Social costs of smoking are triple those of illicit drugs (Junk Science & Barf Alert)

British Medical Journal ^ | 2/1/03 | Christopher Zinn Sydney

[qam1]

the conclusions of this study just defy logic to me.

That never stopped the mainstream media from reporting it word for word or politicians using Junk Science such as this for justification for raising taxes or passing prohibition type laws.

[Gabz]

That never stopped the mainstream media from reporting it word for word or politicians using Junk Science such as this for justification for raising taxes or passing prohibition type laws.

You've got that right and the biggest reason is MONEY. they have lots of it to spend on high profile advertising and "get out the word" campaigns.

[Great Dane]

#36...... Well done, thank you.

[ladyinred]

I am a smoker too, and I think last time I looked, it was not illegal to be one. I do know that certain types are trying to take that freedom from me however, and pretending it is for my own good.

[Bogey]

My father-in-law enjoyed that legal commodity and copious volumes of alcohol too. Diabetes, cirrhosis of the liver, emphysema and ultimately congestive heart failure just before breakfast one morning. Room temperature at age 53. My wife's grandmother took an early exit with emphysema from the same legal commodity. Room temperature at age 58. Good stuff.

---

Non smokers die in mass everyday in their teens, 20,30's.
What's your point?
A kid wrapping a car around a tree wasn't a preventable cause of death? Should we raise the minimum driving age up to 30?
When will you extremists come to terms with the fact that you will still die. Maybe young. Even if you don't smoke.
This spew of preventable deaths is hysterical.
I wonder how many of the 3000 that died on 9/11 just quit
smoking a few days before, because you told them quitting would prevent their death..
Idiot.

[Mears]

Sounds like inferior genes to me!

[maxwell]

So basically if you die or get sick and you smoke, The smoking caused it and it cost society.

Hmmmmm... SO can we turn that around, and say that if you DON'T smoke and get anal cancer, that NOT smoking caused it?

Geezus. Calling this dreck "junk science" is a slam on the field of junk science.

PUFF

[Eastbound]

Lucky Strike Bump!

[Gabz]

Hmmmmm... SO can we turn that around, and say that if you DON'T smoke and get anal cancer, that NOT smoking caused it?

I think you're on to something here.............

[maxwell]

I think you're on to something here.............

Bwaha, it takes a Ph.D. in physics... ;)

[qam1]

Hmmmmm... SO can we turn that around, and say that if you DON'T smoke and get anal cancer, that NOT smoking caused it?

Unfortunately the Anti-smoking Nazis have that covered. If you don't smoke and get anal cancer of course it was Second hand smoke that caused you to get anal cancer.

[Myrddin]

I wasn't trying to justify any laws to take away your freedom. Perhaps Maine Rebel or SheLion can explain it to you.

[Max McGarrity]

I cannot believe you said that.

You are the lowest form of life.

[SheLion]

Perhaps Maine Rebel or SheLion can explain it to you.

Let me bring you up to date: Maine Rebel passed away on the 13th of January. You will have to deal with "me" now.

[SheLion]

There is probably a genetic component that predisposes some individuals to develop cancer or heart disease as a consequence of smoking. Until you can definitively tell an individual that he or she has no such predisposition, it is irresponsible to advocate that smoking is unconditionally safe.

It's LEGAL. Which makes it none of your business WHO buys and smokes it!

[Great Dane]

Perhaps Maine Rebel or SheLion can explain it to you.

You truly are disgusting.

[Gabz]

How DARE you.......................

[SheLion]

I am not a smoker, the conclusions of this study just defy logic to me.

Well, if all that junk science about smoking and second hand smoke were really really true........why is it still a legal commodity, after hundreds of years? Where's the logic in THAT?

[Myrddin]

My apologies to you personally for referencing the recent loss of your husband. The loss of my family members to smoking related illness was counted as simply another insignificant anecdote.

[Gabz]

Which makes it none of your business WHO buys and smokes it!

It seems our "FRiend" Myrddin is no different than the rest of the anti's here.

they seem to be in 3 categories:

1. hit and run (make a nasty comment and refuse to answer)
2. ad hominem attacks at smokers (low lifes, addicts, child abusers, etc.)
3. parrots (repeat all the appropriate phrases from the paid press releases of the antis)