Did you really think prohibitions for health reasons were about love and care for you? They don't even know you.
I guess this one of the ways capitalism produces evils. 
Posted on 01/30/2007 11:38:44 AM PST by neverdem
Smoking cigarettes is a clear health risk, as most everyone knows. But lately, people have begun to worry about the health risks of secondhand smoke. Some policymakers and activists are even claiming that the government should crack down on secondhand smoke exposure, given what "the science" indicates about such exposure.
Last July, introducing his office's latest report on secondhand smoke, then-U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona asserted that "there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure," that "breathing secondhand smoke for even a short time can damage cells and set the cancer process in motion," and that...
--snip--
In addition, results are not consistently reproducible. The majority of studies do not report a statistically significant change in risk from secondhand smoke exposure, some studies show an increase in risk, and ¿ astoundingly ¿ some show a reduction of risk.
Some prominent anti-smokers have been quietly forthcoming on what "the science" does and does not show. Asked to quantify secondhand smoke risks at a 2006 hearing at the UK House of Lords, Oxford epidemiologist Sir Richard Peto ¿ a leader of the secondhand smoke crusade ¿ replied, "I am sorry not to be more helpful; you want numbers and I could give you numbers..., but what does one make of them? ...These hazards cannot be directly measured."
It has been fashionable to ignore the weakness of "the science" on secondhand smoke, perhaps in the belief that claiming "the science is settled" will lead to policies and public attitudes that will reduce the prevalence of smoking. But such a Faustian bargain is an ominous precedent in public health and political ethics. Consider how minimally such policies as smoking bans in bars and restaurants really reduce the prevalence of smoking, and yet how odious and socially unfair such prohibitions are.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Now I get the big picture.
Abort a child and save them from the torments of life's fruits.
No wonder there has been such a promotion of abortion in the recent past by "progressives".
It's for the children....
"Years later all studies proved that the Surgeon General had based his decision on phony science and that the original implants were safe."
I have it!!! We need to make phoney science illegal. Yeh, that's it. /sarc
Seriously, there has got to be a way of fighting this propaganda. Just the other night, I saw a PSA (public service announcement) claiming that we all, every single one of us, are responsible for global warming. And global warming is real and it will destroy our planet..SOON!!!
They are using our very own tax monies against us and it seems we cannot stop them.
Claire!!! Is it time yet?
And all this time I have been hearing that there is good smoke, bad smoke, and ugly smoke.
Your just not "picky" enough in your tastes Gabz. ; )
God gave us eye lid's and attorneys finished God's work for him.
They are disciples....
I guess I'm not.
"Yes, that yellow/brown tar and heavy metals clogging up your a/c filter is a figment of your imagination "
I was thinking that very thing as I walked past the baby's crib a blew some cigarette smoke into her little face. What could it hurt?
¿ astoundingly ¿
You'll never get out of it alive. May as well end it before you begin it! *SHIVER*
I've been taking care of a friend's 4 month old baby boy this past week. How anyone in their right mind cannot understand what the end result of a pregnancy is just amazes me to no end!
Thanks again, NOW Hags! Thanks again, "Planned Abortionhood!"
Right mind is the key focus.
In 1998 The World Health Organization toted up the results of a ten year multicountry study on second-hand smoke and cancer. For both the workplace and the home, it found that there was no statistical connection between the two. No evidence that secondhand smoke raises the risk of cancer. WHO published an initial summary then denied it, and has buried the report itself. This is not an urban legend. See the article at: http://www.reason.com/news/show/28274.html
BTTT for later
Amen! And we are working on it!
Is this a state or federal law?
Because, as I remember, (could be wrong) among the "broadcast" liscensee's, there is a minimun requirement in the federal agreement to broadcast a certain number of hours per day of PSA's.
How the quality of the PSA is ensured, I'm not sure. (Actually, considering our government, quality is probably the last criteria accountable.)
I'm not quite sure where you are coming from, or what it is that you want. I'd like to help you so please fill out this questionaire for me:
I hate smokers/smoking because:
A. The smell of smoke is icky and yucky, it makes my hair and clothes stink and I hate walking into a bar/restaurant where people are smoking. So rather than take advantage of the free market and go somewhere that is voluntarily smoke free, I would rather use the power of the state to impose my personal preference on my fellow citizens.
B. My beloved ___________ (choose one: husband, wife, father, mother, brother, sister, nephew, niece, uncle, aunt, maid, dog, cat, goldfish, gay lover) died from (choose one: cancer, heart disease, emphysema, car crash, train wreck, terrorist attack, sting ray) because of their smoking.
