U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-21-2010, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 18,169,227 times
Reputation: 7724

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by max's mama View Post
Sorry, but it's just not true. Maybe you can explain it to my son's classmate who is 5 and developed asthma because his parents were constantly smoking inside the house. His own mother tearfully admitted to me that she felt it was her fault.

There is no room to be open-minded in this situation.

Sorry, I won't respond to your posts anymore.

Who said it was because of his mother's smoking? And, based upon what evidence?

Let me guess...the childs Doctor, right?

Well, consider this: My father in law developed bladder cancer late in life. He'd smoked all his life, so his Doctor listed the cause of his cancer as "smoking," based upon nothing more than the odds of it being the cause. There was no definitively established quid pro quo, just the Doctor's subjective opinion based upon the odds. Later, when my father in law died of complications from bladder surgery (they sewed him up with defective stitches and his guts fell out), his official cause of death was...you guessed it..smoking. He is among those people "killed" by cigarettes every year that folks like to talk about.

I could give other examples of smoking deaths and illnesses which ought to give anyone pause before accepting such things without question, but I won't. And remember one more thing before believing everything you're told: The figures commonly used to demonstrate how deadly cigarettes are usually include the phrase, "Smoking related." Stop and think for a moment. Just what does that mean? It means a cigarette was involved somewhere, somehow, at some point in time and nothing more. It does NOT mean the cause of death was attributed solely to smoking or even primarily. It merely means there is some kind of connection between the person who died and cigarettes. It may be a tenous connection, or it may be a solid one; it doesn't matter for the sake of scaring the pants off people about smoking.

Another example of that kind of subjective data which generates an emotional response is found in the figures for "alcohol related" traffic deaths. If there was a beer can in any car involved in a fatal accident, it can, and often IS listed as "alcohol related," even though that beer had nothing to do with the cause of the wreck.

The bottom line is to always consider the source of data which concerns or frightens you and take a look at the test methodologies before going off in alarm. People and organizations who generate such shady figures generally have an agenda and it usually involves money, control and power.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-21-2010, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Indiana
324 posts, read 514,931 times
Reputation: 351
maxmama, sorry about any sick child, but there is no evidence in the world to prove the asthma to be from second smoke. There are many asthmatic kids, that have never smelled a second hand smoke.

To your second hand smoke single source link, I offer tons of the opposite info:
FORCES International - The Evidence - Second Hand (Passive)Smoke

Edit:
I just saw now, that maxmama issued 'no response to paulpan' stand.
Honestly, I'm not surprised. When arguments are being lost, it's better to back off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 18,169,227 times
Reputation: 7724
Quote:
Originally Posted by max's mama View Post

This is a perfect example of what I was talking about above.

First off, what motivation does the National Cancer Institute or the Surgeon General's Office have for coming to the conclusion that second hand smoke is dangerous? That's easy...budget dollars.

Secondly, take the time, as I just did, to scan the actual study, not just the published conclusions, and you might be surprised at how they arrived at those conclusions. Suffice it to say they did NO tests or measurements of their own, but relied on other studies done in other places primarily in a controlled environment and involving a very, very limited number of test subjects. They coupled that with a long dissertation on how air circulates in buildings with mechanical air conditioners or heaters and extrapolated their conclusions from that. The study is loaded with qualifiers such as "may," or "might," or "indicates."

It's junk. Nothing more than an opinion based upon very little with no conclusive proof one way or the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 10:46 AM
 
Location: South FL
9,444 posts, read 15,749,377 times
Reputation: 8043
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulpan View Post
maxmama, sorry about any sick child, but there is no evidence in the world to prove the asthma to be from second smoke. There are many asthmatic kids, that have never smelled a second hand smoke.

To your second hand smoke single source link, I offer tons of the opposite info:
FORCES International - The Evidence - Second Hand (Passive)Smoke

Edit:
I just saw now, that maxmama issued 'no response to paulpan' stand.
Honestly, I'm not surprised. When arguments are being lost, it's better to back off.
The reason why I said that is because you implied that your messages are not for open-minded and since I'm not open-minded about the issue of second-hand smoking, then your messages are not for me. The argument is not being lost. The truth is, I don't know for sure if it was second hand smoke that caused asthma or not, but is there a guarantee that it wasn't??? It's easy to say "no prove" when you have your own agenda.

