Posted on 01/09/2006 8:19:48 AM PST by billorites
If this were the 'actual' case here. . .then most of America's baby boomers would have finger and toe deformities. . .
Now; feet not always pretty. . .but you are right and the truth is; this is not about 'babies or their fingers and toes. . .for sure.
One thing is for sure, abortion is a LOT more dangerous to the fetus than the mother smoking.... and you don't need any statistical analysis to make that finding!!!!
Sometimes the addicted are right. I'm not saying that is the case here, but the anti-smoking lobby plays fast and loose with it's agenda. In my town here, the parish passed a no smoking ordinance in the past year that governs public conveyances with very few exceptions. Part of the anti's (well funded) media blitz leading up to the vote was a radio spot that emphasized the fact that last year (2004) "753 Louisians died from the second-hand effects of smoking." I was thinking, that's a pretty damn specific number; because of my work, I'm pretty familiar with the provisions of HIPAA, and I figured if they had such a specific number, maybe they could produce a list of names...To make a long story short, I started pushing and found out that the fatalities from the, "second hand effects of smoking," included people who died in fires where a cigarette was determined or suspected to be the cause...
I'm a smoker. I know it's unhealthy, and I would never advocate or encourage anyone to start. Having said that, I'm not mentally deficient or predisposed to lying, particularly to "spread," my habit.
What the hell do THEY know about pregnancy???
In my experience the one child I know who was born with finger abnormalities was the child of 2 non-smokers so can I take it that not smoking may cause defects?
I agree but we all know that when an anti-smoking statement is made it is taken for fact.
Thats why I offered up what is called an out, as we may notice in the post its says in my case, which aleviates any possible attacks on said post as being anecdotal or without scientific merit.
They are already using this in custody issues. Pretty soon, you'll have to go to the neighborhood dealer to get a nickle bag of tobacco along with your B.C. Bud.
I smoked when pregnant, and all 4 of my children are higher than average in intelligence.
Maybe nicotine helps brain development.
Their fingers, toes, and other appendages are normal . And they were much healthier than their peers, in spite of all the second hand smoke they inhaled. And, get this, none of them are smokers today! Neither am I since New Year's.
I quit cold-turkey after 40 odd years of smoking, not because of health, but because of cost and social pressure. So far, doing fine.
So has anyone examined Lucy Arnez and Desi Arnez Jr?
Show me the data.
29%; 38%, even 78% are not statistically significant numbers.
More fear mongering by the jump on the bandwagon crowd.
My mom smoked all through her pregnancy with me, and probably through most of the labor. My fingers and toes are ok, but I am pretty ugly, and until I left home for college in 1976, I smelled like smoke.
I question the science behind this, but even if it were solidly shown that smoking causes birth defects, this thread would not look much different than it does now and will as the posts mount. Smoking never appealed to me, but those of you who like it must REALLY enjoy it. Light up and lighten up.
(And that newspaper photo out of Roanoke, Va is hilarious). I immediately printed it.
I had two cousins with webbed toes. My aunt smoked like a freight train. I also remember a girl in my typing class in high school who was missing a pinkie. I asked her about it once and she said she was born without a pinkie. I don't know if her mother smoked, though.
I smoked and my adult children's toes are fine. I would not smoke again. I quit back in 1987 and am glad I did.
I also question the science, but disagree if it were solidly shown to be true things would not be different on this thread.
But the point is there is nothing solid shown here. even a 78% "increase in risk" is so far from being statistically significant that it means nothing. If they were saying an increased risk of over 200%, we would be talking something entirely different.
My doctor told me that the stress from trying to quit would be more detrimental than the actual smoking. My gal turned out just fine.
This stuff makes me puke!
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.