Notes from Spain and Spanish Forum Learn REAL Spanish now!  

Go Back   Notes from Spain and Spanish Forum > Spain Forum > Spanish culture, life, food, and news

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 7th March 2009, 06:04 PM   #41
Legazpi
Mega Forero
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Madrid (Arganzuela)
Posts: 834
Default

I personally don't view second-hand smoke as being sufficiently harmful to my health for me to worry about. Also as an ex-smoker I can't really point the finger at smokers for harming my health when I myself smoked heavily for over 10 years. Furthermore, it's difficult for me to point the finger at smokers for harming my health in a pub when I'm happily tipping large quantities of alcohol down my throat.

In fact I personally don't really notice the smoke in most pubs because I'm so used to it, although I have occasionally walked out because the smoke was overwhelming. However, when I go to a pub in the UK I do now notice how much more pleasant it is to have a beer in a smoke free environment. I can see that these days people less accustomed to smoky environments than I am get angry when they cannot go out for a drink in a smoke free environment.

Maybe a solution would be to introduce a license to allow smoking in a pub. That way most pubs would be smoke free, which reflects what most people want, but if there is sufficient demand from smokers, some pubs could pay for the smoking license in order to corner that part of the market.
Legazpi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2009, 06:36 PM   #42
ValenciaSon
Hero Forero
 
ValenciaSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Posts: 4,915
Default

2nd hand smoke maybe worse, it turns out because that smoke is taken in without a filter.
ValenciaSon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2009, 07:56 PM   #43
gary
Samuri Forero
 
gary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ValenciaSon View Post
2nd hand smoke maybe worse, it turns out because that smoke is taken in without a filter.
Errr... wasn't it filtered the first time? ...and won't at least some of the tar/toxics be in the lungs of the primary smoker?

I cant see how it could become more dangerous particularly as the concentration must be lower than sucking it straight out of a cigarette.

As you know I am a "never smoked" person with some degree of tolerance for currently persecuted considerate smokers, but this does sound like propaganda of the highest order.

I am sure it will be backed up by research but then the relationship between statistics and the truth is like that of the drunk and the lamp-post - more for support than illumination
gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2009, 07:58 PM   #44
ValenciaSon
Hero Forero
 
ValenciaSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Posts: 4,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Errr... wasn't it filtered the first time? ...and won't at least some of the tar/toxics be in the lungs of the primary smoker?

I cant see how it could become more dangerous particularly as the concentration must be lower than sucking it straight out of a cigarette.

As you know I am a "never smoked" person with some degree of tolerance for currently persecuted considerate smokers, but this does sound like propaganda of the highest order.

I am sure it will be backed up by research but then the relationship between statistics and the truth is like that of the drunk and the lamp-post - more for support than illumination
Filtered in the direction of the smoker, not in the direction of those around the smoker.
ValenciaSon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2009, 08:00 PM   #45
gary
Samuri Forero
 
gary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 2,711
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ValenciaSon View Post
Filtered in the direction of the smoker, not in the direction of those around the smoker.
Yeah, sorta forgot about the point of combustion....
gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2009, 01:22 AM   #46
lazarus1907
Forero Senior
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 59
Default

I don't smoke myself, and I don't exactly enjoy smoke (I find it revolting), but in my experience, smokers tend to be more interesting on average than non-smokers (this is not a mathematical rule). I wonder why. Last time I worked in a school here in England, the most friendly and with a real sense of humour among the staff, were all practically in the smoking room, where I could barely breath, but I could enjoy a good laugh and a friendly conversation. The other "cleaner" staff room was as aseptic psychologically as it was in terms of purity of air. Most non-smokers behaved more like stiff emotionless robots, and you could barely hear a joke or a laugh (they were all too stiff, wearing perfect ties, and all that). Scary.

I am not calling all non-smokers (I am one of them!) boring and heartless, but both in Spain and England there is a surprisingly high percentage of smokers among the most interested people I know. I wonder what the effect of banning smoking will have.

Right now, I find it hard to recall many smarty, witty, friendly friends and family members of mine who don't smoke. Surely, there are some, but it is definitely easier to find interesting smokers among my circle of friends, and I honestly wish didn't smoke.

