Smokers – selfish scum or persecuted minority?

sixrings

This has been entertaining to read. I grew up in a house full of smokers but don't smoke myself. I am not a doctor and can't quote any studies. However, I do consider myself smarter than a rock and can figure out that if I spend a lot of time in a coal mine breathing in coal dust it could be bad for me. I know that people who smoke have a higher rate of cancer. Therefore I don't need a study to tell me that if I spend a lot of time breathing in unfiltered smoke, it could be bad for me. The risk may not be as high as a smokers risk but its still a risk I don't want to take.

I've seen some arguments that government should not mandate no smoking in bars/resturaunts...but the government mandates a lot of food safety, work safety issues, handicap accessibility and we are all ok with it. I don't see any difference with this one. I'm not against people smoking when it only affects them...same with shooting guns. I don't care if someone takes a gun and shoots it all day at a range--good for them...but once they start just shooting it in the air where you don't know if someone will get hurt when the bullet comes back down--then I do care--even if the odds of someone actually getting hurt are small.

chinatbag

MDWilliams185 states: "First, second hand smoke is no danger as many studies have proven. "

I am a professor and a researcher, and my response here is based solely on the one study you posted a link to - I remember this study, and the firestorm it created. So, first let's be clear, even if we assume this to be a valid and reliable study, it didn't state there was no danger, what it stated was that the level of danger was lower than was being estimated in other studies. However, the study contained some serious methodological flaws which call its validity and reliability into question. A study which isn't reliable and valid is basically worthless except as a lesson in what not to do when conducting research.

This flaws in this study stem in large part from the fact that it is difficult for any study that examines humans over the long run in an uncontrolled environment, In this study, at the time the original data was collected, there were few limits on smoking, so you can't eliminate a major confounding variable (exposures from other sources besides one's spouse). This is a major confounder, as even if a non-smoker is married to a non-smoker, this doesn't mean that they aren't exposed to second hand smoke at the work site or from other family members. So, for the study to be valid, it needed to tighten its controls to eliminate other possible sources of exposure. They couldn't do this as the researchers were reviewing previously collected data (secondary data). This leads us to the second problem, which stems from their use of this second-hand data after being warned that the data might not be 'good'. The researchers were warned by the 'owners' of that the data they were examining that it had not been collected in such a way that the research question the researchers were posing could be validly answered. If a study isn't valid it simply means it wasn't measuring what it claimed to be measuring. If that is the case, then its highly unlikely that the results can be found if the study is repeated with a new population so its results aren't reliable.

In support of my comments, I think it should be noted that, after more analysis, the BMJ, the journal that published that article, published a piece describing the research as being “fundamentally flawed". Why did the researchers persist in examining data that they knew might not produce a valid and reliable study result? The American Medical Journal had refused to publish the article for the same flaws, as well as an additional problem. This problem stems from the fact that this study is fraught with the potential for researcher bias. Both of the study authors had long histories as consultants/researchers for tobacco interests and this study was largely funded by those same interests. This is why today researchers must clearly identify their funding sources when submitting research.

As I remembered these discussions, but didn't have specific references to them I took a look around the internet and found this piece. Its published by a clearly anti-smoking group (so is potentially biased) BUT it has a great list of references if anyone wants to dig them up to assess the accuracy of the site's conclusions - http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?id=333

This is one of the best replies in this whole thread and it is probably overlooked by everyone that wants to add in their personal opinions.

charlottelouise12345

Second, there is not a single study anywhere in the world that proves that second hand smoke is as dangerous as people try to make it out to be. My advice, worry about your own kids and stay out of other peoples business.

Two 'crazy days' in one week? Is it the moon? Are people drinking? What the heck. ><

If you have a non biased study by all means share it. I dont want to see the cancer society etc.. I want to see and actual study published in a medical journal. You wont find one. Every study ever done shows the same thing. Exposure to second hand smoke does not put your health in an type of long term danger or any higher risk of cancer.

