Posted on 03/31/2012 1:50:13 AM PDT by EnglishCon
Making houses and cars smokefree is the only way to protect children from second-hand smoke, according to a new government campaign in England.
The TV and radio adverts show how pervasive invisible second-hand smoke can be.
Breathing it in can damage lungs and cause cancers, research has shown.
Snip
The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health said it wanted to see smoking in cars made illegal, when children are present. "I have no doubt an outright ban on smoking in cars would have the same positive results [as banning drink-driving]” - Prof Terence Stephenson Royal College of Paediatrics & Child Health
Professor Terence Stephenson, President of the RCPCH, said: "The state does have a duty to protect children's health and intervene where necessary.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
I think this is the same group that was pushing for a ban on *all* pointed knifes. For the good of the children, of course.
I bought one of the pointless kitchen knives, purely for the novelty value.
I bought one of the pointless kitchen knives, purely for the novelty value
we have one also it’s called a butter knife.Maybe next they will ban forks or make rubber prongs. Better cut down all trees you could poke an eye out with a twig.
“The state does have a duty to protect children’s health and intervene where necessary....No, the parents do. Government needs to stay the hell out of the way.
I'll bet there's absolutely no proof of that. Just some slap-dash studies where a tiny bit of correlation is taken to be causation.
Stop giving them ideas!
Just to give you an idea of the insanity we have here - my business owns a small van. It is registered to the business, not to me, to get the tax break.
I am the only person that drives it, never carry a passenger, and legally I am not allowed to smoke in it because it is a business vehicle.
Or, I bought a new kitchen knife a couple of weeks ago. A nice one, well made, good steel and a comfortable size. I had to show proof of age, despite having a fairly impressive and nearly totally white beard.
I can not drop off or pick up my grandkids from play group. Because I am male. That is not an assumption, that is a direct quote from the playgroup leader.
The list goes on and on. Forget the camels nose in the tent, the entire herd is in here.
My Grandmother is 100 and smoked unfiltered cigarettes until she was 75. Last year she got pnuemonia and fluid in the lungs and she recovered. So much for damaged lungs from smoking. Her only problems now are deafness and failing eyesight so I assume liberals will want to ban sound and light.
Liberals here in the US are reading this and salivating..
See also:
“Global Warming”.
Same same.
Ever noticed how the rise in cancer levels matches very closely the rise in using preservatives in food on a decade by decade basis?
I am not going to say smoking is not a factor - it is. That is pretty settled. It takes your lungs a while to recover when you quit smoking, and inhaling tars and carbon monoxide are not terribly good for you.
Time to bring this site out again.
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html
I have Pulmonary Fibrosis, a terminal lung diease. Never smoked.
I’ll not smoke around children. It is rude. If the kids are here, I go into the garden for a smoke, rather than doing it inside.
But that is my choice, in my own home. Nothing at all to do with the government. Most parents/grandparents do that now as a matter of course, just in case. My daughter and son in law doesn’t smoke, so I naturally do not smoke in their home.
I have seen evidence that second hand smoke has an effect - usually on children with poor diets. Nothing that I would consider rock solid proof, but there is evidence, and, personally, I’d rather be safe than sorry.
Oddly, your post triggered an odd association in my mind. The whole thing about killing children’s immune systems by using antibacterials everywhere. That is something to ponder on for later, I guess.
I started smoking when I was 10 - back in the 60’s. If someone ever invents a time machine, I will queue for months for the chance to go back and kick my 10 year old a$$!
I agree there is a lot of cod science being thrown about here. No attempt to look at all the factors involved.
And yet they want to legalize pot.
,,,,, I think I’ll go to my humidor and celebrate this thread with a Cohiba Lanceros ,,,
My Grandmother is 100 and smoked unfiltered cigarettes until she was 75. Last year she got pnuemonia and fluid in the lungs and she recovered. So much for damaged lungs from smoking.
For your ping list...
The nonsense anti-tobacco propaganda continues its march.
The cold fact, is that Adolph Hitler never achieved the level of control over the minutiea of the life of the AVERAGE German citizen, as the British government does today.
Ditto for the level of surveillance.
The ultimate fact, is that after all the mass murders and cleansing,,, they wanted a control freak society like the UK has “achieved”.
It distracts
Maybe if we had paid such attention to terrorism than the liberal agendas of second hand smoke, corporal punishment, capital punishment, guy rights, no child left behind, etc
911 wouldn't have happened.
