What the doctor said . . .

U

uncballzer

aka Silky
Had a pathology lecture yesterday morning. It was horrible! It's on the respiratory system, and this pathologist believes in moderation and lifestyle of red wine and dark chocolate. But he could not stop bashing any type of tobacco use. He actually said "smokers should be taken behind the barn and shot . . . . would save a lot of money in healthcare . . . ." That did it! I'm actually skipping his lectures today; could take any more of it. I did email him last night, mentioning my position and emailed him the copy of Joe Jackson's esay and the link to the tobacco analysis.

Oh look, gmail saves the sent emails too: Just my :2

You were killing me this morning!! I know the dangers of cigarette
smoking, although I think they are exaggerated to a great deal.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to research the matter further to
find articles that are well written and experiments well performed
instead of the retrospective "do you have cancer and have you ever
been around tobacco smoke before?"

Anyway, I thought I would throw a little reading your way on the
subject. I'm a believer in moderation (as you do with dark chocolate
and red wine). A person can be in perfect health and still smoke.
That is where the moderation comes in. Plus, it is possible for a
otherwise healthy and physical active smoker to be in better shape and
health than any random non-smoker. Although I do look at cigarettes
with disgust (even though both my parents smoke them), I am an avid
cigar smoker and am getting into pipes. There are BIG differences
between the types of smoking. The risks are slight with either
though. Cancer of course is on the rise, but also for the most part
it is an "old person's" disease. I feel also that the benefits of
pleasure/relaxation now outweigh the risks of "waiting to die of
cancer" later. The risks are greater probably by the 1000s of me
dying in a car wreck tomorrow than of lung cancer/smoking-related
disease in the future (speaking in terms of cigars/pipes). Again, I
must enjoy these in moderation, and not over do it; how does the
saying go: it's not the poison but the amount? Water will kill
someone with enough overload.

Anyways, I mean no offense by this email; I just had to put my 2 cents
out there. The attachment is an essay by Joe Jackson, who is a
musician that was living in New York until he grew tired of the
smoking bans. He wrote this essay as a response to that, mostly
arguing and defeating most of the anti-smoking campaign groups. The
link below is to a physician's blog who also grew tired of the
"anti's" campaign tactics. He still believes smoking is bad, but he
provides (at least try to provide) details behind the studies,
etc--all the time using common sense!

Again, no offense meant by this. But I hope you do have the time to
look at these, as they are very well written for the most part and are
a decent read. Hope you enjoy them!, --Richard McNeilly


http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspo<wbr>t.com/


<script><!-- D(["mb","arguing and defeating most of the anti-smoking campaign groups. The\u003cbr /\>link below is to a physician\'s blog who also grew tired of the\u003cbr /\>&quot;anti\'s&quot; campaign tactics. He still believes smoking is bad, but he\u003cbr /\>provides (at least try to provide) details behind the studies,\u003cbr /\>etc--all the time using common sense!\u003cbr /\>\u003cbr /\>Again, no offense meant by this. But I hope you do have the time to\u003cbr /\>look at these, as they are very well written for the most part and are\u003cbr /\>a decent read. Hope you enjoy them!, --Richard McNeilly\u003cbr /\>\u003cbr /\>\u003cbr /\>\u003ca onclick\u003d\"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)\" href\u003d\"http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/\" target\u003d_blank\>http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspo\u003cwbr /\>t.com/\u003c/a\>\u003cbr /\>\u003c/div\>",0] ); //--></script>
 
The degree that smokers are villified has gotten WAY out of hand. People seem to feel more sympathy toward crackheads than they do towards smokers (drug addiction is a disease, smoking just makes you an idiot).
 
