smokers revenge

Exactly, Clay.... Unless someone is soul-sucking a smoker to get some
second hand smoke, he is undoubtedly breathing in a thousand-fold more
in various toxic chemicals -- and on a "daily" basis -- from industry,
vehicle exhaust, plywood walls, air conditoners, radon gas, and even
home cooking. (How many on this group alone have filled their home with
burnt bacon grease, because they forgot the burner was still turned on?)
...Undoubtedly, the scientific tests for second-hand smoke were done in
a sealed chamber with the smoke so thick that the rats probably died
from lack of oxygen. --Aren't all tests done that way?
...A hundred miles south of where I live, there is a pulp mill.
...People just take the 24 hr. noxious smell and -- God only knows what
is in that crap spewing from the chimney -- in stride. ...But let
someone light up a smoke 50 feet away. ...And all hell breaks loose.
Ridiculous. ...Totally ridiculous. ....Jon

wrote:

Exactly, Clay.... Unless someone is soul-sucking a smoker to get some
second hand smoke, he is undoubtedly breathing in a thousand-fold more
in various toxic chemicals -- and on a "daily" basis -- from industry,
vehicle exhaust, plywood walls, air conditoners, radon gas, and even
home cooking. (How many on this group alone have filled their home with
burnt bacon grease, because they forgot the burner was still turned on?)
..Undoubtedly, the scientific tests for second-hand smoke were done in
a sealed chamber with the smoke so thick that the rats probably died
from lack of oxygen. --Aren't all tests done that way?
..A hundred miles south of where I live, there is a pulp mill.
..People just take the 24 hr. noxious smell and -- God only knows what
is in that crap spewing from the chimney -- in stride. ...But let
someone light up a smoke 50 feet away. ...And all hell breaks loose.
Ridiculous. ...Totally ridiculous. ....Jon

Also pitiful; ain't it.

Howie

It's really very simple.

Do you believe that Benzene and Methylene chloride are Carcinogens and
Mutagens (cancer causing and gene mutating agents)? They are known to be.
But it's your choice as to whether you "believe" them to be. If you
purchase them to be used in a lab (they do have scientific value as
solvents), they are clearly marked as cancer causing agents. They have to
be used in hoods or isolators (glove boxes) in the labs.

If you accept that they are, then the answer is simple. Smoke contains
these compounds. Chemically and physically, it contains them. They are
by-products of the combustion process. They form at a particular
temperatures during the burning. They are classified under the term "hex"
because of the hexagonal Benzene ring in the molecule. If you look at a gas
chromatograph of the various peaks in cigarette smoke (remember the peaks in
the movie Medicine Man?), they are usually far toward the right on the
graph. It's these hex compounds that are VERY nasty. These tie into the
concept of "free radicals" which everyone has heard about. If you inhale
smoke, then you're putting Benzene, Methylene Chloride and other "hex" ring
compounds into your lungs, sinuses, throat, etc., where they will cause
genes within cells to mutate and cause cancer cells to grow.

It doesn't really matter whether you believe or don't believe anything about
the smoke. It's whether you are willing to acknowledge that these Benzene
ring compounds are as nasty as they are.

Then it's a simple matter. And here's the key point. If the natural
defenses in your body can continue to fight these mutations and cancer
cells, you won't get cancer. This happens all the time. Bodies have
defenses against mutations, against cancer cells, against viruses, against
bacteria, etc. BUT, If your natural defense mechanisms in your body can't
keep up with destroying these cells before they can start replicating
themselves... then you've got a problem. That's why some people will get
cancer, while others won't.

Maybe you've smoked 20 years and will never get cancer... but that doesn't
mean you're not giving it to your 10 year old son.

It has nothing to do with the smoke. It has to do with the "hex ring"
compounds in the smoke. And whether you are willing to acknowledge the
chemistry of these compounds. In how these compounds cause genes to mutate
and cause cancer cells to grow out of control. And whether your body has
the defenses to fight off the cancer cells before they grow out of control.
But every person is different. Some can fight it, while others can't.

