Surgeon chap says secondhand smoke bad

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Arrian
The converts are always the worst.

-Arrian

Yeah, ever talk to a guy who used to be an alcoholic? Man... don't even think about even mentioning a beer brand!

[Wezil]

Originally posted by PLATO
Ban smoking now! It really is just plain stupid.

And the war against personal freedom rages on...

[Ming]

Yep... let's also ban drinking... dangerous sports... eating fatty foods... crossing the street... and anything else that might not be healthy

[General Ludd]

You wouldn't need to ban crossing the streets if cars are banned.

[Sava]

Originally posted by GePap
To Sava:



Grow up. And watch as smoking bans proliferate. Hurray for the march of sound public health policy!

aw pity...

no response, eh?

Well... too bad. It's a shame that the anti-smoking zealots are twisting the science of this and trying to make this a public health issue when it is really an issue with people not wanting to be around a cigarette smoker when they eat dinner.

Grow up you say? Who is the one who needs to grow up? Me, who uses somewhat immature tactics when debating (even though I thoroughly PWNED you), or anti-smoking zealots like you who set up this giant strawman?

Sure, smoking bans will continue to proliferate because people will continue to use government power to legislate their tastes... banning something they don't like as people like you continue to twist the facts and manipulate the science into further demonizing second hand smoke.

What bothers me is not that people aren't allowed to smoke. I could care less. In fact, cigarette smokers bother me (when I'm eating at a restaurant). That's not the issue. The issue is people like you who are LYING about the facts, distorting the truth, and using the legislative process for something that IMO it should not be used for.

Just be honest: Say you want smoking banned because it bothers you. You don't need to make up this bull**** about "NO LEVEL OF SECOND HAND SMOKE BEING SAFE!"

What a crock of ****. If I spend 8 hours in a smoke filled room, I'm not going to get cancer. But if I were to listen to the anti-smoking propaganda, that's the belief I would have.

Lies and misinformation piss me off. And it's coming from the anti-smoking lobby. Maybe if the science wasn't being manipulated and distorted and people would just be honest about everything, this wouldn't be such a big issue for me. Because I really don't like being on this side of this issue.

[Ming]

GePap and Sava... let's not keep it personal. Feel free to destroy each others comments... but no more of the "grow up" type of personal crap.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Yeah, ever talk to a guy who used to be an alcoholic? Man... don't even think about even mentioning a beer brand!

No, I haven't, thankfully.

Hey, in this sense I too am a convert. I quit almost 7 months ago (New Years). But I'd been weening myself for years before that and I quit because I knew I should, not because I got sick.

-Arrian

[PLATO]

Yes, I am a convert.

Yes, converts are usually the worst...simply because many are converted due to the incredible health risk that has been unveiled to them by actual experience.

I see that several have said that banning smoking is an assualt on personal freedom. I see also that there is one lame attempt to package banning smoking in with some hazardous activities as well.

Apples and Oranges.

The Government has banned or regulated plenty of different substances due to their health risk. Why should nicotine be exempt? Any amount of nicotine is harmful to the body. Moderate amounts of alcohol are not...moderate amounts of fatty foods are not...
When it comes to personal choice, everyone should be allowed to make decisions on how they wish to use substances that in one form or another may not be harmful. Nicotine is not one of these substances...it causes damage from the get go and provides almost no positive benefit.

Let's face it...the only reason that it is not a controlled substance now is because of the enormous amount of money involved. It is time that people give up petty arguments and make a stand for public health on this issue.

[Wezil]

I don't see it as the government's job to protect me from myself.

The Government has banned or regulated plenty of different substances due to their health risk.

Supports my point.

What I knowingly do to myself is none of the governments damn business. This is a very steep and very long slope.

[Arrian]

The secondhand smoke issue is one thing (there you are harming others w/o their consent).

Banning smoking, full stop, is ENTIRELY another.

-Arrian

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Wezil
I don't see it as the government's job to protect me from myself.

The Government has banned or regulated plenty of different substances due to their health risk.

Supports my point.

What I knowingly do to myself is none of the governments damn business. This is a very steep and very long slope.

Also a very old and well established slope. They are, after all, supposed to promote the general welfare. When it comes to regulating things that can kill you, I see no problem whatsoever. This is a lame argument IMHO...you want the right to cause your body harm? Fine. Just sign the waiver that you refuse all health care so society won't waste its resources on you.

It cost my insurance company $30K to keep me alive because of my stupidity. The only chance that I have of repaying even a small amount of that to society is to be vocal about the truth. It is ridiculous that we keep spending this kind of money to care for disease that can so easily be prevented.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Arrian
The secondhand smoke issue is one thing (there you are harming others w/o their consent).

Banning smoking, full stop, is ENTIRELY another.

-Arrian

No! The ecnomic impact to society is the same issue in a different form!

I just caused your health insurance premium to be some small amout higher. Are you happy with that?

[Ming]

Originally posted by PLATO
Also a very old and well established slope. They are, after all, supposed to promote the general welfare. When it comes to regulating things that can kill you, I see no problem whatsoever. This is a lame argument IMHO...you want the right to cause your body harm? Fine. Just sign the waiver that you refuse all health care so society won't waste its resources on you.

I would have no problem with this as longs as all fat people who eat fast food all the time, and all people who drink on a regular basis, and all people who don't exercise, and all people who drive motorcyles without helmets, and all people who drive to fast in their cars... sign the same waiver.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Ming


I would have no problem with this as longs as all fat people who eat fast food all the time, and all people who drink on a regular basis, and all people who don't exercise, and all people who drive motorcyles without helmets, and all people who drive to fast in their cars... sign the same waiver.

There is no proof that ALL obese people WILL have health problems...There is no proof that ALL people who don't exercise WILL have health problems...there is no proof that ALL people who drive to fast WILL harm themselves. Excessive alcohol consumption on a regular basis I'll grant ya . Nicotine use WILL cause health problems...it is simply a matter of time. Why would society want to incure a definite cost? If the matter is open to possibility, then we must come down on the side of personal freedom. If it is a definite, like smoking, then we must act to protect the interest of society as a whole. Ban smoking Now!

[Wezil]

Originally posted by PLATO
IMHO...you want the right to cause your body harm? Fine. Just sign the waiver that you refuse all health care so society won't waste its resources on you.

If I simultaneously get to stop paying the 'sin' taxes my government charges I would have made that choice. My taxes paid compounded over the last 25+ years would more than cover your $30K. I'm a net contributor to the system. (Was actually, I no longer pay cig taxes).

It cost my insurance company $30K to keep me alive because of my stupidity. The only chance that I have of repaying even a small amount of that to society is to be vocal about the truth. It is ridiculous that we keep spending this kind of money to care for disease that can so easily be prevented.

Ming answered this nicely.