the more of them we must classify as “carcinogens.”

http://www.acsh.org/publications/pubID.990/pub_detail.asp

 

Which I bring up because according to this USA Today article they relied heavily on animal studies for this piece of junk (and for good measure meta-analysis from what I gather)

 

(Below is the article I mentioned at the top of this email):

 

http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/hliving/smobrca.html

[Arkie2]

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.

[GoLightly]

I'm glad to hear you enjoy what the ban in NY has done for you. Maybe you'll help me getting all of the things that cause me misery to get banned too! Dogs, cleaning supplies, perfumes, air conditioning & spring flowering trees must go!!

I'd be so much happier without the watery, red & puffy eyes, the headaches, the violent sneezing fits that continue long after I'm exposed, sometimes waking me up at night...

[blackeagle]

bump

[SheLion]

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!

[SheLion]

[eccentric]

I couldn't get a job at the Federal Agency to Restrict Tobacco. Although indoor smoke and even perfume may irritate my sinuses, I never understood how it could be a problem outdoors.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

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.

[zencycler]

While I generally support private establishments being allowed to cater only to smokers, I think its ultimately a bad business decision.

Smokers represent 25% of the population, and the other 75% generally don't want to smell it.

What ticks me off isn't private establishments, but public areas - including outdoor areas - where non-smokers may be subjected to the smell of a smoker, with little recourse. Such as waiting for a train on an outdoor platform.

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.

It's smokers like these, in part, who have caused a backlash against smoker's rights to quietly enjoy their bad habits in private areas.

[Arkie2]

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.

[TAdams8591]

Looks like you came to the right place. SheLion does EXCELLENT WORK!!!!!! I have bookmarked this thread. I thank you too.

[SheLion]

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.

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???

[SheLion]

Looks like you came to the right place. SheLion does EXCELLENT WORK!!!!!! I have bookmarked this thread. I thank you too.

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