|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998
All Pro
|
OP
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 998 |
Since these past couple days have been full of heated debates, I thought I'd throw another controversial topic out on the table...  Smoky bar triggered fatal asthma attack First case of secondhand smoke causing an immediate death, study says A woman in her late teens died from an acute asthma attack triggered by secondhand cigarette smoke shortly after arriving at her job as a waitress in a bar in Michigan, researchers reported on Friday. They said it was the first reported case of an immediate death caused by secondhand smoke. “She didn’t have any other possible known causes of death,” said Dr. Kenneth Rosenman, a Michigan State University professor who oversees three state public health surveillance systems. Cigarette smoke is known to trigger acute asthma attacks. “We know that particulate levels from secondhand cigarette smoke in bars like this reach sufficient levels to set off an asthma attack,” Rosenman said. He said the woman was a student who had a job at a fast-food restaurant, and worked a second job as a waitress at the bar. “She was perfectly fine when she went to work,” Rosenman said in a telephone interview. “After about 15 minutes, she had an acute asthma attack and collapsed on the floor. The autopsy clearly indicates she died from asthma,” said Rosenman, who would not disclose the woman’s name or the precise place and time of her death for privacy reasons. Rosenman said the woman had asthma since age 2. Her asthma was poorly controlled. She had made four visits to her doctor in the year before her death for flare-ups, and had been treated in a hospital emergency department two to three times that year. Although she had prescriptions for an assortment of drugs to prevent and treat asthma attacks, she was reported to only use them when she was having breathing difficulty. On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her. When she became sick, she told the bar manager she needed to go to the hospital, then collapsed on the dance floor. Bar patrons offered an inhaler and the woman tried to use it, but could not. Emergency response workers were unable to revive her and she died shortly thereafter. Rosenman, who wrote about the case in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, said 24 U.S. states prohibit smoking in public places such as bars. A number of other states, including Michigan, are considering it. He said a smoking ban could prevent future deaths. Secondhand smoke causes about 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 46,000 heart disease deaths in adult non-smokers in the United States each year, according to the American Lung Association. “There are a lot of statistics out there about secondhand smoke. Here is a human face. She died acutely. It is a tragic death,” Rosenman said. The study was funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. link While I don't smoke and am fairly opposed to it, I definitely don't think that it should be banned. I'm sorry that this girls life had to end like this, but I don't think using it as an argument to ban smoking is valid at all. As they noted, it was the first recorded 'direct cause' of death from second hand smoke, and it's because it triggered an asthma attack. Many things can trigger asthma attacks...
Wise words spoken by sages
From SkyTel to BlackBerry pagers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
Quote:
Her asthma was poorly controlled. She had made four visits to her doctor in the year before her death for flare-ups, and had been treated in a hospital emergency department two to three times that year.
Although she had prescriptions for an assortment of drugs to prevent and treat asthma attacks, she was reported to only use them when she was having breathing difficulty.
On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her.
This was the reason that she died.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
And if you have asthma problems why on Earth are you working in a smoky bar? 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
She died from poorly treated asthma; the second hand smoke is incidental. Her attack might just as easily have been triggered by automobile exhaust, factory smokestacks, a neighborhood cookout, or people who apparently put on their cologne with a power-sprayer (like a few people where I work). It was a totally avoidable tragedy if she hadn't neglected to bring her inhaler.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509 |
I am sorry this girl died, but don't think her death should be used as a political argument for banning smoking in bars. I do, however, there should be a smoking ban.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Quote:
Her asthma was poorly controlled. She had made four visits to her doctor in the year before her death for flare-ups, and had been treated in a hospital emergency department two to three times that year.
Although she had prescriptions for an assortment of drugs to prevent and treat asthma attacks, she was reported to only use them when she was having breathing difficulty.
On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her.
This was the reason that she died.
And the fact that she was stOOpid enough to take a job in a smokey bar when she had asthma.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Her asthma was poorly controlled. She had made four visits to her doctor in the year before her death for flare-ups, and had been treated in a hospital emergency department two to three times that year.
