Cigarette smoke perculates through the walls from next door. Ugh. How can I seal it?

[BigWallop]

Yes it's been proven. After a study was carried out a few years back, during or after the Roy Castle case I think, they found that non-smokers sitting in smokey clubs and pubs showed well over their normal limit of carbon monoxide, and that was only after a few hours. So to say it doesn't effect but only irritates others, is not quite true.

The new campaign on tele' which shows the kids breathing out smoke is really hard hitting, and that's why I've always stayed to just one room in the house that the kids are not allowed to come into. And I always sit here with the window open a touch.

[BillR]

I aggree with the foam solution. One thing that occurs to me is if smoke can get through one household to another it must be a risk in case of fire in one property and therefore probably doesn't meet fire regulations. What can you expect from Wimpy though. I bought my first house around that time and they were well known to be the one developer to avoid if at all possible.

[Snowman]

You are a credit for your consideration. More so than most I see with their children, particularly in cars.

[Steve Firth]

Uh huh, tanks defend themselves from the nuclear, biological and chemical agents outside the tank by pumping in air from outside the tank eh? I can spot a slight flaw in this scheme.

[ANt]

You could try letting off a flare in his house and see where the coloured smoke appears on your side :-) Best wait for him to go on holiday for that and tell him you'll watch his house for him.

Ant.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Oh, I agree. I have been a non smoker for some years as well. So I understand both sides.

I would rather have a situation where its REALLY smoking or REALLY non smoking - some hotels I have been to actually put you in diferent wings, which to me is just FINE.

Or if you wanted to run a restaurant with both, meet some standard of air cleanliness in teh smokeless zone.

Nothing can be 'proven' - especailly from a single case. Satistically, e.,g. kids in homes where one or more parents smoke can be shown to sufer as a result. Not all do, some do a lot. Some kids who don't and who never smoke will die of lung cancer at the age of 30 as well having ingested something else floatig by - a nice piece of radioactive plutonium for example.

It was a vegetarian who died of CJD for example. The exception proves nothing: Only the broad weight of staistical evidence that 'in general, smokers and those who live around them to an extent, die a bit younger, of various diseases, of which heart disease and lung cancer are the most markedly higher in occurrence'.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I don't think so. It would hit trade too much.

[The Natural Philosopher]

They should do the same study on M25 drivers in the rush hour then. At least carbon monoxide is completely out of the system in a few hours time, whereas diesel particulates may be there for life. I never faiil to get a severe headche, runny nose and sore throat after navigating the M25, except curiously, at weekends when ther are no heavy lorries about.

Mind you, if I had my way, I'd ban wheat. Living next to wheat rusts does my

lungs in far worse than cigarettes do.

Nice touch. I usually go outside at friends houses with kids too.

Ofetn a good excuse to leave a boring argument about - er - things like health, and smoking :-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

They filter it you know.

>

[Frisket]

If your going to come out with reasonable, well thought out arguments then kindly keep your opinions to yourself. Next you'll be suggesting that smokers pay more into the coffers (pun not intended) than they take out! Richard.

[Mike Barnard]

those were the days. I was in the 2nd Royal tank regiment from '74 to '78. Qualified crewman (driver, gunner and operator) on Chieftain and Fox. Sigh...

[Mike Barnard]

Wow, what a thread! :) Sorry in delaying replying but I've been working nights.

Too many posts to reply to individually but the gist of the thread is obviously LIFT THOSE BOARDS! Well, I can't for a while as I have a big desk to dismantle etc and I'm busy doing out another room. But I now fully expect to find some sort of gaps.

From putting in a power socket in the back room I discovered that they have built the interior walls over the continous floorboarding, but I shouldn't think they could do this across individual houses...can they? This MUST breach any fire regs regarding dividing walls, even from the '60's!?!

OH well, thanks to you all for the pointers and I'll let you know the outcome in the future.

[Fraser]

Bit of a Bill Hicks quote: "non-smokers die everyday!!"

Just because you don't smoke, you aren't going to live for ever. You are going to die and probably require similarly expensive healthcare in the meantime. That whole anti-smoking argument is nonsense, believed only by people who _want_ to believe it...i.e. non-smokers.

The amount of money paid in tax on cigarettes, and the pension savings of the early-checkout far more than compensate for the health care and other costs. If that wasn't the case, they'd ban or further restrict it.

Oh yeah, passive smoking. It's a bit like the whole breast cancer thing...sure it can kill, but there are far more deadly and more common dangers out there. As other posters mentioned, a walk through a busy town at rush hour is far worse than living with a smoker. Big industry puts far more harmful chemicals in the air than smokers do.

F./

[Huge]

All true. And all irrelevant. You're welcome to smoke in my presence, just as long as I am welcome to urinate and vomit drunkenly on you.

[Andy Hall]

This demonstrates and misses the point exactly.

Apart from the increased health risks to all concerned why should the unpleasant smell and worsened air quality be inflicted on others in public places such as bars and restaurants, or worse yet in their homes?

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[PoP]

PoP

[RichardS]

I'm not a habitual smoker, but on this point I can only quote one of the characters in Southpark (was an episode from one of the first series): "Having never taken drugs myself, I can honestly say they have nothing to offer me".

Don't see the point of corporal punishment myself, but hey, some people pay good money for it....

But the point is why isn't the free market sorting these things out? Nobody is forced to eat in a particular restaurant or drink in a particular bar (whereas people are forced to use particular buildings when accessing public services such as social security offices, etc).

Market forces should surely rule this, perhaps backed up by a requirement to state a smoking policy on the door or something like that? With the majority of the country not smoking I am at a loss to understand why there are not more restaurants and bars with a no-smoking policy (at least in eating areas).

Which begs the question: where are they?

-- Richard Sampson

email me at richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

[Ferger]

You don't have to go there. If the proprietor chooses to allow smoking in part or in full and you don't like it, go somewhere else. There is no should about it, but you can exercise choice.

--

F

[Frisket]

There have been times when I've felt almost sorry for the way you are sometimes abused on this group but this has to be the most unmitigated pile of dogs whoopsie you've ever put your name to. "Some" people losing their jobs? Several thousand I'd have thought. Society not changing in a negative way? You must have bloody deep pockets or an optimistic point of view if you don't think Gordon Brown won't screw your plums to the wall to replace his lost revenue. Or are you one of the unbrainwashed non-smoking elite who know that banning smoking will enable everyone to live forever in peace and harmony, banish hunger and disease and put the Great back in Britain? The previous poster had a valid point when he suggested market forces should apply. If everyone wanted no smoking bars and eateries and voted with their feet then no smoking they would be. However, perhaps normal people prefer the company of smokers to the sad arsed politically correct who inhabit the strictly no smoking venues...

Richard

[geoff]

In message , IMM writes

You would make a good politician, in the way that you have learned nothing from history.

If smoking was banned tomorrow, a black market of such huge proportions that would leave class A drug smuggling in the background would instantly spring up, and it would spiral totally out of control.

Never heard of prohibition ? how did that stop drinking? It didn't, it just made a lot of criminal gangs very powerful