FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Smokers!
Smokers!
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I'm a non smoker and to be honest can't stand the smell or the look of a cigerette!! but i have no problems with people who smoke, it's up to them there choice and why should i need to comment! but some people have this problem with smokers! they really go out there way in making life alot harder for the smoker!! we all know the risks it's discribed on the frigging packet!! so why do people need to preach so much about it! people don't seem to do the same about alcahol, yet you can smoke as many fags in a night but that won't kill you! but have the same amount of alcohol and that will kill you! i'm so fed up with this country and its double standards and its silly prejudices. it's a democracy isn't it free speech and all that crap??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Well i packed in smoking 2 weeks ago after a bad chest infection that needed 2 courses of antibiotics and steroids,i couldnt even walk up the stairs without being breathless which scared the life out of me.
My 13yr old son was ill the same time,he needed an inhaler and antibiotics,i swear he was so ill because of passive smoking so im thinking that maybe thats why people are so against smoking,its people around smokers that suffer too.
We dont have a problem meeting smokers but only considerate ones,as i dont want to be tempted to smoke again not untill im confedent enough to know i wont be tempted to have a sneaky cigarette x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
theres non so boring as a recent quitter ...why do they suddenly feel after quitting they have to preach and preach and preach ,,,and preach of its health hazards ....er we know already ffs lol ...can someone change the record  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"theres non so boring as a recent quitter ...why do they suddenly feel after quitting they have to preach and preach and preach ,,,and preach of its health hazards ....er we know already ffs lol ...can someone change the record "
I wasnt preaching,got nothing against smokers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ruitWoman
over a year ago
near kings lynn |
Well done JP, good on ya.
I have found smokers breath smells and their clothes and hair too.
Am very proud of anyone that quits and they should be proud too.
Would you want to kiss anyone that stank of alcohol. I dont mean smell of it. I mean stink of it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
im smoking a faaag!!! nanny state..you cant do this ..that...o fuckem. i work hard i pay my bills pay my ni and tax so if i wana smoke drink then i will and should be able to, as long as dont hurt anyone then whats the problem... stupid rule you cant smoke in your car errrr my car i paid for it fuckoff!!! if some one didnt smoke the out of respect i would somke near them, but to be told ooo you shudnt ..gets on my tits!! you shudnt drink dont see them banning that do you!!!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
That’s not true about all ex smokers preaching about it, I used to smoke and don’t preach about it, yes you can tell the difference kissing a smoker, but its no worse than a non drinker kissing a drinker reeking of booze. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ruitWoman
over a year ago
near kings lynn |
"I'm a non smoker and to be honest can't stand the smell or the look of a cigerette!! but i have no problems with people who smoke, it's up to them there choice and why should i need to comment! but some people have this problem with smokers! they really go out there way in making life alot harder for the smoker!! we all know the risks it's discribed on the frigging packet!! so why do people need to preach so much about it! people don't seem to do the same about alcahol, yet you can smoke as many fags in a night but that won't kill you! but have the same amount of alcohol and that will kill you! i'm so fed up with this country and its double standards and its silly prejudices. it's a democracy isn't it free speech and all that crap??? "
This has all been said before but if "you" stuff yourself silly all night with food in a room with a child in that room, then your the only one eating it.
If you sit in that same room and smoke all eve in the same way then the only difference is that your not the only person in that room getting smoke inside their lungs, the child is too.
As they have to breathe your forcing them to breath ie in. With eating your not forcing everyone to eat the same food as you. Its their choice to not stuff themselves silly.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
Ha ha ha... Bigchief has his knickers in a big twist!! I am not pro or anti, but the reason for stopping smoking in cars would be the same as why you can get a ticket for eating in a car... Lack of control... Nothing to do with whose car it is!!! 
JnP.. Really hope you manage to keep off the ciggys... I quit in 1976 and I must say that it was tempting for a while. But with your health concerns it may help quite a bit. Good luck with that xx |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I thinks its unfair that non smokers are given priority over smokers in terms of operations. Some hospitals even refuse to deal with smokers health issues ...Reason i am saying it is unfair is because regardless of whether u do or dont smoke we all pay same level of national insurance contributions.
Now the controllers of the nanny state are moving on to the obese. Its simply a smokescreen to meet hospital stats such as ops done on time reducing waiting lists etc. If we all pay same level of NI then we should all be equal to the level of service regardless of if we do or do not smoke.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Ok here I go…… ….Now although I don’t meet smokers,, ,
I did used to smoke myself, and I loved every single drag of every fag I ever had , and I’d still smoke now if it simply weren’t for the health damaging implications….….
So anyway just to slide off topic slightly….,,,,and regardless of any argument supporting tax paid on cigarettes provides funding for appropriate health care for people suffering smoking related diseases … There are at present approximately 290 people die each DAY from smoking related illness in the UK compared to approximately 90 deaths each day caused though alcohol related diseases ….
Which is Kinda chilling really..... as niether way to die is usualy quick and painless for the patient or their loved ones
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
" i can smoke and dive at the same time as the fag is in my mouth all the time and i only take my hand off the wheel to put it out!! dont you have to do that to change gear if thats the case everyone must have to drive an auto...ooo theres another rule for the the men and women behind closed doors to make up!! and plz dont think im having a pop at you im not just hate been told how to live my life! by silly men with really bad hair who have no idea of life in the real world!! rant over i think pmsl "
If the "Fag" is in your mouth, how did it get there? Oh yes, you had to find the packet, open it, take out the "fag", put it in your mouth, press in the car lighter and wait or find the lighter and spark it up. Then you have to hold the lighter (either) to the tip of the "Fag" and light it... Once you have put the lighter down, only then can you leave it in your mouth all the time.
Oh, but I'll bet you are the one person to have the "Fag" already out and the lighter just to hand at all times!
Best place for the "Fag" is in your hand, in your mouth means you are dodging smoke and cannot see properly! I used to use all the same arguements and while I don't necessarily agree with a ban in cars, I can see the point. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"i light up b4 i start the car "
I knew there would be a smart ass answer! Good to know you are never driving for more than one "Fag" at a time though, at least that keeps us safe!
