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.
And even as a nonsmoker, the third-hand smoke thing is ridiculous. Talk about obsessive. You are about as likely to develop lung cancer from hugging people with stinky sweaters as you are to develop stomach cancer from microwaving in plastic bowls or skin cancer from that time you accidentally fell asleep in the sun. Tobacco smoke isn't asbestos. You HEAL from it (even if you smoked 2 packs a day for 25 years). Its constant moderate-to-heavy contact with any carcinogen that will give you cancer. Unless you encircle yourself with tons of heavy smokers that smoke in tiny spaces and wear very absorbent clothing, thats never going to happen from third hand smoke.
I'm sorry but you are not very educated on this subject. Not to be mean, but I suggest you do some research. Toxic tobacco smoke is deadly, and lungs do not always heal after one stops smoking.. A lot of ex heavy smokers (15+ a day) are developing lung cancer decades after quitting. The damage was done. This also happens, though to a lot lesser degree and chance, to non smokers who are forced to breath in someone else's smoke. Yes this is mostly years of SHS. (like a spouse of a smoker, a child or working in a bar, etc) The point us "obsessive" non smokers are trying to make is this: We do not want to take a chance on this at all! NONE! Even if it is a 1% chance. Do you people not understand this concept? I am not going to tolerate it as I value MY life. If I did not I would smoke and get my dopamine hits with the deadly price tag. But instead I want to try to live as long as I can, and smoking cigarettes is counter productive with this ideology.
I'm sorry but you are not very educated on this subject. Not to be mean, but I suggest you do some research. Toxic tobacco smoke is deadly, and lungs do not always heal after one stops smoking.. A lot of ex heavy smokers (15+ a day) are developing lung cancer decades after quitting. The damage was done. This also happens, though to a lot lesser degree and chance, to non smokers who are forced to breath in someone else's smoke. Yes this is mostly years of SHS. (like a spouse of a smoker, a child or working in a bar, etc) The point us "obsessive" non smokers are trying to make is this: We do not want to take a chance on this at all! NONE! Even if it is a 1% chance. Do you people not understand this concept? I am not going to tolerate it as I value MY life. If I did not I would smoke and get my dopamine hits with the deadly price tag. But instead I want to try to live as long as I can, and smoking cigarettes is counter productive with this ideology.
Fortunately reality is in our favor. According to our latest scientific information, our lungs do heal substantially after we quit. Three days after quitting, the little hairs in our lungs called 'cilia' begin to regenerate – even if they've suffered substantial damage. This allows the aveoli to recover, and the result is within three months, we have regained as much as 1/3rd of the original function of our lungs!
In addition to lung capacity is another sometimes less thought of but certainly no less important topic – cancer. Lung cancer is the greatest risk factor associated with smoking. As the cells in your lungs begin to change in response to cigarette chemicals (squamous cell), your risk of all cancer types goes up. And thus if you quit smoking now, your chances of surviving increase significantly.
"Studies have shown that quitting at about age 30 reduces the chance of dying from smoking-related diseases by more than 90 percent. People who quit at about age 50 reduce their risk of dying prematurely by 50 percent compared with those who continue to smoke."
Now, most of those over 30 weren't raised with the knowledge that smoking is way unhealthier than they thought. Smoking was allowed everywhere (I remember being little and half of buger king just having a side for nonsmokers). So these studies are being done on people who spent all but the past 15 or so years smoking anywhere they please and had no programs to help them stop. Despite that, even a 50 year old smoker that stops today has a 50/50 chance of dying from something that can't be blamed on cigarettes. Most 30 year olds started the same time the news got out that cigarette companies knew they were slowly killing people. If they all quit today, less than 1 in 10 would die from anything that could be related to smoking.
