Jump to content

Pro and Anti smoking views

Guest touchofsable

Recommended Posts

Post your views here please, and keep the other smoking post for smoking glamour.

there was a really good debate on the melody forum and you may want to research that first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

S1m17....you have here a great deal of peudo scientific study funded both by the tobacco industry and drug companies. The smoking cessation drugs, patches etc are worth billions of dollars a year and fund most of the latter; as do the medical profession eager to shift the emphasis from treatment to prevention.


If smoking is so bad look at some facts that aren't eveer considered.

Why for example, are smoking related diseases in Europe far less in southern parts, when smoking is far higher there.


Why have several diseases including cervical cancer and stomach cancwer and ulcers been taken off the list of smoking related dieases, and how were they ever there in the first place/


Fact: you cannot get cervical cancer without human papiloma virus

Fact: you cannot get stomach ulcers/cancers without helicobator pylori (unless you take colossal amounts of radiation or chemicals orally)


Fact: adeno viruses have been recently found to be present in up to 60% of lung cancer patients.

Fact: most people who never smoked and havent been exposed to smoke in their household and workplace are still likely to die of smoking related diseases.

Fac: when you take all other factors (drinking, stress, genetic suscebtibility, exposure to other carcinogens such as asbestos, viral infections etc) out of the equation, a heavy smokers life is likely to be less than two years shorter than a non smokers, and in that figure social factors like bad housing poor diet etc are not taken into account.


I am not saying its good for you; but the risks are exagerated.


I personally maintain its because if you create a guilty conscience, people don't moan about being taxed for their pleasure. You have to have a reason to levy tax that people accept.


Oh , and the NHS claims 3.4 billion is spent treating smoking related diseases (remembering that non smokers get heart attacks and lung cancer too...both groups are minisculely different in percentage terms) .

The government raises 9.6 billion on revenue on tobacco Tax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the long-term PSYCHOLOGICAL effects of smoking?


Nicotine IS a mild stimulant and a mood elevator. It tips the neurochemical balance inside the user's brain and actually changes the way he thinks and feels.


Upon quitting smoking, even after the classical physical addiction has been overcome, the neurochemical imbalance REMAINS! This neurochemical adaptation continues even AFTER the body has been COMPLETELY purged of nicotine and its metabolites! It can take months and even YEARS for the neurochemical balance to be restored! In extreme cases the damage is PERMANENT!


In a very real sense, using drugs actually RE-WIRES your brain!


Some of the long-term effects of drug use are subtile:

  • Mood Disorders.
  • Anxiety.
  • Depression.
  • Memory problems.


In extreme cases:

  • Bipolar disorder.
  • Schizophrenia.


I, personally, have been affected by most of the things on the first list even after quitting smoking. It's been more than a year and I'm just, now, beginning to understand the damage I did to myself.


I've said it before. Despite my vocal opposition to smoking, I don't care if other people smoke and I don't even mind being around people who do. But, personally, I wish I had never started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Yes. The report really says nothing. There is a lot of 'Claims' which means nothing. How many times have people 'Claimed' to have seen the Loch Ness monster.


As for it being calcinagenic so is burnt toast (alledgedly).


PS the report is wrong from the start or we are all being conned as Passive Smoking is how a pregnant woman may be affecting her unborn child. Smoke passed through the air is Secondary Mainstream Smoke.


PPS I don't really mind if you are against smoking, i just love a good discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about:


A non-smoking person exposed to passive smoking in a room full of smokers = VERY UNCOMFORTABLE.


Eyes sting, throat stings, breathing is awful, clothes stink, hair stinks.


It's not more complicated than that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes I agree Earendil....a little common sense is all that is needed and a few manners. I certainly never smoke in a non smokers house unless they INSIST which very often they do, but the we will just have one or two in an evening.


On the other hand, in a well ventilated room like a racecourse restaurant or bar then its ludicrous. the in a pub or restaurant there should definitely be a seperate room for non smokers.


I don't even like being in too smokey an atmosphere.


However what has happened is a witchhunt against smokers backed up by some very dodgy science and governments eager for revenue.


