The "chemicals" are in such a minor trace amount that they are not
actually harmful. You are simply offended by the smell.
If the government "bans" something, that is not the market, it is the
government. The title of this thread is not "where should smoking be
unprofitable" or "where should smoking be politically incorrect" it
says "illegal" . That is enforcing your beliefs at the point of a
government gun and that is not "conservative" thinking.
On 5/29/2016 9:58 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
You're wrong about the chemicals, AND about me simply being offended by
"Thirdhand smoke consists of the tobacco residue from cigarettes,
cigars, and other tobacco products that is left behind after smoking and
builds up on surfaces and furnishings. Tobacco smoke is composed of
numerous types of gasses and particulate matter, including carcinogens
and heavy metals, like arsenic, lead, and cyanide. Sticky, highly toxic
particulates, like nicotine, can cling to walls and ceilings. Gases can
be absorbed into carpets, draperies, and other upholsteries. A 2002
study found that these toxic brews can then reemit back into the air and
recombine to form harmful compounds that remain at high levels long
after smoking has stopped occurring.
There is a growing body of evidence that this lingering tobacco residue
has significant health risks. People, especially children and
hospitality industry workers, can have considerable exposure to it. As
confirmed by the 2006 Surgeon General's Report, there is no safe level
of exposure to tobacco smoke. And tobacco smoke toxins remain harmful
even when breathed or ingested after the active smoking ends.
A study published in February 2010 found that thirdhand smoke causes the
formation of carcinogens. The nicotine in tobacco smoke reacts with
nitrous acid - a common component of indoor air - to form the hazardous
carcinogens. Nicotine remains on surfaces for days and weeks, so the
carcinogens continue to be created over time, which are then inhaled,
absorbed or ingested."
Give me a real science study, not a hit piece from a group who says
"no smoke" in their name.
I can find a "study" from some fundamentalist organization that says
people are "harmed" by damned near anything.
On 5/30/2016 12:27 AM, email@example.com wrote:
Did you try the links referenced in the article? I'm guessing you didn't
even read the article or try the links to the studies it referenced.
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/1/e74?variant «stract&sso=1&sso_redirect_count=1&nfstatus@1&nftoken 000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token
Any link that starts out "no-smoke" is going to be a biased hit piece
and any "science" that does not talk about dosage and the TLV is
hyperbole. I was the OSHA hazmat compliance officer among other duties
and I am very familiar with protocols around chemicals.
I imagine you are getting more harmful fumes from your nail polish
remover than any amount of second hand smoke you encounter. Read the
MSDS on that solvent sometime if you want to be scared. Simply
painting a toxic chemical on your nails is bad enough and god only
knows what is in the other cosmetics.
On 5/30/2016 12:32 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
OSHA huh? OK.
Since you're familiar with OSHA, and that seems to be the only source
you'd accept as valid, why don't you provide the OSHA information that
says smoking is safe and doesn't cause health problems via secondhand or
third hand smoke?
Smoking is dangerous and there are plenty of references for that. In
very high concentrations of ambient smoke, for long periods of time is
very likely a hazard. An occasional whiff of smoke is not dangerous
and the idea of the latent smell of smoke in a curtain being dangerous
On 5/30/2016 1:38 PM, email@example.com wrote:
Prove it's not dangerous, then.
I've provided multiple references that says it is dangerous and causes
health problems, and I and some others have said that even a whiff of
secondhand smoke can make them sick, in addition to, providing links
that provide proof of that happening.
You don't believe any of the references to any of those things that I've
provided. So, I'd like for you to provide me with links that support
your conclusion that a whiff of smoke is not dangerous and latent third
hand smoke is also not dangerous.
Prove carrots don't cause cancer.
Another red herring, you can't prove a negative.
The lack of any real evidence that second hand smoke ever killed
anyone is about all we have.
Random musing by groups who start out condemning smokers and cherry
picking random data points to confirm their case is not proof of
I am done with this,. If you don't like smoke, stay away from smokers.
On Tue, 31 May 2016 00:04:44 -0400, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I want you to provide data that backs up your assertions. You claimed
to "know" about such things because of your OSHA experience. There
should be data that backs up your claim of small amounts of
secondhand smoke does no harm. Tests? Studies? Something? A medical
article? Anything from the OSHA website?
Where is your evidence?
I've provided multiple references to legitimate sources that back up
my claims about secondhand smoke, and all you've done is say they
aren't credible sources because YOU know more on the subject, but now
you're telling me you've got no evidence to back up anything you've
said on the subject?
Any "study" that does not address TLVs is bogus. Chlorine is
considered a WMD and it killed hundreds of thousands of soldiers when
used as a weapon but nobody is concerned when they get a little whiff
of it pouring bleach in the washer or when they jump in a swimming
pool. It is all about dosage. Until you recognize that fact, you are
just a an alarmist smoke nazi
On Tue, 31 May 2016 01:40:45 -0400, email@example.com wrote:
Who are you to say "it's all about dosage" when several people here
have told you they get sick with very little exposure? A whiff of
secondhand smoke does make people sick. How do you explain that
How can you ignore the obvious proof it makes people sick?
OK. Where are the studies that agree with your conclusion?
Since, "Tobacco smoke contains more than 7,000 chemicals, including
hundreds that are toxic and about 70 that can cause cancer", which
chemical(s) are people allergic to?
If allergies are the cause, there should be detailed documentation that
backs up your statement.
They are the principle chemicals deemed dangerous by OSHA.
Water is a "chemical".
The important issue with that chart is to show the concentration
necessary to create a hazard. To reach the TLV, you need to smoke over
1000 cigarettes in a small unventilated room for the worst offenders
and most involve needing to smoke 10,000 or more. That also assumes
the smoker did not absorb any of those chemicals.
The simple fact that you feel sick is simply a trained response with
no real organic cause. There are plenty of people who will get sick
watching someone puke on TV and there is nothing at all involved but
their own acquired psychological response. Do you get sick when you
see people smoke on TV too?
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.