The smoking topic.

[Hem]

I knew someone who died from lung cancer, under the age of 35, who didn't smoke, and did not frequent environments where smoking occured.

[Twozzok]

My friend's sister's friend's mum (phew) has just been diagnosed with lung cancer from passive smoking.

 

 

 

Did she work in a pub or other smokey environment?

 

Because passing someone on the street who is smoking isn't gonna give you cancer.

[jayseven]

Cigarettes may give pleasure but so do many other things. It would be better for people to pick up an activity or something to take their mind off cigarettes. It may seem harsh that I think eventually they will be banned, but people would still retain a great deal of freedom in their life, just they wouldn't be able to smoke something which is frankly making them ill.

You can enjoy Cigarettes - full stop.

 

You're not taking a risk because there's no evidence to say you are. With cigarettes we are talking about nasty carcinogens that are the number one cause of cancer in the UK. That is why I didn't think the examples were entirely relevant.

Cigarettes are bad for your health - full stop. Got it.

 

What i mean by risk-taking is that there's no conclusive proof, so surely that means these things could still be bad?

 

 

Maybe, but equally I don't think people should smoke in stationary situations. It just creates an unpleasant zone for non-smokers.

Stationary situations - you mean standing still, or queues? Thing is 'unpleasant' is precicely the majority of the problem, as I said before there's often things beyond my control which make my surroundings 'unpleasant'. If someone farts, I move away. Glaring at them doesn't solve anything. Sometimes I hold my breath when crossing a road behind a vehicle chugging out fumes. Why is that acceptable? Smokers are frowned upon because smoking is tabboo, and people exaggerate their distress around them.

 

If you honestly thought that I did not think alcohol can ever be harmful in any quantity, I would have to reiterate that you do not have common sense. You're just being pedantic in interpreting the sentence.

Dude, how can I honestly know either way? You might know your own level of competance and intelligence, but nobody else on the forums do. You're making a mistake if you presume that others can immediately say "oh, he'll know what I mean" when you communicate wrong. If you don't believe your wording is at all ambiguous, then maybe there are areas of your own schooling that are dreadful.

 

As for being pedantic; well isn't this entire discussion just that? :P

 

My point really lies with the fact that cigarettes can never be said to be safe under any circumstance, which is why I believe they differ greatly from alcohol. Also their highly addictive quality means that many smokers smoke regularly, more regularly than they would drink. I also think that a lot of people who binge drink are actually doing so not really through addiction, but out of fun.

So recreational drug abuse is fine? :P So it's ok to binge drink and damage yourself, but not if you're addicted?

 

I can understand your safety argument. I can. But I don't care.

 

 

You were allowed to not want the public smoking ban, but it happened.

That's different to a complete ban

 

Is learning how to roll a joint a good thing? I don't think it's a great key skill to take home. It may have triggered interest in taxation, but you didn't learn that from the cigarette.

So you're agreeing with me? Why quote it and reiterate it?

 

If I use facts he rejects it, while if he knew the facts he wouldn't reject them. Pretty simple logic behind why I don't think he knows much about the subject.

"if he knew the facts he wouldn't reject them"? I know smoking is bad. I still smoke. That says nothing about anything, does it? And I say again; does knowing about statistics matter at all when you already know that smoking is bad?

 

The sentence was vague in the subject; I thought he was referring to cigarettes. In which case, he wouldn't really know much about the possible diseases/implications, at risk groups, etc.

So you thought wrong? So all that "in which case..." stuff after the bit where you thought wrong is unnecessary, and also wrong?

 

And life experience with cigarettes may just let you think they aren't much of a harm, seeing as they haven't done much harm yet.

You're talking as if all people are like that fat guy who sued macdonalds because he got obese. Your logic is "smoking is bad > you need common sense to know what is good and bad > therefore smokers have no common sense > so they fantasize that cigarettes do no harm", or something.

[ipaul]

Even reading through that argument is annoying let alone being in it =P Both sides have done the argument to death now can people not just agree to disagree and move on?

[jayseven]

I just want him to admit that I'm right in certain points :P

[weeyellowbloke]

I'm with Jayseven. Just to clear up my position, I'm a non-smoker and have never smoked (well tobacco anyway......well maybe occassionally in a shisha pipe, anyway I digress). Point is I don't like cigarette smoke, but if others want to do it and find pleasure in it who am I bitch about it. Yeah it annoyed me in pubs and clubs, but smoking not there now and I barely see any problem with smoking in general as a result. To paraphrase Trainspotting, yeah it causes damage to health when society says you should choose life and look after your health, but some people choose not to choose life and choose something else. The point is choice. You go around banning everything bad for people you end up in the world from Demolition Man with people who want choice consuming substandard illegal products.

