Per Mark Lloyd:
My guess? A mix of the two.... But I once knew an extremely high-powered programmer from IBM who maintained that without the help of nicotine and caffeine he never could have produced what he did.
smokers need to know and accept they are now 3rd class citizens, with their filthy dirty disquisting habit......
Wow.
It is interesting that we treat smokers worse than opiate addicts, drunks and the morbidly obese even though those 3 groups have a worse effect on society.
makes ya warm and fuzzy, doesn't it? betcha he has a different opinion of ILLEGAL immigrants, though
But only as long as they continue the filthy dirty disgusting habit.
Per bob haller:
Way back in the early eighties a guy I worked with - and who made a number of predictions that eventually came true - told me that eventually smoking would be viewed like chewing tobacco and spitting.
At the time I thought "Geeze, you're a really smart guy.... but this time you've gone over the top."
Seems to me like his prediction is not too far from coming true.
Per snipped-for-privacy@aol.com:
Agreed.... but none of them stink and none of them directly effect us on a person-to-person basis (unless we get robbed by an addict).
There's something about separate parts of the brain for "Here-and-now" stuff and more abstract stuff.... and the "Here-and-now" part tends to overrule the more abstract part.
Chewing tobacco and spitting isn't all that far from smoking.
Chewing leaves brown streaks on your car when you spit out the window. When I worked in the steel mills, the tobacco spit disappeared in the dust. I quit chewing when there was no place to spit.
Lots of drug addicts, drunks and fat folks smell bad. If you don't think the obese have an immediate effect on you, I imagine you never fly. I would rather be sitting between 2 cigar smokers in coach than between two 300 pounders. Most of the rational arguments against smokers comes down to financial cost and that pales in comparison to drugs, alcohol and obesity.
How do you feel about the gum?
Those are all separate issues, and none of them negate the validity of the problems and medical issues secondhand smoke causes.
Occasionally, I like to chew peppermint gum, briefly, to freshen my breath after a meal. I throw it away in the same paper I took it out of.
I imagine it leaves brown streaks down someone's chin when they spit, too.
I notice you were quiet for a while after I actually put government supplied numbers to that danger ... like needing to smoke over 1000 cigarettes in a small closed room to get to the OSHA TLV for the most dangerous chemicals in cigarette smoke... but f*ck science, you are offended by the smell so we need to do what you want. I am offended by the smell of a sweaty fat guy encroaching into my seat space on a plane but I am not getting any help. I have to buy a first class ticket for relief. Maybe the government should subsidize that. Instead they subsidize the drug and alcohol problems of the addicts on SSI for their addictions.
I responded to your last post about your government supplied numbers.
.......... MID:
"Can you provide your source that documents those chemicals at those levels are present in a whiff of smoke, and that it's safe to inhale?" ...........
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 10:31:10 -0500 MID:
"Nice chart, but there are 7000 chemicals in secondhand smoke, and your link doesn't reference anything about allergies." ...........
You've never addressed the 7000 chemicals in secondhand smoke, or even provided evidence the chemicals you listed *exist* in the measured doses you provided in your comments here.
You're the one who claims the OSHA levels don't exceed those measurements. You prove a whiff of smoke is safe.
YOU: "OK demonstrate that a whiff of smoke exceeds these OSHA levels"
Contaminant PEL STEL Carbon Monoxide 35 ppm 200 ppm Nicotine 0.5 mg/m3 Sulfur Dioxide 2 ppm 5 ppm Ammonia 35 ppm Nitric Oxide 25 ppm Nitrogen Dioxide 1 ppm Vinyl Chloride 1 ppm 5 ppm Hydrogen Cyanide 4.7 ppm Formaldehyde 1 ppm 2 ppm Benzene 1 ppm 5 ppm Arsenic 0.1 mg/m3 ...........
Separate issues and irrelevant to the issue of secondhand smoke.
I referenced the chemicals that were dangerous according to our government and trace amounts are not dangerous. What part of that confuses you?
If we regulated everything that some .01% of the people could actually demonstrate a clinical allergy to, not a psychosomatic aversion, we would not have much left in this country.
My grandfather used to chew tobacco, and had spit cans (old coffee cans) around the house. I think I thought that was disgusting when I was growing up. That was when I had NO experience with people smoking, which is much worse. Consider that chewing tobacco spit is a thick liquid that DOESN'T enter other people's lungs.
Thread drift. The technique of those who cannot win an argument.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.