Buffalosrfree
I would agree with you that it is everyones choice whether to smoke or not but I must disagree on your point about passive smoking. You said
I also believe the incidence of dying from secondary smoke is a bunch of horse shit. If that were so then people who smoke and hang together would have an even higher incidence of lung cancer than others, they don't as far as I know
Horse shit? Not according to my textbooks..... let me quote for you a few facts.... please take these comments in the spirit that they are given, just trying to give you a bit of information here, after all,you said you dont know...
‘There is increasing evidence that smoking relates directly to the high incidence of lung cancer, which kills about 300 people a day in the UK alone (Pollock 1993, Buck 1997). The sidestream smoke inhaled in passive smoking has a higher concentration of some toxic and carcinogenic substances than has mainstream smoke, which is significant for families and workmates of smokers. The evidence is that both active and passive smoking by pregnant women have detrimental effects on the unborn child and are clearly associated with low birth weight and perinatal morbidity and mortality. (Jones & MacLeod-Clark 1993). Maternal smoking has been linked to sudden infant death syndrome and passive smoking to a high incidence of childhood asthma (Azizi 1993). Passive smoking can also be linked to a high incidence of coronary heart disease in adults. (Kawachi et al 1997).’
Also, the following was interesting...
‘Recent research showed that non-smokers are at risk by exposure to other peoples’s smoke; one-quarter of lung cancer cases in non-smokers are estimated to be due to passive smoking (Trichopoulos et al 1981, Valanis 1996)
And if that wasnt enough - this is the part that really got to me.....
‘Children and adolescents exposed to passive or second-hand smoking have been quoted as being at risk of the adverse effects of smoking. Impaired respiration, chest infections and asthma in children are more often associated with parental smoking than any other causative factor. The effect of this ’passive smoking’ is receiving increased attention. A report by the Independent Scientific Committee on Smoking and Health suggests that people who are subjected to the smoke of others have an increased risk (in the range of 10-30%) of developing lung cancer. The committee suggests that in view of the dangers of ’second-hand’ smoke, ’non-smoking should be regarded as the norm in enclosed areas frequented by the public or employees, special provision being made for smokers, rather than vice versa’. The effects of tobacco smoke on non-smokers can include nose, throat and chest irritations, breathing difficulties, coughing, red and runny eyes, headaches, dizziness, nausea, lack of concentration and decrease in lung function. Those with long-term health problems such as asthma, chronic bronchitis, allergies and heart problems are especially at risk’
The point of my post here is not to judge those who smoke, I believe that everyone has a choice in how they lead their lives. I merely present this information in answer to those who deny that passive smoking is a real problem.
As a final note - it was only a few days ago that I spring cleaned a relatives house for them as a surprise for when they got back from their holiday..... someone in the house is a smoker and you would not believe how yellow their house was inside, I spent four hours just washing down walls and doors and paintwork. Another person who lives in that house is a non-smoker.... I can only imagine that her lungs must be as tainted. Not so easy to scrub your lungs clean.... and there I rest my case.....