(But no doubt that if you are on a longer journey, there is always someone in the car to light it for you! Or you actually stop!  )
Anyway, smart answer all you like now.. Like I said, I am not really up for that type of ban but in your case.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" i can smoke and dive at the same time as the fag is in my mouth all the time and i only take my hand off the wheel to put it out!! dont you have to do that to change gear if thats the case everyone must have to drive an auto...ooo theres another rule for the the men and women behind closed doors to make up!! and plz dont think im having a pop at you im not just hate been told how to live my life! by silly men with really bad hair who have no idea of life in the real world!! rant over i think pmsl
If the "Fag" is in your mouth, how did it get there? Oh yes, you had to find the packet, open it, take out the "fag", put it in your mouth, press in the car lighter and wait or find the lighter and spark it up. Then you have to hold the lighter (either) to the tip of the "Fag" and light it... Once you have put the lighter down, only then can you leave it in your mouth all the time.
Oh, but I'll bet you are the one person to have the "Fag" already out and the lighter just to hand at all times!
Best place for the "Fag" is in your hand, in your mouth means you are dodging smoke and cannot see properly! I used to use all the same arguements and while I don't necessarily agree with a ban in cars, I can see the point. "
maybe big chief lit his cig prior to starting his engine? saying the smoke impairs his view of the road is not really much of an argument ...His choice to smoke yours not to ...ever tried you sound like you need to chill a bit |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"errr i am chilled very chilled, as for drugs!!!! errrr no way and dont get me started abt them either "
chief i was reffering to the other person m8 ..fook some really take these forums far to seriuosly, thought they were for open debate rather than avin a rant lol ...as for i suggested it as a passive agressive for the other person well either that or valium they sound like they need somert to relax lol..oh i in america gps have actually started prescribing it to there patients for many ailments coming to a gp near us soon lol. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was under the impression that the ban was only for company vehicles?
That's what I thought!!!"
Yep bans only for company drivers...How really can you police a ban on private car smokers ...nanny state gone barking mad lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was under the impression that the ban was only for company vehicles?
That's what I thought!!!
Yep bans only for company drivers...How really can you police a ban on private car smokers ...nanny state gone barking mad lol "
There is no such ban |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
i gave up smoking 15 years ago,but have never preached to anyone about it...just because i dont drink or smoke doesnt mean no one else can....its thier choice..thier lifes...just hope noone blows the smoke in my face.,...i might just want to start smoking again,lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
" maybe big chief lit his cig prior to starting his engine? saying the smoke impairs his view of the road is not really much of an argument ...His choice to smoke yours not to ...ever tried you sound like you need to chill a bit "
You haven't done yourself any favours with this post, just makes you look a bit silly, imho!
If having impared vision because of smoke is "not really much of an argument" then perhaps we should just let people drive off on frosty mornings with a small area cleared in front of the driver! Perhaps we shouldn't worry about those we see driving with dirty windscreens... Hell, I'll leave my glasses at home!
And to even mention "Weed" Perhaps chill is not the right word. Maybe you should visit my best friend in the hostel where he lives. Lifelong "Weed" smoker and a shadow of his former self. Kinda like alchoholism.. Can't think, can't make decisions and just freezes every now and then... No thanks, but you can if you like! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was under the impression that the ban was only for company vehicles?
That's what I thought!!!
Yep bans only for company drivers...How really can you police a ban on private car smokers ...nanny state gone barking mad lol
There is no such ban"
Oh yes there is company cars are spot checked fr signs of smoking in them such as cig burns smell etc. I know this from a friend who recently had to sit through a disciplinary hearing... for smoking he was given a verbal warning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
we are both lepers oppsy i ment smokers.... we tell everyone who we plan to meet so they know if a prob sorry dont meet us then.... we dont chain smoke and smoke lightly when we meet with a non smoker ... i guess horses for courses liek everything some ppl dont like smoking some dont like anal personal preference its why this site succeeds as if we all the same and thought the same would be boring !! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
" reading posts can go one way or the other it would be diff if you could see the persons face as they spoke then things would come across in a diff way!, its the ..been told you can or cant thing for me. "
That is sooo true |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Non Smoking laws were brought in to protect people from passive smoking, it was banned in company vehicles (where there is vehicle sharing or multiple users) because it was considered that people were being subjected to passive smoke without choice.
The BMA suggested last year that smoking in private vehicles where children are being carried should also be banned.
To date I don't think this has been taken into law at this point?...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"some dont like anal personal preference its why this site succeeds as if we all the same and thought the same would be boring !!"
Don't get me started on Anal!!! Do you know how dangerous that is when driving!!!!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was under the impression that the ban was only for company vehicles?
That's what I thought!!!
Yep bans only for company drivers...How really can you police a ban on private car smokers ...nanny state gone barking mad lol
There is no such ban
Oh yes there is company cars are spot checked fr signs of smoking in them such as cig burns smell etc. I know this from a friend who recently had to sit through a disciplinary hearing... for smoking he was given a verbal warning. "
I think you know I meant there is no such ban on private vehicles... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"some dont like anal personal preference its why this site succeeds as if we all the same and thought the same would be boring !!
Don't get me started on Anal!!! Do you know how dangerous that is when driving!!!! "
I could imagine you might get into a situation where you could shit ya self yes lmao |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" maybe big chief lit his cig prior to starting his engine? saying the smoke impairs his view of the road is not really much of an argument ...His choice to smoke yours not to ...ever tried you sound like you need to chill a bit
You haven't done yourself any favours with this post, just makes you look a bit silly, imho!
If having impared vision because of smoke is "not really much of an argument" then perhaps we should just let people drive off on frosty mornings with a small area cleared in front of the driver! Perhaps we shouldn't worry about those we see driving with dirty windscreens... Hell, I'll leave my glasses at home!
