Smoking ban has dramatically slashed number of heart attacks

On Jun 9, 8:59*am, "Simon S-B" wrote:
Just because we can live longer, should we? Been to a nursing home lately?
Think they have a wonderful quality of life? Reckon the economy and the
planet in general really needs people living to be 110?

It's far better to die from the body giving out, than for the body to stay
fit whilst the mind disappears. Until they can find a way to stop dementia
and senility, the only people who benefit from heart attacks being slashed
are those who own the £3,000 per month nursing homes that you have to give
all of your relatives life-savings to, then when the cash has all gone they
go back to being a burden on the state somewhere filthy and horrible.

Bloody do-gooder PC ****s never actually think anything through do they?
Always too busy patting themselves on the back, like today.

Less smokers mean that my life (and the air that I breathe) is less
blighted by their ****ty habit.

If people want to kill themselves, that is fine, but do it somewhere
else.

On 09/06/10 12:26, Mike wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 07:59:52 +0100, "Simon S-B"
wrote:

the only people who benefit from heart attacks being slashed

has it occurred to you that smokers often have heart attacks in their
60s or earlier while still fully active?

The heavy smokers I knew didn't even make it past 55.

On 09/06/2010 11:27, Mike wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 02:50:39 -0700 (PDT), My two cents
wrote:

Quality of life is important - not just quantity.

indeed, like having clean air in pubs.

In the old days I used to go to a pub about 3 or 4 times a year.
Now there is no smoking it's about every couple of weeks.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

Flotillagate wrote:
Smoking ban has dramatically slashed number of heart attacks

By JENNY HOPE
Last updated at 1:33 AM on 9th June 2010

The number of heart attacks has fallen dramatically since the smoking
ban came in, figures reveal.
At least 1,200 heart attacks were prevented in England in the year
after the ban's introduction, according to a report in the British
Medical Journal.
In the largest study of its kind, information on adult heart attack
patients from the five years before the ban came into force in July
2007, was compared with data from the subsequent 14 months.

Forcing people to smoke outside has dramatically slashed the number of
heart attacks by 1,200, a report has revealed
The Bath University research found hospital admissions for heart
attacks fell 2.4 per cent in England in the year after it became the
last UK nation to ban smoking in indoor public places.
This cut in admissions saved the NHS around £8.4million and is likely
to have prevented almost 200 deaths.
The survival rate in hospital is 85 per cent, so within a group of
1,200 admissions around 180 would be expected to die.
Experts pointed out that heart attacks are only one of the smoke-
related health problems that the ban will have reduced.
Deborah Arnott, of the charity Action on Smoking and Health, said
longer-term improvements in cancer could also be expected.
Research has already demonstrated that the smoking ban has
significantly reduced exposure to secondhand smoke among nonsmokers
and children, which is likely to result in further improvements in
health.
Smoke, both first and secondhand, is thought to increase the chances
of a heart attack by making the blood more prone to clotting, reducing
levels of 'good' cholesterol and raising the risk of dangerous heart
rhythms.
More than one in five adults in Britain is a smoker, with 23 per cent
of men and 21 per cent of women smoking regularly.
There are 230,000 heart attacks each year, of which 123,000 are in
adults younger than 75.
Betty McBride, of the British Heart Foundation, said: 'It's brilliant
news that an average three fewer people a day are admitted to hospital
suffering a heart attack.
'What's more, we'll see more benefits in future because heart attacks
aren't the only way that tobacco smoke harms the heart.
'Government should see this as a green light for further life-saving
measures, going beyond the forthcoming ban on cigarette vending
machines, to crack down on illegal tobacco smuggling and introducing
plain packaging on cigarette boxes.
'These will also help stop people dying prematurely because of smoking-
related illnesses.'
Previous studies have shown reductions in the number of heart attacks
of 14 to 17 per cent after bans were introduced in Scotland and
Northern Ireland.
Experts said the effect was smaller in England because many workplaces
and restaurants were already smoke-free when the law changed.


Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...#ixzz0qKOfzN5y

Apparently the risk of suffering a heart attack when watching the World
Cup on TV goes up by 400%

T.

On Wed, 09 Jun 2010 13:11:04 +0200, Tom P wrote:

Apparently the risk of suffering a heart attack when watching the World
Cup on TV goes up by 400%

One risk I will miss!
--
Petrol Head

"Tom P" wrote in message
...
Flotillagate wrote:
Smoking ban has dramatically slashed number of heart attacks

By JENNY HOPE
Last updated at 1:33 AM on 9th June 2010

The number of heart attacks has fallen dramatically since the smoking
ban came in, figures reveal.
At least 1,200 heart attacks were prevented in England in the year
after the ban's introduction, according to a report in the British
Medical Journal.
In the largest study of its kind, information on adult heart attack
patients from the five years before the ban came into force in July
2007, was compared with data from the subsequent 14 months.

