Smoking Ban in MD

[vraiblonde]

So, admittedly, you choose not to evaluate the studies yourself and find the truth but will just sit back and let others tell you what is or isn't true. And you call others retarded. :sheesh:

See, Ken? I told you.

 

[Kyle]

just trying to show kyle how retarded his request for a COD labeled 'secondhand smoke' is......

WTF?

You claim second-hand smoke is a lethal substance that causes cancer and emphazema in non-smokers and kills.

All I'm asking for is 1.

Not too much to ask.

 

[Larry Gude]

Want to...

Not too much to ask.

...reconsider that?

 

[tommyjones]

WTF?

You claim second-hand smoke is a lethal substance that causes cancer and emphazema in non-smokers and kills.

All I'm asking for is 1.

Not too much to ask.

i said that cigs are known to cause cancer, and that logic tells you that second hand smoke is bad for you....

that is all.

 

[tommyjones]

See, Ken? I told you.

just go pave that cough down why dont cha

 

[This_person]

WTF?

You claim second-hand smoke is a lethal substance that causes cancer and emphazema in non-smokers and kills.

All I'm asking for is 1.

Not too much to ask.

I gave you 3,000 previously:

Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking (Also Known as Exposure to Secondhand Smoke or Environmental Tobacco Smoke - ETS) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992)
Key findings:

In adults:

ETS is a human lung carcinogen, responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually in U.S. nonsmokers. ETS has been classified as a Group A carcinogen under EPA's carcinogen assessment guidelines. This classification is reserved for those compounds or mixtures which have been shown to cause cancer in humans, based on studies in human populations.

This is from the EPA - not exactly a biased source. There's links on the link provided to the actual study.

Smoke. It's bad for you, like eating too many french fries or sodas, like driving too fast or showering in a lightening storm. It's no one else's business.

And, employers should provide healthy environments as appropriate to their employers. If that means having big fans to remove smoke, it does. The smoking ban is stupid, but not sufficienlty lowering the toxic concentration in the air is just as stupid. There were better solutions than a ban, though.

 

[vraiblonde]

just go pave that cough down why dont cha

Don't be pissed at me just because you're an idiot. I didn't give birth to you, and if I had, you would at least have a brain cell or two rattling around in your cage.

 

[Larry Gude]

*lol*....

Don't be pissed at me just because you're an idiot. I didn't give birth to you, and if I had, you would at least have a brain cell or two rattling around in your cage.

 

[tommyjones]

Don't be pissed at me just because you're an idiot. I didn't give birth to you, and if I had, you would at least have a brain cell or two rattling around in your cage.

I'll take not being in a smoke filled bar for 1000 alex......


gotta love when the smoketards get all bent out of shape cuz they got to go outside to enjoy there nasty addition.......

 

[Larry Gude]

Good...

I'll take not being in a smoke filled bar for 1000 alex......


gotta love when the smoketards get all bent out of shape cuz they got to go outside to enjoy there nasty addition.......

...come back! Witty, cross reference intellectual show to illustrate depth and sophistication, ignore flaws in own argument about spread of government.

Smoketards.

 

[tommyjones]

...come back! Witty, cross reference intellectual show to illustrate depth and sophistication, ignore flaws in own argument about spread of government.

Smoketards.

i dont have an argument about the spread of government, that was your argument.......

 

[Larry Gude]

Don't...

i dont have an argument about the spread of government, that was your argument.......

...tell me you never got around to post #1, you know, the point of the thread?

Would that make you threadtard?

 

[Kyle]

just trying to show kyle how retarded his request for a COD labeled 'secondhand smoke' is......

WTF?

You claim second-hand smoke is a lethal substance that causes cancer and emphazema in non-smokers and kills.

All I'm asking for is 1.

Not too much to ask.

 

[This_person]

WTF?

You claim second-hand smoke is a lethal substance that causes cancer and emphazema in non-smokers and kills.

All I'm asking for is 1.

Not too much to ask.

