Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 49
  1. #11
    The point is that people who smoke choose to. When people are smoking near you, be you a smoker or not it doesnt mean you want to breathe it in. Also simply becuse it doesnt kill you doesnt mean it cant or wont harm you. You can die of a smoke related issue but thats not what will be said in the report.
    You can get lung cancer and not die, that doesnt mean it was pleasent.
    In no way can breathing in smoke of any kind be better or as good as breathing in air that is free of it.

  2. #12
    Premium User Krespo's Avatar


    Weasyl
    N/A
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,246
    Dont be blowing smoke in my face or I hurt you >:I

  3.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #13
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    Quote Originally Posted by CoyoteCaliente View Post
    Man seeing all these conversations about smoking makes it really hard to stop smoking.

    I wonder--Has any cause of death EVER been written down as "Complications from Second Hand Smoke"?
    You know, that brings up an interesting point. Benny up there mentioned how unreliable statistics can often be, but it's actually not the statistics themselves that are unreliable but the way they're interpreted (because the numbers you get are the numbers you get). That could make something like 'second hand smoke deaths' both an easy and a difficult target. Easy in the sense that, no, probably no doctor writes down 'cause of death: secondhand smoke inhalation' because of what Tycho said, so that means that in order to determine whether or not the actual cause of death was TRIGGERED by second hand smoke, you have to make some inferences. And once you start increasing the degrees of freedom like that, you start allowing for lots of different possibilities, and the data itself because much more easily manipulated.

    That said, plenty of scientists are aware of these biases, and so they do their studies in the best way to answer the question that's being asked (how many deaths each year are directly caused by complications from second hand smoke inhalation). Those are the studies we should be paying attention to in this regard. Like, the Heartland Institute can pretty much always be written off as bullshit no matter what they do (the only science they excel in is the science of manipulating public opinion), but I also wonder who pays for Cancer.org, you know? You really just have to read and understand the studies themselves. I mean... that kind of goes without saying in any scientific field, but in health issues it seems to be doubly true for some reason.

  4.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #14
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    Quote Originally Posted by XoPachi View Post
    I'm more interested in what makes Heartland Institute terrible. First time hearing about it...guess that's a good thing?
    They're basically just a libertarian thinktank that exists to promote skepticism regarding issues that their biggest donors would like the general public to be confused about in order to maintain their current profit margins, amongst other things. Right now they're going after global warming, promoting the idea that anthropogenic climate change is not happening, or that if it is happening it's a good thing, or something along those lines. They're not a scientific organization by any stretch of the imagination; they only hire scientists to add an aura of credibility to their mostly fraudulent work.

    Libertarian thinktanks are fine, but these particular people have made a case for themselves for being horribly untrustworthy and downright malevolent in the way they spread misinformation. Their agenda is what drives their conclusions, which means any study funded by them is basically useless from a scientific standpoint.

  5. #15
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Gamedog
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Москва
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    843
    I call bullshit. If you think about how cigarettes work, it's clear that second hand smoke is probably just as harmful as first-hand smoke. When you smoke, you're inhaling directly into your lungs but you're inhaling through a filter which supposedly filters out some toxins. Despite this, people still get lung cancer at alarming rates.
    Second hand smoke is not filtered, you're breathing in everything that a smoker doesn't breathe in because they have a filter.
    I can tell you that I've lived with a smoker for my entire life. I had horrible headaches almost daily, and my pets were coughing a lot. When I moved and there was no more smoking inside, I don't get headaches anymore and my pets don't cough anymore. Breathing in smoke (whether it's "filtered" or not) every day is not good, is not healthy, and is definitely dangerous in my opinion.

  6. #16
    Solifugid Onnes's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Onnes
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    321

  7.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #17
    Didn't try, Succeeded Fay V's Avatar



    Weasyl
    Fayv
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,379
    The heat element adds to it, that's in part why there is substantially less cancer in things like hookah and vaporization...that and not the shitty additives.

    But yeah, anyone that has been around cigs for any amount of time could note that it's not good. Even if it's not as bad as people are lead to believe, that shit sticks to everything, your furniture, clothing, everything. People hate the smell, it sets off asthma, all of that.

    Heck I smoke cigars and I smoke a pipe on a rare occasion and cig smoke still bothers me. So i understand regardless of statistics people don't want to be around smoke, and I've known plenty of people that just don't understand that. I've told off more than one person that wanted a casual smoke with me that their chosen spot was too close to a crowded street or door or something.

    On the other hand people do get really obnoxious about it. Like they'll go to a smoker that's alone on an empty street so as not to disturb anyone, and someone walks by making a point to walk close so they can cough obnoxiously...

    What I hate is these movements anti-smoking movements on campuses that push for no tobacco. Now I get it, college students are dicks and smoke can be gross, the smoke is a concern. But then they include things like chew and it's just...patronizing after that.
    I hate chew, i think it's one of the most disgusting habits possible, but if someone wants to do it it's not like it stops me enjoying my day.

  8. #18
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Gamedog
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Москва
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    843

  9.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #19
    Didn't try, Succeeded Fay V's Avatar



    Weasyl
    Fayv
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,379
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamedog View Post
    I... what...


    If someone wants to rot their jaw off with black goop, more power to them, as long as they don't spit that shit in public and have the decency to spit it into a container of some sort.
    yeah exactly.

  10. #20
    Banned Benny Bunnycorn's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Mugourth
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    138

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •