Smokers – selfish scum or persecuted minority?

Options
1…5681011…26

Replies

  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    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.

    Feel free to kill yourself in your home. The point is you shouldn't force other people to breathe in your toxic smoke.


    If I allow smoking in my restaurant, how am I forcing others to breathe toxic smoke? Didnt they make the choice to eat there?
  • thebigcb
    thebigcb Posts: 2,210 Member
    Options
    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.


    Wait, you think you should be able to make choices concerning your own life without the interference of government or busy bodies? Man, youre as crazy as I am. Everybody knows we need others to tell us how to live our lives properly.

    I know, crazy isn;t it. I never smoke anywhere that you are not allowed(in ireland thats pretty much everywhere) and smoke out the back of my own house. As long as someone is of age, then thats there call.
  • persephone87
    persephone87 Posts: 220 Member
    Options
    I've come to the conclusion some people you just can't argue with due to sheer ignorance and stupidity so I'm ending this now.

    If you think passive smoking is a myth, get onto Science Direct or BMJ and see the evidence that you're talkin bollocks. Though I doubt you know what to look for in a good research study, so maybe just sit there in your house, being a good little keyboard warrior and keep your ignorant blinkers on, I don't care I know enough to know you're wrong, if you can't see that then whatever.

    Non smokers shouldn't have to limit their choices for the stupid minority.

    Smokers, feel free to ruin your body and your health and you can enjoy an early grave, but don't subject everyone else to it.
  • chinatbag
    chinatbag Posts: 249 Member
    Options
    No sir, We are not talking about staff that has done any real research. We are talking about someone who works in a hospital and says that ids come in and cant breather because their parents smoke. For one, its total BS. And two, in no universe that Im aware of does that constitute evidence of anything.

    So if by account of them saying they work in a hospital and have experienced this, as in, people coming in and becoming patients due to second hand smoke, is invalid. Does that also mean that your account of having been exposed to second hand smoke and smoking, but now no longer smoke, and are completely healthy, is also disregarded as a valid account?

    I'm not really sure what you're posting about in here. You go back and forth between "this medical study says this, therefore I'm right" and "I've experienced this, so therefore, I'm right in this account" and "I'm completely oppressed by my government, we should live in a free world".

    Some of the things you say make sense, but a lot of it doesn't make any sense. I'm not sure what you're advocating.
  • Painten
    Painten Posts: 499 Member
    Options
    I used to smoke. I gave up when i discovered i was pregnant. I don't think that smokers are selfish. Not really sure they are persecuted either.

    I do know that while i do like going into pubs and clubs without inhaling smoke, the smoking ban has been detrimental to some areas.. There are no local pubs now. In actual fact there are no actual pubs, they are all late night bars which have killed off the nightclubs. What used to be nightclubs are now strip clubs clubs.
  • blondiedawnie
    blondiedawnie Posts: 10 Member
    Options
    Smoking, doing drugs, eating what you like is all personal choice but one thing is for sure this post has sure got some people a bit lets say... heated :)
  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    No sir, We are not talking about staff that has done any real research. We are talking about someone who works in a hospital and says that ids come in and cant breather because their parents smoke. For one, its total BS. And two, in no universe that Im aware of does that constitute evidence of anything.

    So if by account of them saying they work in a hospital and have experienced this, as in, people coming in and becoming patients due to second hand smoke, is invalid. Does that also mean that your account of having been exposed to second hand smoke and smoking, but now no longer smoke, and are completely healthy, is also disregarded as a valid account?

    I'm not really sure what you're posting about in here. You go back and forth between "this medical study says this, therefore I'm right" and "I've experienced this, so therefore, I'm right in this account" and "I'm completely oppressed by my government, we should live in a free world".

    Some of the things you say make sense, but a lot of it doesn't make any sense. I'm not sure what you're advocating.


    No sire, I stated very clearly that my experience does NOT constitute proof of anything. A persons own personal experience does not prove anything nor does it disprove anything. So saying that I work at a hospital and some kid had health issue and both parents smoked is irrelevant. It means nothing. There is no evidence that the kids health issues are a result of the parents smoking. It takes studies done over a period of years to draw those type of conclusions not one or two kids that have breathing problems and the parents happen to smoke. I lived with two smoking parent and have no health problems. And by that same token, my personal experience of living with two smokers and having no health problems also doesnt prove anything. Its anecdotal and does not constitute proof or evidence of anything.