I gave you 3,000 previously:

Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking (Also Known as Exposure to Secondhand Smoke or Environmental Tobacco Smoke - ETS) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992)
Key findings:

In adults:

ETS is a human lung carcinogen, responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually in U.S. nonsmokers. ETS has been classified as a Group A carcinogen under EPA's carcinogen assessment guidelines. This classification is reserved for those compounds or mixtures which have been shown to cause cancer in humans, based on studies in human populations.

This is from the EPA - not exactly a biased source. There's links on the link provided to the actual study.

Smoke. It's bad for you, like eating too many french fries or sodas, like driving too fast or showering in a lightening storm. It's no one else's business.

And, employers should provide healthy environments as appropriate to their employers. If that means having big fans to remove smoke, it does. The smoking ban is stupid, but not sufficienlty lowering the toxic concentration in the air is just as stupid. There were better solutions than a ban, though.

 

[Ken King]

I gave you 3,000 previously:This is from the EPA - not exactly a biased source. There's links on the link provided to the actual study.

Smoke. It's bad for you, like eating too many french fries or sodas, like driving too fast or showering in a lightening storm. It's no one else's business.

And, employers should provide healthy environments as appropriate to their employers. If that means having big fans to remove smoke, it does. The smoking ban is stupid, but not sufficienlty lowering the toxic concentration in the air is just as stupid. There were better solutions than a ban, though.

And that study, by the EPA, was declared null and void by Judge Osteen in 1998. Granted his ruling was later overturned on a technicality as to process but the result of his decision was that the EPA sought out preconceived results. In the judge's words

"In this case, EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun; excluded industry by violating the Act's procedural requirements; adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the Agency's public conclusion, and aggressively utilized the Act's authority to disseminate findings to establish a de facto regulatory scheme intended to restrict Plaintiffs, products and to influence public opinion. In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment, disregarded information and made findings on selective information; did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information; deviated from its Risk Assessment Guidelines; failed to disclose important findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers. EPA's conduct left substantial holes in the administrative record. While so doing, produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes cancer. Gathering all relevant information, researching, and disseminating findings were subordinate to EPA's demonstrating ETS a Group A carcinogen."

Yep, the EPA was unbiased -

 

[PsyOps]

My great-grandmother never smoked, and was allergic to it, so nobody even ever smoked around her.

Died of lung cancer 34 years ago.

What's your point?

I already know how you feel. It's pointless to try to convince you otherwise. If the addiction is so strong within you that you're willing to deny the health problems associated with it, then all I can say is you will eventually reap what you are sowing.

I hope you are one of the very few that don't suffer from any ill-effects of smoking. I doubt you will be. My dad, even after his triple bypass and now diagnosed emphysema, he denies that his decades of smoking had anything to do with it. My aunt died a horrible, slow and painful death. I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

 

[vraiblonde]

I hope you are one of the very few that don't suffer from any ill-effects of smoking.

I don't believe that for one minute. I think you are licking your chops in hopes I come down with some dread disease so you can go, "HA! I TOLD YOU SO!!!"

 

[vraiblonde]

Yep, the EPA was unbiased -

The government does crap like that all the time. This will kill you, that will kill you, blah blah blah. Then nothing happens and they have to make up some new scare tactic to control the rabble.

It's amazing that anyone falls for this anymore.

 

[Dork]

The government does crap like that all the time. This will kill you, that will kill you, blah blah blah. Then nothing happens and they have to make up some new scare tactic to control the rabble.

It's amazing that anyone falls for this anymore.

So, the government made up this whole thing about cigarette smoking being bad for you? Do you really think it's a healthy thing to do? I agree the government can be a little controlling at time but I think it's a no brainer that cigarette smoking is a bad nasty habit. It's a personal choice and you have a right to smoke but you can't tell us it's a healthy choice that doesn't have any negative affects on your body.

 

[vraiblonde]

you can't tell us it's a healthy choice that doesn't have any negative affects on your body.

Even if it's not, why do you care? I no longer do it around you in restaurants and bars, and you're not my Dad, so mind your own business and find something else to worry about besides the health of a stranger on the internet.