 

Oh I also support the legalisation of addictive substances such as heroin as well, but that's a whole other topic completely.

 

And so ends this long and rambling post.

[The Bard]

I just want him to admit that I'm right in certain points :P

 

No point trying to approach a discussion Socratically with a science student. *shudders*

 

I joke.

 

This thread makes me want to cause myself grevious bodily harm.

[jayseven]

Me too dude, me too.

 

*lights cigarette*

[Twozzok]

Try smoking while riding a bike!

 

Now that took effort !_!

[jayseven]

Smoking while riding a bike is the easy part - it's rolling it that's tricky

[Daniel]

done that before, i used to have a part time job requiring me to cycle up a hill at 7am every morning, perfect cig smoking conditions lol pedalled like f**k all the way up, stopped at the top, lit a cig then free wheeled all the way down the other side hehe

[Sheikah]

What i mean by risk-taking is that there's no conclusive proof, so surely that means these things could still be bad?

 

They might even make you less likely to get cancer, canceling the 2 possibilities out.

 

 

Stationary situations - you mean standing still, or queues? Thing is 'unpleasant' is precicely the majority of the problem, as I said before there's often things beyond my control which make my surroundings 'unpleasant'. If someone farts, I move away. Glaring at them doesn't solve anything. Sometimes I hold my breath when crossing a road behind a vehicle chugging out fumes. Why is that acceptable? Smokers are frowned upon because smoking is tabboo, and people exaggerate their distress around them.

 

You probably can't help a fart, even then it's gone after a few seconds. Smoking is a deliberate several minute thing, you know you're breathing in toxic stuff unlike with a fart. I really dislike when people light up a cigarette in a situation where you have to be standing still and fairly near them.

 

Dude, how can I honestly know either way? You might know your own level of competance and intelligence, but nobody else on the forums do. You're making a mistake if you presume that others can immediately say "oh, he'll know what I mean" when you communicate wrong. If you don't believe your wording is at all ambiguous, then maybe there are areas of your own schooling that are dreadful.

 

This is definitely something you should admit fault to. Do you honestly think anyone is thick enough to think you could down 50 pints of beer and walk out alive? The fact is that you know what I was saying, I know what I was saying, but you didn't have a valid comeback so simply picked on the wording of the sentence. Also it's blatantly obvious I am not stupid, I am displaying more scientific evidence and understanding than anyone else here. Please do not pretend to be ignorant, I know exactly that you understood what I was saying.

 

As for being pedantic; well isn't this entire discussion just that? :P

 

Pedantic means finding small trivial details to pick on instead of addressing the issue. I've very much been talking about the effects of smoking, not trying to say your sentences mean something else because of the way they're worded, even if I knew what you were basically saying.

 

 

So recreational drug abuse is fine? :P So it's ok to binge drink and damage yourself, but not if you're addicted?

 

It's never ok, but if people binge out of competition/fun/for the sake of it when with friends then they can at least stop being such a tool. Smoking seems to get people addicted far more easily, that's why there's usually stop smoking ads everywhere unlike stop drinking. Some people just drink stupidly, and they should change the amount they drink.

 

I can understand your safety argument. I can. But I don't care.

 

Oh well. Maybe if you're ever on a ventilation unit you'll wish you did.

 

 

That's different to a complete ban

 

You said smokers could simply say they didn't want it, but they sure as hell did that regarding public ban and it still happened. In the future, what's to say it couldn't happen again? The number of people smoking has decreased over the years massively, what's to say in the future people won't care about smoking enough?

 

So you're agreeing with me? Why quote it and reiterate it?

 

What the bloody hell are you talking about? You didn't learn anything useful, in fact you didn't even learn to roll up since cigarettes are already packaged. I'm talking about boxed cigarettes. You didn't even learn about tax because you must have researched on your own to do that. Smoking a cigarette does not teach you about taxes. Like hell I was agreeing with you, pay attention to what I'm saying!

 

"if he knew the facts he wouldn't reject them"? I know smoking is bad. I still smoke. That says nothing about anything, does it? And I say again; does knowing about statistics matter at all when you already know that smoking is bad?

