|
|
Please note that any comments expressed in these forum posts do not reflect the opinions of Medical News Today in any way at all. Opinions posted in this forum do not constitute medical
advice, which should be sought from qualified medical advisers. Disclaimer.
Lunatics & Asylums
posted by Donal McCarthy on 10 Jun 2007 at 6:28 pm
QUOTE: "Smoking kills thousands of children every year (largely from respiratory infections), is also a major factor in SIDS, and causes millions of medical problems in kids each year ranging from asthmatic attacks (and new cases of asthma) to ear aches, so protecting young children from tobacco smoke is long overdue," says Banzhaf"
If Mr. Banzhaf has absolute incontrovertible proof that each one of his claims are true, then I challenge him to provide it.
In the absence of such proof, then I suggest that there is no safe level of Banzhaf, and his opinions should have no place on Medical News Today.
This is a serious issue; zealous antismokers are wrecking untold millions of real lives. The medical profession bears a large responsibility for this, by staying quiet and refusing to quell the junk. What twisted legacy are you passing on to future generations? What price courage, or the cost of the lack of it?
Read the news article that this opinion was posted about:
More Smokers Barred From Adopting Children - Latest Step In Movement To Protect Kids From Smoke
Selfish Smokers
posted by JUlie Prost on 11 Jun 2007 at 1:23 pm
Donal reminds me of my father, I am 15.
My father smokes like a trooper. I suffer from asthma. All my life I have asked him to smoke outside - he tells me I am stupid and am ruining his life - he always smokes inside, filling the living room with smoke. I have been to hospital so many times for smoke induced asthma - however, there is no acknowledgement on his part for ruining - MY - life.
I have noticed that the most vehement enemies of anti-smoking people are men who smoke, never women who smoke, men who don't smoke, or women who don't smoke. I wonder why?
I have no time for men who say anti-smoking lobbyists are ruining their lives. They are selfish - selfish - selfish.
I Agree With Julie
posted by John Pritchard on 11 Jun 2007 at 1:27 pm
Julie is right,
Nobody is more selfish, vicious and inconsiderate than an addict whose doors slowly get closed.
I have no time for smokers who bellyache about non-smokers ruining their lives. As a non-smoker, my life has been ruined long enough.
Pot Calling The Kettle Black
posted by Blad Tolstoy on 11 Jun 2007 at 3:11 pm
There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to ban smoking in all public places. With to-day's ventilation and air cleaning technology available at increasingly easy to afford prices everyone can have a choice of environments in which to socialise.
As for your comments, John Pritchard, everyone bellyaches and your side is notorious for it.
We are sick of listening to people like you, not I will add, because we are fundamentally opposed to the principle of give and take but because you aren't. Moreover, given the extent of ban damage to people's livelihoods, jobs and health plus the social divisions, the fact that you are unable to see beyond your own narrow viewpoint does not do you credit either!
Perspective
posted by Donal on 11 Jun 2007 at 3:20 pm
I am not your enemy Julie. I do have great sympathy for your condition. But that is not the issue.
The issue is that Antismoker Extremism is being translated into neo-fascist law all over the so-called free world. The aim of the Antismoking Movement is to "denormalise" smoking and smokers, based on hype and rhetoric, not scientific vigour.
I have no time for (seems to be the right phrase?) laws which marginalise people, divide society, cause social isolation, destroy livelihoods, and which threaten from within the democratic ideals of liberty and personal autonomy.
Millions of people fought and died in two world wars to preserve those very freedoms that you take for granted today.
I am saying they are under threat again.
The Anti-smoker Trap
posted by Simon Barnes on 11 Jun 2007 at 4:09 pm
"I have noticed that the most vehement enemies of anti-smoking people are ... never ... men who don't smoke"
I've never smoked a cigarette in my life, Julie, yet I'm most definitely a "vehement enemy of anti-smoking people". I wonder why?
There are two types of people who don't smoke: non-smokers and anti-smokers. Non-smokers, the vast majority, simply get on with their lives without tobacco, and think no more of it. Anti-smokers think they have a God-given right to live their entire lives without ever encountering tobacco, and invoke unhealthy quantities of vitriol should they ever smell it or witness it being enjoyed. In my eyes, those who focus all their worldly attention on how much they hate something are the worst kind of human beings imaginable.
That being said, I too have asthma, Julie. If you are concerned that your father's excessive smoking is triggering your attacks, you should notify your doctor and ask him for advice. Your father is clearly being grossly irresponsible in these circumstances.
