Of course smoking is a cause of cancer! If evryone stopped smoking tobacco as of tomorrow the number of new lung cancer cases would fall by over 80% in about 50 years.
I don’t really understand what you’re trying to say. Since not everyone who’s ever driven on a wet road has had an accident, are we thus expected to surmise that wet roads are NOT a cause of auto accidents? By that logic, since not everyone who has sex gets pregnant, then sex doesn’t cause pregnancy.
lezlers: What a perfectly ridiculous semantic game. You might as well say that being shot merely “increases” your risk of death because not everyone who’s been shot has died.
That’s beautiful!
On the other hand (not that I really want to further the other side of the argument, but … ) there is a flaw.
People who have never smoked cigarettes have gotten lung cancer. There’s never been anyone who’s never had sex who has gotten pregnant.
See what I did there? I have now made this a religious argument too. All we need is a handgun or two and we got a triple threat.
Jack, then we can say several things cause cancer, of which smoking is one of them, while only sex causes pregnancy.
Several causes of death: being shot in the head, falling off a cliff, etc. the fact that one can die from other causes does not mean a shot in the head does not cause death.
Actually. I agree.
For my money … you show me a guy who says that smoking doesn’t cause cancer, and I’ll show you a guy with a two pack a day habit and stock in RJ Reynolds.
Many pregnancies are begun each year via artificial insemination, which most people would hardly define as sex.
So why don’t we knock off the semantics.
Which is a fairly dorky argument considering the now mandatory use of unleaded gas and catalytic convertors. Automobiles are regarded as sources of pollution and health risks and public policy is to minimize the pollution.
No kidding. For the record, I find both smoke and car exhaust to be extremely annoying. I wouldn’t cry if most of the people in the world stopped driving. I try not to be nasty to people for doing things which are, after all, perfectly legal (such as idling cars unnessecarily or smoking in permitted areas), but I’m put in some physical discomfort by it and I think I’m perfectly reasonable in finding such habits nasty.
Could we PLEASE put this fucking lameass argument to rest? Or do I REALLY need to explain to you the difference between a necessity (Going to work to get paid) and feeding a habit?
Even if second hand smoke isn’t dangerous, it’s still annoying as hell, and you do NOT have the right to subject everyonearound you to it.
Your rights end at the tip of my nose.
Git a horse.
To be fair, there’s been one rather famous exception.
Anyhoo, I’m also prepared to put aside the cancer argument completely aside. Smoking is annoying in the here-and-now, irritating my lungs, throat and eyes so fuck your freedom to poison the immediate atmosphere, with a carcinogen or excess perfume or your jovial farts or anything else.
And as for vehicle exhaust straw men, let me say I’d be equally annoyed if some putz parked his car in the restaurant while I was eating and left the motor running. Ditto for the guy who drives his motorcycle into my office.
We know for fact that wet roads = slippery conditions = hard to stop = more likely to crash into someone. BAM! Crash!
We also know that pregnancy comes from sperm from a man fertilizes an egg in womans body. BAM! Baby.
We do not know that smoke inhaled through are lungs causes
cancer.
Sweetheart - please - fill your lungs with as much cigarette smoke as your little heart desires. If you want to close yourself into the bathroom and smoke till you pass out, be my guest.
But this is a site dedicated to fighting ignorance - not perpetuating it. You’re assertion that smoking doesn’t cause smoking is laughable. A joke. A total farce.
If it makes you feel better when you’re puffing away to believe that, go ahead - but please don’t spread your bullshit all over the board - Uuuuummmmmm, K?
Moron.
Actually, there’s a whole religion based on that exact premise.
What about the many, many nonsmoking flight attendants from the old smoke-filled airplane days? it’s been pretty well proven that they had virtually NO other increased exposure to carcinogens than breathing all that smoke in the workplace, and their incidence of lung cancer is WAAAY higher than the average.
I knew a 12-year-old girl who died of asthma some years back; I’ve often wondered how much the smoke in her father’s house contributed to her death. And as someone who’s suffered from asthma myself, I can PROMISE you that breathing someone else’s smoke would irritate and aggravate my asthma. Even today, when my asthma is almost totally under control, a smoke-filled environment is one of the few things that can cause my chest to start tightening up. So you can promise me all you want there’s no connection; I can promise you that I’ve experienced a direct connection.
And last, I’ve noticed that it appears to be only smokers who insist smoking doesn’t cause cancer. I have only one word in response to that: Denial.
That would be “causes CANCER” of course.
However, I sure you get my point.
Actually Mama Tiger - the connection between inhaled smoke and asthma attacks is established and well proven.
Good gravy dude. Are you really that ignorant about the carcinogenic properties of tobacco?
Even internal documents from the tobacco companies admitted to such.
Not that this stopped the tobacco companies from marketing to teens…
If you want to see lots MORE internal documents from the tobacco companies, have fun at the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library
Oh yeah! Disgusting smell aside, I’ve had run-ins (literally) with these “tiny torches” myself.
Once a guy ran one into my hand (OUCH!) and another guy (separate time) into a brand new dress. The guy who burned my hand never even stopped or said he was sorry.
But the guy who burned a hole in my dress did pay for it. Didn’t even bat an eye at how much it cost (and yes I was honest) and pulled the bucks right out of his pocket and handed them to me, then went on his merry smoke filled way.
I hate cigarette smoke in bars, but I love dancing more than I hate cigarette smoke, so I put up with it.
Anyway, in answer to the OP, …You know??? “open air” doesn’t magically make your cigs less poison and nauseating.
If you (collective you, not targeting the OP), are so addicted that you can’t even go a measly couple of hours (for a game etc), or even worse, 45 minutes for a dinner, without getting your fix, you’ve got bigger problems than anti-smoking folks.
One question/complaint re: the folks who have to smoke their cigs all the way to the entrance to a store, take that one last HUGE drag, toss the cig and then blow out the last smoke filled breath as they walk into the store.
What is UP with THAT kind of action? MUNDO addictio/ pathetic behaviour there.
You can’t even live without your nicotine fix long enough to shop for food? Sheesh.
Hey, CanvasShoes! Well, I’m a smoker and since you’re moving into the area, you’ll be happy to know Dallas bars/restaurants are now smoke-free. Which doesn’t bother me in the least - I smoke outside or in my car (alone); married with kiddos, so we make it out maybe once a month to restaurants, if that.
I understand non-smokers (and smokers) distaste with cigarette smoke. It smells horrible, can’t stand it myself. However, if I am in an establishment that permits smoking, it’s pretty annoying to get the dirty looks from the “non-smoking, but no other tables were available” group. You chose the smoking section, people!