--Tom




"Badger" wrote in message
m...
Tom & Linda wrote:



You don't need to convince the people who already believe that it is
bad.

And you're simply not going to convince the people who don't care that
it's
bad. They are smokers, and don't care about the health risks of smoking
to
themselves... no less others
--Tom



Tom your argument isn't valid.

I don't smoke, but I did. I quit for my own health. I do care about the
health of all people around me. However, I don't believe the risks of
second hand smoke are what you think they are, and there is no proof
that it is.
If you can show me the proof of the dangers, scientific proof, not
studies done by biased groups, I will jump on the wagon to Ban all
smoking in public areas.

I won't however believe it just because someone says it is, as you do.

Clay

In article , Badger
wrote:

If you can show me the proof of the dangers, scientific proof, not
studies done by biased groups, I will jump on the wagon to Ban all
smoking in public areas.

There are plenty of studies with scientific proof. The problem is that
you and others are going to claim they are biased because you don't
agree with the conclusion. A circular argument. If you would like to
see some of the studies there is a lot of information on them at this
web page put up by my neighbors in Bethesda, the NIH. (National
Institutes of Health)

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/secondhandsmoke.html

--
Charles

wrote in message
...
Exactly, Clay.... Unless someone is soul-sucking a smoker to get some
second hand smoke, he is undoubtedly breathing in a thousand-fold more
in various toxic chemicals -- and on a "daily" basis -- from industry,
vehicle exhaust, plywood walls, air conditoners, radon gas, and even
home cooking. (How many on this group alone have filled their home with
burnt bacon grease, because they forgot the burner was still turned on?)
..Undoubtedly, the scientific tests for second-hand smoke were done in
a sealed chamber with the smoke so thick that the rats probably died
from lack of oxygen. --Aren't all tests done that way?
..A hundred miles south of where I live, there is a pulp mill.
..People just take the 24 hr. noxious smell and -- God only knows what
is in that crap spewing from the chimney -- in stride. ...But let
someone light up a smoke 50 feet away. ...And all hell breaks loose.
Ridiculous. ...Totally ridiculous. ....Jon

It's becasue of people like you that countries, states and towns enact laws.
It ends up being a wonderful solution.

--Tom

Tom & Linda wrote:

It's really very simple.

Do you believe that Benzene and Methylene chloride are Carcinogens and
Mutagens (cancer causing and gene mutating agents)? They are known to be.
But it's your choice as to whether you "believe" them to be. If you
purchase them to be used in a lab (they do have scientific value as
solvents), they are clearly marked as cancer causing agents. They have to
be used in hoods or isolators (glove boxes) in the labs.

If you accept that they are, then the answer is simple. Smoke contains
these compounds. Chemically and physically, it contains them. They are
by-products of the combustion process. They form at a particular
temperatures during the burning. They are classified under the term "hex"
because of the hexagonal Benzene ring in the molecule. If you look at a gas
chromatograph of the various peaks in cigarette smoke (remember the peaks in
the movie Medicine Man?), they are usually far toward the right on the
graph. It's these hex compounds that are VERY nasty. These tie into the
concept of "free radicals" which everyone has heard about. If you inhale
smoke, then you're putting Benzene, Methylene Chloride and other "hex" ring
compounds into your lungs, sinuses, throat, etc., where they will cause
genes within cells to mutate and cause cancer cells to grow.

It doesn't really matter whether you believe or don't believe anything about
the smoke. It's whether you are willing to acknowledge that these Benzene
ring compounds are as nasty as they are.

Then it's a simple matter. And here's the key point. If the natural
defenses in your body can continue to fight these mutations and cancer
cells, you won't get cancer. This happens all the time. Bodies have
defenses against mutations, against cancer cells, against viruses, against
bacteria, etc. BUT, If your natural defense mechanisms in your body can't
keep up with destroying these cells before they can start replicating
themselves... then you've got a problem. That's why some people will get
cancer, while others won't.

Maybe you've smoked 20 years and will never get cancer... but that doesn't
mean you're not giving it to your 10 year old son.