However, please do not fall into the anti-smoking trap and be so immature as to infer that all other smokers must be as selfish as your father purely on account of their common habit. They are not.
Get Things Into Perspective
posted by mandyv on 11 Jun 2007 at 5:08 pm
Asthma is on the increase, yet smoking is on the decrease, less people smoke around children, yet the rates are higher now than in the biggest so called passive smoking decades. Strange that. Maybe instead of villifiying smokers you could spend some of the millions on finding out the real reasons. You do owe that much to the children.
Perfumes, deoderants, air fresheners, also have carcinogenic chemicals, So shall we refuse adoption to people who use them. Cleaning products, like furniture polish cause lung problems. Where exactly are you going with this witchunt. Because that is what this is, why do you not have big fat warnings on all these other things too? You have picked out one legal product,
Just google dangers of each product, maybe you will not want to get out of bed. It is the dose that does the poison remember.
8th August 2006 the HSE in their document OC 255/15 article9 state
" HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to second hand smoke to the raised risk of contacting specific diseases".
9 The evidential link between individual circumstances of exposure to risk in
exempted premises will be hard to establish. In essence, HSE cannot
produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to SHS to the
raised risk of contracting specific diseases and it is therefore difficult to prove
health-related breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act.
Lies and hatred are not healthy for anyone or any Country.
Freedom Isn't Free...
posted by Michael J. McFadden on 11 Jun 2007 at 5:58 pm
First of all I would like to congratulate Julie on the literacy level of her post. The complex sentence structure, correct use of hyphenation as punctuation, and grasp of adult idiom such as "smokes like a trooper" is most unusual in a 15 year old. John Pritchard's posting, four minutes later, is also well-stated.
Ten years ago, the concept of using smoking to take children away in a custody case was virtually unthinkable. Five years ago using it as a barrier to adoption was also unthinkable. Five years from now when we see them beginning to take children away from functional nuclear families because of smoking it will no longer be unthinkable. And five or ten years afer that when they begin taking our children away for other poltically correct reasons and ensure that they are raised in politically correct ways... that won't be unthinkable either.
Banzhaf and friends always start small. Remember the promise that all they wanted was a "non-smoking section" on long air flights? Or how about the ASH UK press release of 8th September 1998 where they said:
"Few people are seriously suggesting a wholesale ban on smoking in all pubs and restaurants it is just that the 72% that don't smoke should be able to participate in British social life without having to breathe other people's smoke. The idea is to give non-smokers adequate choice - not to ban all smoking. Much could be done by segregating smoking areas. "
Anyone on your side of the Atlantic should know perfectly well how dangerous it is to give away your freedoms one inch at a time.
I wish the July 1st Defiance Day resisters all the best wishes in the world.
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Tasker
posted by Dave Tasker on 12 Jun 2007 at 2:50 am
What an interesting article and dare I say brave article for this publication.
Well done Donal for raising this issue. I have to confess I am an ex smoker (I quite 12 years ago). I didn't quit for health reasons but because I simply didn't wish to give the government more tax than I had to. I am not an anti-smoker, in fact I still regularly drink with my smoking friends. We enjoy each others' company and have done for many years and will continue to do so (although NOT in our local pub).
I have often wondered when and where all this smoking ban business started and I guess its a typical scenario where the person who shouts the loudest for longest gets heard in the end. I was a Police officer for many years and I have seen untold death and destruction due to that other social vice, alcohol. So it's no good telling me 'yes but alcohol doesn't affect third parties', because it does. I would imagine that after smoking alcohol will be targeted next. I am all for smoke free public houses and there should be many more of them to give people a proper choice as to where they go, but lets stop hitting smokers with a big stick it just makes them want to 'light up'.
Well Said Donal
posted by zanuzi on 12 Jun 2007 at 7:56 am
The whole passive smoke issue is based on a lie..Passive smoke harms nobody..and if anyone has the proof that it does..please speak now. Either put up or shut up you moaning Nannies. On the other hand, there is proof that it is all a lie. Hewitt has lied, flint has lied, Blair has lied, who have lied.scoth have lied,the nhs have told more lies [the wedding adverts now halted cos there untrue] the fish hooks..now halted. Another lie now proved untrue..and when put before either a british court or a european court the lies will be proved.
I Agree With John Pritchard
posted by Barbara Miley on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:20 am
Selfish smokers are like people who are addicted to hard drugs. They are aggressive, confrontational and complain that everyone else should leave them alone. However, they do not care one iota for the majority of other people who are sick of them.