Although she had prescriptions for an assortment of drugs to prevent and treat asthma attacks, she was reported to only use them when she was having breathing difficulty.
On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her.
This was the reason that she died.
And the fact that she was stOOpid enough to take a job in a smokey bar when she had asthma.
Stupid enough, or needed the work? I've worked in many places that were unhealthy and dangerous, and I carry some scars as a nice reminder of those times. Not saying she wasn't stupid, but if she's working two crummy jobs, my guess is she didn't have much choice and she probably couldn't afford very good healthcare. Anyway, even if she's stupid, it's sad she died because of it.
On the smoking ban, I really don't care that much, but i've always thought the only argument for it is worker safety. If smoking is allowed in bars, for example, then the bartenders and waiters should have gas masks to filter the air, just like a worker would who works in a different toxic air environment. It'd look retarded, but maybe that underlines just how toxic that stuff is.
I smoke sometimes, but it's very different than working in that environment. I used to come home nauseated sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
, or people who apparently put on their cologne with a power-sprayer (like a few people where I work).
Now that is just plain funny!!! 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
but if she's working two crummy jobs, my guess is she didn't have much choice and she probably couldn't afford very good healthcare.
College students in their late teens have "crummy" jobs. I don't recall many college students in their late teens that are CEO's of corparations - or even working full time at a decent job.
And, just as you state maybe she didn't have good healthcare or couldn't afford it, I would say more than likely she was covered on her parents plan, being that she was in college and in her late teens - this wasn't a 30 yr. old.
It is sad, without a doubt.
The article also states she did not take care of her asthma. Apparently she had what she needed, she just chose to not use it - for whatever reason. We don't know enough to make any thing other than assumptions.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
I'm usually for less laws and more personal freedoms, but there needs to be a smoking ban in places like this. It has nothing to do with this death. I don't have a problem with people who smoke, but do it outside or in your own home. Once you start bringing in restaurants, bars, etc, you're essentially making the air toxic (to some extent or another) to the people around you. The dangers of secondhand smoke are well documented.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
The dangers of secondhand smoke are well documented.
Actually, they aren't.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
And here's a study by the W.H.O. (UN's World Health Organization) that says the effects of second-hand smoke are negligible: http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
Quote:
The dangers of secondhand smoke are well documented.
Actually, they aren't.
You are absolutely wrong. This information has been recorded for decades in countless books, magazines, newspapers, online articles, etc.
If you don't agree with the nearly universal consensus, fine, I can respect that, but don't say the information out there isn't well documented.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509 |
I believe the study you linked to is about lung cancer risks, at least according to the abstract. The study I linked to was about cardiovascular health. They're both reputable sources. I'm too lazy to read the full study of the one you posted since I have to write an appellate brief by Monday. Based on the abstract I think the two studies are about different aspects of health.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
And here's a study by the W.H.O. (UN's World Health Organization) that says the effects of second-hand smoke are negligible:
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html
If you look hard enough, you are always going to find someone who agrees with your point of view and writes well enough to be convincing. I'm still going to be skeptical of a lone individual smoker who has a website that is almost certainly a one-man project, does a poor job of linking to any reputable sources, where the site only exists to make a few dollars in google adsense revenue...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
I don't believe you.
About what, exactly?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
And here's a study by the W.H.O. (UN's World Health Organization) that says the effects of second-hand smoke are negligible:
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html
also, this isn't the study by the WHO. It's just a site that talks about that study. The actual study is linked by the site though, but my laptop doesn't have adobe installed, so maybe I'll install it or go over to the desktop and look at it later. I don't have the time right now though.
