NEPA and Health (Philadelphia, Danville: credit, houses, wages)

[jimazee]

Originally Posted by NEPAhopeless31

NEPA is one of the worst places for asthma sufferers in the country. People there don't care about health at all. Smoking and binge drinking are a daily norm for lots of people there. It really is sad to say the least.

Is the asthma because the people don't care about their health at all, the smoking, or the binge drinking?

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by auntieannie68

i believe you first focused on that and others followed your lead---

It's in your first post, what else do you expect? You haven't even commented on the elderly population or radon but certainly felt the need to throw the smoking grenade again. If you're going to post an opinion on a public forum especially one as ridiculous to what you were alluding too then expect to be challenged on it. This isn't the place for a one sided argument where you get to dictate, if you want a one sided argument go talk to the wall.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by jimazee

Is the asthma because the people don't care about their health at all, the smoking, or the binge drinking?

Since the 80's the six most common air pollutants in the US have been reduced by 67% at least according to the EPA yet we have had a drastic upturn in asthma case.

There is three significant things that have changed in that time. Better building techniques and renovations to older homes make them air tight trapping indoor air pollution. You have a switch from the traditional hydronic heating systems to ducted systems that deliver both heat and and AC, these systems can harbor and easily distribute the "bad stuff". Last but not least that's compounded by the fact kids spend a great deal more time indoors.

[Michael J. McFadden]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Since the 80's the six most common air pollutants in the US have been reduced by 67% at least according to the EPA yet we have had a drastic upturn in asthma case.

Coalman, the reduction in ETS exposure has been more drastic than 67%. I believe it's more like 80%, with some studies incorporating verification through cotinine analysis into their work. Any objective observer, coming upon this question from a tabular rasa, who just looked at the figures, would almost be bound to conclude that exposure to secondary smoke was a great protector against the development of asthma. Anecdotal observations from those over 50 tend to confirm the science pretty well too: e.g., to give my own historical example, I first met someone with asthma late in high school, didn't meet anyone with "smoke-sensitive asthma" until senior year in college, and never saw anyone use an "inhaler" until after graduating from college.

Yet today, as I just noted on another thread ( In Defense of My 'Shameful' Occasional Smoking Habit | xoJane ) we have people going into asthma attacks from simply being in the same room with a smoker even when the smoker is not smoking! In TobakkoNacht I even quoted an example of a young woman who was convinced she was developing breast cancer and talked her doctor into performing a biopsy, because she had USED AN OFFICE TELEPHONE that was also used by a co-worker who smoked when out on breaks!

When I refer people to the ASDS (Antismokers' Dysfunction Syndrome) link, it's not a joke. People have a very real, and largely unrecognized problem in this area that's caused an enormous amount of social disruption and personal suffering.

All very sad.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Michael J. McFadden

Coalman, the reduction in ETS exposure has been more drastic than 67%.

I'm talking about outdoor air pollution which is often cited as a cause for asthma.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by Michael J. McFadden

Coalman, the reduction in ETS exposure has been more drastic than 67%. I believe it's more like 80%, with some studies incorporating verification through cotinine analysis into their work. Any objective observer, coming upon this question from a tabular rasa, who just looked at the figures, would almost be bound to conclude that exposure to secondary smoke was a great protector against the development of asthma. Anecdotal observations from those over 50 tend to confirm the science pretty well too: e.g., to give my own historical example, I first met someone with asthma late in high school, didn't meet anyone with "smoke-sensitive asthma" until senior year in college, and never saw anyone use an "inhaler" until after graduating from college.

Yet today, as I just noted on another thread ( In Defense of My 'Shameful' Occasional Smoking Habit | xoJane ) we have people going into asthma attacks from simply being in the same room with a smoker even when the smoker is not smoking! In TobakkoNacht I even quoted an example of a young woman who was convinced she was developing breast cancer and talked her doctor into performing a biopsy, because she had USED AN OFFICE TELEPHONE that was also used by a co-worker who smoked when out on breaks!

When I refer people to the ASDS (Antismokers' Dysfunction Syndrome) link, it's not a joke. People have a very real, and largely unrecognized problem in this area that's caused an enormous amount of social disruption and personal suffering.

All very sad.