Just a thought.

Last edited by lazarus1907; 8th March 2009 at 01:25 AM.
lazarus1907 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th March 2009, 01:22 PM   #47
gastephen
..es que yo no estoy loco
 
gastephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gales
Posts: 1,932
Default

gastephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2009, 08:22 PM   #48
camperman
Novato
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Default

69 carconogenic chemicals left in the air which can add to the risk of cancer when breathed in,

CRAP
Read up on the subject and come back when you have a little knowledge.

There are more carcinogens in a glass of milk !! Even more in every day food and household products. As for second hand diesel. Now you are talking cancer !!
camperman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2009, 08:24 PM   #49
camperman
Novato
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Default

Treating smoking related illnes in England (i.e. only part of the UK) cost the NHS £2.7 billion in 2007.

Tax revenue from tobacco products in the U.K. are 10 billion pound a year.
So smokers are paying for health care of non smokers.
Learn the facts.
camperman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2009, 08:27 PM   #50
camperman
Novato
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Default

I'm an asthmatic, so I avoid smokers whenever I can

I avoid asthmatics whenever I can. I hate the second hand steroids coming from their pumps. They cause many illnesses. Steroids kill !!
camperman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th March 2009, 11:14 PM   #51
ValenciaSon
Hero Forero
 
ValenciaSon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Silver Spring, Maryland, USA
Posts: 4,915
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post
69 carconogenic chemicals left in the air which can add to the risk of cancer when breathed in,

CRAP
Read up on the subject and come back when you have a little knowledge.
Having worked in clinical research at the National Institutes of Health for 7 years, to include the National Cancer Institute, I am not likely or concerned for any lack of exposure to research content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post
are more carcinogens in a glass of milk !! Even more in every day food and household products. As for second hand diesel. Now you are talking cancer !!
What is the source of your data?

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post
Treating smoking related illnes in England (i.e. only part of the UK) cost the NHS £2.7 billion in 2007.

Tax revenue from tobacco products in the U.K. are 10 billion pound a year.
So smokers are paying for health care of non smokers.
Learn the facts.
That assumes that a human life is worth less than the difference of the cost of care from tobacco tax revenue, mmm. Do your figures also factor in the cost of care for children born after undergoing intrauterine growth retardation from smoking or the lack of productivity in the workplace for smoke breaks?

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post
I'm an asthmatic, so I avoid smokers whenever I can

I avoid asthmatics whenever I can. I hate the second hand steroids coming from their pumps. They cause many illnesses. Steroids kill !!
Corticosteroids from inhalers are not the number one most preventable cause of heart attacks. Their therapeutic value is well documented, as opposed to tobacco.


BTW, please curb the acerbic tone in this forum. Thanks.

Last edited by ValenciaSon; 15th March 2009 at 04:35 PM.
ValenciaSon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th March 2009, 07:46 PM   #52
Edith
Pangolin Forero
 
Edith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Países Bajos
Posts: 3,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post

There are more carcinogens in a glass of milk
¿Andas troleando?

There are special forums for people who believe in things like alien abduction, the flatness of the earth, etc.
Edith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th March 2009, 07:51 PM   #53
Edith
Pangolin Forero
 
Edith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Países Bajos
Posts: 3,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazarus1907 View Post
I don't smoke myself (...) but in my experience, smokers tend to be more interesting on average than non-smokers
Isn't this what they call a 'tópico' in Spanish? In other words, a stereotype which has got more to do with pub folklore than with truth? It reminds me of similar folk wisdoms about chubby people being good fun to be around, and about black people being good dancers and athletes.
Edith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 12:36 AM   #54
gastephen
..es que yo no estoy loco
 
gastephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gales
Posts: 1,932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edith View Post
¿Andas troleando?

There are special forums for people who believe in things like alien abduction, the flatness of the earth, etc.
Of course the earth is not flat. It is hollow though. And there's a Nazi UFO base at the South Pole.

And don't get me started about all those chemtrails.