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/111/20/2684.short

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=646710

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=646710

http://ajrccm.atsjournals.org/content/179/11/1029.short

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=387760

http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/27/4/386.short

http://journal.nzma.org.nz/journal/118-1213/1404/

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/294/2/E456.short

http://ajplung.physiology.org/content/298/1/L3.short

http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7446/977


Here. Studies from 1995 up to recently published ones. Published in peer reviewed medical journals from America, Europe and New Zealand. Those are just the ones I found on the first page of my search, there were pages and pages of articles on this topic. One of the studies directly looks at the effects of a public smoking ban. You cannot say that there is no evidence.

solyhhit

I don't smoke and never have. Would also never date someone who did.

With that said, your comments have been incredibly ignorant. Everyone has lived under different circumstances. Many people have lived around smokers their entire lives (parents) and many haven't had the education about smoking that many of us have. Some people have friends who've peer-pressured them while they were young and easily influenced.

It doesn't take a genius to see why someone would 'try' smoking and could potentially get addicted.

You never have, I never have. Good for us. But get off your high horse and realize that many people aren't as fortunate.

Great answer. I totally agree.

opalescence

I had a procedure done on Monday and the woman in the bed next to me had emphysema severely and never smoked a day in her life and neither did her parents etc, she could not recall ever being around cigarette smoke so it may not entirely be the cigarette smoke thats causing such health problems, it could be all the pollutants in the air we breathe.

Until companies stop polluting the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food they serve us and everything else, I will continue to enjoy my only vice, I mean after all it is perfectly legal.

I am very considerate of non-smokers as long as they give the same consideration.

Koldnomore

I smoked for over 25 years - Have been smoke free now for almost 5. Where I live smoking has been banned in public for just over 4 years, this also includes smoking in your car if you have a minor in there with you. Additionally you have to be at least 9 meters from a door to a public area if you are going to smoke.

When I did smoke I was always a very courteous smoker and I did not litter my butts everywhere either! When I started smoking it was a 'normal' thing to do. Pretty well everyone I knew smoked. My father smoked 42 years before he quit cold turkey - right around the time I started actually.

These days I really think that smokers are almost persecuted..The hate towards people who have this addiction is crazy - you can see it in some of the replies. I really don't believe that most smokers are out to be *kitten*. I think they are just trying to find a little relief in whatever way they can, having smoked as long as some of you people have been alive I can understand where they are coming from.. If you have never smoked it's hard to be 'compassionate' - kind of the same argument we make for people who have never been fat and how they can't possibly understand the addiction and emotional attachments to food.

I think that as a business owner you should have the choice with respect to what you will allow on your premises however then you would also have to make certain that anyone who works with you will also agree to be OK with the SHS - of course this may open a can of worms with respect to 'discrimination' against hiring non-smokers ( I don't know enough about the law to say). As a patron I have the choice to either go into your place, or not.

If I am walking around and someone blows smoke in my face believe me I will say something..same if they are smoking in a place with obvious no smoking signs, but if they are in a 'designated smoking area' then it's up to me to find a way around it or deal.

moosegt35

I don't smoke and never have. Would also never date someone who did.

With that said, your comments have been incredibly ignorant. Everyone has lived under different circumstances. Many people have lived around smokers their entire lives (parents) and many haven't had the education about smoking that many of us have. Some people have friends who've peer-pressured them while they were young and easily influenced.

It doesn't take a genius to see why someone would 'try' smoking and could potentially get addicted.

You never have, I never have. Good for us. But get off your high horse and realize that many people aren't as fortunate.

Great answer. I totally agree.

If you agree then you obviously didn't read my response to his post. If you get addicted to ANYTHING, you are weak minded and have no self control.

moosegt35

I had a procedure done on Monday and the woman in the bed next to me had emphysema severely and never smoked a day in her life and neither did her parents etc, she could not recall ever being around cigarette smoke so it may not entirely be the cigarette smoke thats causing such health problems, it could be all the pollutants in the air we breathe.

Until companies stop polluting the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food they serve us and everything else, I will continue to enjoy my only vice, I mean after all it is perfectly legal.

I am very considerate of non-smokers as long as they give the same consideration.

