Smoking Cigarettes

1. 61

   mr. daydreamposted 14 years ago

   Do you think the public smoking ban is too extreme?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Though there is a lot of hype about smoking..there is no actual proof it causes cancer. Yes, I know they say there is.
      The fact is, as many non smokers who are never exposed to smoke, get as much lung cancer as the smokers.
      The hospital where I have worked most of my adult life..is a research hospital..they collect data for their own research and for the government.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         chipsdigitalpcposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         With all due respect, are you kidding?

         replyreport
         1. 57

            chipsdigitalpcposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Perhaps you are refering to the fact that only a plausible conclusion can be reached due to technical limitations to research.  However, look at the data and any logical person knows it causes not only cancer, but heart attack, stroke, pancreatic cancer, colon cancer, emphysema, and a host of other diseases.  Non-smokers get as much lung cancer as smokers? 
            
            Not trying to personally attack here, but the evidence is overwhelming.   
            
            http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultran … ology.html

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               ______________________________________________________________
               You can find anything on the net that agrees with your opinion.
               I work for a hospital that has been doing research since 1957.(53 years)
               Everything they research is sent to the government.
               
               Lung cancer is usually caused by
               1.A primary cancerous lesion in another part of the body that
               metastasized to the lungs
               2.Has breathed Asbestos fibers (a fibrous silicate mineral) into the lungs (Asbestos is even in brakes)
               3. A Melanoma skin cancer, usually on the back but not necessarily, which has sent it's tentacles (So to speak)  into the lungs.
               
               For the other comments
               
               No one is allowed by law to smoke inside. Smokers have designated areas to smoke.
               (Not for you but for the others) All you need to do is stay away from the smoking areas. If someone is smoking where they work or visit, it is in an area for them. Just go to the areas for non-smokers.
               
               I am not a smoker, however I feel people should have their rights.
               
               I know everyone will disagree so I won't be replying to this again.

               replyreport
            2. 57

               chipsdigitalpcposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               You work at a hospital. .  as an MD?
               Cancer can present itself  in any part of the body.  As most of us know, cancer is simply an uncontrolled growth of radical cells in the body.  When you do things like drink and smoke for a long period of time, you are putting foreign (to the body) chemicals where they don't belong.  What can (and does) happen is these cells become radical cells, which begin to form into cancer after a while.  That is why it happens with asbestos as well. 
               
               Cigarettes contain not only tobacco but ammonia, formaldehyde, cyanide--basically 41 known carcinogens-not to mention smoke itself.
               
               My wife is a surgeon at one of the leading hospitals in the US, and I am a health teacher. Many research hospitals tend to be run and funded by one side or another (ie: tobacco companies). 
               
               Virtually any Dr in the US would agree w/ me (unless he is in the pockets of Big Tobacco.    Saying that smoking doesn't cause cancer suggests that it is some big gov conspiracy to make us not smoke?!!?? 
               
               This makes no sense because politicians already take billions of dollars in campaign contributions from tobacco lobbyists.  If there was any way they could dispute cancer claims they would do so, Plain and simple.
               
               If the hospital that you work at is "discovering" that smoking does not cause cancer, then they are funded by Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds .
               Sorry, but this is the kind of stuff I hear from 9th grade students when we discuss these things in class. 
               
               I have been a non smoker until 3 years ago, but then just recently quit.
               
               Regardless, It always puzzled me when I would hear about "smokers rights"   There really is no such thing.  Everyone has the same rights as per the Bill of Rights.  However, the basic tenet surrounding these is that generally people are free to do what they want until it infringes on the rights of others.
               
               Thus all rights--free speech, freedom of and from religion, etc are limited in this manner.   It doesn't matter how much smoke is in the air or if it does or doesn't cause cancer.  If I (as a non-smoker) went up to people and screamed at the top of my lungs as they walked by, I would eventually be arrested or put in a straightjacket.  Getting screamed at doesn't cause cancer, but it sure the hell is annoying.
               
               When your actions cause other people discomfort and/or illness, it is up to you--not them--to correct it.

               replyreport
      2. 81

         earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         That is most interesting Deborah. I did not know that.
         It blocks the lungs though doesn't it?

         replyreport
   2. 0

      kimberlyslyricsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      yes I mean the problem isn't that it's cigarettes but rather what does it set precedence for a ruling against next?

      replyreport
   3. 70

      waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      No...smoking in peoples faces who don't smoke is even more extreme!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         kimberlyslyricsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         yep Good Point and nose candy oral satisfaction and if need be other forms of habits let the government decide who gets and who doesn't publicly speaking of course.  Privately everything should be anything, goes all legal, excluding matches, sulfur not so good for you. Waynet's fault

         replyreport
         1. 70

            waynetposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I used to smoke, but then I quit and replaced it with drink...much better for your health....I drink lots of water!

