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.
The report also found no indication that lung cancer rates have changed among lifelong nonsmokers in the U.S. since the 1930s, failing to support assertions by other researchers that lung cancer risk has increased substantially in the United States in lifelong nonsmokers. Still, they point out the importance of the disease among non-smokers. “Lung cancer is obviously a significant public health and medical problem, even beyond the overwhelming disease burden caused by tobacco smoking,” the researchers conclude.
The first article, which is a scientific report, does not mention the words "second-hand smoke" and the second is from a pro-smoking group which is making unsubustantiated assumptions from that article.
I think I have to be done with this thread. It seems like an agree to disagree. The smokers have their stance and the supporters of the ban have their stance. It is what it is. PA has a ban after all these years. We'll all deal with it.
The first article, which is a scientific report, does not mention the words "second-hand smoke" and the second is from a pro-smoking group which is making unsubustantiated assumptions from that article.
dr siegal is the one who wrote the second part from his blog.............acs has made the correlation of shs to non-smokers lung cancer for years and now their own study disproves that.....................read the acs propaganda on their site................
The traditional standard for the limits of personal rights is captured by the saying: "Your right to wave your fist ends where my nose begins".
Again, that is the basic problem some smokers seem unwilling to admit: their smoking literally puts particles in the air which enter other people's bodies. Accordingly, that is a straightforward example of something which crosses the line from an exercise of a personal right into a physical invasion of another person's body.
The traditional standard for the limits of personal rights is captured by the saying: "Your right to wave your fist ends where my nose begins".
Again, that is the basic problem some smokers seem unwilling to admit: their smoking literally puts particles in the air which enter other people's bodies. Accordingly, that is a straightforward example of something which crosses the line from an exercise of a personal right into a physical invasion of another person's body.
sorry your wrong,smoking has been settled before by smoking sections and or no smoking at all when desired by the OWNER of an establishment.dont you see how this is gonna play out.......they went from scare tactics to smoking sections to prohibition..........then it goes to smoke where you want cause nobodys gonna follow the law anylonger...it comes full circle and this is the prohibition part of the equation........it all happened befor leading up to 1919 and ended by 1933...same health scares and itll be the same outcome..........a law nobody obeys.
acs has made the correlation of shs to non-smokers lung cancer for years and now their own study disproves that.....................read the acs propaganda on their site................
Secondhand smoke is classified as a "known human carcinogen" (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.
Tobacco smoke contains over 4,000 chemical compounds. More than 60 of these are known or suspected to cause cancer.
Secondhand smoke can be harmful in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:
an estimated 35,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers
about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults
other breathing problems in non-smokers, including coughing, mucus, chest discomfort, and reduced lung function
150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations
increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma
more than 750,000 middle ear infections in children
That is directly from the American Cancer Society's link, and it doesn't sound like they're disproving any of the problems caused by secon-hand smoke at all.
The whole thing is interesting, but this is from the Executive Summary:
Quote:
Secondhand smoke, also known as environmental tobacco smoke, is a mixture of the smoke given off by the burning end of tobacco products (sidestream smoke) and the mainstream smoke exhaled by smokers. People are exposed to secondhand smoke at home, in the workplace, and in other public places such as bars, restaurants, and recreation venues. It is harmful and hazardous to the health of the general public and particularly dangerous to children. It increases the risk of serious respiratory problems in children, such as a greater number and severity of asthma attacks and lower respiratory tract infections, and increases the risk for middle ear infections. It is also a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing agent). Inhaling secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and coronary heart disease in nonsmoking adults.
. . .
In 2005, it was estimated that exposure to secondhand smoke kills more than 3,000 adult nonsmokers from lung cancer, approximately 46,000 from coronary heart disease, and an estimated 430 newborns from sudden infant death syndrome. In addition, secondhand smoke causes other respiratory problems in nonsmokers such as coughing, phlegm, and reduced lung function.
sorry your wrong,smoking has been settled before by smoking sections and or no smoking at all when desired by the OWNER of an establishment.dont you see how this is gonna play out.......they went from scare tactics to smoking sections to prohibition..........then it goes to smoke where you want cause nobodys gonna follow the law anylonger...it comes full circle and this is the prohibition part of the equation........it all happened befor leading up to 1919 and ended by 1933...same health scares and itll be the same outcome..........a law nobody obeys.
Comparisons to alcohol bans are of little value, precisely because a person drinking alcohol has no direct effect on neighboring people in the same way as smoking.
Moreover, this PA law is far from an attempt on a general prohibition on smoking (for example, see all the exemptions we discussed above).
Years ago, I was walking down the sidewalk with a latte, sipping at it. I was following a woman who was smoking. Now -- I can't walk and chew gum at the same time, why I continually think I can sip coffee and walk is beside me.
I took a "sip", stumbled on a hairline invisible crack that wasn't there in the sidewalk, got a huge load of coffee that went down the wrong pipe... and started coughing badly.... and could barely get any air.
The woman got angry because her first thought was I was being snotty about her smoking, but when she turned around to yell at me, she realized that I needed help... and she helped me.
Moral of the story is -- being militant about stuff rarely helps ANYONE. Yes -- I have a real grudge against smoking, but you have the right to do it. BUT your rights of smoking are not MORE right than my right not to breathe it.
Just use common sense, people. Why does this have to be mandated?
I didn't read the entire thread because I know that the smoking issue just gets hot and heavy on both sides.
I can only say a few things that might help a smoker understand the otherside.
After just getting over my pneumonia, the smoke in a restaurant was too hard on my lungs. I could feel that. I've always been one who knows driving down a highway that there is a fire up ahead. My eyes start to tear and burn.......it can be miles away. I'd be the first to know.
The worst thing is the ones in the family with Asthma or Allergies. We have had to leave restaurants. It is not a fun thing to see one of the little fellows start in with a big asthma attack. One of the children is on a major pill and inhalers for this.
Most the time he does ok, but one of the triggers is smoke.....
Many of us get watery eyes, or tear up. Plus all kinds of cold related symtoms.
Yes, it would be easier for us then to sit by a drinker then someone smoking........
That is very true.
Other people who are affected are ones with heart issues who are told to stay away from smoke..........any kind of smoke.
Its not hard to ask someone to smoke outside. I see it done in our family without request. I see it done at weddings, when the guests who smoke go outside.
Its just a matter of manners anymore, and thinking about others.
Just a note........smoking sections don't work. That smoke is everywhere and then some.......those little 1/2 walls in no way work
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.
