WAAAY OT: Third-hand smoke toxicity

Page 2 of 3  


of them do you suppose smoked more than a pack a day? OTOH, maybe the guy who ran the milking machine was a smoker and it was second-hand smoke that did them in.
If all these cases of bovine lung cancer are caused by second-hand smoke it wasn't from tobacco. Maybe from the eruption of Mt. St. Helen's or any of the other volcanic eruptions which occur periodically on our planet and spew more pollutants into the air than a thousand years of cigarette smoke.
Go worry about a metiorite crashing into earth.
"Liberalism is a mental disorder."
Joe
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Winterburn Wrote:

-- tomeshew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Winterburn Wrote:

-- tomeshew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 18 Feb 2005 20:07:01 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Check out <http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=second+hand+smoke&fr=yscpb&vs=www.junkscience.com
Quoting one comment regarding Health Canada study link between second hand smoke and breast cancer, "Epidemiology studies on second-hand smoke rely on statistics rather than scientific experiments. While statistical studies can be helpful in identifying cause-and-effect relationships, the statistical associations must be strong. Smoking was linked to lung cancer because populations of heavy smokers had about 1,000% more lung cancer than non-smoking populations. Weak statistical associations, though, are open to question. Among epidemiologists, statistical associations purporting to represent increases in risk of 100% or less are considered 'weak associations.' As the U.S. National Cancer Institute said about an earlier study on abortion and breast cancer, 'In epidemiologic research, [risks of less than 100%] are considered small and usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to chance, statistical bias or effects of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident.'
The statistical associations in the Health Canada study are weak. And it has other shortcomings. "
From yet another (a 1998 article), "There are many good reasons to avoid secondhand smoke. It stinks. It lingers. It irritates. But contrary to popular wisdom and anti-tobacco propaganda, there is little solid evidence that it kills. Last week, a federal judge threw out a widely touted study by the Environmental Protection Agency that declared secondhand tobacco smoke a Class A carcinogen in 1993. The EPA report used dubious statistical methods to conclude that passive smoke causes 3,000 lung-cancer deaths per year. The ruling affirms what respected epidemiologists and biostatisticians have said for five years: EPA used political science, not sound science, to arrive at its ominous numbers."
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety Army General Richard Cody +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
EPA used political science, not

Imagine that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Abortion being in any way harmful to the mother or to the unborn child does not fit the liberal agenda. Ergo, any study linking increased probability of breast cancer resulting from abortion had to be faulty. If you rhink ir could be otherwise you do not understand liberalism.
Joe
"Liberalism is a mental disorder."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Have her read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear".
Dave

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fri, Feb 18, 2005, 8:07pm (EST-3) snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com claims: <snip> Her position is <snip> Perhaps she just doesn't want to come right out and tell you that she's going to bludgeon you to death if you continue.
JOAT Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong. - David Fasold
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fri, Feb 18, 2005, 8:07pm (EST-3) snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com cites: <snip> the bazillion toxins in cigar smoke. <snip> Let me add to my previous post.
I quit smoking many years ago. Twice. Had been up to 5+ packs a day (so that, "I'm such a heavy smoker", at a pack a day, is just a load of crap). Now if I'm around any smoke at all, my system shuts down. Feels like my lungs start filling up with liquid, and I can't breathe. Just the smell of tobacco smoke on someone's clothing is horrible to me anymore. So, even if she is wrong on the health part, she could still have a valid point. Or, you could continue, until she blugeoons you to death.
JOAT Intellectual brilliance is no guarantee against being dead wrong. - David Fasold
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're in trouble Phil. You can't win any discussion with a person who takes things this far. She clearly hates everything related to smoking, and that has the feel of a no-win battle ground. On the other hand, every breath we take reduces the number of breaths left remaining to us in our lives. Best not to breathe, and then that way we'll never hit that point of breathing our last breath.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If you can smell the smoke, it is getting into your lungs. Tobacco smoke has about 50 toxic chemicals in it, including cyanide and arsenic. Your wife is correct. To make peace you could change clothes before entering the house and don't argue with the SWMBO.
On 18 Feb 2005 20:07:01 -0800, snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's one "discussion" that even if you win, you most likely lose.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Evidence or not, it doesn't matter. Smoke filled clothing especially from cigars to a non smoker smells like shit. I would bet your wife is more upset about you coming home and reeking up the joint. Buy some Febreese (sp?) in the laundry detergent isle and spray it on your ripe self before you walk in the front door.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Take a tip from the 18th century English Gentlemen: Get a smoking jacket and hat and wear them when you smoke, leave them some where else when you associate with the ladies so as to be inoffensive.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I am convinced women have a much more acute sense of smell than men. We have this discussion about exhaust smell from lawnmowers and snow blowers.
My take is, reasonable or unreasonable, the smell bothers her. She is the best thing to happen in my life, and if avoided smells makes her happier, I'll do it. She does the same for me.
Logic, reason, and statistics have little place in this argument.
Walt C

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Walt Cheever wrote:

Not "women". Individual women. And individual men. Consider the people who get paid by perfume manufacturers to judge nuances of fragrance. Some folks have noses dang near as good as a bloodhound.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

Maybe she doesn't like smell? After a few bowls of chili and a 6-pack of beer, I certainly won't fart anywhere near my wife. In fact, after a meal like that, I go to a cigar bar and fart. Who'd know? Now I think about it, that would be inconsiderate, because some of the patrons will have to go home at some point....
It's a complicated world.
00
Rob----> who doesn't smoke and thinks that people who do, stink.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hi Phil,
Google "Michael Fumento" Hudson Institute and you will find all the information you want that proves ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke), while awful is basically harmless.
Here is a link to get you started:
http://www.fumento.com/disease/smoking.html
Lou (non-smoker for 30+ years now but hates PC crap)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote:

This whole thread makes me want to point out that I feel the same as your wife does, except I feel that way about perfumes and artificial fragrances of every flavor. Certain kinds of vanilla, and one berry-scented something they don't make anymore, and oddly enough, Brut. Everything else from Old Spice to Chanel #5 gives me a splitting headache moments after coming into proximity with the repugnant vapors.
The world is filled with these horrible fake fragrances. I've even heard limp wristed prancing little prissy boy perfume industry fragrance designers assert that there is absolutely no difference between a fake fragrance and a natural one. I assert that that is bullshit. Why don't real flowers make my head hurt?
I couldn't care less about smokers, but if I had my way, I'd abolish the entire artificial fragrance industry. No more perfume, deodorant (except Brut), cologne, scented candles and plugins and air fresheners and whatzits. Get rid of it all and replace it with the scent of good cherry pipe tobacco. That would be a nice start.
It feels good to get this rant off my chest. I've been meaning to find some reason to rant about this for ages. I guess it's one reason SWMBO and I have stuck together so long. I told her how badly such things affect me early on, and she stopped spraying herself with that glop. She's one of the few women I know who doesn't exude chemical foulness from her every pore. I appreciate her for giving up her perfumes for me, because I know women are into that crap.
--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan < snipped-for-privacy@users.sourceforge.net>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"> I Get rid of it all and replace it with the scent of good cherry

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It 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.