Nhs

[Boxlicker101]

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/04/secondhand-smoke-air-quality-test.html

Secondhand smoke air quality test results measuring nicotine cited by the British Medical Journal.....proves secondhand smoke is not a health hazard

Gee, I like that so much I may adopt it!



Amicus

I can't say for sure, but I believe nicotine, although addictive, is not a carcinogen. Most or all of it is probably absdorbed by the smoker. However, some of all the other dangerous chemicals and tars are blown out into the air surrounding the smoker. And, of course, a smoldering cigarette in an ash tray or on the floor ar anywhere else is sending out just as much bad stuff as the smoker would be breathing in.

ETA: I read the article, and it looks totally bogus to me. They just tested for nicotine, not for anything else, and found little. That's reasonable, because the nicotine is absorbed into the smoker's bloodstream, rather thsn being exhaled as much of the other chenmicals are. Besides that, if you look over the site, it is obvious they are advocating no bans on smoking.

 

[amicus]

Box...not to be just argumentative, although I can be that, but I have been a two pack a day smoker for most of my life, since about age 15. I enjoy both the taste and the smell of tobacco and I am greatly angered at both the social pressures against smoking and governmental taxation of those who purchase tobacco products selectively. As I read the Constitution and the Tax Code, that is illegal.

It was women that brought about the ban on alcohol; it is women that are leading the charge to ban tobacco; ya know, the more, 'sensitive' sex that likes only perfumed cigarettes.

I didn't spend a lot of time looking for reference documents and I don't intend to make a career of it, but I may find another source, one that, hopefully, you might find more acceptable.

But just like the Global Warming advocates, it is not popular or productive to swim against the current, one tends to lose one's grant monies for research. Still, as the 'true' politics free science has debunked Global Warming so seriously the advocates now say, 'Climate Change'. I am certain, even if you don't accept the Brit's Medical Assn, I can probably find other sources.

Amicus

 

[Liar]

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/04/secondhand-smoke-air-quality-test.html

Secondhand smoke air quality test results measuring nicotine cited by the British Medical Journal.....proves secondhand smoke is not a health hazard

Yep. It has been disproved in numerous studies that secondhand smoke doesn't increase the risk for cancer so much that it's statistically certain. And it's been proven that the amount of nicotine in secondhand smoke is not enough to make it addictive.

That, however ain't the only two health risks connected to tobacco.

ps. Regarding our other conversation re: economy 101, I'll get back to that when I'm not suppsed to be working.

 

[R. Richard]

The problem I have with secondhand tobacco smoke is this: "Why do I have to share your habit when I don't want to?"

If you get drunk in public, to the point where it's obvious, you can be arrested. If you get drunk and drive, you should be arrested. If you inflict your alcohol habit on others, you're punished. Why not with tobacco smoke?

If you want to screw in private, not a problem unless you accidently wind up with some other guy's wife. If you want to screw in public, you can be arrested. Why do I have to share your tobacco habit in public?

The long term affects of certain habits are well known. If you chose to smoke, then you take a risk. If I don't want to take the risk, why do I have to breathe your secondhand smoke?

 

[trysail]

The problem I have with secondhand tobacco smoke is this: "Why do I have to share your habit when I don't want to?"

If you get drunk in public, to the point where it's obvious, you can be arrested. If you get drunk and drive, you should be arrested. If you inflict your alcohol habit on others, you're punished. Why not with tobacco smoke?

If you want to screw in private, not a problem unless you accidently wind up with some other guy's wife. If you want to screw in public, you can be arrested. Why do I have to share your tobacco habit in public?

The long term affects of certain habits are well known. If you chose to smoke, then you take a risk. If I don't want to take the risk, why do I have to breathe your secondhand smoke?

I think it safe to say that the society has seen to it that you are almost never forced to do so.

 

[R. Richard]

I think it safe to say that the society has seen to it that you are almost never forced to do so.

Unfortunately not. I won't have cigarette [or cigar] smoke in my own home. However, in many of the places I have to go in connection with my work, I encounter cigarette smoke. However, I must admit that an even worse hazard is bottled beer. I can't count the number of times some ass hole has tried to chop me up with a broken beer bottle.

 

[penandpaper]

Here are my examples:

I've been a firefighter and teacher. Both, according to US standards offer very good insurance. I've taught in many different states (5). All served me well. I got a wife. She worked for a Canadian company and therefore, we were both covered by Canada.

I thought I had it good until I had that.

My wife's hysterectomy, completely covered. Her prescriptions for hyperthyroidism, completely covered. Her migraine medicine, completely covered.

Right now she works for a US company. We spend over five hundred dollars a month on insurance, medicine, and occassional doctor/dentist/eyecare visits. And we're both active healthy middle-aged adults.

I do not see how anyone can espouse something without having tried the other. It's like saying an apple is your favorite fruit, but youve never tried a grape or mango or peach. I guess it all boils down to being scared of change, which is understandable, especially in a country that if change is wrong it is very slow to correct. But, that's a chance I would urge the opponents of "socialized" (I'm so fucking sick of that word being demonized!) to make.

 

[penandpaper]

Unfortunately not. I won't have cigarette [or cigar] smoke in my own home. However, in many of the places I have to go in connection with my work, I encounter cigarette smoke. However, I must admit that an even worse hazard is bottled beer. I can't count the number of times some ass hole has tried to chop me up with a broken beer bottle.

Where the hell do you work? Thunderdome?