It has nothing to do with the smoke. It has to do with the "hex ring"
compounds in the smoke. And whether you are willing to acknowledge the
chemistry of these compounds. In how these compounds cause genes to mutate
and cause cancer cells to grow out of control. And whether your body has
the defenses to fight off the cancer cells before they grow out of control.
But every person is different. Some can fight it, while others can't.

--Tom




"Badger" wrote in message
m...

Tom & Linda wrote:



You don't need to convince the people who already believe that it is

bad.

And you're simply not going to convince the people who don't care that

it's

bad. They are smokers, and don't care about the health risks of smoking

to

themselves... no less others
--Tom




Tom your argument isn't valid.

I don't smoke, but I did. I quit for my own health. I do care about the
health of all people around me. However, I don't believe the risks of
second hand smoke are what you think they are, and there is no proof
that it is.
If you can show me the proof of the dangers, scientific proof, not
studies done by biased groups, I will jump on the wagon to Ban all
smoking in public areas.

I won't however believe it just because someone says it is, as you do.

Clay




Tom, you're argument was still invalid.

You said, in a blanket statement, " And you're simply not going to
convince the people who don't care that

it's

bad. They are smokers, and don't care about the health risks of smoking

to

themselves... no less others



I disagreed with that comment, which is a falsehood.

Some who don't care if it's bad, may not be smokers. They may also care
what it does to others.

If you think it's bad, fine, but don't inject your emotions into your
argument.

I believe the chemicals are bad for you and should be handled properly
in large quantities. I do not however believe second hand smoke is any
more dangerous than the diesel smoke from my last cruise, and you don't
have any scientific evidence to the contrary.

Clay

Charles wrote:
In article , Badger
wrote:


If you can show me the proof of the dangers, scientific proof, not
studies done by biased groups, I will jump on the wagon to Ban all
smoking in public areas.


There are plenty of studies with scientific proof. The problem is that
you and others are going to claim they are biased because you don't
agree with the conclusion. A circular argument. If you would like to
see some of the studies there is a lot of information on them at this
web page put up by my neighbors in Bethesda, the NIH. (National
Institutes of Health)

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/secondhandsmoke.html

Been to the site above; and I really don't wish to argue with you or
anyone else about this (especially on rtc). The fact is that given the
amount of money devoted to research which shows the negative effects of
second hand smoke, the evidence that it is seriously harmful is ****
poor. My guess is that if half the money were available to study the
negative effects of second hand inhalation of anti-perspirant fumes,
there would also be studies that show this.

In today's political climate, studies that find even the smallest
negative effect get funded and published. Those that don't, rarely do.
As I have stated before, a rather large scale study on the effects of
second hand smoke on children showed an inoculation effect for lung cancer.

Now I vow to say nothing more on the subject (which I am sure will make
many of you happy) for at least two months.

Howie

Howie

Badger wrote:

If you can show me the proof of the dangers, scientific proof, not
studies done by biased groups, I will jump on the wagon to Ban all
smoking in public areas.

Hey, that's an idea. Roll deodorant over the tables with ashtrays on them.
At least there might be an improvement in odor. :-)

"Howie" wrote in message
...


In today's political climate, studies that find even the smallest
negative effect get funded and published. Those that don't, rarely do.
As I have stated before, a rather large scale study on the effects of
second hand smoke on children showed an inoculation effect for lung
cancer.


Ya mean like taking a young child who's allergic to poison ivy and rubbing
it all over them to see if they can develop some resistance to it over
time...

--Tom

wrote:

..A hundred miles south of where I live, there is a pulp mill.
..People just take the 24 hr. noxious smell and -- God only knows what
is in that crap spewing from the chimney -- in stride. ..

That's just as stupid as sitting on one's ass and allowing second-hand smoke to
pollute the air of public places or where workers work.

Personally, I have spoken out (successfully) at the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District when it was appropriate (re toxics in the air from a
company, not cigarette smoke). I have served on committees to rid toxics from
communities. There isn't just one source of pollution. It's not either/or.
It's all crap in the air we breathe, the water we drink. Anyone who tolerates
it without doing something to protect themselves, their families and their
community isn't someone whose opinion matters much to me.