Surgeon chap says secondhand smoke bad

[Dis]

smoking is the life blood of my state. People cannot gamble without smoking.

I am subjected to enourmous amounts of second hand smoke in the course of my job. But hey, it's a choice. I could always work at McDonald's or something.

[Arrian]

Well, I don't really feel that way. I feel the same as I did pre-quitting, both physically and emotionally. And I don't feel like convincing others to quit (my quip to Ming notwithstanding).

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Dis
smoking is the life blood of my state. People cannot gamble without smoking.

I am subjected to enourmous amounts of second hand smoke in the course of my job. But hey, it's a choice. I could always work at McDonald's or something.

Ick. Even when I was a smoker I hated 2nd hand smoke.

-Arrian

[Dis]

Originally posted by Ming


And all I'm proposing is personal freedom

I just love how some claim their freedom is being infringed upon when they decide to walk into a known smoking establishment... if they don't want to be exposed to second hand smoke, DON'T GO INTO A SMOKING ESTABLISHMENT! But no, there suggestion is to impose on many other peoples personal freedom...

You are wrong Ming. How can a non smoker go out and party without being exposed to smoke?

We are forced to be hermits and not drink.

[Theseus]

Originally posted by Lancer
What I like is what others have already observed in this thread. Ever time someone quits it is the most amazing transformation. They see what happens to their health and realize what smoking has been doing to them. You don't see it when you are young and you start, or progress into a pack or two a day addict. Like the frog in the frying pan, you don't feel what it's doing to you until you can't stop. So you start hating yourself and your weakness, you get defensive about the whole subject and start argueing for your 'right' to inflict detrimental health effects on others. Why? Because the damn things own you. When you break that addiction you become so strongly anti-smoking, non smokers and smokers alike are amazed by your vehemence. All of a sudden they can smell a smoker a block away and realize that's how THEY smelled. The physical and psycological effects are off your back and your proud of yourself, proud you beat it, mad at the damn things, and getting healthy feeling enough to take the battle to the enemy.

So, with every smoker who quits you potentially get another person strongly against smoking in public places.

These bans are inevitable and much of the reason is us ex smokers, flush from our victory over addiction and tired of the stench. We also realize that a ban might help others quit. Nobody wants to be a social outcast.

Victory!

That's great. Seriously. It just has nothing to do with science or law.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Lancer
What I like is what others have already observed in this thread. Ever time someone quits it is the most amazing transformation. They see what happens to their health and realize what smoking has been doing to them. You don't see it when you are young and you start, or progress into a pack or two a day addict. Like the frog in the frying pan, you don't feel what it's doing to you until you can't stop. So you start hating yourself and your weakness, you get defensive about the whole subject and start argueing for your 'right' to inflict detrimental health effects on others. Why? Because the damn things own you. When you break that addiction you become so strongly anti-smoking, non smokers and smokers alike are amazed by your vehemence. All of a sudden they can smell a smoker a block away and realize that's how THEY smelled. The physical and psycological effects are off your back and your proud of yourself, proud you beat it, mad at the damn things, and getting healthy feeling enough to take the battle to the enemy.

So, with every smoker who quits you potentially get another person strongly against smoking in public places.

These bans are inevitable and much of the reason is us ex smokers, flush from our victory over addiction and tired of the stench. We also realize that a ban might help others quit. Nobody wants to be a social outcast.

Victory!

Yes...that's it!

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Ming


Just saying I'm wrong doesn't make it true

Nonetheless...you are.

I'm glad you included the word "anecodotal"... because that's all the "evidence" there is. Many things cause arterial blockage... but you are just picking on nicotine

Quite true, but the anecdotal evidence is pretty significant. High saturated and transfat diets are a big contributor as well...and no, I'm not advocating eliminating high fat diets! Nicotine is a highly addictive drug...it causes both physical and metal dependency. Most people can live without the Big Mac and fries if they choose to. Stopping smoking means breaking an addiction. They are very different in nature.

Now... is that "FACT" based on somebody who smokes 3 packs a day... or a person who may smoke 5 cigs a month or in a year???? There is no FACT that smoking a cig will certainly cause COPD. It depends on your body, and how much and how long you smoke...

A legitimate argument...to a point. Again...we are talking about a highly addictive substance. I don't suppose you are supporting the occasional use of heroin, are you?

As I've said... it's NOT the medical certainty that you seem to be implying...

I'm not implying...I am stating it as fact. And the American Medical association agrees with me...or should I now address you as Dr. Ming?