Also, rather than link to a hundred credible books or articles that would have a directly opposite viewpoint of what was linked, I'll just say this. Go to the WHO homepage, and they just came out with a study that basically said that countries around the world don't do enough to protect it's citizens from tobacco, that many of the 8 million? deaths caused by tobacco annually (this isn't directly referring to secondhand smoke to make that clear) could easily be prevented, countries earn 500x the amount in taxes from tabacco companies that they spend in anti-tobacco efforts, and lots of interesting stuff. I just skimmed through it really quick though and this is just from memory so you will have to read it yourself. The only reason I brought it up is because it's from the same organization that you just cited.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
You can attack the source all you want, but facts are stubborn things ... it was study by the WHO, not a "lone smoker", and it still debunks the popular perceptions and beliefs regarding the effects of second hand smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
You can attack the source all you want, but facts are stubborn things ... it was study by the WHO, not a "lone smoker", and it still debunks the popular perceptions and beliefs regarding the effects of second hand smoke.
yeah I didn't really come off how I wanted to in my last post. Anyway, I guess I'll just agree to disagree since it's not something I'm really interested in debating. I don't have anything against smokers.. hell I'll have a cigar every now and then, I just don't think it should be allowed indoors in public places. I don't have much of a problem with it personally, but you can't assume everyone is going to be perfectly healthy and in their 20's....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,069
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,069 |
The smoking ban was really the only thing I've ever actually cared enough to vote for. Every time I went out to the bars I would without a doubt be sick with lung/sinus problems for a week afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
crazy idea. dont go to those places
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,069
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,069 |
Right, I'd much rather sit at home then go out with friends. I couldn't even go to most restaurants to have family dinners. Either way, it's banned now (as it should be) and I'm happy as can be.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 6,331 |
Quote:
Right, I'd much rather sit at home then go out with friends. I couldn't even go to most restaurants to have family dinners. Either way, it's banned now (as it should be) and I'm happy as can be.
I'm a smoker. Not that many, about 4 a day usually.
I think that argument is rediculous. If there was that much demand for non-smoking bars and restaurants, they would open. Owners would see the demand and say, hey people hate going to places filled with smoke. Is it fair for smokers to have to go outside to smoke their cigarettes, especially in the winter when it's freezing cold? Is it fair to take away from bar owner's business by not letting people smoke there? Look at it from an objective view and you see that smokers do have a point. They're people too and have the same rights that you have. So do the owners. Say what you want, you don't have to go to places with smoking if you don't like it.
The one argument that I do agree with for the smoking ban is that it saves lives. It cuts down on people's smoking and even keeps some people from smoking. The only things that really does work to cut down smoking is banning it in public places and raising cigarette prices IMO. This is why I agree with the ban.
And I've heard arguments from both sides on second hand smoke, it's undoubtably harmful: the question is how harmful
UCONN HUSKIES 2014 Champions of Basketball
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,642
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,642 |
Personally, I feel the ban should have really only focused on restaraunts. Bars, frankly, I've always expected smoking in bars and as someone with a sensitivity to smoke (not allergic, but it does get to me more than it does others), I just didn't/don't often go to bars. I knew when I went what I was putting myself into.
When I'm eating, I expect a completely different thing. And separate smoking/non-smoking areas did not help. I still could taste/smell the smoke. Ick! Not something I need/want when I'm trying to enjoy a meal. And a smoking ban, honestly hasn't seem to have affected the businesses of the restaraunts that I frequent.
My uncle, who owns a restaraunt/bar in Canton says that his food business is up but his bar business is a tad down (not much, just a bit). But, his bar was always a smaller part of his business (the bar itself was fairly damn small). At least for my uncle, the overall result for him has been that he's come out ahead and is expanding his business into catering some high end events in Canton (including hosting several HOF'ers each year).
Ok, all that rambling aside. I'm sorry that the girl died, but she is more responsible for her death than any kind of second hand smoke. She KNEW that her body couldn't take it, yet left her inhaler at home. Lack of medical insurance doesn't seem to be the issue here. The article said she had the prescriptions, but only used them when she needed them, but didn't have her inhaler with her that night. Why the heck wouldn't she? She knew that smoke was a trigger and she knew she'd be working in that environment.