And to even mention "Weed" Perhaps chill is not the right word. Maybe you should visit my best friend in the hostel where he lives. Lifelong "Weed" smoker and a shadow of his former self. Kinda like alchoholism.. Can't think, can't make decisions and just freezes every now and then... No thanks, but you can if you like! "
And there speaks the word of god? yep ok no worries. lets agree to disagree and leave it there ..and oh for the record im not a smoker i simply said it figuritevly speeking because they say it relaxes you and you sound like you could do with relaxing a bit.
As i said forums for open debate isnt it to express opinion rather than someone to go trying to force there own opinions down somebodys throat. There i go again figurtively speeking and making a comolete cock of myself but hey its good to laff at yourself sometimes ..ever tried it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" ......... has never been for me, but my mum smokes it for the pain she had her breasts removed due to cancer she reckons its great for the pain."
There's no doubt it works as an analgesic for some folk but there ought to be no reason why she's had resort to smoking for her pain.
Actually there's no real reason why she should be in pain after mastectomy. There's plenty of tools in the modern physician's little black bag. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
i gave up smoking. i don't really miss it.
for me,drinking and smoking kinda went together so i hardly drink either now.
I don't really miss that either.
I used to occasionally have a puff.
I miss that a bit
that and the meow meow |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"And there speaks the word of god? yep ok no worries. lets agree to disagree and leave it there ..and oh for the record im not a smoker i simply said it figuritevly speeking because they say it relaxes you and you sound like you could do with relaxing a bit.
As i said forums for open debate isnt it to express opinion rather than someone to go trying to force there own opinions down somebodys throat. There i go again figurtively speeking and making a comolete cock of myself but hey its good to laff at yourself sometimes ..ever tried it "
You really don't get it do you! So me expressing my opinion is "Forcing" and you expressing opinion is OK? What do you call debate? Is it not stating your opinion and facts to back you up? Well, that is what we have been doing (well, a bit light on facts but plety of opinion!) And if you knew me, you would know that if I got any more chilled, I would combat Global Warming all by myself. And as for laughing at myself.... I do it most of the time... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umourCouple
over a year ago
Rushden |
"some dont like anal personal preference its why this site succeeds as if we all the same and thought the same would be boring !!
Don't get me started on Anal!!! Do you know how dangerous that is when driving!!!! smoking and having anal omg now thats something i gotta see "
Whatever you do don't try it! That is how I got this bent cock! Still, I was told I should have been a woman!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" ......... has never been for me, but my mum smokes it for the pain she had her breasts removed due to cancer she reckons its great for the pain.
There's no doubt it works as an analgesic for some folk but there ought to be no reason why she's had resort to smoking for her pain.
Actually there's no real reason why she should be in pain after mastectomy. There's plenty of tools in the modern physician's little black bag."
Like what ....a couple of leaches |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
as a recent quiter of ciggies i do find the arguments here rather annoying,in fact its enough to force me back on the ciggies,,,,
now il waitfor the people to start saying "ah youv no will power",,,
as all i can see on this thread is arguments,and as all people giving up ciggies,will tell you,theyr temperand patience is stretched as it is |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Yeah,,,,,hmmm ok!!!…… well I reckon offering someone a light for their cigarette constitutes associated issues of technically assisting suicide should the smoker subsequently die of smoking related diseases ….
Then ya gonna be in big twubble...!!!
So there…….. stick that in ya pipe and smoke it ……..
tic
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" ......... has never been for me, but my mum smokes it for the pain she had her breasts removed due to cancer she reckons its great for the pain.
There's no doubt it works as an analgesic for some folk but there ought to be no reason why she's had resort to smoking for her pain.
Actually there's no real reason why she should be in pain after mastectomy. There's plenty of tools in the modern physician's little black bag.
Like what ....a couple of leaches "
Leeches have their uses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *umpkinMan
over a year ago
near the sounds of the wimborne quarter jack! |
"I was under the impression that the ban was only for company vehicles?
That's what I thought!!!
Yep bans only for company drivers...How really can you police a ban on private car smokers ...nanny state gone barking mad lol
There is no such ban
Oh yes there is company cars are spot checked fr signs of smoking in them such as cig burns smell etc. I know this from a friend who recently had to sit through a disciplinary hearing... for smoking he was given a verbal warning.
I think you know I meant there is no such ban on private vehicles..."
The police could always get you for "not being in full control of the vehicle" if they catch you trying to, for example, fish a ciggy out of a packet while you driving, in the same way that they would get you for having a swig of (soft) drink from a can/bottle. In that respect, smoking in a car would indeed be illeagal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I thinks its unfair that non smokers are given priority over smokers in terms of operations. Some hospitals even refuse to deal with smokers health issues ...Reason i am saying it is unfair is because regardless of whether u do or dont smoke we all pay same level of national insurance contributions.
hmmm interesting.
Now the controllers of the nanny state are moving on to the obese. Its simply a smokescreen to meet hospital stats such as ops done on time reducing waiting lists etc. If we all pay same level of NI then we should all be equal to the level of service regardless of if we do or do not smoke.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" ......... has never been for me, but my mum smokes it for the pain she had her breasts removed due to cancer she reckons its great for the pain.
There's no doubt it works as an analgesic for some folk but there ought to be no reason why she's had resort to smoking for her pain.
Actually there's no real reason why she should be in pain after mastectomy. There's plenty of tools in the modern physician's little black bag.
Like what ....a couple of leaches
Leeches have their uses."
they do indeed, I believed they are used for anti blood clotting amonst other things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Yeah,,,,,hmmm ok!!!…… well I reckon offering someone a light for their cigarette constitutes associated issues of technically assisting suicide should the smoker subsequently die of smoking related diseases ….
Then ya gonna be in big twubble...!!!
So there…….. stick that in ya pipe and smoke it ……..
tic
"
cum on baby light my fire ... all join in now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
"
good informative post. So Roy Castle who never smoked but died of lung cancer could have contacted the disease by something else other than passive smoking?
I remember the arguments at the time against passive smoking and Roy Castle got more air time dead than he did alive as the beacon of the passive smoking kills lobby ...im just asking  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
"
you can dig facts up from all sorts of places but its a fact people do get cancer from passive smoking. Lets be honest if the government didn't get so much duty from it then it would have been banned years ago.