I firmly believe that anyone should be able to do what they want as long as what they do does not hurt/affect anyone else but themselves. People now-a-days are educated enough to know the risks associated with smoking of any kind, and can take full responsibility if they choose to smoke. I'm not going to look down on people who smoke, because that's their choice, and while I may or may not agree with it, it's not my choice to make for them. However, I also agree that second-hand smoke is a problem; if not a health risk, than a major annoyance to people who don’t smoke. When I'm out at a restaurant or whatever, the last thing I want is to be engulfed in cloud of someone else’s cigarette smoke. I enjoy cigars, as everyone on CS does, but there is a time and a place and I certainly wouldn't want my cigar smoking affecting the people around me negatively. If I want to smoke, I do it in the comfort of my backyard, my local B&M, or a place where it is socially acceptable. When I hear smokers of any kind complaining about how they can't smoke because it isn't permitted at this place or that, I get a little bit perturbed. It's selfish to think that just because you have made a choice to do something that is undoubtedly harmful in some respect or another, that you should be able to do it wherever and whenever you want without taking into consideration the other people who live in this society with you. I don’t think anyone has the right to tell you want to do, but there certainly needs to be limitations on when and where you do it if it is affecting the people around you. With that being said, I can’t wait to get home and light up a stogie, relax, and ponder other more important matters...such as who will win the Lions game this weekend. :ss<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:p></o:p>
 
:tpd:

I'd put limits on the hurt/affect other people restriction though. There are people that get in a huff if you smoke within 100 feet of them, even if you're outside.
 
kjjm4 said:
The degree that smokers are villified has gotten WAY out of hand. People seem to feel more sympathy toward crackheads than they do towards smokers (drug addiction is a disease, smoking just makes you an idiot).
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I think this is an absurd statement. I enjoy cigars now and used to enjoy cigarettes before I quit but smoking is really bad for you. Doesn't matter if you inhale it into the lungs or leave it in your mouth. Depending on the person, genetics, and environment smoking causes all sorts of cancers. My wife is a doctor and I was in medical school for 2 years. Bottom line - smoking is a terrible addiction.

I don't think anything has gotten out of hand. I wouldn't want a smoker near my kid or baby. Second hand smoke is terribly unhealthy. I know I might get ripped a new one at CS since I am a cigar lover but I choose to smoke them. I've never met anyone who's shown more sympathy towards a crackhead than a smoker. Addiction is a disease. It doesn't matter if you have an eating disorder, smoking habit, shopaholic, drugs...its all addiction.
 
Bruin7 said:
...Second hand smoke is terribly unhealthy.
Click to expand...

Prove it :)

The case against "secondhand smoke" has no scientific merit, with knee-jerk conclusions based on faulty science and statistical nonsense. The anti-smoking establishment and their devoted followers, as with other groups with no real honest to goodness data, fallback on the "Save The Children" tactic. When one questions their "findings", they just label them "Child Killers" or similar.

I don't smoke my cigars around other folks (unless they do not mind) but not because I'm afraid of killing them. I recognize that many folks just do not like the smell, and if they associate the smell with death, well not much I can do to change them.

From what I can see (and yes, the Joe Jackson essay is a well written piece on tobacco in general), the case against "secondhand smoke" is a scam, IMO.
 
Bruin7 said:
I'm sorry but I think this is an absurd statement. than a smoker. Addiction is a disease. It doesn't matter if you have an eating disorder, smoking habit, shopaholic, drugs...its all addiction.
Click to expand...

I resent that statement. Addiction has proven to be a fine and generous BOTL and I hope he doesn't read this slander:pp
 
My comment about crackheads was somewhat sarcastic. It doesn't carry well in text form though.
 
Bruin7 said:
Doesn't matter if you inhale it into the lungs or leave it in your mouth.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the evidence doesn't support that statement. In fact, most studies that I've seen have put the risks of cigars either within the margin of error of the study or just barily above, while cigarettes are a MUCH greater risk.

Bruin7 said:
Bottom line - smoking is a terrible addiction.
Click to expand...

You consider cigar smoking an addiction? Honestly, if that's true, you should get out now.

Bruin7 said:
Addiction is a disease. It doesn't matter if you have an eating disorder, smoking habit, shopaholic, drugs...its all addiction.
Click to expand...