Forcing people to smoke outside has dramatically slashed the number of
heart attacks by 1,200, a report has revealed
The Bath University research found hospital admissions for heart
attacks fell 2.4 per cent in England in the year after it became the
last UK nation to ban smoking in indoor public places.
This cut in admissions saved the NHS around £8.4million and is likely
to have prevented almost 200 deaths.
The survival rate in hospital is 85 per cent, so within a group of
1,200 admissions around 180 would be expected to die.
Experts pointed out that heart attacks are only one of the smoke-
related health problems that the ban will have reduced.
Deborah Arnott, of the charity Action on Smoking and Health, said
longer-term improvements in cancer could also be expected.
Research has already demonstrated that the smoking ban has
significantly reduced exposure to secondhand smoke among nonsmokers
and children, which is likely to result in further improvements in
health.
Smoke, both first and secondhand, is thought to increase the chances
of a heart attack by making the blood more prone to clotting, reducing
levels of 'good' cholesterol and raising the risk of dangerous heart
rhythms.
More than one in five adults in Britain is a smoker, with 23 per cent
of men and 21 per cent of women smoking regularly.
There are 230,000 heart attacks each year, of which 123,000 are in
adults younger than 75.
Betty McBride, of the British Heart Foundation, said: 'It's brilliant
news that an average three fewer people a day are admitted to hospital
suffering a heart attack.
'What's more, we'll see more benefits in future because heart attacks
aren't the only way that tobacco smoke harms the heart.
'Government should see this as a green light for further life-saving
measures, going beyond the forthcoming ban on cigarette vending
machines, to crack down on illegal tobacco smuggling and introducing
plain packaging on cigarette boxes.
'These will also help stop people dying prematurely because of smoking-
related illnesses.'
Previous studies have shown reductions in the number of heart attacks
of 14 to 17 per cent after bans were introduced in Scotland and
Northern Ireland.
Experts said the effect was smaller in England because many workplaces
and restaurants were already smoke-free when the law changed.


Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar...#ixzz0qKOfzN5y

Apparently the risk of suffering a heart attack when watching the World
Cup on TV goes up by 400%

T.

Quiet, or the lesbian tree huggers will ban it.

"Flotillagate" wrote in message
...
On Jun 9, 8:59 am, "Simon S-B" wrote:
Just because we can live longer, should we? Been to a nursing home
lately?
Think they have a wonderful quality of life? Reckon the economy and the
planet in general really needs people living to be 110?

It's far better to die from the body giving out, than for the body to
stay
fit whilst the mind disappears. Until they can find a way to stop
dementia
and senility, the only people who benefit from heart attacks being
slashed
are those who own the £3,000 per month nursing homes that you have to
give
all of your relatives life-savings to, then when the cash has all gone
they
go back to being a burden on the state somewhere filthy and horrible.

Bloody do-gooder PC ****s never actually think anything through do they?
Always too busy patting themselves on the back, like today.

Less smokers mean that my life (and the air that I breathe) is less
blighted by their ****ty habit.

If people want to kill themselves, that is fine, but do it somewhere
else.

Is there anything you can tell me that isn't stating the bleeding obvious?
Tell me, do you drink? Are you a big fatty bum bum? What are you going to do
when they ban alcohol and sweets?

"Dirk Bruere at NeoPax" wrote in message
...
On 09/06/2010 11:27, Mike wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 02:50:39 -0700 (PDT), My two cents
wrote:

Quality of life is important - not just quantity.

indeed, like having clean air in pubs.

In the old days I used to go to a pub about 3 or 4 times a year.
Now there is no smoking it's about every couple of weeks.



You're very much in a minority. Pubs are closing in huge numbers because
nobody is going to them since the ban.

"My two cents" wrote in message
...
On 9 June, 07:59, "Simon S-B" wrote:
Just because we can live longer, should we? Been to a nursing home
lately?
Think they have a wonderful quality of life? Reckon the economy and the
planet in general really needs people living to be 110?

But cigarettes don't merely reduce your life expectancy. They reduce
the number of years you can expect to live in good health.

And being fat and drinking doesn't? No doubt you'll argue 'but me drinking
only hurts me, not anyone else'. Do I really need to be getting stats on the
causes of crime, and showing where alcohol comes in the list? Have you ever
tried sitting on a long haul flight next to a fat *******? Why should you
only get half a seat because they have a pie addiction? I'm not against the
smoking ban, but those that want to look down their noses at smokers can
**** right off unless they don't drink and are an acceptable weight.

"Flotillagate" wrote in message
...
On Jun 9, 8:59 am, "Simon S-B" wrote:
Just because we can live longer, should we? Been to a nursing home
lately?
Think they have a wonderful quality of life? Reckon the economy and the
planet in general really needs people living to be 110?

It's far better to die from the body giving out, than for the body to
stay
fit whilst the mind disappears. Until they can find a way to stop
dementia
and senility, the only people who benefit from heart attacks being
slashed
are those who own the £3,000 per month nursing homes that you have to
give
all of your relatives life-savings to, then when the cash has all gone
they
go back to being a burden on the state somewhere filthy and horrible.

Bloody do-gooder PC ****s never actually think anything through do they?
Always too busy patting themselves on the back, like today.

Less smokers mean that my life (and the air that I breathe) is less
blighted by their ****ty habit.

Do you drive a car? Do you use public transport? You selfish ****, if you
walked my air would be better.