>>Smoking was so healthy for my mother it killed her with lung cancer. Smoking was so healthy for me it gave me COPD.<<
Understanding that your mother died of a lung disease and knowing that you have come up with one yourself, I would think that it is genetic in your family.
Now they are finding that Radon has a big factor in Lung disease. People who have never smoked nor lived with smokers have contracted lung disease. As the rates of smoking go down, the rates of lung cancer are remaining the same. Why is that? If one’s house is on a slab with any part of it (including crawlspaced)exposed to dirt, Radon is a danger.
I’m not a smoker, but I don’t like junk science. When every list to prevent any disease has “stop smoking” included, this has become a big boogey man and a way to control people. It’s time to take a serious look at ALL the causes. Especially since obesity rates have skyrocketted as smoking has been reduced.
” Breathing it in can damage lungs and cause cancers, research has shown.
I’ll bet there’s absolutely no proof of that.”
Harvard Med did a study 20 years ago, that proved second-hand smoke was harmless....just an eye irritant. It was reported once, and buried for eternity : )
Harvard study was over 5 years, and used a large room, with no ventilation.
Yeah, a large room with no ventilation, like our living room.
Agree with you. It has been the tool they've used to spike the Gov't's intrusion into ALL health matters.
Once the 2nd-hand-smoke house of cards falls, the whole push for Gov health care falls with it IMO. Kind of like the increase in oil production and general prosperity will balloon once the Warming myth has been deconstructed.
The number of deaths from 2nd-hand-smoke is pitifully small. It's ridiculous that they've built a whole movement on it. In addition, many of those deaths were due to miners' exposure to coal, etc. not cigarettes.
LOL.....I did read the report. It disappeared faster than the Grace Commission : )
Deaths due to second hand smoke/man made global warming
two Big Lies.
No, it is not good to smoke around little kids..DUH : )
Here is the British Medical Journal peer reviewed study of over 30,000 Californians that were non smokers with smoking spouses that proves second hand smoke has no ill health effects.
http://www.bmj.com/content/326/7398/1057.full
The second hand smoke claims are pure crap.
FWIW
Results mirror Harvards’ shorter study.
Nobody dies from second hand smoke, period.
BTTT.
If everyone stopped smoking they’d have a bigger revenue problem than they did when they raised the top rate to 50%.
You all pay so much in road taxes that it's a wonder you can afford housing.
Nanny State PING!
Indeed, my Mom smoked around me in the car and the house all the time when I was growing up. In the car, she cracked the window, but nonetheless, I’m sure I had exposure there.
And here I am, without a hacking cough or lung cancer, apparently none the worse for wear.
“I can not drop off or pick up my grandkids from play group. Because I am male. That is not an assumption, that is a direct quote from the playgroup leader.”
==
Your other comments were proof of the insanity we are living with today,but not being able to pick up your own grandchildren makes my blood boil.
Can their fathers pick them up?
Is this legal?
I’m still smoking and will be 80 my next birthday.
Raised 5 healthy kids,all non-smokers.
The entire 2nd hand smoke thing is pure b*******.
Congrats on having a 100 year old grandmother——pretty neat.
Yep.
We had a conversation about this last week. Something reminded me of taking our then 9 yo daughter to a birthday party. I knew the mom, I knew the child, blah, blah blah. But I was on my way to work and told the mom that my husband would be picking her up. She looked at me and said "I don't know him, I hope he won't mind when I ask him for ID." I was dumbstruck. I finally collected myself and informed her he was her father and her own daughter knew him.
Is this legal?
Yup
“”I don’t know him, I hope he won’t mind when I ask him for ID.””
—
Astonishing.
Too bad men are the people who know how and are willing to kill the people who would harm other people for numerous indeterminate reasons for the sake of protecting their own people.
I cut her some slack because she had just gone through a really nasty divorce and custody battle, but I find it so disconcerting that so many people just assume a husband is not the father or a wife is not the mother.
It used to be the norm...........
How about paying attention to that kind of stuff and stop inventing BS like threatening to take away children because a parent smokes.............DUH
Sorry for my rant, but this hits too close to home for me.
Let’s see. As smoking bans have uniformly increased, at the same time people have also uniformly gotten fatter. I propose a theory...
Or even when there probably is causation, the risk increases from 1 in 100 million to, gasp, 10 in 100 million or something and of course they report that as "a tenfold increase in risk". (Which it is, but who cares, given the absolute magnitude of even the new, increased risk.)
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.