There are so many things wrong with this statement, I'm not sure where to begin. I'll just say that you're confusing psychological conditions with physical conditions, and to lump them together is laughable.
 
Great job! :tu

IMO there are too few people willing to say what they think if it isn't PC, or conflicts with the current conventional wisdom.

Do let us know what, if any response you get.
 
oddball said:
Prove it :)

The case against "secondhand smoke" has no scientific merit, with knee-jerk conclusions based on faulty science and statistical nonsense. The anti-smoking establishment and their devoted followers, as with other groups with no real honest to goodness data, fallback on the "Save The Children" tactic. When one questions their "findings", they just label them "Child Killers" or similar.

I don't smoke my cigars around other folks (unless they do not mind) but not because I'm afraid of killing them. I recognize that many folks just do not like the smell, and if they associate the smell with death, well not much I can do to change them.

From what I can see (and yes, the Joe Jackson essay is a well written piece on tobacco in general), the case against "secondhand smoke" is a scam, IMO.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. Junk science at it's best (or worst depending on how you look at it) pure and simple.
I realize this opinion isn't likely to win me any friends here and may get me :bn but I think it is time for those of us who enjoy smoking cigars, pipes or cigarettes to quit rolling over for the anti-smoking police lies and half-truths.
Kelly
 
oddball said:
Prove it :)

The case against "secondhand smoke" has no scientific merit, with knee-jerk conclusions based on faulty science and statistical nonsense. The anti-smoking establishment and their devoted followers, as with other groups with no real honest to goodness data, fallback on the "Save The Children" tactic. When one questions their "findings", they just label them "Child Killers" or similar.

I don't smoke my cigars around other folks (unless they do not mind) but not because I'm afraid of killing them. I recognize that many folks just do not like the smell, and if they associate the smell with death, well not much I can do to change them.

From what I can see (and yes, the Joe Jackson essay is a well written piece on tobacco in general), the case against "secondhand smoke" is a scam, IMO.
Click to expand...


I'm with you 100%...Up until a year or two ago the anti smoking crazies were saying that 13,000 people a year die of second hand smoke,,then it grew to 49,000.and when you say it enough people believe it.If that is the case then what were the figures in the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s..During those years people smoked everywhere,, at their desks, in airplanes, restaurants and bars. Should there not have been a pandemic of second hand smoke deaths..Answer there wasn't.. The anti-smoking alliance would not get very far except the Surgeon General said any second hand smoke is harmful..Did not say how harmful..If you asked if any exhaust from a veh is harmful this would have been the same answer..But they are using this to get the bans passed and using the employees health concern as there selling point. Minnesota just enacted the wall to wall smoking ban and the bar owners will feel the pinch but these people don't care if some bars go out of business because alcohol is their next cause..Like you I want to see how all this data is collected ..

Jerry (still smoking) in Minnesota.
 
c2000 said:
I'm with you 100%...Up until a year or two ago the anti smoking crazies were saying that 13,000 people a year die of second hand smoke,,then it grew to 49,000.and when you say it enough people believe it.If that is the case then what were the figures in the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s..During those years people smoked everywhere,, at their desks, in airplanes, restaurants and bars. Should there not have been a pandemic of second hand smoke deaths..Answer there wasn't.. The anti-smoking alliance would not get very far except the Surgeon General said any second hand smoke is harmful..Did not say how harmful..If you asked if any exhaust from a veh is harmful this would have been the same answer..But they are using this to get the bans passed and using the employees health concern as there selling point. Minnesota just enacted the wall to wall smoking ban and the bar owners will feel the pinch but these people don't care if some bars go out of business because alcohol is their next cause..Like you I want to see how all this data is collected ..

Jerry (still smoking) in Minnesota.
Click to expand...

I tried to look for some literature, but there's soo many studies out there trying to prove that "second hand smoke is bad" that I would have to search through thousands of papers just to find anything--I don't have to do that.

Richard (smoking away) in West Virginia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top