Smoking in your own home is fine, but elsewhere its a thing of the past and should stay that way. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
you can dig facts up from all sorts of places but its a fact people do get cancer from passive smoking. Lets be honest if the government didn't get so much duty from it then it would have been banned years ago.
Smoking in your own home is fine, but elsewhere its a thing of the past and should stay that way. "
I do still smoke but I agree and I would not be against similar rules applied to alcohol that is also out of hand and does affect other peoples lives, very badly in some cases. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Kung fu i think what peaches may be implying is that passive smoking causing cancer ...may be a smokescreen pardon the pun "
I know so many have dug up info in the past on that in various sites. What you have to remember is the tobacco industry spends millions trying to discredit the passive smoking theory. I just wish they would put the same money into developing alternatives to putting burning sticks in your mouth. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
you can dig facts up from all sorts of places but its a fact people do get cancer from passive smoking. Lets be honest if the government didn't get so much duty from it then it would have been banned years ago.
Smoking in your own home is fine, but elsewhere its a thing of the past and should stay that way.
I do still smoke but I agree and I would not be against similar rules applied to alcohol that is also out of hand and does affect other peoples lives, very badly in some cases. "
Its not similar to smoking though because breathing out beer fumes don't give people cancer.
Also if you have 10 pints some guys kick off. With cigarettes there is no aggregation linked. I don't really see a big similarity my self. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
you can dig facts up from all sorts of places but its a fact people do get cancer from passive smoking. Lets be honest if the government didn't get so much duty from it then it would have been banned years ago.
Smoking in your own home is fine, but elsewhere its a thing of the past and should stay that way.
I do still smoke but I agree and I would not be against similar rules applied to alcohol that is also out of hand and does affect other peoples lives, very badly in some cases. "
yes be nice i agree there it was the government that brought in 24/7 licensing laws. Now they admit d*unken behaviour in city centres is out of hand but rather than cut the liscening hours ..which would prob sort the problem. They come up with the idea of increasing the price of alchohol ????...def a win win situations for those oily snakeskin salesam politicians and may i say how lovely yr bums looking tonight |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If everyone in the country stopped smoking where else do you think the government would get the revenue from the taxes they have put on the tobacco from."
Now that is a really daft thing to say if its meant to justify smoking. If no one had ever smoked on the first place we wouldn't need to raise as much to support the NHS.
The fact is its an unsociable habit. Yes it looks like smokers are picked on but it is still unsociable these days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If everyone in the country stopped smoking where else do you think the government would get the revenue from the taxes they have put on the tobacco from.
Now that is a really daft thing to say if its meant to justify smoking. If no one had ever smoked on the first place we wouldn't need to raise as much to support the NHS.
The fact is its an unsociable habit. Yes it looks like smokers are picked on but it is still unsociable these days. "
But smoking doesnt have to be justified ...its not illegal is it ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If everyone in the country stopped smoking where else do you think the government would get the revenue from the taxes they have put on the tobacco from.
Now that is a really daft thing to say if its meant to justify smoking. If no one had ever smoked on the first place we wouldn't need to raise as much to support the NHS.
The fact is its an unsociable habit. Yes it looks like smokers are picked on but it is still unsociable these days. "
just to further add it comes accross as your picking on smokers by saying if no one ever smoked we wouldnt have to raise as much to support the nhs.
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Even when i smoked i used to hate seeing kids in a car with their parents smoking x"
ooo and pregnant women smokeing, its my biggest hate and ive nearly got a smack in the face several times for voicing my opinion when i see pregnant women smoking
i dont think it should be legal as unborn babies now have legal rights and its ilegal to smoke under 18
theres logic in there somewhere lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The preference given to non-smokers in the NHS is not due to the fact that they are smokers, but the fact they are less likely to survive a surgical procedure done under anaesthetic.
Personall i like smokers, they pay loads in tax & then die early therefore not taking up their pensions 
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit."
Funny you should mention the standing out in the rain. Everyone of my friends that smoke and thats not many now days go outside when to smoke even when at home!!! That just tells me that they know it stinks and is not a good habit to have.
Now as someone who is a non smoker and someone that has never even tried it, I have never understood the attraction of burning money which effectively is what smoking is. I also see no attraction in being a slave to a habit that makes me stand outside to burn that money no matter what the weather!!!!!
I choose not to meet smokers because I don't like the smell or the taste it makes me feel physically sick and have often gagged. The one time I kissed a smoker I vomited on his shoes. I am sure if this happened on a meet this would most certainly put a damper on things.
I remember when my ex father in law gave up smoking he went round to all of his family and apologised because he said he didn't realise he smelt so bad!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Y'know, my mates who have given up did exactly that! all commented on how bad smokers smell & then apologised for it!
I won't meet smokers, don't care if they are gorgeous as they smell will put me off. My partner is an ex-smoker & is even more anti smoking than i am.
I don't like being around smokers for too long as it makes my chest tight, and i can feel the effects when i go out on the bike the next day. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If everyone in the country stopped smoking where else do you think the government would get the revenue from the taxes they have put on the tobacco from."
ded right smokers pay way more in tax than they cost the nhs, so people should be thanking us, we both smoke its our choice to, we dont smoke inside and never would, life is all about freedom of choice |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Maybe as an individual maybe but what about the others smokers effect. Friend of mine has 3 kids she smoked with the first 2. Both kids had constant ear infections coughs colds snotty noses although she never smoked round them but smoked while pregnant. With her 3rd she gave up completely the youngest never had any of the problems like the older 2. Is still the healthier of the 3 children now they are teenagers. the youngest is also the only one of the 3 that does not smoke! I wonder if there is a link!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
i cant stand it wen ppl preach about not smoking i have a few in my family,if i wana fag ill have one,i dont drink every single wk its rare i do drink and i neva do drugs so thats my vice and i enjoy it,i will stop soon but im not ready to yet!
sorry ranting hehe  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The preference given to non-smokers in the NHS is not due to the fact that they are smokers, but the fact they are less likely to survive a surgical procedure done under anaesthetic.
