2nd hand smoke...lets be clear you indocterated stupid fucks

[frigidweirdo]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

Ah, so there's no evidence, so it doesn't happen? Is that your argument? There's no evidence that if someone falls into the sun they'll die. Are you willing to fall into the sun?

 

[oreo]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

Ah, so there's no evidence, so it doesn't happen? Is that your argument? There's no evidence that if someone falls into the sun they'll die. Are you willing to fall into the sun?

You first--LOL

 

[80zephyr]

Well color me indocterated, whatever that means. My Grandmother died of lung cancer and never smoked a single cigarette but she lived in a small house with my Grandfather who chain smoked for 40 years. My piano instructor who never smoked a single cigarette died of lung cancer but he played smoky lounges all his adult life. I'm sure if I take a few minutes I can find a "study" that does find a link between second hand smoke and lung cancer but I don't need one.

Did they live in a high radon area?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

How about a link for that allergy claim.

I don't need a link I am an X smoker--I know exactly what it does. You talk to any X smoker and they'll tell you the same. Eyes start burning, sinus's act up, throat gets sore, etc.

So is my mother in law, doesn't bother her a bit. Maybe is all in your wittle head.

Your mother in law tolerates it because she is your mother in law. You get around an X smoker that you're not real familiar with and they'll you to take it somewhere else, or will walk away from you.

This is a common issue with X smokers. If you don't believe me, QUIT and wait a year and then get around some cigarette smoke--LOL

Yea I know the worse smoking Nazis are the ex ones

Can you please justify exposing others to second hand smoke?

Isn't smoking the most intrusive habit? When someone is smoking near another who does not smoke, why should the smoker not be asked to extinguish their cigarette out of common courtesy?

Deodorants, perfumes, etc., are toxic as well. Do you ask the same question of the people that use these items?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

OSHA has, for years, regulated exposure to chemicals in the workplace by providing rules for "safe" levels of exposure to people in the workplace.

Early on in the "smoking wars" the abolitionists petitioned OSHA to regulate SHS as a danger to the working public. OSHA responded that the chemical concentration of SHS to be so minute that OSHA wouldn't regulate
SHS.

"Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded."
-Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Ass't Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997


Today, facts don't matter. So, OSHA now limits SHS, EVEN IF the chemicals in SHS do not exceed safety limits.

Mark

 

[Nosmo King]

I don't need a link I am an X smoker--I know exactly what it does. You talk to any X smoker and they'll tell you the same. Eyes start burning, sinus's act up, throat gets sore, etc.

So is my mother in law, doesn't bother her a bit. Maybe is all in your wittle head.

Your mother in law tolerates it because she is your mother in law. You get around an X smoker that you're not real familiar with and they'll you to take it somewhere else, or will walk away from you.

This is a common issue with X smokers. If you don't believe me, QUIT and wait a year and then get around some cigarette smoke--LOL

Yea I know the worse smoking Nazis are the ex ones

Can you please justify exposing others to second hand smoke?

Isn't smoking the most intrusive habit? When someone is smoking near another who does not smoke, why should the smoker not be asked to extinguish their cigarette out of common courtesy?

Deodorants, perfumes, etc., are toxic as well. Do you ask the same question of the people that use these items?

Mark

I usually don't walk away from an encounter with someone with poor hygiene smelling of a trailer park ashtray.

 

[80zephyr]

So is my mother in law, doesn't bother her a bit. Maybe is all in your wittle head.

Your mother in law tolerates it because she is your mother in law. You get around an X smoker that you're not real familiar with and they'll you to take it somewhere else, or will walk away from you.

This is a common issue with X smokers. If you don't believe me, QUIT and wait a year and then get around some cigarette smoke--LOL

Yea I know the worse smoking Nazis are the ex ones

Can you please justify exposing others to second hand smoke?

Isn't smoking the most intrusive habit? When someone is smoking near another who does not smoke, why should the smoker not be asked to extinguish their cigarette out of common courtesy?

Deodorants, perfumes, etc., are toxic as well. Do you ask the same question of the people that use these items?

Mark

I usually don't walk away from an encounter with someone with poor hygiene smelling of a trailer park ashtray.

Deflection. Either you are worried about exposure to these chemicals or not.

Mark

 

[Nosmo King]

Your mother in law tolerates it because she is your mother in law. You get around an X smoker that you're not real familiar with and they'll you to take it somewhere else, or will walk away from you.