Someone got emphysema without being around smoke? That must mean smoke isn't what is causing it. Next you are going to tell me someone is HIV+ that didn't sleep with someone who has AIDS. I just don't believe it.

katescurios

I smoke and personally am pig sick of everyone having such a problem with it! The arguament about it being financially draining to the health service (UK) is crap! In the UK in 2011/12 the government generated £12.1 billion tax revenue from the sale of tobacco, cost to the NHS in treating smoking related illness - £2.7 billion a year. As far as I can see all non-smokers should be really bloody happy that smokers are providing so much income to the government, as without us there would be a deficit of nearly £10 billion that they would have to fund in additional tax payments!

I don't smoke around kids, I don't even smoke inside my own house, but if I want to sit outside a cafe/bar/restaurant or stand outside my work on my lunch break and have a cigarette then I should be able to do that without having interferring busy bodies coughing obnoxiously as they pass me or even worse coming up to me to tell me about the dangers of my choices.

It is apparently OK to get so drunk you end up vomiting or urinating all over the streets, starting fights and verbally abusing people but it is not ok to calmly and happily enjoy a cigarette????? The world is mad!

newmanmb463

I am going through this thread and I am not sure it's been brought up but, in my experience, smokers tend to litter. A LOT. In that respect, I would say they are selfish scum.

Not all. I will go out of my way to find an ashtray or trashcan or put a butt in my pocket before throwing it on the ground. I've seen plenty of non-smoking people that litter, so that is a pretty generalized stereotype. :flowerforyou:

Then you appear to be in the minority of smokers. I drive an hour to and from work every day, mostly on two lane roads, so when you get behind someone, you tend to be behind them for quite a while. Most of the people that I see smoking in their car throw their butts out the window when they are done,

In order to walk from my house to the downtown area, we have to walk through a congested intersection with gravel shoulders. It's disgusting how many of hundreds and thousands of cigarette butts are on the shoulder there. If you want to talk about legislature that should be implemented immediately, I'd love to start seeing $50-$100 tickets being handed out for littering (for any kind of litter, but definitely keep after the cigarette butts).

LordBear

i smoked from 19 tell about 3 or so years ago... finally got tired of the stuff and stopped cold turkey and never looked back... as a smoker yes.. got a lot of grief bout where and when or how u smoked.. i understand most of it..but as a business the business owner should have that choice. and if some one didnt want to be around it..they didnt work there and they didnt go in.. that is the way it should have been. i would be watching a parade and find a spot where no body was around and people would come up next to me..then gripe me out for smoking next to them. and so on...

however now that i am done with that crap i can really care less..lmao..and wish they would make it completely illegal.. but if that happened.. it would go underground and then the govt. would find somebody else to rape with their taxes. i cant even be near some one smoking now..makes me gag, and eyes burn etc.. i understand if i am visiting some one it is their home...but they could hold back on the smoking some or not at all or go outside. just to be polite.

katescurios

@moosegt35

Your post makes no sense.

Plenty of people get emphysema without smoking just as plenty of people get HIV without sleeping with someone who has aids.

Causes of empyhsema - http://www.medicinenet.com/emphysema/page3.htm#what_are_the_causes_or_risk_factors_for_emphysema

Other potential causes of HIV - born to a HIV+ mother, infection from a needle stick, blood transfusion...... to name but a few.

tmanfromtexas

As a smoker I will say that our government over governs. Smokers had their own smoking sections in most restaurants and smoking rooms in hotels. But with the nanny government we allow to control us, those things in most places no longer exist. Most of that is because of very left leaning liberals who are trying to save ourselves from ourselves. I dont need or want their f@cking help. I revolt by simply not eating out at restaurants and will not stay in hotels that do not support my desire to do what is legal. I cant wait for the government to come after what ever you like to do, that is for the ones who are hitleresque in their rabid hate of smokers. Your time will come and I will be smoking away watching what you want to do be denied. I hope it comes for you soon enough.

Angelv40

I stopped smoking four months ago and started walking again after a long break. As a smoker I felt persecuted for having an addiction that was so hard to get rid of. Heroin addicts get free needles free substitute drugs free clinical advice and they even go into a rehab centre for 28 days free of charge with free everything gas electric food rent (DRUGS). I would have stopped a long time ago if I got THAT much help.