Last edited by gastephen; 15th March 2009 at 12:08 PM.
gastephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 02:30 AM   #55
Edith
Pangolin Forero
 
Edith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Países Bajos
Posts: 3,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gastephen View Post
Of the earth is not flat. It is hollow though. And there's a Nazi UFO base at the South Pole.

And don't get me started about all those chemtrails.
Edith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 03:41 PM   #56
Legazpi
Mega Forero
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Madrid (Arganzuela)
Posts: 834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edith View Post
Isn't this what they call a 'tópico' in Spanish? In other words, a stereotype which has got more to do with pub folklore than with truth? It reminds me of similar folk wisdoms about chubby people being good fun to be around, and about black people being good dancers and athletes.
To be fair to Lazarus, he was clearly talking about his personal experience rather than his personal opinion. He didn't say that he thought smokers were more interesting, just that the ones he had met had tended to be more interesting.
Legazpi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 07:55 PM   #57
Chuckles
Forero
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 8
Default

Well said Camperman.

ValSon- I know plenty of people who have worked in your field too including the US Centres for Disease Control who'd laugh at your suggestion of the "79" carcinogens in SHS.

Also number 1 cause of heart attacks?? Stress and obesity.
Chuckles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 08:11 PM   #58
Edith
Pangolin Forero
 
Edith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Países Bajos
Posts: 3,799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legazpi View Post
He didn't say that he thought smokers were more interesting, just that the ones he had met had tended to be more interesting.
To me, that sounds just the same.
Edith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 09:33 PM   #59
camperman
Novato
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4
Default

ValenciaSon
Quote:
What is the source of your data?
The real cause of lung cancer, according to another Oxford research scientist, Dr. Kitty Little, is diesel fumes. And the evidence here is much more persuasive. It includes the facts that:

* tobacco smoke contains no carcinogens, while diesel fumes contain four known carcinogens;
* that lung cancer is rare in rural areas, but common in towns;
* that cancers are more prevalent along the routes of motorways;
* that the incidence of lung cancer has doubled in non-smokers over past decades;
* and that there was less lung cancer when we, as a nation, smoked more.

Pointing out that there has been evidence for over 40 years that smoking does not cause lung cancer, Dr Little says:

"Since the effect of the anti-smoking campaign has been to prevent the genuine cause from being publicly acknowledged, there is a very real sense in which we could say that the main reason for those 30,000 deaths a year from lung cancer is the anti-smoking campaign itself".


Quote:
Do your figures also factor in the cost of care for children born after undergoing intrauterine growth retardation from smoking or the lack of productivity in the workplace for smoke breaks?

The figures do not take into consideration the extra money spent on treating asthmatic children who would have had their lungs strengthened by exposure to tobacco. As the childhood asthma has dramatically risen since cigarette smoking reduced then smoking must have offered protection. It does not take into account the money spent on
Alzheimers
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...2/ai_n18302293

Pre eclampsia
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/51264.php

ulcerative colitis
http://ibdcrohns.about.com/cs/ibdfaqs/a/smokingguts.htm

I won't bore the reader with more.

Quote:
lack of productivity in the workplace for smoke breaks?
In the U.K. since 2007 there has been NO smoking in the workplace. The recession shows that work productivity has definitely dropped since the workforce aren't allowed by law to smoke.

Quote:
Corticosteroids from inhalers are not the number one most preventable cause of heart attacks. Their therapeutic value is well documented, as opposed to tobacco.
I did not say that steroids are the number one preventable cause of heart attacks. I just said that I don't like second hand steroid particles around me.
I repeat
Steroids kill.
Well known fact as they are designed to suppress the immune system.
Smoking does not do that you will find.
camperman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th March 2009, 09:46 PM   #60
gastephen
..es que yo no estoy loco
 
gastephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Gales
Posts: 1,932
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camperman View Post
As the childhood asthma has dramatically risen since cigarette smoking reduced then smoking must have offered protection.
Have you proven a causal link between these, or are you just basing your conclusion on a correlation between them. If it's the latter, I think you'll also find that global warming has been caused by the decline in the number of pirates.

BTW, do you smoke?
gastephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks
Learn REAL Spanish now!

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.