 

If he knew the things that I was saying he wouldn't have pretty much said 'I know better', the jist of what he was implying when he said he had experience.

 

 

So you thought wrong? So all that "in which case..." stuff after the bit where you thought wrong is unnecessary, and also wrong?

 

It was impossible to think right about something that he didn't attribute. The most obvious thing to respond to was about cigarettes since - DUN DUN DUN! It's a smoking topic and most of the discussion has been about cigarettes.

 

You're talking as if all people are like that fat guy who sued macdonalds because he got obese. Your logic is "smoking is bad > you need common sense to know what is good and bad > therefore smokers have no common sense > so they fantasize that cigarettes do no harm", or something.

 

Christ, how can you interpret this from what I just said? It's blatantly obvious what I was saying. A smoker's view of smoking, if they do not have cancer or any serious illness because of it, may be that smoking is not that bad because they haven't had anything too bad happen to them yet. In fact, I have encountered people just like this. I know a friend's grandmother and a friend of my own grandmother who have said things along the lines of "I've been smoking 50 years and nothing's ever happened to me, all the stuff they say happens is rubbish".

 

In fact, there is no advantage smokers hold in a discussion like this about cigarettes. We both know why people smoke, and that is as much info as someone gets from smoking.

[rokhed00]

I just want him to admit that I'm right in certain points :P

 

More chance of winning the lottery.

[jayseven]

They might even make you less likely to get cancer, canceling the 2 possibilities out.

I doubt my laptop on my lap will prevent cancer.

 

You probably can't help a fart, even then it's gone after a few seconds. Smoking is a deliberate several minute thing, you know you're breathing in toxic stuff unlike with a fart. I really dislike when people light up a cigarette in a situation where you have to be standing still and fairly near them.

Your problem is inconsiderate smokers. Why can't I say the same about farters! What about cars?

 

 

 

This is definitely something you should admit fault to. Do you honestly think anyone is thick enough to think you could down 50 pints of beer and walk out alive? The fact is that you know what I was saying, I know what I was saying, but you didn't have a valid comeback so simply picked on the wording of the sentence. Also it's blatantly obvious I am not stupid, I am displaying more scientific evidence and understanding than anyone else here. Please do not pretend to be ignorant, I know exactly that you understood what I was saying.

Actually the fact is that I genuinely thought you were being an idiot. I can apologise for misinterpreting what you said, but I can't apologise for you saying something wrong. You cannot presume exactly what I was thinking. Surely I can say, like you, taht you ought to know that I never have an invalid comeback, but then saying something like that would be big-headed.

 

Throwing science around doesn't prove your level of intelligence. Bard chucked some liver wordage into the fray which was actually far more intelligent sounding than what you've said.

 

Pedantic means finding small trivial details to pick on instead of addressing the issue. I've very much been talking about the effects of smoking, not trying to say your sentences mean something else because of the way they're worded, even if I knew what you were basically saying.

Pedantic isn't necessarily about avoiding any larger issue. If you bothered to see past what I was 'basically' saying, you'd see that I've been addressing the larger issue :P

 

It's never ok, but if people binge out of competition/fun/for the sake of it when with friends then they can at least stop being such a tool. Smoking seems to get people addicted far more easily, that's why there's usually stop smoking ads everywhere unlike stop drinking. Some people just drink stupidly, and they should change the amount they drink.

So you're a tool if you don't binge out of competition/fun/for the sake of it with friends? Honestly, I don't know if you mean binge drinking makes you less of a tool, or if you mean that you have the choice to either binge drink or be a tool? Call me pedantic if you wish, but if I don't understand which you're saying (and i'm not going to presume anything, because that makes us all asses) I need to point it out, don't I?

 

I overdrink constantly. I'm only harming myself, but I agree that there are many irresponsible drinkers out there. One of them made me fall down a flight and a half of metal stairs.

 

Perhaps the amount to drink isn't always the problem, but the people who drink is?

 

Oh well. Maybe if you're ever on a ventilation unit you'll wish you did.

Probably.

 

You said smokers could simply say they didn't want it, but they sure as hell did that regarding public ban and it still happened. In the future, what's to say it couldn't happen again? The number of people smoking has decreased over the years massively, what's to say in the future people won't care about smoking enough?

 

 

 

What the bloody hell are you talking about? You didn't learn anything useful, in fact you didn't even learn to roll up since cigarettes are already packaged. I'm talking about boxed cigarettes. You didn't even learn about tax because you must have researched on your own to do that. Smoking a cigarette does not teach you about taxes. Like hell I was agreeing with you, pay attention to what I'm saying!

