Great Britain: 17,000 blinded by fags (Smoking, that is)

The Sun (U.K.) ^ | September 7 ,2005 | EMMA MORTON

[Stoat]

17,000 blinded by fags

By EMMA MORTON

 MORE than 17,000 Britons have gone blind because they SMOKE, it was revealed yesterday.

 

The shock statistic shows the link between fags and sight loss is as strong as that between cigs and lung cancer.

The cigarettes cause a form of blindness called Age-Related Macular Degeneration, known as AMD.

Smoke destroys cells in an area at the back of the eye named the macular. And smokers do not absorb nutrients from food essential for good eyesight.

Cigarette puffers are four times more likely to develop AMD or lung cancer than those who shun the weed.

And even social smokers who only indulge on nights out run double the risk of blindness than people who never light up.

The alert follows research by medics from Manchester University.

Study leader Simon Kelly, a consultant opthalmic surgeon, said: “An important health message needs to be conveyed. We would like to see labelling on cigarette packets.”

AMD victim Pauline Edwards, 50, was told she had the eyes of an 80-year-old — and was going blind.

The ex-nurse, of Salford, Greater Manchester, used to smoke up to 40 fags a day.

She said: “I woke up one morning and the walls in my bedroom seemed wobbly. I was very, very frightened.”

[Gabz]

Smokers and Christians are currently among the groups that are regarded as "okay to discriminate against in the most brutal manner possible"

Unfortunatley many of those Christians are leading the charge at discriminating against smokers.

[Stoat]

Better than going blind from that other thing, i guess.

But, then again, come to massachusetts, you can't smoke one in a bar, but you CAN marry the fag you shag.

Any sane folks still residing in Massachusetts have my deepest sympathies for the pain that they must endure on a daily basis.

I'm in Washington, which seems almost as bad at times.  I would have left here years ago if it weren't for responsibilities that require my presence here.  I've spoken with FReepers from Texas here before, and places like Lubbock seem awfully nice by their descriptions.  I would love to visit there one day, and perhaps stay.

"sigh"

[Stoat]

17,000 blinded by fags

Don't they know how to do the Three Stooges hand in front of those/parallel to the face block over there?

I will be sure to ask some of my British friends about this the next time I tuck in to a breakfast of bangers and mash with them.

17,000 blinded by fags

Don't they know how to do the Three Stooges hand in front of those/parallel to the face block over there?

[Stoat]

Double entendre, always funny.

I'm happy that your online experience here has been worthwhile  :-)

[R. Scott]

Again, given the fact that human beings are, by nature flawed and therefore there is always potential for abuse and corruption anytime a profit is to be made, would this be a valid rationale for dispensing with a system of laws altogether, merely because there is a potential for corruption

Ah yes! We must be protected from ourselves, because we mere mortal humans are, by nature flawed.
Much of my last was composed with a good deal of cynicism, and directed exactly at the above rational.

[Stoat]

We must be protected from ourselves

Is this not the basis for most, if not all, law?

[R. Scott]

Is this not the basis for most, if not all, law?

No, most are designed to protect us from others.

[Stoat]

If that's true, it doesn't sound too bad to me....I don't mind being protected from criminals.

[R. Scott]

Me neither – but I don’t much like being protected from myself.

[Stoat]

Well, society has decided that children in particular need protection from themselves; hence many laws of this sort are targeted at underage FReepers.

Adults are in the luxurious position of being able to go to the polls and vote their conscience if they believe that a law is unjust.

I am usually so busy that I don't feel overly encumbered by any laws and I'm able to have a pretty darned good time with what little free time I get.

It would be nice if my state was a Class 3 firearms state so that I could own a stylish fully automatic machinegun, but I will enjoy my semiautos and I have the option of moving to Oklahoma, Texas, Oregon, Montana or any of the other Class 3 states if it really begins to bother me.

[R. Scott]

Adults are in the luxurious position of being able to go to the polls and vote their conscience if they believe that a law is unjust.

I am usually so busy that I don't feel overly encumbered by any laws and I'm able to have a pretty darned good time with what little free time I get.

Unfortunately the electorate has little voice in enacting or repealing a law. We can elect a politician to office on the promise of enacting a law, but few politicians above the local level put much into keeping all campaign pledges. When was the last time a politician ran on a platform of repealing a law? How much of our lives are ruled by regulations not involved in the political process? How about politically motivated court decisions?

I am not generally encumbered much by the laws either, local zoning ordinances are the biggest pain in the butt here. I am against many “protective” laws just on principle.

[Still Thinking]

(Exceptionally nasty) smoke gets in your eyes?