            replyreport
   4. 59

      Davinagirl3posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yes.  Plain and simple.  To differentiate "cigarette smoke" with the other carcinogens that float about on a daily basis is ridiculous.  Rarely, do you see someone smoking, outside, blowing smoke in the faces of innocent passers by.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   I get it inside where it can be very harmful but outside where it is just mixed with all the other crap being pumped into our air that they can not control just makes no sense to me.

   replyreport
3. 60

   Will Say Plentyposted 14 years ago

   Depends on where you live.  I would have to say that I sure am annoyed whenever I think any of MY tax dollars are being p8ssed away on telling people smoking is bad for you.  My father never needed the government to tell him that and he is going on 75.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   Yes. Recently we have attempted to ban smoking on my campus. Yes we are outdoor, but having to walk through a cloud of smoke to get to class is ridiculous. It isn't about the smoker, its about the smoke.

   replyreport
5. 61

   mr. daydreamposted 14 years ago

   By me no longer being a cigarette smoker, it is reliving to a degree not to smell cigarette smoke in public buildings. But I guess it ain't too much we can do about outside. The smokers are entitled to some rights, as long as they're not in the doorways.

   replyreport
   1. 74

      FranyaBlueposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Why are smokers entitled to some rights? isn't it a drug like any other that kills and harms like any other? Should other drug addicts have some rights too?
      
      I used to smoke, but now i'm one of those horrid ex smokers that always has something to say about it

      replyreport
      1. 61

         mod2vintposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Because smokers are human too. They just choose to smoke.

         replyreport
      2. 59

         Ohmaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         As well intended as I am sure your thoughts are I do not think it is really fair to clump my LEGAL cigs. into a group with illegal drug use.
         Yes we all know that smoking has health risks and we all know that there are people who are annoyed by being around smokers but since I am not doing anything that breaks the law and I do try to be as respectful as possible to others around me I think your typical ex-smoker spiel is a little unfair.
         
         P.S. Do you wear perfume or cologne because there are a lot more people allergic to these than to anything in my cigarette smoke.

         replyreport
         1. 74

            FranyaBlueposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I agree with you on the perfume thing, I find this irritating to hell as I usually get a headache from strong smells and so tend not to wear it myself.
            
            I know my answer was harsh, I remember what it was like to need a cig, I still sometimes smoke in my dreams.

            replyreport
            1. 57

               chipsdigitalpcposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               The only difference between smoking and illegal drugs is the amount of money the tobacco companies have.  Smoking is the leading killer in the U.S., although obesity may soon catch it.    And, while you may be  respectful to others, there are many who are not.
               
               But, i too am an ex-smoker, albiet only for one day.  However, I know I am going to make it this time, cause chantix is the "bomb!!"   I
               
               I am charting my progress day by day and noting side effects of chantix in one of my hubs.  If you are wondering how it really works and affects a real person, check it out

               replyreport
               1. 72

                  lorlie6posted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Hi chip, I enjoyed reading your hub about Chantix, and left you a comment.  I'm now on my 12th day on the medication, and have had no ill effects.  I've warned my entire family of the potential side effects, so everyone's aware of what could happen.  They're all watching me like hawks!
                  I have been tobacco-free for 6 days now and the urges are less intense than when I've tried to quit without Chantix.  I agree with you, though, Lynne, I understand your reluctance and warnings.  And appreciate your concern.
                  I actually feel really great!

                  replyreport
6. 59

   Ohmaposted 14 years ago

   I am the only smoker left in my family. I am very respectful and do not even smoke inside my own home so they do not have to deal withit when they visit. I understand the point about staying away from doorways and such but really if I am waiting for the bus or something who should care.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      mr. daydreamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you on that. I have a cousin whose a chain smoker, I let him smoke when he comes by cuz, well, that's my cousin (the things we do for family). But the neighbor's smoke and when it travels through the vents to my apartment it can be annoying, especially if I hadn't ate yet.

      replyreport
7. 60

   Will Say Plentyposted 14 years ago

   I used to smoke by the way.  Just so you all know.  I smoked while writing in college--we still used typewriters when I got my first position--so I think it was very much an old school thing.  I would otherwise only smoke outside.  I quit about 15 years ago though so I never had to deal with a lot of enforced bans.
   I think we all know the truth now and just have to deal with it.  I have always said they should let the FDA be in charge of the industry.  if we can put a man on the moon why can't we make cigarettes a lot safer?  Mind you, I know you're still inhaling smoke into your lungs so it's never going to be totally harmless but it could be safer.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      mr. daydreamposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I'ma be honest, I think the only safe cigarette is probably the homemade marijuana cigarette (a joint). Despite it's highly addictive nature, maryjay isn't as addictive as nicotine. Just make sure you drink plenty of Apple Cidar Vinegar before you go to take your drug test (lol). Seriously though, I can't believe there was actualy a time when I actually like the smell of cigarette smoke, starting when I was around 7 or 8 years old.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I hate the smell of Marijuana. It gets in your clothes and stays there just like cigarette smoke. Those who smoked the equivalent of one joint a day for 10 years had a 5.7 times higher lung cancer risk than nonsmokers.
         