Personall i like smokers, they pay loads in tax & then die early therefore not taking up their pensions
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit."
You like smokers becaause as you say they pay loads in tax, die young and dont take up there pensions??? Wow what a warm friendly humane human being you appear to be ...your all heart.
and you say you have friends that are smokers ...unbelievable. Such inflammatory comments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit.
Funny you should mention the standing out in the rain. Everyone of my friends that smoke and thats not many now days go outside when to smoke even when at home!!! That just tells me that they know it stinks and is not a good habit to have.
Now as someone who is a non smoker and someone that has never even tried it, I have never understood the attraction of burning money which effectively is what smoking is. I also see no attraction in being a slave to a habit that makes me stand outside to burn that money no matter what the weather!!!!!
I choose not to meet smokers because I don't like the smell or the taste it makes me feel physically sick and have often gagged. The one time I kissed a smoker I vomited on his shoes. I am sure if this happened on a meet this would most certainly put a damper on things.
I remember when my ex father in law gave up smoking he went round to all of his family and apologised because he said he didn't realise he smelt so bad!!"
If you hate smokers so much why then did you attempt to kiss one ? what next lets find another minority group to attack like the obese ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ruitWoman
over a year ago
near kings lynn |
Dont know how it is in real life but i thought if your an alcoholic and Cant manage without alcohol so the same for a smoker that Cant give up is a smokerholic!
If an alcoholic needs a liver transplant then they have to give up drinking before they Will consider being allowed a new liver as they killed their original one.
So does the same apply for lungs for smokerholics? i hope so. Really dont know if it is the case.
But they shouldnt be allowed to have a new one until they give up. Maybe that does happen. I have no idea.
But you Cant justify burning money as smoking is basically doing, clogging other peoples lungs,and killing of their own lungs at the same time and then they try praise themselves by saying about the revenue it brings in and tax and all that!
You stink. Your clothes stink. Your breath stinks.your kids clothes stink... Pretty much. Yes there are some that dont.
No one forced you to do it to yourself.
No one forces obese people to eat but if my sibling is obese they arent forcing me to become obese. Smoking forces others room breath it in unless your in a flipping field then its not happening. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ruitWoman
over a year ago
near kings lynn |
"
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit.
Funny you should mention the standing out in the rain. Everyone of my friends that smoke and thats not many now days go outside when to smoke even when at home!!! That just tells me that they know it stinks and is not a good habit to have.
Now as someone who is a non smoker and someone that has never even tried it, I have never understood the attraction of burning money which effectively is what smoking is. I also see no attraction in being a slave to a habit that makes me stand outside to burn that money no matter what the weather!!!!!
I choose not to meet smokers because I don't like the smell or the taste it makes me feel physically sick and have often gagged. The one time I kissed a smoker I vomited on his shoes. I am sure if this happened on a meet this would most certainly put a damper on things.
I remember when my ex father in law gave up smoking he went round to all of his family and apologised because he said he didn't realise he smelt so bad!!
If you hate smokers so much why then did you attempt to kiss one ? what next lets find another minority group to attack like the obese ? "
th poster probably didnt but got one planted on their lips as i had it happen to me. I wont voluntarily kiss someone knowing they smoke for fear of throwing up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Why is it that for some they consider smokers to be criminals murdererers dirty smelly unintellegent oaths.
Some posts on here simply appear to show the posters for what they are hate filled and inarticulate passing there comments without facts or foundations other than simply to say how smokers are the scum of the earth.
its simples put on your pro u wont meet smokers and smokers wont contact you well some wont who respect others profiles. Is there any need to personally attack the smoker.
I dont know about smokers stinking but some of the attitudes posted simply do . whatever happened to the live and let live ..ok even if smokers might die younger. ironic dont ya think mr or mrs health nut couls step out into the raod tommorow and get hit by a truck.
Why do Non smokers assume they will live longer. My gran smoked from early teens and lived to her late 80s without any smoke related illness.
Smoking is an addiction |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why is it that for some they consider smokers to be criminals murdererers dirty smelly unintellegent oaths.
Some posts on here simply appear to show the posters for what they are hate filled and inarticulate passing there comments without facts or foundations other than simply to say how smokers are the scum of the earth.
its simples put on your pro u wont meet smokers and smokers wont contact you well some wont who respect others profiles. Is there any need to personally attack the smoker.
I dont know about smokers stinking but some of the attitudes posted simply do . whatever happened to the live and let live ..ok even if smokers might die younger. ironic dont ya think mr or mrs health nut couls step out into the raod tommorow and get hit by a truck.
Why do Non smokers assume they will live longer. My gran smoked from early teens and lived to her late 80s without any smoke related illness.
Smoking is an addiction "
I think you will find the statistics disagree. None smokers live longer. I agree with your other views. Smoking is an individuals lifestyle choice and is not a criminal offence x |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The preference given to non-smokers in the NHS is not due to the fact that they are smokers, but the fact they are less likely to survive a surgical procedure done under anaesthetic.
Personall i like smokers, they pay loads in tax & then die early therefore not taking up their pensions
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit.
You like smokers becaause as you say they pay loads in tax, die young and dont take up there pensions??? Wow what a warm friendly humane human being you appear to be ...your all heart.
and you say you have friends that are smokers ...unbelievable. Such inflammatory comments. "
No one forced you to take up smoking, so to claim some sort of moral superiority through paying tax is pretty laughable, you made the choice knowing it costs money. If you don't want to pay then give up.
If you want to smoke yourself into an early grave whilst making yourself smelly thats your choice but you should not be allowed to inflict that choice on others, which is why certain laws are in place.
I'm a cyclist, i need my lungs to operate at a decent level so i won't put myself in places where there is smoke.
I love how some smokers defend their choice by bleating about how their rights are infringed - guess what, your 'right' to smoke stops where other peoples right to a healthy life start.
I've heard smokers make the claim that it is acceptable to be discriminatory towards smokers in a way it is not acceptable towards black people/gay people etc.
Completely different. Smoking is a choice and it is acceptable to criticise a choice when that choice can endanger the health and/or the enjoyment of others.
