To: forktail; Gabz
Sure ban smoking in hospitals,Wow, that raises an interesting question. If, as some suggest, second hand smoke is not harmful, what justification was there for the ban on smoking in hospitals?
48 posted on
01/02/2004 9:27:06 AM PST by
Scenic Sounds
(Sí, estamos libres sonreír otra vez - ahora y siempre.)
To: Scenic Sounds
all that bottle O2
51 posted on
01/02/2004 9:28:22 AM PST by
patton
(I wish we could all look at the evil of abortion with the pure, honest heart of a child.)
To: Scenic Sounds
Wow, that raises an interesting question. If, as some suggest, second hand smoke is not harmful, what justification was there for the ban on smoking in hospitals?
Huge grants to chop off the heads of the smoking staff, patients and family members who smoke, paid for by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. To date, 48 states are now in the pocket of the RWJ Foundation working with the AMA.
60 posted on
01/02/2004 9:41:54 AM PST by
SheLion
(Curiosity killed the cat BUT satisfaction brought her back!!!)
To: Scenic Sounds
what justification was there for the ban on smoking in hospitals? Second hand smoke can aggravate some pre-existing conditions and as hospitals being "health care" facilities it is understandable for them to impose restrictions - but still does not justify government mandated bans.
62 posted on
01/02/2004 9:43:06 AM PST by
Gabz
(smoke gnatzies - small minds buzzing in your business -swat'em)
To: Scenic Sounds
It's stinky and dirty, maybe? The "second hand smoke is not harmful" scientific research could still be accurate while at the same time the residuals of smoking (butts and dust) are damaging in their own ways. Hospitals need to be as clean and germ-free as possible.
67 posted on
01/02/2004 9:47:25 AM PST by
arasina
(Tagline sponsorships! Think about it! Brought to you by MAYTAG)
To: Scenic Sounds
You can't even get those people to empty the bedpans, let alone the ashtrays.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson