[Dr. Luv]

"Oh boy, are you in for it!"

Am I? As an oncologist, I see a daily parade of death of both the young and old caused by smoking. I am not interested, nor do I have time to engage in debate with the self-righteous smoker - I see enough of them when they have to visit me. Of course by the time they have to visit my office, they're much more contrite...

[SheLion]

oh kiss my patoot.

Go to another thread where you can make more sense.

And what would you say to my 86 year old grandmother who smokes three packs of Camels a day, eh?

Bye, CYA!

[metesky]

So, sure as an oncologist all you see is tumors, not all of them, in fact the majority of them, not brought on by tobacco.

In fact, all you can say about tobacco is that it "appears" to be one of the causes of lung cancer.

And as for being contrite about having lived life making free choices, all I can tell you is that there is no sympathy in my mind for those who wimp out and cry at the end.

[CharacterCounts]

Am I? As an oncologist, I see a daily parade of death of both the young and old caused by smoking. I am not interested, nor do I have time to engage in debate with the self-righteous smoker - I see enough of them when they have to visit me. Of course by the time they have to visit my office, they're much more contrite...

Sound like your the self rightous one.

Everyone here knows that smoking is bad for your health, just as is drinking too much, eating too much, speeding while driving, and a host of other things humans do in their daily routine.

The point is, many chose to engage in risky behavior and its none of your business unless they seek you advice.

By the way, what is the life expectancy of a medical doctor? Is it longer or shorter than that of a ordinary mortal?

[mysterio]

You are engaging in flawed logic.

Do you have the right to advise others not to smoke?
Yes.

Is it your professional duty to inform patients that smoking is adversely affecting their health?
Yes.

May you be smug, rude, and look down your nose at smokers to encourage them to stop?
Yes.

Is it your right to create legislation to prevent people from smoking or engaging in other activities which harm their health?
No. It is not. And those who think it is are the cancer of a free society.

[Max McGarrity]

As an oncologist, I see a daily parade of death of both the young and old caused by smoking.

"As an oncologist," you should be aware that 75% of the cancer that affects the population is in nonsmokers. Granted, there are only 20,000 or so lung cancers a year in those who don't smoke and aren't around smokers, but that's still quite a lot.

[Old Professer]

Am I? As an oncologist, I see a daily parade of death of both the young and old caused by smoking. I am not interested, nor do I have time to engage in debate with the self-righteous smoker - I see enough of them when they have to visit me. Of course by the time they have to visit my office, they're much more contrite...

My friend, you do us a disservice by assuming we defend the art of smoking; we defend the rights of the owners of smoking-allowed establishments.

As to being too busy to debate your unsolicited assertions, don't you think that is being a bit imperious?

[Squawk 8888]

OTOH you have no proof of your assertions and are arguing from authority and not facts. You'd get far more respect if you just admitted that anti-smoking is a religion.