However it is spun, smoking is not a right to be inflicted on other people.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The preference given to non-smokers in the NHS is not due to the fact that they are smokers, but the fact they are less likely to survive a surgical procedure done under anaesthetic.
Personall i like smokers, they pay loads in tax & then die early therefore not taking up their pensions
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit.
You like smokers becaause as you say they pay loads in tax, die young and dont take up there pensions??? Wow what a warm friendly humane human being you appear to be ...your all heart.
and you say you have friends that are smokers ...unbelievable. Such inflammatory comments.
No one forced you to take up smoking, so to claim some sort of moral superiority through paying tax is pretty laughable, you made the choice knowing it costs money. If you don't want to pay then give up.
If you want to smoke yourself into an early grave whilst making yourself smelly thats your choice but you should not be allowed to inflict that choice on others, which is why certain laws are in place.
I'm a cyclist, i need my lungs to operate at a decent level so i won't put myself in places where there is smoke.
I love how some smokers defend their choice by bleating about how their rights are infringed - guess what, your 'right' to smoke stops where other peoples right to a healthy life start.
I've heard smokers make the claim that it is acceptable to be discriminatory towards smokers in a way it is not acceptable towards black people/gay people etc.
Completely different. Smoking is a choice and it is acceptable to criticise a choice when that choice can endanger the health and/or the enjoyment of others.
However it is spun, smoking is not a right to be inflicted on other people.
"
er i dont smoke neither have i tried to claim some superior moral high ground on smokers paying tax. Care to point out where i have made this statement ?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
My views were that all peoples lifestyles choices should be respected rather than verbally attacked and pigeon holed in the yr a smoker therefore you stink and your the scum of the earth as some posts appear to claim.
and that smokers have every equal right to nhs treatment because they pay the same amount into it in national insurance contributions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions. "
Here.
Claiming fairness by saying smokers should have a reduction in N.I. contributions? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"My views were that all peoples lifestyles choices should be respected rather than verbally attacked and pigeon holed in the yr a smoker therefore you stink and your the scum of the earth as some posts appear to claim.
and that smokers have every equal right to nhs treatment because they pay the same amount into it in national insurance contributions. "
Except that, as stated, there are a few medical reasons why smokers will be refused treatment until they give up. NHS resources are finite, why should someone who chooses to damage their health be offered the treatment that will allow them to continue?
Would you give a liver to an alcoholic?
Anyway, it is rare that smoking will prevent you from getting treatment, you will often get advice from the doc though about quitting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions.
Here.
Claiming fairness by saying smokers should have a reduction in N.I. contributions?"
well why not? if the smoker ...who as matter of fact pays more tax then the none smoker cos they pay tax on the fags.
Then why shouldnt they recieve a reduction in national contributions having paid in the same amount throught out there working life ...if and heres the if .....they were refused treatmeant because they smoke.
I AM NOT DEFENDING SMOKING i fully know of the health dangers we all do. But what i feel is worth defending is when people as here its smokers are pigeonholed into stinking scum of the earth sorts and some feel it is okay to join in the lynch mob mentality...soz each to there own personally i kinda like to think for myself than seek to be in anybodys incrowd but thats just my personal preffernce.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions.
Here.
Claiming fairness by saying smokers should have a reduction in N.I. contributions?
well why not? if the smoker ...who as matter of fact pays more tax then the none smoker cos they pay tax on the fags.
Then why shouldnt they recieve a reduction in national contributions having paid in the same amount throught out there working life ...if and heres the if .....they were refused treatmeant because they smoke.
I AM NOT DEFENDING SMOKING i fully know of the health dangers we all do. But what i feel is worth defending is when people as here its smokers are pigeonholed into stinking scum of the earth sorts and some feel it is okay to join in the lynch mob mentality...soz each to there own personally i kinda like to think for myself than seek to be in anybodys incrowd but thats just my personal preffernce.
"
The amount of tax paid is irrelevant. Should high earners (who pay more in Income Tax) go to the front of the queue then?
Treatment is refused on medical grounds only. If you are going to set about destroying your new lungs by smoking then the lungs should be given to the person who didn't wilfully damage them. That's only my opinion though, doesn't carry any weight with the medical profession.
If your smoking is affecting your overall health to the point where a medical procedure is dangerous then yes, treatment may be withheld until such time as you are strong enough for it to go ahead.
As before, smoking is a choice. If you make that choice then you also choose the situations that come with that choice, a reduction in medical options may well be one of them.
The tax thing is a fish of a distinctly red hue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"My views were that all peoples lifestyles choices should be respected rather than verbally attacked and pigeon holed in the yr a smoker therefore you stink and your the scum of the earth as some posts appear to claim.
and that smokers have every equal right to nhs treatment because they pay the same amount into it in national insurance contributions.
Except that, as stated, there are a few medical reasons why smokers will be refused treatment until they give up. NHS resources are finite, why should someone who chooses to damage their health be offered the treatment that will allow them to continue?
Would you give a liver to an alcoholic?
Anyway, it is rare that smoking will prevent you from getting treatment, you will often get advice from the doc though about quitting."
It isn't as rare as you think, having spoke to a woman this week who needed surgery but was told she had to stop smoking first. They scheduled her surgery for three months after, but had to do it earlier as an emergancy case.
It was a non smoking related surgey, but it seems Doctors play god with people and it could have turned out much worse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions.
Here.
Claiming fairness by saying smokers should have a reduction in N.I. contributions?
well why not? if the smoker ...who as matter of fact pays more tax then the none smoker cos they pay tax on the fags.
Then why shouldnt they recieve a reduction in national contributions having paid in the same amount throught out there working life ...if and heres the if .....they were refused treatmeant because they smoke.
I AM NOT DEFENDING SMOKING i fully know of the health dangers we all do. But what i feel is worth defending is when people as here its smokers are pigeonholed into stinking scum of the earth sorts and some feel it is okay to join in the lynch mob mentality...soz each to there own personally i kinda like to think for myself than seek to be in anybodys incrowd but thats just my personal preffernce.