As allfurme says, a piece of burnt toast or barbecued meat has x300 the effect of passive smoke in terms of many of the chemicals entering the body.


And if we are that concerned about health, how come the test for helicoabactor pylori, carried by 46% of the worlds population isnt carried out as a matter of course? That is, nearly half of you on this site will have it, and almost certainly be suffering very bad damage from it, which is likely to result in stomach ulceration or cancer.


Look it up on wikepedia.


Problem is governments can't tax bacteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little confused, Touch, about this "look it up in wikipedia" thing, or " this paper says this" kind of thing. How is it ever possible to know who is conning who? (apart from the government that is).


when DO facts become facts, and even a fact now, very often is no longer a fact 20 years down the line. After years of searching I think I've become dissillusioned with the search for the ultimate truth. The bottom line is that it all comes down to opinion. An antique table is lunch to a termite! This is not necessarily bad as it creates the art form of argument. ( Though I have never argued woth a termite)


Having said that, Earendil, I kind of agree with you.


My dog rolls in fox poo. Dont know why he does, but he and his doggy chums seem to have a thing for it, It appears to be the ultimate bliss for them .How does he smell? - Awfull!


Now if I was to go and roll in dog poo (This is hypothetical guys!! that isn't a kink of mine!!) But if I did, then walked into a pub, brushed past people so that they went home reeking of fox poo, I just would not get away with it. I wouldn't even get to the bar. At least with fox poo you just have to wash off the offending article. With smoke you've got to have a shower, put your clothes in the washing machine, hang your jacket to air. And then just when you think your home air is clean again, you open your briefcase and the whiff hits you all over again.


I'm definately not intolerant of smokers. And I still love my fox pooed dog, But I'm not sure many smokers quite understand how totally invasive it is to non smokers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats okay.

We'll keep Kate Beckinsale, Joan Severance, Carol Alt, Catherine Deneuve, Joan collins , my model Claire, Lana Cox, Tracey Coleman etc etc etc out of your way then!


Oh and you wouldnt be wanting to be with Ann-Margret in lynx then either:



or Arsene Lupin in white fox www.celebsmoking.com/PG/Arsene-Lupin/img00000002.htm


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ho Ho Ho Touch. I guess I could be persuaded! They say every man has his price.


btw the anne margaret link didn't work for me - I mean - the page didnt come up. I'm sure Anne Margaret in Lynx would definately work for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry its www.celebsmoking.com/Ann-Margret.htm


sorry missed an r out.


Interesting thing is that on celebsmoking someone reviews this as average and to me its the best thing on there apart from maybe Joan severance and Carol Alt...and maybe the jap girl in that film that reservoir dogs was based on ...she's in silver fox.


But its a good resource, like opera gloves, to check out some of your fave actresses.


If like me you'd had a smokey kiss from a girl like these (actually two...one was a little like joan Severance and the other like Kate beckinsale)in fur when you were young, you'd feel a tad more pro smoking!

So I just appeal for tolerance in the same way as I would appeal to anti fur people to live and let live.


OK OK I know, fur doesnt affect your health, but you know what I mean.


Oh, and I forgot to add Sharon Stone, and Liz hurley to the smoker list; and it was good to see J-Lo has recently started again. Then there's Madonna and Charlotte church and Gwen Stefanni and Brittany Spears.


Well the party is in full swing in the smokers lounge....how's it looking in the non smoking bit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The female swedish tanning team just walked in and they are all wearing furs.


I'll save you smokers some perfume-smell from them




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but I think you will find that the swedish tan shop near us (two finns and a czech and a swede....all smoke!!! Only seen one of them in real fur though it was a cracking turquoise dyed fox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to got to the bars and smoke a pack of cigs in one night and drink till I was ready to puke. I'd wake up in the morning feeling like shit.(younger stupider days). Later in life I quit drinking and smoking but would still go to the bars with friends. Designated driver most of the time. The odd thing was I'd wake up in the morning feeling just as bad as when I drank and smoked. No booze so it was obviously the smoke making me feel like crap.


