Sonthert Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Surgeon General Carmona unequivocally stated that second hand smoking is dangerous.I am plowing through the report, all 729 pages of it, Here is a little jewel from it:These conclusions suggest that control strategiesfor indoor exposure to secondhand smoke cannotuse approaches based on HVAC system design andoperation. The benefits from HVAC systems includea number of critical functions that help to maintain ahealthful and comfortable indoor environment. Thisreview of their functioning shows, however, that currentHVAC systems cannot fully control exposures tosecondhand smoke unless a complete smoking ban isenforced. Emphasis added by me. HVAC is an air conditioning/heating system, like central air conditioning. Notice the last line...you can see where this report is going...and where we are going...you can't smoke in an apartment because the other people in other apartments will be inhaling the carcinogens from your second hand smoke. Total smoking ban...coming soon to a facist state near you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted June 27, 2006 Author Share Posted June 27, 2006 "Nevertheless, many challenges remain tomaintain the momentum toward universal smokefreeenvironments."Some more lovely crapola from the reportAnd:"Some states (California, Connecticut,Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, RhodeIsland, and Washington) have met the Healthy People2010 objectives (USDHHS 2000) that protect againstinvoluntary exposures to secondhand smoke throughrecommended policies, regulations, and laws, whilemany other parts of this nation have not (USDHHS2000). Evidence presented in this report suggests thatthese disparities in levels of protection can be reducedor eliminated. Sustained progress toward a societyfree of involuntary exposures to secondhand smokeshould remain a national public health priority."Which creates a small note of hope for us to be spared from the hordes of crazy, reactionary pseudo-scientist crusaders, if California is one of the models for the future, we might be safe...if Delaware is, we are all screwed...then of course, we just wait to see what the 2020 objectives are...lynch the smokers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Saskatoon already has smoking ban. You can't smoke inside restaurants, malls, bars, or even outdoor patios. You have to be something like 10 meters away from the enterances to a building when smoking outside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mushrat Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 Oh joy.... While north carolina has some restrictions...our leading legal crop is tobacco..so I think we have some time yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buford Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 The so-called "Indoor Clean Air Act" that was proposed this year in VA made it out of the Senate but was left in committee in the House, killing it for the year. In general the current Senate is a disgrace to VA, and this is yet another sample of that. At least the House tends to kill this kind of crap.[url="http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?061+sum+SB648"]SB648 bill tracking / history[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoner Posted June 27, 2006 Share Posted June 27, 2006 I don't know the story going on in Jersey, but jeez, this is sort of over doing it. I just wish all government would just back off sometimes. Libertarian aspect of myself. However, isn't tobacco already regulated by Congress, i.e. already having rules set up about it? Thus making it legal in that aspecet, regardless of area? I'm probably wrong though. However, I highly doubt that the morons on The Hill (and I mean both sides, for sure) will go that far and ban it outright. Strangely enough I'm rooting for the tobacco industry? Weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted June 28, 2006 Author Share Posted June 28, 2006 C. Everett Koop Threatened to regulate it using the FDA (cigarettes) citing that they were sophisticated poison delivery systems. Actually, the tobacco industry is remarkably unregulated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthHookah Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 has anyone here ever seen a penn & teller: bullsh*t episode on second hand smoke? i thought it was very effective in debunking the myths behind SHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c4r80n Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 i love that show, but i'm too broke to afford HBO or whatever premium channel its on.maybe they can make a DVD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HookahDuck Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Did anyone catch the 10 greatest myths, lies and rumors on CBS a few months back? Among them were "Drivers of red cars get more tickets/spend more on insurance", "The earth is running out of oil", "Opposites attract", "Global Warming", and "Second-hand smoke kills". Keep in mind this was on a heavily liberal mass-media-esque news network.It went on to prance several scientists on going on and on about how second-hand smoke kills hundreds of thousands each year, followed by an army of people with PhD's and Pulitizers explaining that no-one has ever been proved to have died of second-hand smoke. I remember several months ago on the board there was a med-student commenting on the gross over exagerated death tolls from tobacco in the media.The anti-tobacco lobby is absolutly obsessed in this country. As we've said a million times on this board, "WE KNOW ITS BAD FOR YOU." With that, leave us to our enjoyable, stress relieving, pass time and quit trying to proslitize your "health ethics" on others because of what you think. For a long time I gave in to all of the anti-tobacco propaganda- believe me, I do not by any means think it is a healthy activity, nor do I believe that there is not a strong link between it and cancer. However, I just recently sat down and I realized that it is one of the few things that I have accepted just because they have always said so. Like anything else that requires absolute belief on my part, I need to see some hard evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buford Posted June 28, 2006 Share Posted June 28, 2006 The anti-smoking crusade is similar to the anti-gun crowd in a lot of respects. Everything is in the name of "public health", and its easy to demonize something that has a negative aspect to it. Statistics can be used in any number of ways to distort a picture, and an emotional plea often factors heavily into it."Won't somebody think of the children?"How about, won't somebody think of personal liberty to live their life free of interference?Tobacco is harmful to the user. We all know that. Still, I should have the right to use it if I want to.I don't like cigarettes, and I often try to sit in the non-smoking sections of restaurants. That's a personal choice, but don't take away the restaurant owner's right