The amount of tax paid is irrelevant. Should high earners (who pay more in Income Tax) go to the front of the queue then?
Treatment is refused on medical grounds only. If you are going to set about destroying your new lungs by smoking then the lungs should be given to the person who didn't wilfully damage them. That's only my opinion though, doesn't carry any weight with the medical profession.
If your smoking is affecting your overall health to the point where a medical procedure is dangerous then yes, treatment may be withheld until such time as you are strong enough for it to go ahead.
As before, smoking is a choice. If you make that choice then you also choose the situations that come with that choice, a reduction in medical options may well be one of them.
The tax thing is a fish of a distinctly red hue."
Personall i like smokers, they pay loads in tax & then die early therefore not taking up their pensions
Your words, your views ..not mine. oh by the way you will probably be pleased to know a friend of mine died from cancer |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"My views were that all peoples lifestyles choices should be respected rather than verbally attacked and pigeon holed in the yr a smoker therefore you stink and your the scum of the earth as some posts appear to claim.
and that smokers have every equal right to nhs treatment because they pay the same amount into it in national insurance contributions.
Except that, as stated, there are a few medical reasons why smokers will be refused treatment until they give up. NHS resources are finite, why should someone who chooses to damage their health be offered the treatment that will allow them to continue?
Would you give a liver to an alcoholic?
Anyway, it is rare that smoking will prevent you from getting treatment, you will often get advice from the doc though about quitting.
It isn't as rare as you think, having spoke to a woman this week who needed surgery but was told she had to stop smoking first. They scheduled her surgery for three months after, but had to do it earlier as an emergancy case.
It was a non smoking related surgey, but it seems Doctors play god with people and it could have turned out much worse."
Yep its becoming all to familiar unfortunatley of doctors playing god. Unfortunatley hospitals appear more obbsessed with stats to appease the mps rather than saving peoples lives and in order to bring there waiting lists down to appease the governments statistics use smokers as a smokescreen (no pun intended) to put of there ops simply to meet government targets on bringing down waiting lists and operation timescales.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
maybe i am being mildly paranoid here but they do say its only a heightened sense of awareness.
round here we are sent a census every six months to fill in its a tick box exercise. They ask do you smoke. So if you do and your being honest you put a tick in the yes box.
Now heres where my paranoia kicks in in my my mind the gps surgeries probably the length an breadth of the country are negligent in consantly losing there own patients files .....repeatedly asking them the same questions.
or they are conducting a census and discriminating against smokers as once recieveing the info back they can then mark down the person as a put on the future waiting list for ever ....because they smoke? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I was surprised to learn that smoking around children can actually damage their hearing! Bizarre eh!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11758345
"
I think it's because children's senses etc are still developing & smoke will affect that. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Apparently according the bbc article it something to do with affecting blood flow.
I didn't realise even if you don't smoke you can end up with cotinine in your blood. :/ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Passive Smoking
The idea that tobacco smoke, heavily diluted in the atmosphere, can kill or seriously harm large numbers of non-smokers is so implausible that the anti-smoking lobby has gone to exceptional lengths to foster a fear of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), also known as secondhand smoke (SHS) or “passive smoking”.
While it is perfectly legitimate for people to express a dislike of the smell of tobacco smoke or say it causes them some discomfort, the distortion of scientific, statistical, methodological, and research procedure to provide a medical justification for banning smoking in public places is not acceptable, least of all as a pretext for removing the rights of ten million British adults.
Are non-smokers at risk from ETS?
Regardless of what you may have heard, the scientific establishment has found it impossible to reach agreement on the issue. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's Desert Island Discs on 23 February 2001, Professor Sir Richard Doll, the first scientist to publish research that suggested a correlation between lung cancer and primary smoking, commented: “The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me.” Professor Doll’s comments surprised some people, but not those who have analysed the arguments about ETS in detail.
you can dig facts up from all sorts of places but its a fact people do get cancer from passive smoking. Lets be honest if the government didn't get so much duty from it then it would have been banned years ago.
Smoking in your own home is fine, but elsewhere its a thing of the past and should stay that way.
I do still smoke but I agree and I would not be against similar rules applied to alcohol that is also out of hand and does affect other peoples lives, very badly in some cases.
Its not similar to smoking though because breathing out beer fumes don't give people cancer.
Also if you have 10 pints some guys kick off. With cigarettes there is no aggregation linked. I don't really see a big similarity my self."
not in that sense but in the sense of collateral damage yes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
my point is smokers have just as much rights to use the nhs as non smokers as both groups pay there national insurance contributions. Maybe it would be fair then if smokers were exempt from paying national insurance contributions ?
The millions poured into the nhs is not to support smokers its mostly to support the nhs beurocrats pensions.
Here.
Claiming fairness by saying smokers should have a reduction in N.I. contributions?
well why not? if the smoker ...who as matter of fact pays more tax then the none smoker cos they pay tax on the fags.
Then why shouldnt they recieve a reduction in national contributions having paid in the same amount throught out there working life ...if and heres the if .....they were refused treatmeant because they smoke.
I AM NOT DEFENDING SMOKING i fully know of the health dangers we all do. But what i feel is worth defending is when people as here its smokers are pigeonholed into stinking scum of the earth sorts and some feel it is okay to join in the lynch mob mentality...soz each to there own personally i kinda like to think for myself than seek to be in anybodys incrowd but thats just my personal preffernce.
The amount of tax paid is irrelevant. Should high earners (who pay more in Income Tax) go to the front of the queue then?
Treatment is refused on medical grounds only. If you are going to set about destroying your new lungs by smoking then the lungs should be given to the person who didn't wilfully damage them. That's only my opinion though, doesn't carry any weight with the medical profession.
If your smoking is affecting your overall health to the point where a medical procedure is dangerous then yes, treatment may be withheld until such time as you are strong enough for it to go ahead.
As before, smoking is a choice. If you make that choice then you also choose the situations that come with that choice, a reduction in medical options may well be one of them.