I was a heavy smoker for over thirty years. I have been smoke free for over fifteen years. I never knew how offensive I was until I stopped smoking. We make all kinds of excuses for our bad habits. I thought people were just picky or ultra sensitive - it could not be me! It wasn't until I stopped smoking that I realized how bad my smoking friends smelled. I (we; my wife also gave up smoking) ended up replacing friends because of smoking. It is pretty bad when you cannot stand the smell of your best friends!

[Michael J. McFadden]

Originally Posted by fisheye

I (we; my wife also gave up smoking) ended up replacing friends because of smoking. It is pretty bad when you cannot stand the smell of your best friends!

I would agree, it is pretty bad. Though I might be more inclined to say pretty sad.

Go back in the history of literature of the 20th Century, particularly pre-1980 and see how many similar examples you find of people or characters doing such things. Find just three or four and note them here ... it could come in helpful in showing how natural such a concern is among people.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by Michael J. McFadden

I would agree, it is pretty bad. Though I might be more inclined to say pretty sad.

Go back in the history of literature of the 20th Century, particularly pre-1980 and see how many similar examples you find of people or characters doing such things. Find just three or four and note them here ... it could come in helpful in showing how natural such a concern is among people.

In the early 1970's I was given military "C" and "K" rations that still contained small packs of cigarettes. It took a long time for our Country to make a stand against the big tobacco companies. It also took me and my wife a long time to quit smoking - it isn't easy. Our Country is still evolving.

[Michael J. McFadden]

Originally Posted by fisheye

" I (we; my wife also gave up smoking) ended up replacing friends because of smoking. It is pretty bad when you cannot stand the smell of your best friends." (AND) "Our Country is still evolving."

Fisheye, very true: times DO change. The point I was making was that the strength of your feelings about the scent of smoke is not so much "natural" as it is "created" through our culture. The constant barrage of antismoking press-release "news" stories, ...

combined with the $500 million to $900 million annual MSA expenditure on "Tobacco Control" activities, ...

combined with who-the-hell-knows how much antismoking spending by the various charities intent upon plucking heartstrings about "protecting the children" in order to open our pocketbooks, ...

combined with PSA-avoidance antismoking plot lines subliminally inserted in popular programming, ...

combined with antismoking ads for the NicoGummyPatchyProductPushers, ...

combined with illegal use of federal funds for antismoking social engineering efforts (See: Federal Support for Anti-Tobacco Advocacy Raises Legal Questions | Washington Free Beacon for more on that.), ...

combined with whatever else is out there...

all add up to produce sensitivities and attitudes that have been consciously structured more than simply "naturally occurring." I would be willing to bet strongly that if you and your wife had quit smoking in the era of 50 years ago that your decisions to quit would NOT have resulted in the destruction of friendships with your smoking friends: that destruction was engineered.

[fisheye]

Originally Posted by Michael J. McFadden

Fisheye, very true: times DO change. The point I was making was that the strength of your feelings about the scent of smoke is not so much "natural" as it is "created" through our culture. The constant barrage of antismoking press-release "news" stories, ...

combined with the $500 million to $900 million annual MSA expenditure on "Tobacco Control" activities, ...

combined with who-the-hell-knows how much antismoking spending by the various charities intent upon plucking heartstrings about "protecting the children" in order to open our pocketbooks, ...

combined with PSA-avoidance antismoking plot lines subliminally inserted in popular programming, ...

combined with antismoking ads for the NicoGummyPatchyProductPushers, ...

combined with illegal use of federal funds for antismoking social engineering efforts (See: Federal Support for Anti-Tobacco Advocacy Raises Legal Questions | Washington Free Beacon for more on that.), ...

combined with whatever else is out there...

all add up to produce sensitivities and attitudes that have been consciously structured more than simply "naturally occurring." I would be willing to bet strongly that if you and your wife had quit smoking in the era of 50 years ago that your decisions to quit would NOT have resulted in the destruction of friendships with your smoking friends: that destruction was engineered.

I don't think the media and current attitudes affected our nose. Fifteen years after my wife quit; she still misses smoking and the smell of a cigarette does not offend her or me. This is more of a 'stale' smoke smell and not all smokers have that smell. Today I worked with several smokers that were not offensive - but one man stinks and not from body odor. He is also one of those people that gets right in your face to talk! I have no idea if anybody has ever studied this? If you are a non-smoker I am sure you have run into people that just make you back up. My feeling is that I was one of those people when I smoked.