What-- calm down mate! Jeez. Clearly you've misinterpreted what I've said, or I've not been clear enough. I guess I was wrong when I thought just saying "rolling" and "i buy tobacco" would be enough to suggest I roll my own? I'm talking about the fact that I said;

 

you can learn how superficial others can be. You can learn how to roll a cigarette (thus a joint). Taking up smoking made me want to learn more about taxation. Of course not everyone learns much from simply smoking, but as you said, that whole trail of thought was about drug use, so nyer :P

I agree with you that not everyone learns much from simply smoking. I suppose I should've said "nobody learns anything directly from smoking" and instead indirect things can be learned. Yes, you win. Smoking a cigarette is not as good as attending a lecture on The Afterlife, or whatever.

 

I said you were agreeing with me because what you said was what I meant. I understand that that didn't come across clearly now, so sorry.

 

If he knew the things that I was saying he wouldn't have pretty much said 'I know better', the jist of what he was implying when he said he had experience.

Experience about drugs. Thought we agreed this was irrelevant?

 

It was impossible to think right about something that he didn't attribute. The most obvious thing to respond to was about cigarettes since - DUN DUN DUN! It's a smoking topic and most of the discussion has been about cigarettes.

.. Or so you assumed! Get over it.

 

Christ, how can you interpret this from what I just said? It's blatantly obvious what I was saying. A smoker's view of smoking, if they do not have cancer or any serious illness because of it, may be that smoking is not that bad because they haven't had anything too bad happen to them yet. In fact, I have encountered people just like this. I know a friend's grandmother and a friend of my own grandmother who have said things along the lines of "I've been smoking 50 years and nothing's ever happened to me, all the stuff they say happens is rubbish".

You're getting pretty worked up aren't you? You're a scientist. You should be rubbish at writing anyway, right? If your incoherancy is a touchy subject, I can leave it alone if you want.

 

As for the rest of the paragraph; so someone might be thinking something? You knew someone once who thought it? Awesome.

 

In fact, there is no advantage smokers hold in a discussion like this about cigarettes. We both know why people smoke, and that is as much info as someone gets from smoking.

So all the info I get from smoking is the reasons why people smoke? Ok. But that doesn't take away from the fact that I also know more stuff-- Hey, don't forget the health warnings plastered all over the packets. Smokers therefore also know all the bad things that smoking can cause too, ok?

 

now i'm going out, so I won't be able to continue this tonight

[Sheikah]

 

but I can't apologise for you saying something wrong

 

You can, because it wasn't necessarily wrong to say what I said. Just because it wasn't phrased in perfect English that doesn't mean that someone couldn't have worked out what I was saying.

 

Throwing science around doesn't prove your level of intelligence

 

Knowing science would imply I knew science - science being the effects of too much alcohol. =D

 

So you're a tool if you don't binge out of competition/fun/for the sake of it with friends? Honestly, I don't know if you mean binge drinking makes you less of a tool, or if you mean that you have the choice to either binge drink or be a tool? Call me pedantic if you wish, but if I don't understand which you're saying (and i'm not going to presume anything, because that makes us all asses) I need to point it out, don't I?

 

Yes I am saying people are tools if they binge drink regularly, resulting in cirrhosis and god knows what. You see women like this a lot around university on nights out, it is definitely not clever.

 

Perhaps the amount to drink isn't always the problem, but the people who drink is?

 

The amount is definitely a problem, how do you think George Best got shafted? :p

 

.. Or so you assumed! Get over it.

 

Like I said, he never made it clear, so common sense was used to guess he was talking about smoking. Turns out he wasn't, so he should have stated that to begin with.

 

 

You're getting pretty worked up aren't you? You're a scientist. You should be rubbish at writing anyway, right? If your incoherancy is a touchy subject, I can leave it alone if you want.

 

I should be rubbish at writing? You should try read scientific journals, immaculately written and highly complex. I also studied English at A-level, and on forums I'd say I'm usually one of few people who spells most things correctly, uses correct punctuation, etc. I find it funny that you think I have poor grammar just because of a small mistake. If you really want I can go through your post history and highlight a few for you, but trust me when I say that no one wants that.

 

 

Smokers therefore also know all the bad things that smoking can cause too, ok?

 

Bollocks they do, do you think they have time to list all the diseases, risk groups and statistics in a string of text on cigarette packets? You come out with some silly things sometimes.

