Smoking Ban - The Isle Of Man

[bozz]

Oh, and to nick something from Bill Hicks - just so you know, thousands of non-smokers die every day. Smoke or no smoke - you will die. You probably won't get to choose how or when.

 

So don't get all down! Lighten up! Smoke a ciggy

[Speckled Frost]

Oh, and to nick something from Bill Hicks - just so you know, thousands of non-smokers die every day. Smoke or no smoke - you will die. You probably won't get to choose how or when.

 

So don't get all down! Lighten up! Smoke a ciggy

 

Oh fuck it it, heroin and crack it is then

[bozz]

Oh, and to nick something from Bill Hicks - just so you know, thousands of non-smokers die every day. Smoke or no smoke - you will die. You probably won't get to choose how or when.

 

So don't get all down! Lighten up! Smoke a ciggy

 

Oh fuck it it, heroin and crack it is then

 

See? When you get past the bullshit and get to the heart of the argument, it all becomes clear.

 

The skag is on me!

 

EDITED cos the arteries in my fingers had hardened to the point where I couldn't type the word "becomes" properly.

[Lonan3]

That's why you can't leave bear-traps on your door step when Jehova's witnesses are doing the rounds.

 

I think that's terribly unfair - and certainly ought to be the subject of a legal review.

[Chinahand]

Being drunk is not *supposed* to be a legal defence - but all those in the dock still seem to use it to great effect.

 

As to the negligence - I think you'd have to provide cast-iron evidence that my smoking poisoned anyone (and if it did, don't THEY have an equal responsibility to avoid my smoke?). Seems we have a new breed of intolerants who willingly enter smoking establishments just so they can feign coughs and make a bloody fuss!

 

Even the most fervent anti-smokers have trouble proving the effects of secondary smoking, despite the rampant current propaganda campaign.

 

Environmental Tobacco Smoke is an active area of research. As far as I'm concerned smoking in a public area, and especially a pub, is anti-social, rude, smelly, unhygenic and bad for the health of the smokers and those in their vicinity.

 

Does anyone want to challenge me on any of these points?

 

This is the latest paper I can find from the British Medical Journal.

 

Participants: 303 020 people from the EPIC cohort (total 500 000) who had never smoked or who had stopped smoking for at least 10 years, 123 479 of whom provided information on exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Cases were people who developed respiratory cancers or died from respiratory conditions. Controls were matched for sex, age (plus or minus 5 years), smoking status, country of recruitment, and time elapsed since recruitment.

 

Results: ... In the whole cohort exposure to environmental tobacco smoke was associated with increased risks (hazard ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.95, for all respiratory diseases; 1.34, 0.85 to 2.13, for lung cancer alone). Higher results were found in the nested case-control study (odds ratio 1.70, 1.02 to 2.82, for respiratory diseases; 1.76, 0.96 to 3.23, for lung cancer alone). Odds ratios were consistently higher in former smokers than in those who had never smoked; the association was limited to exposure related to work. ... Frequent exposure to environmental tobacco smoke during childhood was associated with lung cancer in adulthood (hazard ratio 3.63, 1.19 to 11.11, for daily exposure for many hours).

 

Conclusions: This large prospective study, in which the smoking status was supported by cotinine measurements, confirms that environmental tobacco smoke is a risk factor for lung cancer and other respiratory diseases, particularly in ex-smokers.

 

And here are 363 pages of scientific research on the effects of secondary smoking from the US Surgeon General.

 

The current Report, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Smoking, examines the evidence that even the lower exposure to smoke received by the nonsmoker carries with it a health risk. Use of the term “involuntary smoking” denotes that for many nonsmokers, exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke is the result of an unavoidable consequence of being in proximity to smokers. It is the first Report in the health consequences of smoking series to establish a health risk due to tobacco smoke exposure for individuals other than the smoker, and represents the work of more than 60 distinguished physicians and scientists, both in this country and abroad.

 

After careful examin ation of the available evidence, the following overall conclusions can be reached:

1. Involuntary smoking is a cause of disease, including lung cancer, in healthy nonsmokers.

2. The children of parents who smoke, compared with the children of nonsmoking parents, have an increased frequency of respiratory infections, increased respiratory symptoms, and slightly smaller rates of increase in lung function as the lung matures.

3. Simple separation of smokers and nonsmokers within the same air space may reduce, but does not eliminate, exposure of nonsmokers to environmental tobacco smoke.

[bozz]

News just in: People die.

[Mr. Sausages]

"They were gonna die anyway" - H. Shipman

[bozz]

"They were gonna die anyway" - H. Shipman

 

Ah, Harold Shipman, the infamous social smoker. Locked them poor pensioners in a poorly ventilated room with him while he smoked like a fookin chimney.

[Chinahand]

News just in: People die.

 

I wish you, your friends, and family as long a life as they wish to have, free from illness and pain.

 

Societies efforts to reduce premature death are a central plank of our civilization. It appears you are uninterested in this ... ah you smoke - that explains alot.

[manxman8180]

Being drunk is not *supposed* to be a legal defence - but all those in the dock still seem to use it to great effect.

 

As to the negligence - I think you'd have to provide cast-iron evidence that my smoking poisoned anyone (and if it did, don't THEY have an equal responsibility to avoid my smoke?). Seems we have a new breed of intolerants who willingly enter smoking establishments just so they can feign coughs and make a bloody fuss!

 

Even the most fervent anti-smokers have trouble proving the effects of secondary smoking, despite the rampant current propaganda campaign.

blah....blah

 

I know it upsets you, but I think it will better for you just to accept that change is good!

