Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:31 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
There appears to be a gene which makes some people more susceptible to lung cancer. That may be why some smokers never get lung cancer.

There are genetic factors in cardiovascular disease. That may be why some smokers never get heart attacks.

We cannot use statistics to tell what will happen to an individual. We use them to tell the probability of what will happen to groups of people. Probablility tells us that smokers on average will not live as long as non-smokers.

Here's a nifty little link:

Premature Smoker Death Rates

Look at Dr. Pearl's data from 1938. Given groups of non-smokers, light smokers, and heavy smokers, at age 95 there are slightly more light smokers than non-smokers alive. Interesting, no? But the majority of deaths in light and heavy smokers come in the earlier age groups. So you may be a smoker and live to be 95, but the odds are the majority of smokers will die at earlier ages than non-smokers.

In 1938, about 43% of non-smokers died before age 65. About 62% of heavy smokers did. Light smokers were in between.

Today, adult smokers die about 14 years earlier than non-smokers. Since there is no way to know what factors protected the 95 year old smokers, it behooves us to remove tobacco from the equation.

Only tobacco? It's not the only variable. What about other things?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:32 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807
Nobody has yet answered my tunnel question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,296 posts, read 121,054,432 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Nobody has yet answered my tunnel question.
Just another deflection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Just another deflection.
How and why?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:45 AM
 
1,364 posts, read 2,922,334 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yooperkat View Post
Michigan and Wisconsin have banned smoking in hotels. This happened last year. Jennifer Granholm is an anti-freedom slob and a left wing zealot. It's no wonder that Michigan elected a Republican this time for Governor.

My wife and I recently went on vacation down south. Coming back north we discovered that we couldn't get a smoking room at any hotel in WI or MI.

Why would these states discourage tourism? Tourism is one of Michigan's biggest industries. It's stupid.

If someone smokes in a hotel room -- IT WILL NOT KILL THE FAMILY IN THE NEXT ROOM. Get it Democrats?

Why is it that whenever LIBERALS are in charge ..... AMERICANS lose their FREEDOM?
Losing your freedom? You are free to go outside anywhere to smoke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,296 posts, read 121,054,432 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
How and why?
The thread is about smoking in motels/hotels. It's not about being exposed to cigarette smoke from another car in a tunnel. The lengths smokers will go to deflect is incredible!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
The thread is about smoking in motels/hotels. It's not about being exposed to cigarette smoke from another car in a tunnel. The lengths smokers will go to deflect is incredible!

But, as you well know, the conversation turns on what level of SHS is deemed to be dangerous and, correct me if I'm wrong, you're one of those who believe no level of exposure is justified, no matter how slight. There is no limit at which it is safe and your position is that laws are necessary to eliminate the threat of exposure.

So, the level of SHS in a tunnel you might use is very much germain to this conversation. So too would a discussion on any other place you might be exposed to trace amounts of SHS simply because it would reveal the depths of your commitment to the principle that no exposure is safe.

If a debater stands on a principle, it's well within the bounds of debating etiquette to question the sincerity of that principle, is it not?

Last edited by stillkit; 01-04-2012 at 09:29 AM.. Reason: choice of words
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 09:13 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J. MacReady View Post
Losing your freedom? You are free to go outside anywhere to smoke.

And, if hotels were allowed to decide for themselves, you would be equally free not to stay there if they chose to allow smoking, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,296 posts, read 121,054,432 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
And, if hotels were allowed to decide for themselves, you would be equally free not to stay there if they chose to allow smoking, right?
Groundhog Day! It's a public accomodation. Smoking is a public health issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 20,572,616 times
Reputation: 7807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Groundhog Day! It's a public accomodation. Smoking is a public health issue.
There's no relation between public accommodations and public health issues? If that's true, why are we even having this conversation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:41 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top