Smokers Need To Be More Considerate
posted by Yayoi Kenji on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:22 am
As smokers form an ever-smaller percentage of the population, they should learn that being considerate is not only good manners, but necessary. As far as I am concerned I would like to see smoking banned completely, unless smokers (often a small minority of them) learn to keep their smoke away from me.
Nasty And Selfish
posted by Frederick Stoll on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:24 am
Smokers addicts are the nastiest and most selfish people I ever meet. The only language they understand is the one they use themselves.
Shocking
posted by Erica Villalobos on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:28 am
The other day I was at a cafe with my 2 year-old son. He suffers from asthma. I was waiting to pay. Four guys in the table next to me were just about to light up. I asked them whether they could wait a couple of minutes as I was just about to leave and explained about my son's condition. I received an avalanche of insults and they all stared at me and lit their cigarettes. The experience was frightening.
Keep up the good work!!
Stay At Home
posted by Ronald Jones on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:34 am
If you cannot cope with a bit of smoke, I suggest you stay at home.
Amazing
posted by Manuel Rodriguez on 12 Jun 2007 at 8:41 am
It is amazing how in so many forums on the internet, those defending the rights of the smoker and gun user are non-smokers who have never smoked and people who have never touched a gun. PULL THE OTHER ONE, IT'S GOT BELLS ON IT!!
British Towns
posted by Melinda Marques on 12 Jun 2007 at 9:09 am
I am from Chicago. I was in England last year, visiting some relatives. The centers of British towns on Friday and Saturday nights are crowded with wild drunken teenagers - I found it quite frightening. I suggest juvenile drinking and general debauchery is the biggest problem in England - rather than second hand smoke.
2nd Opinion
posted by Donnie on 12 Jun 2007 at 12:35 pm
The largest study ever done was by Enstrom, which proved passive smoking was harmless. The only report not study which produced a risk ratio of 1.19 was the EPA's. As anything less than 3 is not considered a risk at all. The EPA's report was thrown out by a judge because it fiddled the figures to produce a risk factor albeit a worthless one.
This is also a medical report
CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9776409&dopt=Abstract
I have lost my faith in doctors and science due to the fact that they have corrupted information and twisted the truth. they no longer have any credability with me.
Sauce For The Goose
posted by Pete J on 12 Jun 2007 at 1:49 pm
I also am an asthma sufferer, so are my two brothers and 4 out of 6 of my friends, not one of our conditions has been caused by or triggered by smoking. The main cause of attacks is generally during periods of stress or ill health and triggered by allergies; pets hair/ fur, house dust and aerosol propellant (same for perfumes and air fresheners).
Generally you will find as you get older the affects of asthma reduce and with a reasonable amount of fitness and care attacks will all but disappear.
Many antismokers seem to want smokers to just go away and take their smoke with them, Fine we don't want to fraternise with your type of antisocial attitudes either, so the solution? You go to your non smoking pub, we go to our smoking pub. Everyone is happy and never the twain shall meet.
So you tell me why this compromise solution is so abhorrent to the antismokers?
The Smoking Lobby
posted by Nicki Manarra on 12 Jun 2007 at 2:40 pm
The smoking lobby is strong, well organised and present all over the internet. It dresses itself up in sheep's clothing, loaded with facts and figures, and spreads itself. I know this because I used to be one of them. Many of them profess to have 'never smoked', and pretend to be 'friends' of smokers and embarrassed about non-smokers on the smokers' behalf. They are very clever.
Passive Smoking: The Issue In General.
posted by carlos on 12 Jun 2007 at 4:13 pm
Nicki I dont know what you're on about as smokers and nonsmokers arent as well organised on this issue as antismokers are- especially given the latter have much more funding.
As for passive smoking, it is proven to be nothing more than a mere irritant as the links of Donnie and Micheal Mc Fadden suggest. The only two which show any danger- the SCOTH report of 1998 and the EPA
report of 1993- both of which were later shown to be inconclusive and were shown to have hyped up figures- no surprise given they were based on statistics- something which can easily be played around with to suit a certain agenda.
Reds Under The Bed
posted by Donal McCarthy on 12 Jun 2007 at 7:30 pm
None of the Antismoker rhetoric, so far, has addressed the substantive issue at hand. Let me spell it out. Antismoking groups worldwide have put enormous energy and resources into infiltrating democratic governments everywhere, to hijack public policy and attain the goal of "denormalising" smokers and smoking. There is no other agenda - the veneer of 'health' regarding SHS is merely a hook on which to hang the most outrageous abuse of political power, not seen since 1940s Europe.