 

It may take another 12 months, maybe even 24, but soon you won't be allowed to smoke in public (confined) places. So there will be no 'smoking establishments' for us intolerants to enter.

 

And as much as that riles you and your other cronies on here, it makes many more of us smile with joy. In fact we smile even more when you try to justify your 'right' to smoke. I'm sure we will get the 'civil liberties' issue thrown at us again, at which we will smile a little more.

 

Smile and by happy.

 

[Grumble]

Oh, I'm smiling already.

 

Smiling at the support you can expect from people like me when Big Brother decides that something YOU enjoy is against the public interest and should be banned (thin end of the wedge you see, this anti-smoking lark).

 

Smiling at the extra tax you'll be paying every time one of us gives up and joins the righteous majority.

 

And smiling even more at the number of things we REALLY ought to start complaining about on public health grounds. Booze (I'm a very moderate drinker and wouldn't miss it), dogs (WTF is the thrill in having a different species living with you and shitting all over the place, spreading bugs wherever it goes), breeding (when you can't afford to), eating fatty food, enjoying loud music.

 

Pretty soon we'll have a wonderfully compliant ethnically-diverse society where people only ever walk, take buses or drive at 18mph, work hard to pay mounting taxes while the rich get richer and the poor get shafted, nobody drinks, nobody smokes, nobody takes drugs, any congregation of more than 3 people is banned, dancing is forbidden and music has to be approved by the Government.

 

But hey, the upside is 1000 channels of Big Brother reruns 24/7 and clean air. I'm laughing now, 'cos I'll be long gone. I'm like Sam Tyler, I enjoyed 1977 just fine, but I've been sent 30 years into the FUTURE, and I don't like it one bit.

[bozz]

News just in: People die.

 

I wish you, your friends, and family as long a life as they wish to have, free from illness and pain.

 

Societies efforts to reduce premature death are a central plank of our civilization. It appears you are uninterested in this ... ah you smoke - that explains alot.

 

And I wish the same to you and yours, but it's not going to happen, cos everyone gets ill at some point, everyone suffers pain at some point, and everyone dies at some point. This life thing is ace - you only get it once, so enjoy it while you can, and while you are able, and however you like.

 

I freely admit that I am uninterested in helping the effort to reduce premature death for 2 valid reasons: 1) I'm not a doctor, and 2) there's too many humans on this planet anyway, and the average suggests they're all generally living longer than before. Give 'em all cigarettes and kebabs and sugared drinks and smog and poisonous chemicals in the water supply and all the other horrible nasty things you read about in the news. Thin the numbers down to a level that the planet can realistically support indefinitely.

 

Then clean up what's left.

 

Then you'll have your smoke-free healthy planet with smoke-free healthy people on it.

[Miss Take]

Why don't we just send all smokers to Scotland, have Northumberland and Cumbria as 'neutral' 'no go' zones so that we don't get any border skirmishes from people claiming that they can smell the smoke from Scotland wafting over the border and are treading on the fag butts that have been chucked over. Then we can have the rest of the British Isles as a non smoking zone - problem solved.

[manxman8180]

Oh, I'm smiling already.

 

Smiling at the support you can expect from people like me when Big Brother decides that something YOU enjoy is against the public interest and should be banned (thin end of the wedge you see, this anti-smoking lark).

I wouldn't expect any support from anyone else. I would fight my own corner if necessary. However, I feel I would be rational enough to see the reasons behind the decision. In this instance (and similar ones), I understand that sometimes I can't do exactly as i please for the risk of harming others. Sounds like a reasonable deal to me.

Smiling at the extra tax you'll be paying every time one of us gives up and joins the righteous majority.

I used to pay all that tax just like you still do. Taxes go up, that's a fact of life, But I have all the money I would have spent on fags, so I'm still better off thanks. And as for the 'righteous' majority, in a democracy, majority rules dude.

And smiling even more at the number of things we REALLY ought to start complaining about on public health grounds. Booze (I'm a very moderate drinker and wouldn't miss it), dogs (WTF is the thrill in having a different species living with you and shitting all over the place, spreading bugs wherever it goes), breeding (when you can't afford to), eating fatty food, enjoying loud music.

Your opinions may well be valid. The Government should be doing more undoubtedly. But, equally if you can't accept that they are doing the right thing in this instance, then you need to take of your rose tinted (or should that be smoke tinted) spectacles. And anyway, you are adamant that they are going to turn on everything else soon (i.e. your Big Brother quote) so maybe your wishes will be fulfilled.

Pretty soon we'll have a wonderfully compliant ethnically-diverse society where people only ever walk, take buses or drive at 18mph, work hard to pay mounting taxes while the rich get richer and the poor get shafted, nobody drinks, nobody smokes, nobody takes drugs, any congregation of more than 3 people is banned, dancing is forbidden and music has to be approved by the Government.

Do you really believe all that drivel! Really, as my previous post, you need to smile more, realise what a wonderful place we live in and enjoy it. All this bitterness about the impedning loss of your god given right to do what you like, is making you sound like a sad human being, which I am sure you are not.

 

 

and clean air.

Oh yeah, you've gotta hate that clean air stuff.

 

Smile and be happy.

[Lonan3]

And as for the 'righteous' majority, in a democracy, majority rules dude.

 

I take it that means an immimnent return of both capital an corporal punishment? Or is it that the majority only rules when they have a small number of vociferous, stentorian voices to drown out any kind of reasoned debate?