![[Linked Image from i75.photobucket.com]](http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i302/lrhinkle/d5eaf0b9-e429-4211-b53f-b843bfcf6aa9_zps2ac17420.jpg) #gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
when smoking bans become effectitve and no middle ground is met.
the land of the free becomes not so free.. more controlled by not the poeple/ but the govt.
if i wanted to start a bar and cater to a smoking crowd. it could not happen.
it has started, but where does it end? tomorrow it could be another liberty
maybe we are in a slight recession because of stuff like this. I just tried to go to a pool hall but it was closed because his patrons could not smoke.
I can see a loclaized recession in this case.
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Ah, buck, you don't get it........there are more nonsmokers than there are smokers. Consequently, the majority gets their way. On a better note, all these non smokers that are demanding to breath "clean" air will soon be paying higher taxes. Then they'll complain about that. But first, they'll probably go after cars and busses because of the noxious fumes they emit..........wait, on second thought, they won't go after the noxious fumes because they themselves drive cars.......see, that would hit them right where they don't want to be hit - at home. Meaning, it would negatively affect them. It's so easy to complain about people that do something that you don't. That's fine. When taxes go up because the states are lacking money due to decreased smoking, I'm sure these same people will complain about that - after all, they do have a right to go wherever they want and not be offended in any manner, right?  Next up will be me, complaining about fat people. It makes me nauseus to see fat people, so, within about 10 years we will see a ban on fat people in restaurants. If they want to eat, they'll either have to do it at home, or, if in public, they'll have to stay more than 30 ft. away from any public door. And before you know it, we'll be wearing i.d. bracelets that will track our every movement, and every breath, and every bite. But, I'm sure that will be okay with all these people that are fine with banning smoking, because, when you get right down to it, these other bans will be for our own good as well. Give an inch, they take a mile, but then, when they realize they got caught up in that mile, they complain.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
Quote:
Ah, buck, you don't get it........ these other bans will be for our own good as well.
I am trying though.
There should be SMOKING and of cousre NON SMOKING bars.
You deny the public 2 options because you believe you have their best interest in hand.
As an american I believe I should be able to make that choice by myself, while taking into account the other side (nonsmokers)
95% non smokin bars
5% smoking.
our will there be another ban "for my own good"?
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,642
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,642 |
j/c Here's the problem by saying that this is about more gov't control...it was put to a vote with the voting public of Ohio voting for the current ban. The voters had the choice to allow this to happen or not. Personally, I don't need the gov't in my life any more than it already is. I was merely stating my desire for the smoking ban to be LESS restrictive than it is. I don't get why bars were banned, other than the people who voted for it don't go to bars, so they don't care. I believe (aka, I have no evidence to support this so I could be off) they only wanted their restaraunts to be smoke-free and thougght this was the only way to achieve that.
Not me, I felt that a much less restrictive bill could have passed without the inclusion of bars. But I would have still voted against it, regardless.
So, you see, you both attempted to judge what I was saying and were incorrect. Do I like eating in smokey places? HELL NO! If the ban hadn't have passed would I still go out to eat as often I as I do? HELL YES! You see, it wouldn't have changed the way I conducted my daily life. If I want to go out to eat, I go and if I didn't want the smokey air, I would find someplace else to eat. (and actually, one of my fave place to eat was always smoke-free anyway)
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 563 |
People don't stop going to bars because they can't smoke. People go to bars for mainly two things, Liquor and social reasons. Stepping outside to smoke isn't a big deal, and the bars aren't any less crowded. In fact, I'd be people stay longer because it's not so nasty to breath in there for so long. I've lived in two states with a ban, New York and California, and I noticed no change in business, heard no complaints after about a month, and the majority of people - including a majority of smokes (self included), actually liked it better.
And losing the liberty of smoking is the least of our concerns. The homeland security act is about 10,000 times worse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,826 |
Quote:
j/c Here's the problem by saying that this is about more gov't control...it was put to a vote with the voting public of Ohio voting for the current ban. The voters had the choice to allow this to happen or not. Personally, I don't need the gov't in my life any more than it already is. I was merely stating my desire for the smoking ban to be LESS restrictive than it is. I don't get why bars were banned, other than the people who voted for it don't go to bars, so they don't care. I believe (aka, I have no evidence to support this so I could be off) they only wanted their restaraunts to be smoke-free and thougght this was the only way to achieve that.