The truth is non-smokers have no agenda here, they are not pushing any of their products, they are not trying to convince anyone to buy anything or deal with their unhealthy choices. But smokers do. They are always on the defense about their poor health choices so they come up with all sorts of excuses of why it's okay to pollute the environment and poison others around them. I was so happy when Mayor Bloomberg passed the law "no-smoking" at lounges, restaurants and bars, it was one of his best decisions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Indiana
324 posts, read 514,931 times
Reputation: 351
maxmama, I don't know about other posters, but I don't have incentive to promote smoking or SH smoking, either. I'm not part of the tobacco industry. This is a debate, so I offered my view.
Everyone is certainly free to take it or refuse it.
And, BTW, the nonsmoking in public places like restaurants is just fine. Those who don't smoke shouldn't be forced to share the tobbaco smoke with smokers. On the other hand, the OP's concern of passing around smoking persons outside for a few seconds, is really a concern over nothing, as explained by other posters earlier.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:38 AM
 
Location: South FL
9,444 posts, read 15,749,377 times
Reputation: 8043
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulpan View Post
maxmama, I don't know about other posters, but I don't have incentive to promote smoking or SH smoking, either. I'm not part of the tobacco industry. This is a debate, so I offered my view.
Everyone is certainly free to take it or refuse it.
And, BTW, the nonsmoking in public places like restaurants is just fine. Those who don't smoke shouldn't be forced to share the tobbaco smoke with smokers. On the other hand, the OP's concern of passing around smoking persons outside for a few seconds, is really a concern over nothing, as explained by other posters earlier.

Okay, no hard feelings. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:39 AM
 
8,778 posts, read 17,205,982 times
Reputation: 5259
Quote:
Originally Posted by max's mama View Post

The truth is non-smokers have no agenda here

Huh?

Without getting in to the argument of who is "right" and who is "wrong" here, i don't understand how you can claim that the attempt to eradicate second hand airborne smoke is not an "agenda"?

I would never argue with a person's desire to express their opinion that they shouldn't be subject to the smoke, however, when a non-smoker rails against it and then claims that they "truthfully" don't have an agenda, it doesn't lend credibility to their overall arguments.

On a side note, i think this thread has reached the point where it belongs in P&OC or Great Debates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:47 AM
 
Location: South FL
9,444 posts, read 15,749,377 times
Reputation: 8043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratford, Ct. Resident View Post
Huh?

Without getting in to the argument of who is "right" and who is "wrong" here, i don't understand how you can claim that the attempt to eradicate second hand airborne smoke is not an "agenda"?

I would never argue with a person's desire to express their opinion that they shouldn't be subject to the smoke, however, when a non-smoker rails against it and then claims that they "truthfully" don't have an agenda, it doesn't lend credibility to their overall arguments.

On a side note, i think this thread has reached the point where it belongs in P&OC or Great Debates.
Ugu and what is my agenda would be as a non-smoker to say that second hand smoking is dangerous? No honestly? What am I financially or in any other way gaining from it besides educating others? I want to hear that.

Nothing. I'm not gaining anything from it. I probably shouldn't care how much exposure others get. Nobody in my family smokes. Nobody at my job smokes (shocker) and I live in a clean community with just few random smokers who don't smoke around me or my family. So I have no agenda, and neither does majority of concerned citizens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Texas
14,076 posts, read 18,169,227 times
Reputation: 7724
Quote:
Originally Posted by max's mama View Post
I was so happy when Mayor Bloomberg passed the law "no-smoking" at lounges, restaurants and bars, it was one of his best decisions.
Yet, you say anti-smoking advocates have no agenda?

I beg to differ!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-21-2010, 11:58 AM
 
Location: South FL
9,444 posts, read 15,749,377 times
Reputation: 8043
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit View Post
Yet, you say anti-smoking advocates have no agenda?

I beg to differ!

Yeah, I want to hear your argument, without bringing mainstream medicine into this. The fact that there is always an agenda withing mainstream medicine is not a surprise.
I was referring to common citizens in my original post.
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 > Health and Wellness
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top