I would have considered my self as being a clean smoker, using ashtrays etc Im not a litter bug. At the same time, I always smoked outside even before the ban as I found my smoking to be a five minute break from the indoor activity.

Smokers dont want to be catigorised they want to stop smoking. Herling abuse at them wont help. Instead of deciding right and wrong try asking a friend if he wants to stop smokinmg then HELP them do it.

There are always two choices when confronted with a smoker.... STAY or LEAVE

But dont persecute them......

Tiffikat

Why? I didnt bring them there. Also second hand smoke isnt bad for you. As the study I posted proves. I grew up around smokers, I have no ill effects. If I can live in a house full of smokers for 18 years and have no health problems, then surely spending an hour in a restaurant is not doing any harm.

Your argument is a fallacy. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/relativist-fallacy.html

Personal choice and responsibility ends when you do something in public that harms someone else, and 2nd hand smoke is more deadly than doing it yourself. But saying that...I do think that in bars you should be able to allow smoking. But any place that allows children, I think it should be banned.

I also live in Ohio, and it was the best thing that happened in my opinion.

Add me as another from Ohio that is thankful for the ban. I've also noticed a decrease in the number of smokers here. A LOT of people I know have quit and the smoking ban made that much easier for them. Do what you want to your own body, but when what you want to do affects others you no longer get to choose when/where to do it. You do not get to choose what to do to others bodies, especially children. It really is that simple. That said if I'm with a friend and they smoke I deal with it unless my children are around and then either they do not smoke or I will not be around them.

Tiffikat

I'm a smoker - I don't smoke in my house, I smoke outside it. I don't smoke in my car either. Oh and I don't smoke around children, or around my non-smoking friends if I can help it! The one thing that does get me is pregnant women smoking - yes I know its their choice, but I see that as being selfish (my sister in law smoked constantly whilst pregnant, and unfortunatley lost 2 children - not saying its because of this, but it could of been a factor - and now the 2 children she does have both have bad asthma, again, don't know if it is caused by the smoking whilst pregnant - but it doesnt help)

When I smoke at work, it is on the roof, away from people who would likely walk past and cough and splutter because I'm "polluting their air" - what about all the car fumes you inhale - do you cough and splutter everytime one of them goes past you? If anyone does this to me now whilst I'm walking to work, and enjoying my pre-work ciggie, I make a point of blowing the smoke toward them and try and keep up with them - petty, I know - but if you can be like that then so can I!

When I go to the pub, I smoke outside, away from the door (if I can unless there's some inconsiderate non-smoker taking up my space!)

There are so many rude people on here - everyone has their own vices, and not everyone may agree with them, but not everyone goes on about it, and tries to change people!

I think most of the people here don't care if someone smokes, they just wish most people were as respectful as you are about it.

I do think the vast majority of people do not want to be around someone smoking and that is why public bans are occurring. In almost every case the bans were voted on and the majority voted for the ban.

Tiffikat

And if smoking in front of children is considered child abuse, then what about drinking in front of children or swearing. We cannot wrap kids up in cotton wool and shelter them from the vagaries of real life.

It's not the vagary that is the concern. It is the smoke and the potential effects it could have on a child's health if they are breathing it in. I also keep my children as far from exhaust fumes as possible and I put poisons in the home up in high places they cannot reach. I can't protect them from everything, but when they are too young to protect themselves I will do whatever I possibly can.

SofaKingRad

WE SHOULD MAKE OCTOBER NATIONAL SMOKERS HAVE FEELINGS TOO AWARENESS MONTH!

Tiffikat

Bottom line is this. You cant have it both ways. You can not say that the government should ban this and that and then say they should stay out of your life. If you think the government should have the right to tell me that I cant smoke, then dont be upset when the same government tells you what you can and cant eat. Or who you can and cant marry. Dont tell me that you have a right to an abortion because its your body but I dont have a right to smoke. It makes zero sense. Wake up people. Eventually, something you enjoy is going to be banned and youre going to be pissed. And guess what? Nobody will care because we allow the government and the busy bodies to dictate what we can and cant do. If I want to allow smoking in my house, that my business, you dont like it, too bad, dont come over. If I want to allow smoking in my place of business thats my choice, you dont like it? Too bad, go somehwere else.