As for secondhand smoke, www.no-smoke.org says that 53,800 nonsmoking people in the USA die yearly from something tobacco-smoke related. take 53,800 and divide it by the USA population of 304,059,724. You have a .0176% chance of dying! that's about 1 for every 7500. LiveScience | Science, Technology, Health & Environmental News says there is a 1 out of 5000 chance to die from electrocution. You had best quit using electricity at that rate. But don't go and kill yourself to avoid dying in all these horrible ways. They also state that 1 out of 121 people will die from self-harm.
As for secondhand smoke, www.no-smoke.org says that 53,800 nonsmoking people in the USA die yearly from something tobacco-smoke related.
So cigarette smokers kill 4 times as many innocent people annually as drunk drivers do. Drunk driving is illegal with heavy penalties for doing it. I feel they should do the same thing to smokers who do it in public places. It would solve the problem real quick.
So cigarette smokers kill 4 times as many innocent people annually as drunk drivers do. Drunk driving is illegal with heavy penalties for doing it. I feel they should do the same thing to smokers who do it in public places. It would solve the problem real quick.
And yet, drunk driving constitutes less than a third of all automobile fatalities. Perhaps, since america's auto industry is going to crap anyhow, we should just get rid of cars in general and and only use bikes or mass public transit. That could tip the scales to your argument's advantage even more.
Kidding aside, with the current laws in place for smokers, how do you think they are going to change the death rates for non-smokers? People who start today, 30 years later (if they are still legal). Do you think the smoking habits of people who start now are exactly how they were 30 years ago? Will non smokers 30 years from now have to deal with as much smoke over their lives as did people over the past 30 years? Because all of these studies are done based on people who lived with the old "cigarettes are fine! do it anywhere and as much as you like!" lifestyle. Those are the ones dying prematurely now. People who were constantly exposed to cigarette smoke.
"Studies have shown that quitting at about age 30 reduces the chance of dying from smoking-related diseases by more than 90 percent. People who quit at about age 50 reduce their risk of dying prematurely by 50 percent compared with those who continue to smoke."
Now, most of those over 30 weren't raised with the knowledge that smoking is way unhealthier than they thought. Smoking was allowed everywhere (I remember being little and half of buger king just having a side for nonsmokers). So these studies are being done on people who spent all but the past 15 or so years smoking anywhere they please and had no programs to help them stop. Despite that, even a 50 year old smoker that stops today has a 50/50 chance of dying from something that can't be blamed on cigarettes. Most 30 year olds started the same time the news got out that cigarette companies knew they were slowly killing people. If they all quit today, less than 1 in 10 would die from anything that could be related to smoking.
As for secondhand smoke, no-smoke.org says that 53,800 nonsmoking people in the USA die yearly from something tobacco-smoke related. take 53,800 and divide it by the USA population of 304,059,724. You have a .0176% chance of dying! that's about 1 for every 7500. LiveScience | Science, Technology, Health & Environmental News says there is a 1 out of 5000 chance to die from electrocution. You had best quit using electricity at that rate. But don't go and kill yourself to avoid dying in all these horrible ways. They also state that 1 out of 121 people will die from self-harm.
I just knew someone would say what you did. You must smoke! Of course there are a lot of other things out there that can and will hurt me! I drive a Twin Turbo car and I am sure the exhaust it emits is not good for my pink lungs! I am sure it is pretty bad if I had to breath it in all the time! BUT This has nothing to do with the fact that some addict next to me that has a need to smoke all the time to satisfy her addiction and is affecting me with every nicotine fix she will need! Atleast my car is doing something productive! What does your cigarette do? Not a damn thing but kill you and me and make you happy at my expense. Anyway my position on this is more than just walking by you smoking and me being worried about dieing, it is more of a belief that this is a very destructive habit and that humanity would be much better off without it (except for the money making geniuses lining their pockets at your expense of course!) I am just trying to make a point that this is a very bad habit and it affects everyone.