         Definitely not safe.

         replyreport
8. 60

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   I can't stay the night at my parent's house because my mom is a smoker. I get all congested and in the morning wake up with a headache. If you're a smoker, please please please don't smoke in your house or car. It is seriously hurting your family.

   replyreport
9. 61

   west40posted 14 years ago

   Can't be objective yet - 6 weeks ago I thought it was a little over the top - Now I am a 5 week x-smoker - give me 6 months and I'll chime in.

   replyreport
10. 63

    marcel285posted 14 years ago

    No, not too extreme..depending..It should be fine to smoke while walking down a random road. But not in places where there are a lot of ppl around, like the main street. That's just common sense though. It's just selfish to smoke in places where non-smokers will get a whiff of it. A lot of smokers wouldn't give a shit though. So yeah, they should be fined for smoking on busy streets.
    
    I smoke btw, and i would never smoke where there are a lot of random ppl around.

    replyreport
11. 59

    Yoshi Ninjaposted 14 years ago

    www.greensmoke.com/lbp
    
    copy and paste that into your browser.
    
    Most amazing thing i've ever tried.

    replyreport
    1. 54

       tingyi2521posted 14 years agoin reply to this

       i don' think it's extreme. Smoking is harmful to people's health. so quit it as soon as possible.

       replyreport
12. 57

    sagbeeposted 14 years ago

    I don't think its an extreme act.. it should be banned.. its not only people who smoke inhale harmful toxicants but also the people who are near them inhales the same amount.. it must be banned.. and its for everyone's good..

    replyreport
13. 60

    stephensaldanaposted 14 years ago

    Whats wrong in that? It is harmful for the user and the passerbuy as well.. I agree with sagbee! Smoking cigrattes must be banned...

    replyreport
    1. 0

       kimberlyslyricsposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport
       1. 81

          earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Australia is almost there. Our government lifted the tax another 20% starting at midnight tonight and there is a move to ban cigarette sales altogether providing free nicotine substitution for smokers.

          replyreport
          1. 58

             calpol25posted 13 years agoin reply to this

             I am casual smoker 5 a day earnest but I dont smoke in peoples faces etc, im trying to quit lol But let me tell you that you dont want the government to ban sales all together, because there are billions of pounds/ dollars brought in to every country by cigarettes alone and if that was to stop, you would find that the people would have to pay a tax to replace the cigarette revenue.
             I know it sounds silly but it is what will happen.

             replyreport
             1. 81

                earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I think they may go for a 3 year plan. It is just a proposal at this stage, but we have been moving strongly this way for a few years now, and you are right, our Government is making a packet from cigarette sales.
                We can handle a tax rise as one of the lowest taxed developed economies at this stage and there would be co-operation between political parties to do so once we got the usual idiots in our Government under control. Overall we are not badly governed, although some MP's are not too good.

                replyreport
14. 60

    brandyBachmannposted 14 years ago

    I think smoking in public should be banned, primarily because there are people who are allergic to cigarette smoke, especially people with asthma or pregnant women.

    replyreport
15. 0

    lynnechandlerposted 14 years ago

    Chantix is evil. Has caused deaths and severe depression. Be very careful of this drug.

    replyreport
16. 81

    Rafiniposted 14 years ago

    Whether or not Cigarettes cause cancer or any other illness/disease is debatable.  Seriously, the problem is some people don't like the smell.  I never heard of anyone being allergic to cigarette smoke until the first banning laws were being put into place - now dontcha think if people were allergic it would have been a known fact a loooonnnnggg time ago?
    
    I think the best argument for the bans on public smoking is people with Asthma.  You never know who around you, in a public place, might have Asthma.

    replyreport
17. 90

    Urbane Chaosposted 14 years ago

    I can understand restaurants and other public places - it's no fun to be munching on some well cooked lobster only to get a great whiff of Marlborough smoke up your nose.. but where is the line drawn?  People should have the freedom to do as they please.  Life is about choices: if someone decides to smoke, so be it..
    
    But, at the same time, people should have the common decency to respect those around them.  When I smoked, I would always step away from a crowd, or make sure that I'm not making their lives uncomfortable.  If I see someone who is doing that, I'll be the first to say something.  Still, I'll respect the way another person lives, even if I don't agree with it.
    
    It all comes down to common courtesy - if such a thing still exists.

    replyreport
    1. 93

       habeeposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       What he said!

       replyreport
18. 80

    mega1posted 14 years ago

    are we going to get to vote on it?  no, probably not - I don't trust the precedence this sets - but I do think there's nothing wrong with posting "no smoking" in most public places - but we should get to vote on it if it is going to be banned in all public places  = including empty streets, alleys, etc.

    replyreport