If something I enjoy is harming someone else then it is no longer my right to enjoy it in a way that would harm others.

mommared53

Oh boo hoo the poor children. And there is no allergy to smoke. Anyone that says they are allergic to smoke is lying. Alleriges are caused by various proteins and cig smoke contains no proteins.

Sweet. Please tell that to my sinuses. Because everytime I attend a show in a smoky bar, my nose pours blood the next day.
And make sure my eyes get the memo cause they burn like hell when I'm around smoke...

Burning eyes caused by smoke is not an allergic reaction. But my advice would be to not attend places that allow smoking. If you do that, then i guarantee you will not have burning eyes caused by cig smoke.

That's easier said than done. I have to go outside and take a bus to go places. Even at bus stops or the bus station (out in the open) it's nearly impossible to stay away from smokers. Many times I've had to move more than once to get away from smokers while waiting for the bus. It's hard to do when they don't all stand in one area. Then to be on the bus where there are already smokers and someone who has just smoked a very strong cigarette gets on, I can't just get off the bus and not go where I need to go. It's extremely hard to have to sit there with burning eyes and a nasty taste in my mouth (thankfully I always have TicTacs or mints) and struggle to just breathe. You really can't guarantee anyone they won't have burning eyes caused by cigarette smoke just because they don't go to a business that allows smoking.

moosegt35

I am going through this thread and I am not sure it's been brought up but, in my experience, smokers tend to litter. A LOT. In that respect, I would say they are selfish scum.

Not all. I will go out of my way to find an ashtray or trashcan or put a butt in my pocket before throwing it on the ground. I've seen plenty of non-smoking people that litter, so that is a pretty generalized stereotype. :flowerforyou:

Then you appear to be in the minority of smokers. I drive an hour to and from work every day, mostly on two lane roads, so when you get behind someone, you tend to be behind them for quite a while. Most of the people that I see smoking in their car throw their butts out the window when they are done,

In order to walk from my house to the downtown area, we have to walk through a congested intersection with gravel shoulders. It's disgusting how many of hundreds and thousands of cigarette butts are on the shoulder there. If you want to talk about legislature that should be implemented immediately, I'd love to start seeing $50-$100 tickets being handed out for littering (for any kind of litter, but definitely keep after the cigarette butts).

50-100? It's 500 here, not that it is ener enforced though.

mommared53

I'm not a fan of people who smoke in public. I think it's rude.

Bottom line is you shouldn't really have the right to smoke in public. It is an addiction, and I hate it for you, but do it at home. Aside from bothering people with allergies or asthma, you're also setting a bad example for the kids that may be around you.................

Oh boo hoo the poor children. And there is no allergy to smoke. Anyone that says they are allergic to smoke is lying. Alleriges are caused by various proteins and cig smoke contains no proteins.

they didn't say allergic to smoke, they said 'people with allergies or asthma'....


I have allergies.
Smoke irritates me, makes me feel sick

Then I would give you the same advice. Dont attend places that allow smoking. Simple fix.

In other words, stay in your own home and never go anywhere?

moosegt35

@moosegt35

Your post makes no sense.

Plenty of people get emphysema without smoking just as plenty of people get HIV without sleeping with someone who has aids.

Causes of empyhsema - http://www.medicinenet.com/emphysema/page3.htm#what_are_the_causes_or_risk_factors_for_emphysema

Other potential causes of HIV - born to a HIV+ mother, infection from a needle stick, blood transfusion...... to name but a few.

Sorry, there is no sarcasm text.

moosegt35

As a smoker I will say that our government over governs. Smokers had their own smoking sections in most restaurants and smoking rooms in hotels. But with the nanny government we allow to control us, those things in most places no longer exist. Most of that is because of very left leaning liberals who are trying to save ourselves from ourselves. I dont need or want their f@cking help. I revolt by simply not eating out at restaurants and will not stay in hotels that do not support my desire to do what is legal. I cant wait for the government to come after what ever you like to do, that is for the ones who are hitleresque in their rabid hate of smokers. Your time will come and I will be smoking away watching what you want to do be denied. I hope it comes for you soon enough.