This is a common issue with X smokers. If you don't believe me, QUIT and wait a year and then get around some cigarette smoke--LOL

Yea I know the worse smoking Nazis are the ex ones

Can you please justify exposing others to second hand smoke?

Isn't smoking the most intrusive habit? When someone is smoking near another who does not smoke, why should the smoker not be asked to extinguish their cigarette out of common courtesy?

Deodorants, perfumes, etc., are toxic as well. Do you ask the same question of the people that use these items?

Mark

I usually don't walk away from an encounter with someone with poor hygiene smelling of a trailer park ashtray.

Deflection. Either you are worried about exposure to these chemicals or not.

Mark

I expose myself to personal hygiene products. I do not appreciate having someone else impose second hand smoke on me.

 

[ChrisL]

You can tell me that there is no "evidence" that second hand smoke causes health problems, but common sense tells ME that sitting in an enclosed smoky area and breathing all that smoke into my lungs is NOT healthy for me. Whether it causes cancer, emphysema or whatever, what difference does that make? I don't want any of those diseases, thanks.

 

[DGS49]

Smoking has become a secular "sin" to the Left, and the predictable result has been a mountain of "studies" "proving" that second-hand smoke causes all sorts of problems. This is a common phenomenon on the Left, but I won't go into other examples as they will simply be a distraction.

SHS is unpleasant in a number of ways, and it seems that former smokers are most susceptible to the petty irritations. Understood and agreed. It is rude to smoke in places where other humans cannot avoid the smell, etc., and considerate people do not do so.

In order to "prove" scientifically that SHS causes one or more diseases, it is necessary to compare the general population with the population that is regularly exposed to SHS, and to compare the incidence of the target diseases between the experimental group and the control group. What you are looking for is a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT difference between, say, the lung cancer rate of those exposed regularly to SHS and the lung cancer rate of the GENPOP. There have been many broad studies that have tracked, for example, the non-smoking spouses of heavy smokers vs the GENPOP, and as a general proposition, the lung cancer, emphesema, and other expected diseases are no more prevalent in the non-smoking spouses than they are in the GENPOP.

Of course, some non-smoking spouses do contract lung cancer, just as some non-smokers in the GENPOP contract lung cancer, for reasons that are not entirely understood. The assertion that, "My Aunt Sadie got lung cancer," is not proof of a statistically significant difference in society. In fact, it is a pointless, irrelevant observation.

The CDC has been preaching for decades the "fact" that SHS causes cancer and a number of other diseases, while the relevant studies have NOT SHOWN that this is a fact. In fact, they are inconclusive at best. Pregnant women shouldn't smoke if there is even any question that the carcinogens in cigs can get into the baby's bloodstream. Easy enough.

But the fact is that smoking in public is no more harmful and no more irritating than someone passing gas in an elevator or a bus. Less harmful than teenagers dropping "F-bombs" is a crowded theater. Some people are rude, and sometimes we have to take action to avoid various sorts of unpleasantness. Deal with it. The Gub'mint needs to stay the fuck out of the discussion until it is scientifically proven that SHS causes diseases. Which it isn't yet.

 

[Pop23]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

Ah, so there's no evidence, so it doesn't happen? Is that your argument? There's no evidence that if someone falls into the sun they'll die. Are you willing to fall into the sun?

Put a sign in space warning that the sun is hot. You want to jump in? Be my guest

 

[Pop23]

You can tell me that there is no "evidence" that second hand smoke causes health problems, but common sense tells ME that sitting in an enclosed smoky area and breathing all that smoke into my lungs is NOT healthy for me. Whether it causes cancer, emphysema or whatever, what difference does that make? I don't want any of those diseases, thanks.

Then don't enter

Pretty simple

 

[Pop23]

Smoking has become a secular "sin" to the Left, and the predictable result has been a mountain of "studies" "proving" that second-hand smoke causes all sorts of problems. This is a common phenomenon on the Left, but I won't go into other examples as they will simply be a distraction.

SHS is unpleasant in a number of ways, and it seems that former smokers are most susceptible to the petty irritations. Understood and agreed. It is rude to smoke in places where other humans cannot avoid the smell, etc., and considerate people do not do so.