I had a brother in law living with me for a while. He only smoked outside, but his clothes soaked up the smell so bad his bedroom smelled disgusting.


I realy don't care whether you smoke or don't smoke.However, in my part of the world smoking is illegal in all indoor public places. It's now far more enjoyable to go to a bar or restaraunt than it was even when there were no smoking sections.


Yes I used to be a smoker and I'm sure if I still smoked I might be a bit pissed off about things, but if your going to scream for respect and tolerance of your choice to smoke, you should be more than willing to respect the people who don't want to go home at the end of the night smelling like someone emptied an ashtray in their pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes no probs.

but why can't we have smoking bars and restaurants aswell as no smoking ones....isn't that a fair compromise?


Remember if you allow a government to legislate for stuff like this then it won't be long before fur could be made illegal.


Animal Right groups gave the British Labour party

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look if I have a bar, and have only smoking staff...why shouldnt I make the rules in my own property?


Because you're assuming government could be guided by reasonable thinking and not the special interest group of the month with the deepest pocket.


Smokers are the only group that it is politically mandated to discriminate against. Well them and healthy white males between 18 and 45. But that's another arguement.


I personally don't see any reason why not to have smoking bars and restaraunts as well as non smoking. It's just a legal nightmare waiting to happen though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look if I have a bar, and have only smoking staff...why shouldnt I make the rules in my own property?


I personally don't see any reason why not to have smoking bars and restaraunts as well as non smoking. It's just a legal nightmare waiting to happen though.


I think there should be a laws about when and where smoking is permitted but I also think the laws they are putting on the books now are DEAD WRONG!


A business owner that believes he can make more money (i.e.: attract more paying customers) by allowing smoking should be allowed to do so. If a business owner believes he can attract more customers by banning smoking in his establishment he should be allowed to do that, too.


In other words, let the market decide.


Now, I see no problem with making a law that says each business must declare itself to be a "Smoking Allowed" or a "No Smoking" establishment. Each proprietor must clearly post the message at the entrances to his building(s). It should be an offence to disobey a "No Smoking" order if it is clearly posted.


But, like I said, it should be for the business owners to decide!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Computer has been down.


Earendil, when was the last time you were in a room full of cigarette smoke? Here in England all the pubs that allow smoking are never smoky and i have my non smoking friends who say that. There isn't really any where else people are allowed to smoke. I think we are referred to as social lepers. As i said before i think i will have a go at murder, rape, GBH, robbery with violence etc etc, because i really don't want to smoke in the same room as a none smoker as that would really be awful!


PS Do you drive a car? Well the exhaust fumes from cars really make me cough and choke and it smells so horrible and it is really bad for my health; sounds just like cigarette smoke, doesn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say bar or pub, I said room.


I have no idea why they banned cigarette-smoking in bars - I'm usually too drunk to notice it anyway. :P


No smoking in bars lol.. Soon there will be no drinking and no laughing either!


My point is, ok.. Lets say you go on a trip to a cabin. 12 people. 10 of them smoke. How do you think the atmospheric enviroment will be for the non-smokers?




I just came back from one of those trips. My hair still stinks, and it's 3 days ago. (YES I SHOWERED! :P)


EDIT: And I didn't drive my car into the cabin spilling carbondioxide into it for 2 days straight either. You can't compare carbondioxide-spills from cars outdoors to cigarette-smoking indoors either.


I've never met a smoker to this date, who refuses to put his cigarette out, or take it with him outside if he/she is alone and I ask very nicely "Excuse me, sir. I'm sorry to disturb you, but it'd be great if you could not smoke in here" or some such.


We're still humans. Humanity is not separated by smokers and no-smokers :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May be it should be majority rules.


Everywhere i have lived, if there are more men than women it was toilet seat up and if there were more women than men it was toilet seat down. On the occasions where there was an equal amount it was one day up the next day down.


Unfortunately life is governed by majority rules.


If i was the only smoker in a group of ten i would smoke outside. No i wouldn't, because i wouldn't be with a bunch of sad do-gooders in the first place!!!


(Only joking)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...