Posted on 09/04/2014 5:12:36 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Great post.
When do they quit selling beer? Prescription drugs?
#letstalkaboutahealthiergenerationfirsttotalitarian
He has U.S. taxpayer-paid servants to procure all his drugs for him.
CVS was my pharmacy of choice and I'd usually pick up cigarettes while there, or pick up my prescrip when I stop in for cigarettes.......
Either way, I've switched to Walgreens for both and since they're just as numerous in my area as CVS, it's not even an inconvenience.........
There's big money in drug sales, that's why you see so many Walgreens ads on TV.....I think this was a bad marketing decision for CVS
CVS didn’t do this out of any corporate concern. They did this because they hate smokers. This pisses me off even though I don’t smoke.
Can cigarettes be purchased with EBT cards? And if so, why?
I’ve never had a CVS swipe my DL when buying wine or beer.
I went in and filled a cart with stuff then went to the register and asked for smokes. They said no and I left my cart for them to put away. I might do it again tomorrow.
Freedom of choice - exactly.
No DL, no sale.
***************
That must be a regional thing. I don’t frequent CVS that often but I don’t
remember ever having to use my DL unless paying via check.
Tobacco is a Group I carcinogen. It has cardiopulmonary detrimental effects, as well. We know this.
But we cannot make our own decisions. WE are stupid enough to vote into the presidency this man. so there’s the evidence.
Where does he get his cigarettes?
I get mine from CVS. No more.
I smoke about one cigarette per year when I want one and after I wrap up in an outfit that makes me look like Lucy Ricardo. They are smelly. That’s after growing up with a chain smoker who died at an early age of breast cancer...from oral contraceptives. No one else in the family has breast cancer. not out of five daughters. And they won’t. It was from environmental causes, though try to convince them of that. No one talks about the contraceptive-breast CA link.
But I can bet CVS is selling those things and wouldn’t give up that cash cow any sooner than the Royal Ancient Hibernians and the USCCB gave in on inviting LGBT banner into a Catholic parade, AKA St Pat’s celebration.
But Oral contraceptives are as carcinogenic as tobacco.
That’s well known from the WHO, as is the link between breast CA and abortion,
Anyone doubting can also look at the prevalence of Breast CA now compared with 1930s or even compared with the 1970s when the prevalence was as widespread as it is now. That’s because they have done nothing about preventing it.
Women are very happy to jump in and get mammograms and get cut apart. If they knew of the connection, would they?
WEll, CVS won’t drop this item, so people think it must be safe.
That’s wrong.
It’s so hypocritical, as is everything taking over our culture.
Some research:
First are the IARC Group Classifications for agents and their degrees of carcinogenicity:
Group 1 Carcinogenic to humans (107 agents)
Group 2A Probably carcinogenic to humans (59 agents)
Group 2B Possibly carcinogenic to humans (267 agents)
Group 3 Not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (508 agents)
Group 4 Probably not carcinogenic to humans (1 agent)
from;
http://gerardnadal.com/2010/01/18/oral-contraceptives-who-class-i-carcinogen/
It seems that WHO has taken down the page. However, they have made several expanded pages with a wealth of data. Click here for the links.
The following oral contraceptives are listed along with some other Group I Carcinogens for reference.
From the document:
Estrogen-progestogen menopausal therapy (combined) (Vol. 72, Vol. 91, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Vol. 72, Vol. 91, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
(NB: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary)
Estrogens, nonsteroidal (Suppl. 7, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
(NB: This evaluation applies to the group of compounds as a whole and not necessarily to all individual compounds within the group)
Estrogens, steroidal (Suppl. 7, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
(NB: This evaluation applies to the group of compounds as a whole and not necessarily to all individual compounds within the group)
Estrogen therapy, postmenopausal (Vol. 72, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
[Oral contraceptives, combined estrogen-progestogen: see Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined)]
Oral contraceptives, sequential (Suppl. 7, Vol. 100A; in preparation)
Asbestos [1332-21-4] (Vol. 14, Suppl. 7; 1987)
Benzene [71-43-2] (Vol. 29, Suppl. 7; 1987)
Formaldehyde [50-00-0] (Vol. 88; 2006)
Gallium arsenide [1303-00-0] (Vol. 86; 2006)
Plutonium-239 and its decay products (may contain plutonium-240 and other isotopes), as aerosols (Vol. 78; 2001)
Radioiodines, short-lived isotopes, including iodine-131, from atomic reactor accidents and nuclear weapons detonation (exposure during childhood) (Vol. 78; 2001)
Radionuclides, a-particle-emitting, internally deposited (Vol. 78; 2001)
(NB: Specific radionuclides for which there is sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity to humans are also listed individually as Group 1 agents)
Radionuclides, b-particle-emitting, internally deposited (Vol. 78; 2001)
(NB: Specific radionuclides for which there is sufficient evidence for carcinogenicity to humans are also listed individually as Group 1 agents)
Radium-224 and its decay products (Vol. 78; 2001)
Radium-226 and its decay products (Vol. 78; 2001)
Radium-228 and its decay products (Vol. 78; 2001)
Radon-222 [10043-92-2] and its decay products (Vol. 43, Vol. 78; 2001)
X- and Gamma (g)-Radiation (Vol. 75; 2000)
Tobacco smoking and tobacco smoke (Vol. 83; 2004)
Most assuredly some are stronger than others. The danger in the less potent carcinogens lies in the propensity for a long-term exposure with its cumulative mutagenic effects.
Also on the list was Chinese salted fish. Not sure what’s in there, but will find out, as it was a staple in grad school.
CVS is the biggest seller of alcohol in my town.
LOL.
No you didn’t. But that would be hilarious.
I have long thought that the market could decide whether or not there should be smoking in private businesses. If businesses were simply mandated to decide whether they would be all smoking or non smoking and prominently display their choice on their front door and that choice would also appear in all of their advertising and ads for employment, people would decide where to take their business. My bet is that most businesses would choose to be non smoking. There might be a few small establishments like small local bars that would remain smoking, but in time I think even they would make the switch.
“WE can be the first generation that doesn't smoke!”
Meanwhile young people are being driven to the polls to vote Democrat on the “legalize pot” initiatives.
Let the legislatures legalize (or decriminalize) pot if they want, but please end this double standard of demonizing tobacco as the most evil weed while high fiving the mass marketing of pot.
Free markets will decide. I like that I can go to my local restaurant/bar and not have to breath smoke on cheap wing night. I like that my employer banned smoking on site so that my smoking coemployees don’t get a 15 minute break at least every hour when I have to work the full hour.
I recently got vaped at an outdoor restaurant. Nicotine addicts have no shame. They breath their toxins on anyone nearby.
CVS will never see another dollar of mine.
Drugs kill. They ruin lives. They swallow souls whole.
Pot is more like strong beer without the hangover.
The only reason most think it’s so evil is years of government propaganda.
Most of us here are beyond thought regulation i’d hope.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.