The tax thing is a fish of a distinctly red hue."
and where will this discrimination stop. those who drink and compromise their health, those who eat too much and compromise their health, those who participate in dangerous sport and take risks (even football can be dangerous), those who spend too long in the sun, those who do not eat enough or drink enough water, those who eat to much sugary stuff and put themselves at risk of developing diabites, those who choose to take HRT and put themselves at a higher risk of breast cancer? I could go on ...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *orestersCouple
over a year ago
The Forest |
There is no reliable medical evidence to show that passive smoking carries an increased risk of lung cancer or CHD - in fact, a fart can carry more airborne particulate pollutants than cigarette smoke (Enstrom/Kabat study).
But, of course I can understand the thinking - tell the serfs that passive smoking is dangerous and whack up the tax on that basis - woooosh, billions into the economy.
Tell the serfs that speed cameras are there to save lives (even though many are not in accident blackspots) - wooosh, millions of pounds worth of fines into the economy.
Tell the serfs that using petrol harms the environment and whack up the taxes - wooosh, even more billions into the economy.
But I think the worst pollutant to humankind is the high levels of smug generated by the anti-smokers on this thread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There is no reliable medical evidence to show that passive smoking carries an increased risk of lung cancer or CHD - in fact, a fart can carry more airborne particulate pollutants than cigarette smoke (Enstrom/Kabat study).
But, of course I can understand the thinking - tell the serfs that passive smoking is dangerous and whack up the tax on that basis - woooosh, billions into the economy.
Tell the serfs that speed cameras are there to save lives (even though many are not in accident blackspots) - wooosh, millions of pounds worth of fines into the economy.
Tell the serfs that using petrol harms the environment and whack up the taxes - wooosh, even more billions into the economy.
But I think the worst pollutant to humankind is the high levels of smug generated by the anti-smokers on this thread. "
simpy and beautifully put. thanks you worded it better than i ever could. Although theres always a lot that still refuse to remove the blinkers even when the truth hits em point blank in the face. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There is no reliable medical evidence to show that passive smoking carries an increased risk of lung cancer or CHD - in fact, a fart can carry more airborne particulate pollutants than cigarette smoke (Enstrom/Kabat study).
But, of course I can understand the thinking - tell the serfs that passive smoking is dangerous and whack up the tax on that basis - woooosh, billions into the economy.
Tell the serfs that speed cameras are there to save lives (even though many are not in accident blackspots) - wooosh, millions of pounds worth of fines into the economy.
Tell the serfs that using petrol harms the environment and whack up the taxes - wooosh, even more billions into the economy.
But I think the worst pollutant to humankind is the high levels of smug generated by the anti-smokers on this thread. "
sometimes reminds me of George Orwells "Hour of Hate". He was ahead of his time though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ugby 123Couple
over a year ago
Forum Mod O o O oo |
"My views were that all peoples lifestyles choices should be respected rather than verbally attacked and pigeon holed in the yr a smoker therefore you stink and your the scum of the earth as some posts appear to claim.
and that smokers have every equal right to nhs treatment because they pay the same amount into it in national insurance contributions.
Except that, as stated, there are a few medical reasons why smokers will be refused treatment until they give up. NHS resources are finite, why should someone who chooses to damage their health be offered the treatment that will allow them to continue?
Would you give a liver to an alcoholic?
Anyway, it is rare that smoking will prevent you from getting treatment, you will often get advice from the doc though about quitting.
It isn't as rare as you think, having spoke to a woman this week who needed surgery but was told she had to stop smoking first. They scheduled her surgery for three months after, but had to do it earlier as an emergancy case.
It was a non smoking related surgey, but it seems Doctors play god with people and it could have turned out much worse."
PS just want to make clear that I don't smoke, but still think it is out of order that smokers get different treatment than non smokers, especially as most of the money from packets of fags goes into the treasurys coffers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"There is no reliable medical evidence to show that passive smoking carries an increased risk of lung cancer or CHD - in fact, a fart can carry more airborne particulate pollutants than cigarette smoke (Enstrom/Kabat study).
But, of course I can understand the thinking - tell the serfs that passive smoking is dangerous and whack up the tax on that basis - woooosh, billions into the economy.
Tell the serfs that speed cameras are there to save lives (even though many are not in accident blackspots) - wooosh, millions of pounds worth of fines into the economy.
Tell the serfs that using petrol harms the environment and whack up the taxes - wooosh, even more billions into the economy.
But I think the worst pollutant to humankind is the high levels of smug generated by the anti-smokers on this thread. "
From a solely personal point of view:
My Mum and Dad had pubs from 1959 til 1989.everyone seemed to smoke and the pubs had so much second hand smoke in them my eyes used to sting.
My Dad was/is a non smoker.He is 73 now and despite all those years of 'passive smoking' he has never had a single smoking related illness
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
It's a disgusting habit, horribly anti-social, makes you and your surroundings smell and is unhealthy for all concerned. I won't meet smokers nor allow anyone to smoke in my house. Some of my friends smoke, they stand outside in the rain if they visis & want a cig. On the flip side, if i choose to visit them i know i will have to endure their stinking habit.
Funny you should mention the standing out in the rain. Everyone of my friends that smoke and thats not many now days go outside when to smoke even when at home!!! That just tells me that they know it stinks and is not a good habit to have.
Now as someone who is a non smoker and someone that has never even tried it, I have never understood the attraction of burning money which effectively is what smoking is. I also see no attraction in being a slave to a habit that makes me stand outside to burn that money no matter what the weather!!!!!
I choose not to meet smokers because I don't like the smell or the taste it makes me feel physically sick and have often gagged. The one time I kissed a smoker I vomited on his shoes. I am sure if this happened on a meet this would most certainly put a damper on things.
I remember when my ex father in law gave up smoking he went round to all of his family and apologised because he said he didn't realise he smelt so bad!!
If you hate smokers so much why then did you attempt to kiss one ? what next lets find another minority group to attack like the obese ? "
I dont hate smokers at all!! What I said was that I don't like to meet smokers to play with. And to be honest how the hell was I supposed to know I was going to throw up on the one smokers shoes. And the first paragraph that is quoted in this message was written by another fab member not myself.
I was responding the the visiting smokers houses comment.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