    Not sure how you could miss what Im advocating. I would think its pretty simple. Smoke if you want to its nobody elses business. And if you own a business you should be able to allow smoking and if I dont like it I dont have to eat there. Pretty simple.
  • EverlastBoston
    EverlastBoston Posts: 421 Member
    Options
    Second hand smoke is harmful to others...PERIOD!!
  • fraser112
    fraser112 Posts: 405
    Options
    I don't think smokers are selfish scum but I don't think they're 'persecuted' either.

    I think part of the problem for non-smokers is that cigarette smoke really is disgusting. It smells bad and clings to your clothes so it makes you smell bad. I don't like spending time in a smoky atmosphere because I find it so unpleasant. I'm not sure smokers are actually aware of just how bad it/they can smell.

    To me it's no different to asking me to sit next to a piss-soaked wino, except he won't bleat on and on about being opressed.
    So who is forcing you to sit in smokey atmospheres? You can always leave right?
    When did I say anyone was forcing me to do anything

    It is the case, however, that smokers smell bad. Not just when they are actually smoking, but all day, from the first cig to the last. I work with a smoker and she goes out to smoke. I can smell it on her from across the desk or when walking behind her in the office. I put up with it the same way I'd put up with a colleague's BO or bad breath, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. I would object, however, if she lit up in the office as that gives me no way to avoid it.

    Does she know she smells bad? Probably. Does she continue to smoke? Yes. Does that make her selfish? I'd say that makes her an addict. She spends over £50 a week on a habit that wrecks her skin, makes her smell and could kill her - being selfish is the least of her worries! Maybe if she was persecuted *a bit* she'd give up?

    Just to carry on your point: Obese people smell bad, that foul smell of sweat and crap all rolled into one.
    and before anyone says discrimination im basing this on personal times when ive been stuck next to them.

    But god forbid i say anything about that fat guy or girl taking up 2 seats, making the bus smell of rancid mayo. But these are strong woman who no matter how horribly they hate skinny girls are all beautiful on the inside and should be proud of thier rolls of fat.

    I would go as far to say being obese has a much higher price to pay than a smoker.
    Fat kids will get bullied i school no matter what you do, they will die early and will suffer a worse life because of it.
    if you go after smokers you must go after the obese, its a choice just like smoking.
  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    I used to smoke. I gave up when i discovered i was pregnant. I don't think that smokers are selfish. Not really sure they are persecuted either.

    I do know that while i do like going into pubs and clubs without inhaling smoke, the smoking ban has been detrimental to some areas.. There are no local pubs now. In actual fact there are no actual pubs, they are all late night bars which have killed off the nightclubs. What used to be nightclubs are now strip clubs clubs.

    The common thing around here is, since the smoking ban hurt the are bars, they now charge you $2 for an ashtray. You apy the $2 They give you an ashtray so you can smoke. They use that money to pay the fines when they get caught. Also, we have a restaurant that is now a "private" establishment. Youre membership card is a pack of smokes. Since its a private club, the smoking ban doesnt affect them. You show them a pack of cigs at the door and they let you in.
  • chinatbag
    chinatbag Posts: 249 Member
    Options
    No sire, I stated very clearly that my experience does NOT constitute proof of anything. A persons own personal experience does not prove anything nor does it disprove anything. So saying that I work at a hospital and some kid had health issue and both parents smoked is irrelevant. It means nothing. There is no evidence that the kids health issues are a result of the parents smoking. It takes studies done over a period of years to draw those type of conclusions not one or two kids that have breathing problems and the parents happen to smoke. I lived with two smoking parent and have no health problems. And by that same token, my personal experience of living with two smokers and having no health problems also doesnt prove anything. Its anecdotal and does not constitute proof or evidence of anything.

    Then quite frankly, if none of it means anything, why is there a huge debate regarding experiences and studies (on both sides, having lasted several of years). This is posting to post and a completely moot discussion.

    The only things I've picked out in this thread that are valid: freedom of choice, being obese is harmful to the obese person and bystanders, and relative medical journals don't mean anything.