What bars are you at that people try to "chop you up." My suggestion would be to hang out somewhere normal - and yes I use the word normal, because I've been to a thousand bars and maybe have witnessed three, four fights ever! Find a local pub, a restaurant, somewhere that doesn't house the UFC wannabes.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Here are my examples:

I've been a firefighter and teacher. Both, according to US standards offer very good insurance. I've taught in many different states (5). All served me well. I got a wife. She worked for a Canadian company and therefore, we were both covered by Canada.

I thought I had it good until I had that.

My wife's hysterectomy, completely covered. Her prescriptions for hyperthyroidism, completely covered. Her migraine medicine, completely covered.

Right now she works for a US company. We spend over five hundred dollars a month on insurance, medicine, and occassional doctor/dentist/eyecare visits. And we're both active healthy middle-aged adults.

I do not see how anyone can espouse something without having tried the other. It's like saying an apple is your favorite fruit, but youve never tried a grape or mango or peach. I guess it all boils down to being scared of change, which is understandable, especially in a country that if change is wrong it is very slow to correct. But, that's a chance I would urge the opponents of "socialized" (I'm so fucking sick of that word being demonized!) to make.

Scared of change? Don't think that's it...we got change...don't get me started on change.

The problem I have is that the NHC bill or whatever they are calling it today, will only cover the rest of America. Congress and all those millions of government workers out there will still get there special health care plan that the now enjoy and we foot the bill for to the tune of 1.5 billion dollars a year.

So why should I settle for whatever an inept congress comes up with when they won't have to live under their creation?

 

[R. Richard]

Where the hell do you work? Thunderdome?

What bars are you at that people try to "chop you up." My suggestion would be to hang out somewhere normal - and yes I use the word normal, because I've been to a thousand bars and maybe have witnessed three, four fights ever! Find a local pub, a restaurant, somewhere that doesn't house the UFC wannabes.

I work where the people who owe the man money go. The worst places, IMNTHO, are low class redneck bars or the Mexican bars where I get some of the 'labor contractors.' The ass holes rent out fieldhands and pay them as little as they can get away with. They spend money like it's going out of style and then borrow from the man to meet payroll.

Three or four fights ever? Some of the places I have to go to have maybe three or four fights a NIGHT! Shit kickers fight each other in the parking lot. Mexicans use knives on each other in the parking lot. Low class ass holes.

I've never been to the Thunderdome bar, but if it's rougher than a redneck with a broken beer bottle or a Mexican with a knife, the man gonna have to come up with a lot more ducats before I enlist. Damn sure!

 

[trysail]

Obama Health-Care Plan Draws Deficit Worry, Disapproval in Poll
By Kristin Jensen

Aug. 5 (Bloomberg) --President Barack Obama’s effort to revamp the U.S. health-care system is drawing increasing disapproval from Americans worried about higher deficits, a Quinnipiac University poll shows.

The July 27-Aug. 3 poll found that 52 percent of American voters disapprove of the way Obama is handling the health-care issue and 39 percent approve. That compares with 46 percent who disapproved and 42 percent who approved in late June, the university’s polling institute said.

Almost three-quarters of the respondents said they don’t believe Obama’s promise that Congress can pass a health-care measure without adding to the budget deficit. And 57 percent say the legislation should be dropped if it adds “significantly” to the deficit, ...

Full article:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aM56e_kb2m9Y

 

[penandpaper]

Scared of change? Don't think that's it...we got change...don't get me started on change.

The problem I have is that the NHC bill or whatever they are calling it today, will only cover the rest of America. Congress and all those millions of government workers out there will still get there special health care plan that the now enjoy and we foot the bill for to the tune of 1.5 billion dollars a year.

So why should I settle for whatever an inept congress comes up with when they won't have to live under their creation?

Well said and I don't have an answer for you. It is unfair, I agree. My point was that if the system were similar to UK's or Canada's, don't knock it till you try it. I hope that clarifies my viewpoint. But, I do agree with you. Congress should not receive a special bonus package because of their status. Now teachers on the other hand...

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Well said and I don't have an answer for you. It is unfair, I agree. My point was that if the system were similar to UK's or Canada's, don't knock it till you try it. I hope that clarifies my viewpoint. But, I do agree with you. Congress should not receive a special bonus package because of their status. Now teachers on the other hand...

Oh, I've tried it...it was called the US Air Force. No choice, dependent coverage when they had time and long waits for dependents even with an appointment. Lot's of things not covered for dependents. It really sucked for the wife and kids. Might as well of had no coverage. Duh, they didn't have coverage.

 

[penandpaper]

Oh, I've tried it...it was called the US Air Force. No choice, dependent coverage when they had time and long waits for dependents even with an appointment. Lot's of things not covered for dependents. It really sucked for the wife and kids. Might as well of had no coverage. Duh, they didn't have coverage.

Again, the military's (the government's, teacher's, firefighter's, police officer's, Enron's, Microsoft's, etc.) is NOT Canada's. That is all I'm saying. Are you saying that because a person worked at a Popeye's fried chicken counter they know exactly what it's like to work at a all restaurants. One does not equate to the other - and the same is true for insurance.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Again, the military's (the government's, teacher's, firefighter's, police officer's, Enron's, Microsoft's, etc.) is NOT Canada's. That is all I'm saying. Are you saying that because a person worked at a Popeye's fried chicken counter they know exactly what it's like to work at a all restaurants. One does not equate to the other - and the same is true for insurance.

The problem is...I'm not talking insurance, it's getting in front of a doctor, the insurance aspect has nothing to do with it, it's the health care that I'm talking about.