Definitely not in Cromwells time. IMM is a direct descendant probably.
No gaiety, somber clothes, no drinking dancing or playing of music. And
utter hatred of anything smacking of privilege.
Cromwell - ofetn hailed as the father of parliamentary democracy, made
the Taliban look like S club 7..
The country was overjoyed when he died, and welcomed charles II with
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.
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 :-)
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'.
Got to agree, when I did a first aid course the instructor (who was also a
volunteer at our local infirmary) said he had never seen a man beat up a
woman for the price of a packet of cigarettes but he had seen lots of
domestic violence caused by drink .
Both horrible habits, drink when taken to excess and smoking at all. Have
sympathy for those who are addicted but don't see why I should have to
suffer the consequences.
As to the original question smell is unlikely to come THROUGH the walls
maybe over or under them .The row of houses I live in have one vast area
under them so any noxious odours could be traveling that way . It is nigh
on impossible to make a house air tight, indeed some air flow through a
house (not draughts) is required (air for combustion, to keep wooden joists
from rotting e.t.c.).
addy not usable (not that you would try it)
Just my two-penneth but I'd say you can, or at least you can ask him
to contribute to the cost of solving the problem. You share the
responsibility for the poor quality of the party wall, and if he were
playing loud music you would expect to complain to environmental
Or am I taking it a bit too far?
contribute to the cost of solving the problem. You share the responsibility
for the poor quality of the party wall, and if he were playing loud music
you would expect to complain to environmental health.
Mike P. says:
Stepping into a minefield here, just fill in the voids and seal your side of
Semi-detached houses were originally a good idea, making houses more
affordable. Unfortunately, over the years, due to the greed and shoddy
building practices, these dwellings have become nightmares to a lot of
owners and must be the cause of enormous stress. Inadaquate sound
insulation is usually the major problem. I've never heard of smell
transmission, but I can't say I'm really surprised. I'm afraid the only
answer to all these problems is a detached house. My neighbour is extemely
quiet, but I still like the 16 foot gap between our houses.
Make that 400 yards.
I went up into a friends terrced house roof once. NO DIVIDING WALL AT
ALL. You could here em at it half the night. Spose they could hear us as
Flooors too. Unless the partition wall was built first (and sealed)
quite likley a common underfloor void.
Would you also expect them to pay for dog smells - or cooking etc?
If you have a faulty house in this sort of way, it's up to you to do
something about it - not your neighbour. Anything else would be opening up
a can of worms.
*I get enough exercise just pushing my luck.
Dave Plowman email@example.com London SW 12
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:54:13 +0000 (GMT), Dave Plowman
That statement is open to argument. This isn't the place to have that
discussion, but if you add up all of the costs involved I have my
doubts that is the case. There are a lot of "hidden" costs in dealing
with smokers which don't make the news headlines.
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.
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.