    I feel like I just read about a train wreck that involved no passengers or human operators.
  • EverlastBoston
    EverlastBoston Posts: 421 Member
    Options
    Fraser that could be the dumbest thing I ever heard.
  • sho3girl
    sho3girl Posts: 10,799 Member
    Options
    You have to EAT ... no one HAS to smoke
  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    No sire, I stated very clearly that my experience does NOT constitute proof of anything. A persons own personal experience does not prove anything nor does it disprove anything. So saying that I work at a hospital and some kid had health issue and both parents smoked is irrelevant. It means nothing. There is no evidence that the kids health issues are a result of the parents smoking. It takes studies done over a period of years to draw those type of conclusions not one or two kids that have breathing problems and the parents happen to smoke. I lived with two smoking parent and have no health problems. And by that same token, my personal experience of living with two smokers and having no health problems also doesnt prove anything. Its anecdotal and does not constitute proof or evidence of anything.

    Then quite frankly, if none of it means anything, why is there a huge debate regarding experiences and studies (on both sides, having lasted several of years). This is posting to post and a completely moot discussion.

    The only things I've picked out in this thread that are valid: freedom of choice, being obese is harmful to the obese person and bystanders, and relative medical journals don't mean anything.

    I feel like I just read about a train wreck that involved no passengers or human operators.


    Now you have confused me. Who said medical journals dont mean anything? Medical journals use years and years of studies to draw conclusions. Reports in medical journals are completely different than nurse suzy saying "some kid came in and couldnt breathe, both parents smoked, therefore, second hand smoke is bad" . Two completely different things.
  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    Second hand smoke is harmful to others...PERIOD!!


    Yea, we get it. You dont believe the many studies that show otherwise. Who cares? This isnt about second hand smoke anyway. Its abour a persons right to choose what they do with their own life and business owners right to choose what is alowed in their establishment.
  • MrsM1ggins
    MrsM1ggins Posts: 724 Member
    Options
    FWIW, MDWilliams is correct. Anecdotal evidence is not "evidence" of anything.

    I'm not really interested in arguing about studies though - I don't smoke or subject myself to 2nd hand smoke so the results of any study would be irrelevant to me so I'm not interested enough to read them all and make my mind up as to whether or not it's actually dangerous. Same way I couldn't tell you the odds of your parachute failing to open if you jump out of a plane - until I decide to do a jump I'm not bothered what the odds are!

    It can't be easy to do a 2nd hand smoke study though. Smoking diseases are typically long-term and slow-moving. You'd have to subject a large group of non-smokers to a set amount of smoke over a period of years and then compare their health to a control group to get results. I can't imagine many people would volunteer for that!

    Once you start taking self-selecting groups and trying to draw conclusions from their outcomes you leave yourself open to criticisms of your methods or stated results.

    But this study-talk is really OT so I'll stop now.
  • MDWilliams1857
    MDWilliams1857 Posts: 315 Member
    Options
    You have to EAT ... no one HAS to smoke


    You have to eat but you dont have to over eat and you dont have to eat at a place that allows smoking. Those are both choices to be made.
  • RunningAweigh
    RunningAweigh Posts: 12
    Options
    The difference between the government banning smoking and abortion/perfume/BO (quite frankly, ridiculous things to even try and compare) is that smoking causes harm, not only to you, but to others around you. Abortion is something you choose to do to yourself and causes no harm to anyone. Perfume and BO might be an annoyance, but they don't cause you any HARM. That's the difference. But like someone else mentioned, so many smokers are wrapped up in their little self entitled world that they can't see the difference between the ridiculous comparisons.
  • chinatbag
    chinatbag Posts: 249 Member
    Options
    Now you have confused me. Who said medical journals dont mean anything? Medical journals use years and years of studies to draw conclusions. Reports in medical journals are completely different than nurse suzy saying "some kid came in and couldnt breathe, both parents smoked, therefore, second hand smoke is bad" . Two completely different things.

    You implied in a few posts before regarding that medical studies show that second hand smoke is bad, but then you counter replied with counter articles. Then you said that personal experiences account for nothing. You've made a point in which you argue that journals which have proven counter arguments (second hand smoke doesn't kill) nullify the validity of the other argument (second hand smoke does kill).

    This thread was about the vilifying or glorifying of smoking, but has of course, since it's an ethical grey area, turned into a post that is mostly fueled by feelings (I'm not blaming anyone, this is perfectly human to do so and I realize that).

    I see your point about freedoms, but your reasoning is all over the place.
  • sho3girl
    sho3girl Posts: 10,799 Member
    Options
    You have to EAT ... no one HAS to smoke


    You have to eat but you dont have to over eat and you dont have to eat at a place that allows smoking. Those are both choices to be made.

    Yet no one commented on my previous well though out response though hmmm

Categories