-
My[Confined]Space
Better Than Bread
Movies Coming Soon- Star Trek Books
- “Star Trek: Voyager: 16 Seven Of Nine” Review by Deepspacespines.com
- Nana Visitor Joins Us to Talk About Her New Book – Star Trek: Open a Channel: A Woman’s Trek!
- Out Today: “Star Trek #26”
- Star Trek Strange New Worlds Asylum Book Review
- John Jackson Miller Books Ranked!
- “Star Trek: The Next Generation: Headlong Flight” Review by Lessaccurategrandmother.blogspot.com
- Jumping into Adventure with “Into the Void”
- Happy 2024 Birthday to Jim Johnson!
- “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds: Asylum” Review by Trek.fm
- Beadle & Grimm Interview With StarTrekBookClub.com
- Movie Related Products
- “Deadpool & Wolverine” Review
- Kevin Smith Is Getting Closer and Closer to Dogma 2
- “The Garfield Movie” Review
- Disney Said to be Considering a Surprising Replacement for Bob Iger: EA CEO Andrew Wilson – IGN
- Amazon Is Shutting Down Freevee, Its Ad-Supported Video Streamer
- “Breathe” Review
- “Transformers One” Review
- Captain America: Brave New World | Official Trailer
- Marvel Studios’ Thunderbolts* | D23 Brazil Special Look | In Theaters May 2, 2025
- Mattel apologizes after mistakenly printing porn site on ‘Wicked’ movie dolls packaging | CNN Business
- Music Video DB
Sadly it is only the gullible that would believe such adverts. I’ll sit in a sealed car with a smoker for 30 minutes, the time it takes apparantly to bring on a heart attack in a fit non smoker. If a representative from the DoH who commissioned these adds agrees to sit in a car without cigarette smoke but with the equivalent amount of exhaust fumes. Any takers. If you want to know the truth go to www.freedom2choose.co.uk
Your comment makes little sense. You imply that the commision says that sitting in a sealed car with exhaust fumes is not as bad as cigarette smoke. Who said that because I doubt anyone did. Also the ad doesnt say anything about the sealed car thing. Its just using imagery to get its message across. Notice how the smokers hands look like guns? Imagery
Kero,
On the contrary, The anti movement has since the 50’s claimed that traffic pollution is not a major cause but that smoke is.
The add “uses imagery” to get a completely false message across. According to science passive smoke is less harmful than milk, olive oil and coffee and no-one has ever been shown to die from it. Why would the smoker in those ads who’s dosage is far greater over much longer periods of time be healthy while people around him died?
They are just silly ads that are telling lies in the run up to the smoking ban to ‘make it go smoothly’ by attempting to make people believe that a few wisps of smoke is as harmful as sarin gas.
I remember that big “second hand smoke is less harmful than milk, olive oil, and coffee” study they did. Wasn’t that sponsored by newport.
It is actually theorized that coffee may contain an anti-oxidant and may be healthy in moderation. Olive oil is also known to have some beneficial properties. Milk is very arguable, I for one think you shouldn’t drink much of it once your in your teens. I think you may be a little off on that statement.
It’s not really been proven one way or another whether or not second hand smoke can kill you. It is however logical that taking the smoke and associated chemicals into your lungs is not healthy. Your better off without it.
I live in a place where public smoking has been banned for 2 years now. I am against the ban in the way it violates rights but I must say it has been wonderful for me as a non smoker and profitable for restaraunts that no longer have to wait for lingering smokers.
I say this as a person whose family made money raising barley: Smoking is a nasty habit and the world will be a better place when it’s gone.
There are now over 150 studies into passive smoke, none of which show a risk ratio that is greater than the risks shown by studies into coffee, milk and olive oil. No, none of the above was sponsored by Newport; they were in the main sponsored by the anti-smoking movement and Pharmaceutical companies. Studies have shown that as little as 3 cups of coffee a day are bad for health so I’m not ‘off in that statement’.
The fact that a substance contains health benefits as well doesn’t alter the risk they pose for detrimental effects.
No, nothing of this nature can ever be ‘proved’ but I would say that 150 studies that show it’s less harmful than those things coupled with the fact that the chemicals in passive smoke are thousands of times below published safe levels in even the smokiest pub tells us a lot.
Banning smoking in pubs to remove the toxins might seem ‘logical’ to you, but it doesn’t work because it does nothing about the other 400 carcinogens floating about and all of the toxins in smoke are produced in greater quantities from other sources. Once the toxins are no longer visible ventilation will not be repaired, replaced or even turned on as was the case in the airline industry. The 99% of those toxins that were removed before the ban will be left sitting in the air. You are however welcome to keep believing that it is wonderful for your own dining preferences; although you may be interested however in the Oak Ridge Laboratory research that showed there to be no difference in air quality between a smoking pub and a non-smoking restaurant.
Passive smoking is a health hazard, and the scientific community has been doccumenting this since the early 80s, with more evidence garnered year by year for a variety of disorders and diseases. Attempts to describe passive smoking as similar risk to common activities has been a common tactic used by the tobacco industry to try to fight back against what they consider one of the biggest threats to their bottom line. Smoking bans are very effective in decreasing smoking. They have bought off a handful of labs and scientists (just human, with all the failings involved) to put out claims that smoking isn’t so bad. An editor of the Lancet (one of the most prestigious medical journals out there was on the payrole as a “consultant”). The only reason that I can think of for ordinary (non tobacco industry) people repeating the claims that it is harmless is that they can’t face up to the fact that their actions could be harming the ones they love. That and they can’t get their next hit of sweet, sweet nicotine without stepping outside.
This is awesome! Non-smokers ALWAYS die first! I’m serious! Smoking makes you IMMORTAL!!!
The only post here that matters is the one right above mine. It is signed for TRUTHINESS.
Whatever the truth, I prefer staying away from cigarette smokers. Smells nasty. Weed smells ok tho 🙂