[Twozzok]

Find me a smoker who doesn't know that smoking is bad and i'll give you a gold star...

[ipaul]

Fucks sake =P Can people just put this aside now? Stop arguing over like things as trivial as a small mistake in grammer and just put the whole argument to bed. I agree with Rokhed, there is more chance of winning the lottery than Sheikah accepting some of your views (jayseven etc) so can't we just leave it?

[Sheikah]

I agree with Rokhed, there is more chance of winning the lottery than Sheikah accepting some of your views (jayseven etc) so can't we just leave it?

 

Rokhead has more chance of winning the lottery three times over than EVER accepting anyone elses opinion, or showing any form of warmth to anyone on this forum.

 

Jayseven is the one who went nuts over a grammar mistake, not me. So yeh, tell him. This convo has gone on for ages because neither of us accept each other's views, don't try pinning me as the bad guy, chum.

[Raining_again]

I smoke too. I'm one of those people that only really smokes socially or due to mass boredom. I don't smoke near any non smokers, in my parents house, or in public places (well thats more than obvious now its illegal)

 

I dont really care about the ban, its a bit of a nuisance working on a hospital site where staff have to hide themselves like a leper whilst smoking. (whereas patients get nothing said for smoking at the front door of the health centre)

 

I know its bad for my health and all that shit, but to be honest my health is so far down the shitter i might as well add to it, and it makes me feel better.

[ipaul]

Rokhead has more chance of winning the lottery three times over than EVER accepting anyone elses opinion, or showing any form of warmth to anyone on this forum.

 

Jayseven is the one who went nuts over a grammar mistake, not me. So yeh, tell him. This convo has gone on for ages because neither of us accept each other's views, don't try pinning me as the bad guy, chum.

 

Did I say you went nuts over the grammar mistake? I take your points and think that the opposing sides are equally unlikely to accept one anothers opinions, just I thought jayseven might just think 'fuck it' and leave this now pointless and ultimately futile argument first (no offence)

[rokhed00]

Rokhead has more chance of winning the lottery three times over than EVER accepting anyone elses opinion, or showing any form of warmth to anyone on this forum.

 

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

You might want to do a bit of research before you start making stupid statements like that.

 

BTW, you made a spelling mistake.

[Sheikah]

I've seen loads of your replies Rokhead, I've been on this forum for ages. I only just started posting less than a year ago in considerable amounts, and I've had to recreate accounts (I think they were deleted as new forums came into place, I was definitely on here when it was cube-europe and revo-europe).

 

You really do appear to me like someone with something lodged up your backside. You seem to love making snide comments, and while you enjoy telling me that I don't accept your opinion, you show no promise of doing the same. You can't see from my point of view regarding gender, cigarettes, drugs, you name it - so we'll never meet eye to eye.

 

How about you just stop talking to me completely? It works out, seeing as you clearly don't like me, and I don't like you. I honestly don't want anything to do with you. So how about you never even acknowledge my existence, talk about me or have anything to say about my posts, and I'll do the same. It'll mean great success for the both of us. : peace:

[rokhed00]

I've seen loads of your replies Rokhead, I've been on this forum for ages. I only just started posting less than a year ago in considerable amounts, and I've had to recreate accounts (I think they were deleted as new forums came into place, I was definitely on here when it was cube-europe and revo-europe).

 

You really do appear to me like someone with something lodged up your backside. You seem to love making snide comments, and while you enjoy telling me that I don't accept your opinion, you show no promise of doing the same. You can't see from my point of view regarding gender, cigarettes, drugs, you name it - so we'll never meet eye to eye.

 

How about you just stop talking to me completely? It works out, seeing as you clearly don't like me, and I don't like you. I honestly don't want anything to do with you. So how about you never even acknowledge my existence, talk about me or have anything to say about my posts, and I'll do the same. It'll mean great success for the both of us. : peace:

 

Here's an idea, why don't you throw a little hissy fit like your deluded girlfriend and leave.

[Sheikah]

Just be quiet. I won't be leaving, not by your watch anyway. Ignore me and I will ignore you. If you choose to keep arguing with me, I'll just argue back. A lot. I'm quite proficient at it, if you haven't noticed. If you want that agro, continue.

 

 

It's entirely your choice.

[nightwolf]

oh please dump the hormonoes they are doing my head in.

 

Besides rokhed's name is HED NOT HEAD

 

yeah =]