The infintesimally small percentage of 5 cigarette a year smokers being used as a defense to let the vast majority of smokers continue to harm themselves, others, and (economically at the very least) the rest of society just doesn't hold water. If you are a regular smoker and you don't quit...you WILL develop COPD.

It is highly "directional" but by no means overwhelming.
Those diseases usually appear in heavy smokers, and not as much in light or social smokers...

Light and social smokers tend to quit at early ages, whereas pack a day folks are hooked It is easier to kick an additction if you have less of a level of the addictive substance running through your veins. If light smokers live long enough, even they will develop COPD. Its like playing Russian roulette....heavy smokers just have more cylinders loaded. If you play long enough...you die.

Again... COPD is not definitive in light and social smokers... Just as people who eat fast/fatty food occasionaly aren't at much risk... but those that do so all the time and don't exercise are at great risk.

Excellent points about the benefits of exersize (or the detriments of not exercising??). However, there are two points here. There is no definitive proof that lack of exersize leads directly to death...there is with smoking and COPD.

There are statistics that PROVE you are more likely to hurt yourself if you drive a motorcyle without a helmet.

There are statistics that PROVE married men live longer than unmarried men (I guess you are advocating that all men MUST get married )

There are statistics that PROVE people who eat fatty foods and don't exercise are more likely to have heart problems...

Again... if you are going to use health as a reason... do it across the board.

No, those studies "prove" nothing...they demonstrate a likelyhood. You are using words that do not go together to twist a point. There does, on the other hand, exist proof that if you smoke, then you WILL get COPD. Not "likely"..."WILL".

Oh...and about the married thing...not on your life!!

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Theseus
Back on point:

Sorry.

[Ming]

Originally posted by PLATO
[q] Originally posted by Ming

No, those studies "prove" nothing...they demonstrate a likelyhood. You are using words that do not go together to twist a point. There does, on the other hand, exist proof that if you smoke, then you WILL get COPD. Not "likely"..."WILL".

No... that isn't true... Not all smokers develope COPD. And that's a fact. Yes, you are more likely too... just like my other examples.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Ming

Actually... there is no real proof that smoking causes cancer.

Speechless.

[Lancer]

Denial, wishful thinking, hope...

He's used to being in charge, can't get control over his addiction so he tries to vindicate it.

[Kuciwalker]

Er, actually, Ming, there is. A very, very large body of evidence.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Ming


No... that isn't true... Not all smokers develope COPD. And that's a fact. Yes, you are more likely too... just like my other examples.

True...many die of other causes before they develop COPD. However, absent an intervening condition, smokers WILL develop COPD if they continue to smoke. Let me point out, in your defense, that old age does take some before they develop COPD. That is the anomly that I think you are looking at. If they were able to keep going and kept smoking, they would succumb to COPD as well. That is the difference that genetics and lifestyle can sometimes contribute...some have a higher resistance. Eventually all smokers will sucumb to COPD...that is fact. The fact that it is much later for some than others does not change the inevitability of it.

This is what seperates it from your other examples...their is no inevitability (given no other intervening circumstances) to death by the things you have listed...merly a likelyhood. Once again, if you live long enough and you smoke, you will get COPD. For millions, that comes sooner rather than later. According to American Lung Association statistics, 10.7 million people in the USA have COPD...and 95% of them got it from smoking. The economic cost to our country was over $37 billion in 2004.

It is senseless to defend the right of people to do this to themselves and to our economy. Smoking (i.e. nicotine) should be outlawed...just like other harmful drugs that science and medicine have determined present a risk to the public health.

[GePap]

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 such thing as "second hand bacon".

As for drinking, there are strict laws against acts caused by someone under the influence of alcohol, partioculalrly in driving.

No one cares if you kill youself through stupidity. Its when you hurt others that its wrong. Make cigarettes than affect only the smoker, and let them kill themselves as they like.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ming

However, I do have a problem with the government telling privately owned bars and clubs that they can't allow smoking... People who don't want to be exposed to second hand smoke don't have to enter if they don't want to. They aren't being forced to being exposed to second hand smoke. This doesn't infringe on their freedoms... they can choose to enter or not. However, the owners of these clubs and bars are having their freedom infringed. Smoking is not illegal (at least not yet)...

Said establishments must get licenses and certificates from the public to ever operate, specially health departments which must insure that the restuarants cook in sanitary conditions. Since second hand smoke is a more likely problem for people's health than storing food at improper temperatures for a few hours, the public authorities that control whether you ever open a bar or a retaurant have every right to add a new health condition to running such an establishment.