ParentalAdvisory stated that we were not in a position to critique smoking without critiquing driving, and therefore that those of us who drive but condemn smoking are hypocrites. I responded that I don’t drive.
(The implication, of course, was that all of us drive, so none of us are in a position to condemn smoking; I was refuting that implication.)
Actually, I think it is very valid. The guy sitting at the bar complaining that smoke is hurting his health (while downing MGD’s) doesn’t go outside at tell the pace bus driver to drive somewhere else because of all the black smoke that is pooring out of the exhaust. So you want to hate pollution and smoking, but you’re only telling the smoker to stop, why aren’t you telling Joe Blow 8 cylinder to do the same? Because you like driving, and know one can take that away from you right?
You know, comparing people who dislike smoking to murderous cretins who tried to obliterate everyone but Aryans from the planet - not so bright. I don’t smoke, but I did, and I hate it now. However, I don’t walk around killing people. See the difference there?
Yes, I can see it. I see it every day. I live in California.
I thought the implication was that if the moral authority exists to stop others from smoking in front of you, that same authority should be sufficient to stop people from driving cars. Interesting point, actually.
The relation of smokers to pollution? If the “secondhand smoke” theory had even a shred of credence to it half the people that live in urban areas would already be dead.
Let’s hear the statistics on second-hand smoke deaths versus say – hmm, say obesity. Or any other major cause of death, for that matter.
I smoke only outside (so sorry if the smoke floats from Central Texas and pollutes your state/country). It is quite interesting to me that cigar smokers are somehow still absolved from the witch hunt.
Indeed. I can bring up the deaths-from-asthma statistics from last year if you like.
Fuck second hand smoke. I’m gonna die someday anyway.
Having smoke wafting in my face is irritating. I’m all about the now.
And you know what, when I smoked and I smoked in public places … I knew I was being irritating. I never said I wasn’t a hypocrite … or pretty fucking arrogant in my twenties.
It may not be “good” for you, but that doesn’t mean it’s “bad” either. By all serious evidence, so called “second hand smoke” is merely a null factor, it has very little chance of affecting you adversely. It’s become such an urban legend that I seriously think snopes.com should put in a section about it. The spin doctors of the 1980’s-90’s anti-smoking brigade did such a good job promulgating the myth, that to reverse it now requires serious effort on the part of those who seek the truth, and not just reasons to shun their fellows.
Just remember, all you jerks who think I and all the other smokers should just quit or be taxed out of our habit (not necessarily meaning the quoted poster) are advocating the consequences, which are:
- a return to overeating/snacking as the primary result of the oral fixation
- gaining ~20 pounds
- becoming more irritable
- spending every subsequent day of our lives desperately wishing we had a smoke
Anyone who would wish that upon someone is a total fucknut. Smoking is a victimless activity so just fuck off and leave us alone.
I think you mean emphysema. Asthma, I thought, was something your born with and usually fades out into early adulthood.
I don’t doubt that you can get breathing disorders with smoking. And such things can usually be cured by quiting. But asthma, that’s a new one. But I really hate it when people go around saying “it causes cancer”, well hippity bloo blah fuckers. You have NOT ONE peice of solid evidence to prove such a thing. Merely just opinions and “statistics”, which are so slanted that they cannot be taken seriously. What you don’t see in statistics are the olds fuckers 60+ in age who are healthy as a bat while smoking and eating red meat all their lives and are cancer free.
Keep in mind, I don’t smoke and generally dislike it. I’ve tried it before, but it never really did anything for me but make me throw up and put me into a cold sweat feeling weasy. Even after getting passed the sick part, it just never “calmed” be down as some claim it does. Oh well. Except the occasional once a year weed indulgence, but that did good things for me, never made me sick. Weird.
I’m not familiar with these statistics. Please bring 'em up if they’ll clarify the point you and I find “interesting indeed.”
I’m inferring from your contribution to this thread that these stats make the “don’t smoke in front of me” movement more compelling than the hypothetical “don’t drive anywhere near me” movement. But perhaps I misread you.
As far as the smoking/cancer thing goes, many people ignore the fact that smoking increases your risk of cancer, it doesn’t cause cancer. If it did, everyone who’s ever smoked in their lives would have cancer. Kinda weakens the whole “put that cig out, you’re gonna give me cancer!” argument coming from someone who’s forced to inhale your smoke for about 2 seconds. I guess you could say it’s equal to using sweet and low in your coffee for a week or something, if you’re measuring the actual danger of it. The argument mostly arises from people’s annoyance of second hand smoke, not the actual danger. (I’m talking about strangers in public here, not someone who lives with a smoker and breathes it in all day, every day).
Like I said before, I understand the annoyance. That’s why I’m hyper concious of myself and those around me when I smoke, but at least be honest in your complaints. Don’t hide behind the “danger” that one occasional whiff puts you in.
And for all those asthmatics who are going to rush in here and give testimonials on how one whiff will send them to the hospital, obviously, you’re a rarity and are not who I’m referring to, so please save yourselves the effort. There is an exception to every rule, that doesn’t make the rule, null.
I’m a bit troubled with “increased risk” thing too. There has never been solid evidence anywhere, ever, that smoking increases your risk of getting cancer. I believe that you are predispostioned to get cancer, or not, since birth. If 2 people are born with idenctial genes, 1 smokes, and the other doesn’t, they’ll both get cancer if thats what nature deals them. It’s all about the cards that you are dealt. But since there is no evidence to prove that either, it’s really up in the air. I do believe that smoking reduces your chances of getting rid of the evil cancer in recovery though. I’m fucked up like that.
Utterly wrong. There is a vast amount of evidence-based medicine demonstrating a clear link between cancer and smoking.
You are also completely mistaken in your beliefs about asthma. It does not ‘fade out’ once a person grows up. 5000 people in the US die yearly from asthma attacks. Exposure to second-hand smoke is one of the biggest risk factors for a child to have a more severe state of asthma, with more difficulty controlling said asthma.
QtM, MD
Huh. I didn’t know Reynolds was ever the primary sponsor of Formula One.
NASCAR. Tsssk.
Also utterly wrong. The smoker will be far more likely to get cancer than the non-smoker.
For god’s sake, even the tobacco companies admit their product causes cancer!
Qadgop, increases the risk, doesn’t cause. Like I said before, it that were true, everyone in the world who had ever smoked would have cancer.
I understand what you mean but in common speech I think “Increases the risk” would be equivalent to “is a contributory cause”. i think “causes cancer” is not incorrect but I understand what you mean.