To this end, no lie is too big and the end justifies the means, therefore there is a moral amnesty, bestowed by Antismoking, for all individuals who are prepared so smother their conscience in the crusade against people who are smokers.
Day by day, people are wising up to this ugly creeping fascism to see it for what it really is. It is my intention to help people wake up and see it; someday, even the Antismokers will thank me and my kind; because when you are brainwashed, even your own thinking becomes invisible to you.
My Reds-Under-The-Bed reference is to the last post I see here, and that is from Nicki Manarra on 12 Jun 2007 at 2:40 pm. who hopes you are not going to think, but to feel. This poster is putting out a scare and hoping for a 'scared' response. Classic activist Antismoker, It is typical of the genre: 'There is something lurking in your wardrobe'. The good woman even claims to have been 'one of them'.
Freedom says: draw your own conclusions, take responsibility for your own thinking, and examine closely what you are being told - even by me.
The Smoking Lobby
posted by Caroline on 13 Jun 2007 at 3:25 am
I am a smoker, I am also part of ' the smokers lobby' I have smoked for 30 + years, during 2 pregnancies and whilst raising my 2 children I have been to hospital 3 times twice to give birth and once at the age of 11 to have my appendix out, I have visited the doctor 3 times in the last 5 yrs, both of my children are of good health and both are educated to degree level neither of them smoke, (their decision).
I consider myself to be considerate of other people and fully support your rights to not breath in my smoke and would like other people to show me the same consideration. All I want is the provision of smoking or non smoking facilities and proper healthcare on the rare occasion it is required. too much to ask. I dont think so! It seems to me reading these posts that the anti-smoking lot are the most vitriolic and verbally abusive not the smoking lobby.
All Guns Have Come Out
posted by John Robinson on 13 Jun 2007 at 10:29 am
I am a smoker. I also work in advertising. I have done so for the last 20 years. By reading the 'copy' (texts) in the opinions so far, it is obvious to me that the smoking lobby has its people well trained. The semantic flows are well rehearsed. A warning to those who want to have a go at the smoking lobby: They will push you into a corner - just don't fall into the trap of becoming defensive - if you do, they have got you on the run.
The REDS UNDER THE BED, plus fighting our guts our during WWII for democracy and not Facism, are well rehearsed arguments used by scores of speech writers around the world.
I fear this thread of opinions will eventually become a slanging match between the pro-smoking lobby and the anti-smoking pressure groups - everyone else will be elbowed out.
Nikki Manarra
posted by Blad Tolstoy on 13 Jun 2007 at 1:06 pm
I agree with you Donal McCarthy. If anyone on this string is a truly a fake it's Nicki Manarra. Notice too the words "the smoking lobby" as though those who oppose anti-smoking organisations must be the "tobacco lobby." Most people vehemently opposing these fascist activities are ordinary fed up citizens from across a wide spectrum of the public; moreover, they are pro-choice NOT pro tobacco. As for the tobacco industry itself, it bent over years ago and doesn't even do anything to defend the interests of its patrons.
However, the more people oppose the anti-smoking fanatics the more they will scream and if Manarra had truly been on the side of pro-choice he or she would have learnt a great deal more that the nonsense he or she is spouting. By their words you shall know them!
Hatred Is An Unhealthy Emotion
posted by Diana Reid on 13 Jun 2007 at 9:11 pm
It never ceases to amaze me that anti smokers call smokers selfish. Just what do anti smokers call the demands they are making. Anti smokers have gone from demanding non smoking establishments to wanting to ban tobacco. Their zeal has deteriorated from promotion to persecution. To be consumed with such hatred as they display on these sites does them no credit.
Their arguments are based on personal experiences past and present which have developed an unpleasant side of their personalities. Their suggestions have deteriorated beyond acceptable behaviour between human beings, into the realms of disgusting abuse.
Working as a nurse in some of the worst wards in psychiatric facilities I can honestly say they appear to be heading in that direction.
Hatred is an unhealthy emotion that destroys the individual who has allowed it to dominate their life. It not only changes their personality but eventually their appearance. It separates them from the general population who become uncomfortable in their presence and detach themselves from them. It alienates them from friends and family as the obsession grows.
Unless recognized and controlled, the end result is total isolation.
Pages of Opinions: 1 2 [Next] [Last Page]
[recent opinions appear at end]
Privacy Policy |
Terms and Conditions
MediLexicon International Ltd
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.