It should also be legal to drink and have sex in public if you ask me. I mean, I am not hurting anyone else by doing this and the act is perfectly legal, so why not?

Tiffikat

Believe what you want. The bars have seen a huge dip in revenue, especially int he winter time, and the bowling allies cant get people to go there. Read any American paper and you will see. Doesnt take a lot to research it.

They haven't in Ohio where I live. Bars and clubs are just as busy (or slow) as they were prior to the ban. Restaurants actually seem to have LONGER wait lists and are busier.

Tiffikat

I think its annoying that non smokers seem to think its ok to lecture smokers.

Hers the thing, I'm an adult, its my body and I'll do it if I want. If I get cancer I will not blame anyone else.

I don;t go into McDonalds poking fat people telling them they are killing themselves.

I don't think anyone should lecture someone for something they do unless they are doing it in a way that harms other people. If you smoke around my children I will certainly say something. If you smoke in your own private home or out in the open away from other people that is totally your business.

ValerieMartini2Olives

I smoked for several years. I have been completely cigarette free for probably 5 months now, but slowly weaning for like 5 months before that. I don't have a problem with people who smoke. However, you don't realize how bad you smell. When I walk into a store and someone walks past me, I can immediately tell they are a smoker. They stink to high heaven. I also think it's ridiculous when you walk into a store/restaurant and there's a group of smokers right next to the door and you have to walk through a cloud of smoke to walk inside. It reeks! Or I watch people leaving a store and as soon as they get just into the foyer, they're already pulled out their cigarette and lighter and as soon as they exit, they're already lit up. Jeez, do you really need a cigarette THAT bad?

BrienJD

A persecuted minority of selfish scum......

It's all relative. Let me begin by saying I smoked for nearly 20 years (started when I was 11) and watched the slow and steady progression of anti-smoking legislation and bias from its beginning. Anti-smoking hype has gone way overboard. What started out as a campaign to raise awareness of the the true health risks became an attemept at social engineering. While there is some fact the second hand smoke deal contains a bunch of crap as well. For example I thought the asthma rates were supposed to go down when people were no longer subjected to second hand smoke?

It's also about money...money, money, money....I used to pay $8 a carton...now it's what $50-60? Like any drug, people are still going to want it if they want it....want to raise the price and make obscene profits from it?? Prohibit it (or in the case of cigs...STRONGLY DISCOURAGE it. Do you really think the money that they G reaps in taxes goes to fund healthcare??? The only people who lose money are business owners. Add that to the fact that they try to use the same "business model" on other things we enjoy like soda, sugar, salt and a host of other ingestable goodies and you'll see where I'm coming from.

thelovelyLIZ

I think it depends on the smoker. Some are perfectly courteous, stick to designated areas, and just want to enjoy a smoke without someone going YOU'RE KILLING YOURSELF. Other's are inconsiderate asshats who do smoke in front of heavily trafficked doors and walkways and don't give two ****s about who they're exposing.

I think both sides need to just leave the other alone. Smokers should be courteous since many people don't like being around smoking or have respiratory issues that can be made worse by smoke inhalation. Non-smokers need to accept that it's a smoker's body and they are free to do with it as they please. I don't understand why it's unacceptable to tell a fat person how unhealthy they're being when they eat a cheeseburger, yet it's perfectly okay to jump down a smoker's throat when they light up.

moosegt35

I smoked for several years. I have been completely cigarette free for probably 5 months now, but slowly weaning for like 5 months before that. I don't have a problem with people who smoke. However, you don't realize how bad you smell. When I walk into a store and someone walks past me, I can immediately tell they are a smoker. They stink to high heaven. I also think it's ridiculous when you walk into a store/restaurant and there's a group of smokers right next to the door and you have to walk through a cloud of smoke to walk inside. It reeks! Or I watch people leaving a store and as soon as they get just into the foyer, they're already pulled out their cigarette and lighter and as soon as they exit, they're already lit up. Jeez, do you really need a cigarette THAT bad?

They do need a cigarette that bad, becasue their life is controlled by the cig companies. Smokers want to talk about how the gov't shouldn't control their life all while they are blindly being controlled by the company making the cigs that they are entitled to smoke. It's actually pretty sad