Not me, I felt that a much less restrictive bill could have passed without the inclusion of bars. But I would have still voted against it, regardless.
So, you see, you both attempted to judge what I was saying and were incorrect. Do I like eating in smokey places? HELL NO! If the ban hadn't have passed would I still go out to eat as often I as I do? HELL YES! You see, it wouldn't have changed the way I conducted my daily life. If I want to go out to eat, I go and if I didn't want the smokey air, I would find someplace else to eat. (and actually, one of my fave place to eat was always smoke-free anyway)
See, that's the way it is supposed to work. You spend your money where you see fit. If a restaurant can make a go of it being "smoking", then so be it. If a restaurant can make a go of it being "non smoking", so be it.
However, now, in the state of Ohio, the choice is taken away. I understand, people voted and the majority won. I can deal with that. I have gone out to eat and don't smoke. I also don't stick around.
I quit going to bars. That's a "good for me bad for them" kind of thing. I'm not the only one. What does that do? Bars lose business. Bars layoff employees. Those employees don't spend as freely as they used to.
It's a cycle. Hurt one person here, it will come around and bite you there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
Right, I'd much rather sit at home then go out with friends. I couldn't even go to most restaurants to have family dinners. Either way, it's banned now (as it should be) and I'm happy as can be.
Restaurants I can see, it's a place of food, and smoke does settle and leave behind a film, not something i want on my food. but a bar is a bar, and everyone knows it's a place of drinking and smoking, and if you don't like it, don't go there. pretty simple.
Florida outlawed smoking where food is served and it seems to have worked out well. We have an advantage of nice weather, so most restaurants have a patio that people can smoke on, but even those are usually either empty or the people don't smoke, Most people will wait til they are done with dinner to lite up.
But bars are smoking establishments here, and the few that serve food have patios, but once the kitchen closes, then smoking is allowed.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
People don't stop going to bars because they can't smoke.
Not true.
Quote:
People go to bars for mainly two things, Liquor and social reasons.
Those two things fit right in with smoking (for smokers, of course).
Quote:
Stepping outside to smoke isn't a big deal
It can be a big deal depending on the circumstances.
Quote:
and the bars aren't any less crowded
One of the bar owners I know said as the evenings wear on the sidewalk in front of his place is packed with both smokers and non-smokers socializing and the drinks sit inside getting warm. He's taking a HUGE hit while that happens.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,361
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,361 |
Quote:
People don't stop going to bars because they can't smoke.
My wife and I did, and when we do go out now, our money is spent in PA, NOT OHIO.
Quote:
People go to bars for mainly two things, Liquor and social reasons. Stepping outside to smoke isn't a big deal,
losing your seat every time you go outside, standing in the rain getting soaked, or standing out in the snow when it's 20 degrees out and the wind is blowing 20 to 30 MPH is no big deal
Quote:
and the bars aren't any less crowded.
They are a lot less crowded in this area.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831 |
I just posted a poll about this topic in the k-9 to see how people would react. Even though I will occasionally smoke, I don't think there should be a ban. It should be up to each individual business. I don't smoke when I go out and if I minded it, I would just go to a non-smoking place.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509 |
Smokers who don't want to have to go outside could always quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
Smokers who don't want to have to go outside could always quit.
actually it would probably be easier if all the non-smokers started.... 
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 509 |
Quote:
Quote:
Smokers who don't want to have to go outside could always quit.
actually it would probably be easier if all the non-smokers started....
LOL
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The dangers of secondhand smoke are well documented.
Actually, they aren't.
You are absolutely wrong. This information has been recorded for decades in countless books, magazines, newspapers, online articles, etc.
If you don't agree with the nearly universal consensus, fine, I can respect that, but don't say the information out there isn't well documented.
Just like our old friend global warming, there are many researchers who believe the second hand smoke thing is pure junk science.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Smoky bar triggered fatal asthma
attack
|
|
![[Linked Image from i190.photobucket.com]](http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z33/booger52/phpGGRdhwAM.jpg)