In order to "prove" scientifically that SHS causes one or more diseases, it is necessary to compare the general population with the population that is regularly exposed to SHS, and to compare the incidence of the target diseases between the experimental group and the control group. What you are looking for is a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT difference between, say, the lung cancer rate of those exposed regularly to SHS and the lung cancer rate of the GENPOP. There have been many broad studies that have tracked, for example, the non-smoking spouses of heavy smokers vs the GENPOP, and as a general proposition, the lung cancer, emphesema, and other expected diseases are no more prevalent in the non-smoking spouses than they are in the GENPOP.

Of course, some non-smoking spouses do contract lung cancer, just as some non-smokers in the GENPOP contract lung cancer, for reasons that are not entirely understood. The assertion that, "My Aunt Sadie got lung cancer," is not proof of a statistically significant difference in society. In fact, it is a pointless, irrelevant observation.

The CDC has been preaching for decades the "fact" that SHS causes cancer and a number of other diseases, while the relevant studies have NOT SHOWN that this is a fact. In fact, they are inconclusive at best. Pregnant women shouldn't smoke if there is even any question that the carcinogens in cigs can get into the baby's bloodstream. Easy enough.

But the fact is that smoking in public is no more harmful and no more irritating than someone passing gas in an elevator or a bus. Less harmful than teenagers dropping "F-bombs" is a crowded theater. Some people are rude, and sometimes we have to take action to avoid various sorts of unpleasantness. Deal with it. The Gub'mint needs to stay the fuck out of the discussion until it is scientifically proven that SHS causes diseases. Which it isn't yet.

The fact is, that even the best studies never include the fact that many of those within those studies live in areas with high radon concentration. Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer and other lung problems. The second hand smoking nazis would rather that fact kept buried

 

[Wry Catcher]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

"“Passive smoking has many downstream health effects—asthma, upper respiratory infections, other pulmonary diseases, cardiovascular disease—but only borderline increased risk of lung cancer,” said Patel. “The strongest reason to avoid passive cigarette smoke is to change societal behavior: to not live in a society where smoking is a norm."

The above was cut and pasted from your link. I rate your thread a Half-Truth due to a misrepresentation by omission.

 

[Chris.fran908]

Second hand smoke doesn't kill but it makes it quite unbearable to be around smokers.

 

[Pop23]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

"“Passive smoking has many downstream health effects—asthma, upper respiratory infections, other pulmonary diseases, cardiovascular disease—but only borderline increased risk of lung cancer,” said Patel. “The strongest reason to avoid passive cigarette smoke is to change societal behavior: to not live in a society where smoking is a norm."

The above was cut and pasted from your link. I rate your thread a Half-Truth due to a misrepresentation by omission.

The ends justifies the means.

What a world to live in

 

[Pop23]

Second hand smoke doesn't kill but it makes it quite unbearable to be around smokers.

To some, that's a fact. But a pretty bad reason to create law taking property rights from business owners

 

[jillian]

There is no evidence and never will be one that 2nd hand smoke will kill you before you stuff your face with pizza to death..dumb fucks.

That is all...oh wait and this

Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer

A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, undercutting the premise of years of litigation including a Florida case that yielded a $350 million settlement.

The article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute details a study of 76,000 women over more than a decade, which found the usual link between smoking and cancer. Lung cancer was 13 times more common in current smokers, and four times more common in former smokers, than in non-smokers.

one bought and paid for study and you ignore years of data, you idiot?

reality:

• Secondhand Smoke Causes Cardiovascular Disease(http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/health_effects/index.htm#heart)

• Secondhand Smoke Causes Lung Cancer(http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/health_effects/index.htm#lung)

• Secondhand Smoke Causes SIDS(http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/health_effects/index.htm#sids)

• Secondhand Smoke Harms Children(http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/health_effects/index.htm#children)

CDC - Fact Sheet - Health Effects of Secondhand Smoke - Smoking & Tobacco Use

 

[jillian]

I hate second hand smoke because it smells disgusting and is extremely rude.

Same applies to regressives.

learn english

 

[ChrisL]

You can tell me that there is no "evidence" that second hand smoke causes health problems, but common sense tells ME that sitting in an enclosed smoky area and breathing all that smoke into my lungs is NOT healthy for me. Whether it causes cancer, emphysema or whatever, what difference does that make? I don't want any of those diseases, thanks.

Then don't enter

Pretty simple

Smoke outside. That's simple too.