C. I smoked for _____ (years) and now I am ________ (choose one: sick, dead, born again, enlightened, ashamed of myself) and want to share my experience with others.
D. The Big Tobacco companies are lying scumbags and must pay! (you’re not coming down off the mountain with the tablets there)
E. I represent Big Pharmaceutical interests that benefit from the anti-smoking movement because it increases the sales of our Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) products.
F. I am a deeply caring individual in the mold of Mother Theresa and I am speaking out due to my benevolent, philanthropic, altruistic concern about the health of my fellow man.
G. I am a research scientist and grant junky, and if I don’t tow the party line my grant money will disappear.
H. I’m just a garden variety Fascist and Totalitarian and get a ______ (choose one: cheap thrill, natural high, erection, orgasm) by imposing my will on other people.
I. I am a retard who believes in bogus studies, junk science, the Easter Bunny and the Toothfairy. I fear that because I walked into a bar on Spring Break in 1987, and was exposed to Second Hand Smoke I now suffer from ______(choose one: AIDS, Herpes, Athlete’s Foot, Jock Itch, male pattern baldness, or genital warts)
J. I am a disgruntled, prissy and angry employee of a ______(choose one: bar, restaurant, club, casino) who can't leave the job because I am a _______(choose one: slave, indentured servant, sweatshop laborer, illegal immigrant) and had no idea there was smoking going on in the place before I took the job.
K. An elected public serpent, serving as a _____ (choose one: State Assemblywoman, Senator, Freeholder, city councilman, mayor) and I have failed miserably in my job and trying to tackle really tough problems like _____ (choose one: gang violence, income taxes, property taxes, crime, corruption), so I will support a smoking ban based on the talking points and literature that "L" has given me and claim that I have actually accomplished something to help my constituents.
L. A professional anti-tobacco activist who makes $450,000 per year. MY GOAL IS TO REDUCE SMOKING RATES FROM 25% TO BELOW 10%. KICKING THEM OUT OF THEIR FAVORITE BAR AND RESTAURANT IS JUST A SMALL STEP TO COERCE THEM TO QUIT. I DON'T EVEN BELIEVE THE SHS NONSENSE MYSELF! Don't you dare try to ban cigarettes, if you do I will have to go back to my previous job (choose one: prostitute, drug dealer, pimp, state assemblyman, mayor) where I won't make nearly as much money and the bank will foreclose on my seaside villa and repo my _______(choose one: Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Hummer, Infiniti, Acura, Volvo, Bentley). I take advantage of the prejudices of categories A-K above to accomplish my goal.
M. I don’t fit any of the above categories, I just like to argue with people.
minniemouse writes:
Yes, that yellow/brown tar and heavy metals clogging up your a/c filter is a figment of your imagination and has no effect whatsoever on the lungs of anyone in the room breathing that same air. /sarc
_____________________________________________________
mickeymouse, please fill out the questionaire above and get back to me. I'm from the government and I'm here to help you.
From another report on smoking by Gori:
Time is of the essence, because people are dying or at risk as we read these words, and the IOM report shows that there can be a remedy while also implying that, ethically speaking, the plight of smokers is no less deserving than that of people with other afflictions. Despite all warnings, close to a billion people will continue to smoke for decades to come, making a compelling case for a radically fresh approach in the prevention of tobacco-related diseases. The report makes it clear that action cannot be expected from a tobacco industry mired in controversy and of nonexistent credibility and aims its message directly toward Congress and the government, academic, and private institutions and charities that embody the public health community.
We're beyond the point of arguing IF the SG in cohoots with anti smoking groups cooked the books to grease the skids for social engineering.
We all know that they couldn't care less for Ditter, or mickeymouse or their exposure to SHS. Apparantly they don't care either way as long as their personal comfort is addressed. (can't blame em)
We have now moved on to WHY?...
THE GOAL IS TO REDUCE SMOKING RATES. Kicking smokers out of their favorite bars and restaurants and making it expensive to smoke through taxation, is designed to COERCE smokers to quit. (period, end of story)
These anti tobacco folks may be jackbooted Nazis, control freaks and left wing social engineers, but there is one thing that they are not...STUPID. They definitely don't believe this ETS nonsense themselves. We know that for a fact because they deliberately left out the other 70% of the studies that show no harm from ETS in the SG report. It's not an accident. Here's the proverbial smoking gun, and I will post this here ad nauseam until every FReeper, smoking or non-smoking, sees what is going on:
http://www.forces.org/writers/kjono/pdf/tfw222.pdf
Did you really think prohibitions for health reasons were about love and care for you? They don't even know you.
I guess this one of the ways capitalism produces evils.
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.