to decide if he allows smoking or not. It's their business and they call the shots - don't like it, go somewhere else. Government intervention that steps on the cigarette smoker is also stepping on us, and like it or not they are our brothers in arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted June 30, 2006 Author Share Posted June 30, 2006 Penn & Teller's statistics about the number of people that contracted cancer from second hand smoke shows that second hand smoke isn't that dangerous...if at all. You probably get about as many carcinogens from a nice whiff of new car smell. UNLESS those numbers are being influenced by the pervasivness of second hand smoke...so many people are inhaling second hand smoke, almost everybody, that the numbers are "Washed" and can't be distinguished from smokers. At least that might be a good argument from the anti-smoking people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tessai Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 I work in the restaurant business and trust me the smoke from a wood burning grill is alot more consistent and drawn out over a lets say typical 8 hour shift. We smoke (cigarettes,hookah,what have you) in smaller intervals. I'm not a scientist but I would think that type of exposure would be alot more harmful than smoking would be. My point is "there" research has flaws and such do to "other" circumstances. There are alot of hidden variables that aren't accounted for when they dish out these "facts." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catalyst Paintball Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 Whoa, WTF?SHS is not that bad?And red cars dont get more tickets!?!?I have no knowledge on SHS, but red cars? I want to say that is wrong.And while I'm talking about cars:Drivers with expensive cars get picked on more often the the average Joe driver. This is not to exclude speeding tickets, parking violations, ect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lakemonster Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 The sad thing is that tobacco is what gets targeted. Smoke in general has carcinogens in it, and if breathed in.. they get introduced to the body. People who bitch about SHS should not burn their own leaves or barbeque..... or drive a car for that matter. all this is just a "red herring" to single out tobacco once again. Oh well, luckily, Im into first hand smoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted June 30, 2006 Author Share Posted June 30, 2006 How about: "Second hand smoke is for people who can't commit to things." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enima For Your Lungs Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 I'm breathing out poisonous carbon dioxide right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthHookah Posted June 30, 2006 Share Posted June 30, 2006 "I'm breathing out poisonous carbon dioxide right now..." nicely put! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted June 30, 2006 Author Share Posted June 30, 2006 Carbon Dioxide is an asphyxiant...not poisonous. Carbon monoxide, is on the other hand, "poisonous". More than two thirds of the air we breathe is made of asphyxiating gases (nitrogen, notably). An asphyxiant is not reactive in the human body (therefore not poisonous) but displaces or lowers the oxygen content of air, depriving the body of oxygen, causing oxygen deprivation effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterPiper Posted July 1, 2006 Share Posted July 1, 2006 Quoting Tangiers:"...Sustained progress toward a societyfree of involuntary exposures to secondhand smokeshould remain a national public health priority."Maybe it's just me, but it seems like a waste of time and resources for the government to focus its attention on such an issue when the solution is so simple:If you don't want to be exposed to SHS, then don't put yourself in a situation where you might be exposed to it! There are too many issues that need to be addressed by the gov't; the last thing we need is to clog up the system with things that can be dealt with on a personal level....and easily, at that. Sounds irresponsible, even... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonthert Posted July 3, 2006 Author Share Posted July 3, 2006 Jobs are drying up in this country and parts of the government are despirately trying to drive some industries under (tobacco) when they could be working to stimulate new jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hookah~rob~ Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 is it just me or does it seem like the government has basically put us back about 40 year for civil liberties as well as in moral bearing. alot of the stuff i see on tv reminds me of the mcarty trials with communism. now its smoker. no .. i have not now nor ever have been a smoker.... what is the world coming to. as long as i can smoke in my own house then they can go worry about other problems. like the 200 million dollar deficit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c4r80n Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 ok ok....you can have cigarettes....BUT you can't smoke them or you'll get arrested.like guns. the right to bear arms. but you can't shoot them or you'll go to jail. and you can't carry them around anywhere but inside your own home.are cigarettes facing the same doom? DOOM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skimo Posted July 12, 2006 Share Posted July 12, 2006 theres no way that would ever go through, as many people they would have to lock up theres no way it would last if they did lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buford Posted July 12, 2006 Share Posted July 12, 2006 Just speaking of tobacco products as a whole, I wonder how snus is going to be labelled when that gets sold here. It is being test marketed in a few places in the US (though not here) under the Camel brand starting this month. Snus is also known as "Swedish snuff", it's a Swedish product that's basically like dip. The interesting thing about it is that the tobacco is air-cured, which does not introduce nitrosamines (known carcinogens) into the finished product. The application of heat to tobacco creates nitrosamines, so all flue-cured and fire-cured contain them, and burning any kind of tobacco produces them. Besides having no nitrosamine content, for which I believe Sweden has even allowed the removal of "cancer warnings" from packages since there is no scienific proof that snus can cause cancer, apparently it is also high in antioxidants. Besides the nicotine content, it actually seems fairly [i]healthy[/i] to dip snus.The lack of scientific evidence that snus can cause cancer and that it contains antioxidants that can even prevent cancer will no doubt throw a real wrench into the "tobacco is evil" camp if it makes it as a product here.Sadly, this does not apply to shisha tobacco, though. That whole application of heat thing kind of kills it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now