It just amazes me how people love to go tit for tat with this. "Well you eat fast food, you drive a car, you do this you do that..." There is just not comparison and justification to doing this habit. It is the World's #1 preventable disease and it affects everyone even more so than alcohol. I like to drink once in a while, and I am responsible. Nobody is harmed by it. If I were to smoke a couple cigs each day, it would NEGATIVELY affect me and everyone around me so there is no comparison! Don't try to jump in with your BS of drinking and driving, and how it changes behaviors, etc. I am talking about drinking a few drinks a day here people! How is that bad? (oh no I would be considered an Alcoholic if I did that huh!?!??!) I could drink a glass or two of wine EVERY SINGLE DAY with my dinner and how is that the same as smoking several cigarettes or more every single day like an dope feign? Which is worse? You do the research and get back to me!!!
"Studies have shown that quitting at about age 30 reduces the chance of dying from smoking-related diseases by more than 90 percent. People who quit at about age 50 reduce their risk of dying prematurely by 50 percent compared with those who continue to smoke."
Now, most of those over 30 weren't raised with the knowledge that smoking is way unhealthier than they thought. Smoking was allowed everywhere (I remember being little and half of buger king just having a side for nonsmokers). So these studies are being done on people who spent all but the past 15 or so years smoking anywhere they please and had no programs to help them stop. Despite that, even a 50 year old smoker that stops today has a 50/50 chance of dying from something that can't be blamed on cigarettes. Most 30 year olds started the same time the news got out that cigarette companies knew they were slowly killing people. If they all quit today, less than 1 in 10 would die from anything that could be related to smoking.
As for secondhand smoke, www.no-smoke.org says that 53,800 nonsmoking people in the USA die yearly from something tobacco-smoke related. take 53,800 and divide it by the USA population of 304,059,724. You have a .0176% chance of dying! that's about 1 for every 7500. LiveScience | Science, Technology, Health & Environmental News says there is a 1 out of 5000 chance to die from electrocution. You had best quit using electricity at that rate. But don't go and kill yourself to avoid dying in all these horrible ways. They also state that 1 out of 121 people will die from self-harm.
The point of other ways to die has nothing to do whether second hand smoke is good or bad. It is a clear fallacy. I do not remember the name of that type of fallacy but it is fallacy.
Also, regardless of what the percentages are, which by the way we can manipulate the data as I can see the numbers and ask more specifics but I will not.
The point is this, is smoke from burnt tobacco into your lungs harmful? I believe it is yes. If so, it does not matter if I eat so much my arteries are clogged with a lot of cholesterol. The point is that I may not want harmful smoke in my lungs, that is the bottom line.
I may decide I rather die of a heart attack than lung cancer. Also, if I cook everything with Morrell lard, it does not affect you or those around you as I eat it, smoke does to others near me however little it may be as you claim.
You can bring numbers and others bring their numbers to counter your data, it will not end. You will trust the numbers that will support your views and so the other side so often is it very futile to throw data as I suspect it will be in this case.
When that happens I usually go to some simple example. If you put a candle or oil lamp on a table and burn it every day for lighting, what will eventually happen at the ceiling above? It will get dark with the smoke accumulated. Will the tiny tiny little air ducts get more and more clogged up in time in the lungs due to accumulation? To me physics say it will happen. The odds are higher that I will have a harder time breathing due to clogged lungs. So does it matter how much data and odds you present if the smoke bothers me and I want to protect my lungs from that? In my opinion it will not matter.
Again, does it matter how many people die of eating too much, electrocution, driving, etc? Not to me because that has nothing to do with the subject.
Location: Prescott Valley,az summer/east valley Az winter
2,061 posts, read 4,133,552 times
Reputation: 8190
gotta agree that I'm not really in favor of smoking, but what outlawing smoking would do is fill our already overcrowded jails with productive people who are not real threat to others, much like mj users. As I see it we would be better off filling our jails with white collar criminals that swipe tons of money from hard working people that count on the money they are trying to save for harder times
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.
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.
Drunk driving is illegal with heavy penalties for doing it. I feel they should do the same thing to smokers who do it in public places. It would solve the problem real quick.
