Anti Cigarette site/Pro Smoking Arguments

[General Zod]

Piss is actually sterile, so a better analogy would be allowing people to crap in it.

It's only sterile for about an hour or so. Unlike crapping in it, it also has the ability to diffuse throughout the pool, much like cigarette smoke can drift throughout the restaurant.

Either tobacco should be illegal, or all drugs should be legal (but smoking in the presence of others without their explicit consent should not be legal). Either the government has no say over the toxins one puts in one's own body, or the government must protect all its poor mindless drones from all possible harm they might try to inflict upon themselves. Either way, make it a fair standard. -_-

The fact that some drugs are obviously much more harmful than others and have varying degrees of danger makes this a retarded black and white fallacy.

[Lisa]

Re #5 smoking in the establishment

'Waitress who never smoked' dies of lung cancer

This is old news from over a year ago, but I have to wonder how much damage I did to my lungs working in a bowling alley from 16-18 where the smoke would get down to my knees before the boss would let me turn on the "scrubbers" (he was a penny pincher).

CTV.ca News Staff

Heather Crowe, the long-time waitress who contracted lung cancer after decades of exposure to second-hand smoke, has died. She was 61.

Crowe, who never smoked, became widely known as the face of the nation's anti-smoking movement after sharing her personal story in television ads for Health Canada.

In the advertisements, she describes how she contracted cancer from second-hand smoke at the restaurant where she worked for some 40 years.

Denis Choiniere, director of regulations and compliance for Health Canada said Crowe helped to put a face on the grim numbers.

""She had a strong and influential impact for our second-hand smoke campaigns," Choiniere said, appearing on CTV Newsnet.

"She was the figure, the face for the statistics that we've been using -- about 1,000 people every year dying from exposure to second-hand smoke in Canada," he said.

Crowe was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer in 2002, and she fought the disease with chemotherapy, radiation and steroids before it went into remission.

But she learned last August that she was losing her battle with the disease.

Crowe was the first person to win a claim filed with the Ontario Workers Safety and Insurance Board for full compensation for lung cancer caused by occupational exposure to cigarette smoke.

"If I'd lost my hand at work they'd have paid me,'' she once said of the claim. "So if they're going to take chunks out of my lungs, why wouldn't I be entitled (to benefits)?''

Crowe's death comes about one week before the Smoke Free Ontario Act goes into effect.

The provincial legislature paves the way for a blanket ban on smoking in all indoor public and workplaces to start in June 2006.

By June 2008, the legislation demands retailers remove their so-called cigarette 'power walls' and replace them with a new display that puts them out of sight from minors.

Jim Watson, the Liberal MPP for Ottawa-West-Nepean and a frequent customer at the restaurant where Crowe worked, described her as the "matriarch of the anti-smoking movement.''

Crowe told him she wanted to live to see the anti-smoking legislation come into effect, Watson told The Canadian Press on Sunday.

"It's very sad that she's not going to be here to see it, but she should be very happy that because of her influence, Ontarians will be able to breathe easier as a result of the legislation on May 31," said Watson

[Shrykull]

Thier usual response in the same for the customers, which is "If you don't like it, don't work here."

[Shrykull]

From Twenty Five years of progress: A report of the Surgeon General (1989)
it compared an estimated annual per capita cigarette consumption and lung cancer death rates for both sexes in the US. One can see a clear correlative case in that lung cancer rates started climbing 30 decades after smoking became popular in the US. However, because cancer takes so long to start, in the 50s, the death rate from lung cancer was approximately 10 per 100,000(I'm reading off the graph here), hardly a dramatic rise from previous decades.

Is this from C Everett Koop? He stopped being the surgeon general in 89, so I'm not sure if it was him or his successor?

Anyway, here's some other arguments they come up with, the first one I've already mentioned

1. We pay way more in cigarette taxes than you pay for our healthcare, so leave us alone!

2. Banning cigarettes wouldn't stop it, because it didn't stop alcohol in the 20's, it would prohibition all over again! I'd still be able to get them, Hell, you can get them in prison!

3. Jeanne Clement was the world's longest living person, and yet she smoke til she was 100, and lived to be 120!

4. Einstein smoked a pipe, so are all smokers stupid?

[FedRebel]

Just my two cents (USD, so it's probably worthless)

Smoking though unhealthy as it is, nothing would be gained by making it illegal

Just look a the spectacular "success" of the war on drugs

So called 'narcotics' (some substances have been misclassified to make the word an umbrella term) were made illegal at the beginning of the 20th century, yet they still exist and the government is vainly spending billions of dollars in order to try to squash the thriving black market

If that's not enough, in the 20's alcohol was made illegal by a constitutional amendment, when the 30's came around that amendment was overridden by a new one which can be surmised as "whoops! Our bad."

The prohibition lead to an increase in organized crime and the establishment of a thriving black market. Not to mention that alot of people didn't obey the law

If you completely abolish smoking the same will happen, the tobacco vice will remain with us until it gradually works its way out of our culture

[General Zod]

Just my two cents (USD, so it's probably worthless)

Smoking though unhealthy as it is, nothing would be gained by making it illegal

Banning it in public enclosed buildings is sufficient. Similar restrictions seem to be enjoying a considerable amount of success in Europe. You can still have your smokes, just not around the general public.

[Lisa]

Thier usual response in the same for the customers, which is "If you don't like it, don't work here."

That goes against labour laws for a safe workplace.

[Shrykull]

Just my two cents (USD, so it's probably worthless)

Smoking though unhealthy as it is, nothing would be gained by making it illegal

Banning it in public enclosed buildings is sufficient. Similar restrictions seem to be enjoying a considerable amount of success in Europe. You can still have your smokes, just not around the general public.

yes, and you wouldn't see someone smoking a cigarette in a place they can easily be seen, like in front of a strip-mall or restaurant, at least I've never seen it.

Not to mention that while some people will definitely break the law to get cigarettes, some won't, because they don't want to be criminals. We can't totally eliminate it, just like drugs, I'm not sure many things all at can be 100% eliminated, only minimized.

[Shrykull]

I meant smoking pot in front of buildings and such

[Astarial]

Not to mention that while some people will definitely break the law to get cigarettes, some won't, because they don't want to be criminals. We can't totally eliminate it, just like drugs, I'm not sure many things all at can be 100% eliminated, only minimized.

But the thrill of breaking the law will attract more people than having it legal does. People who don't smoke when they're under 18 (in the US, that is) are drastically less likely to start smoking at all. It being illegal is an added thrill to something that has very little.

(I'm looking for the study I read on people who start smoking under/over 18, will post when I find it.)

[Darth Wong]

It's one thing to argue that the cost and practical problems of outlawing cigarettes would be an enormous boondoggle that causes more problems than it solves. But you need to provide some evidence that it would actually increase smoking rates, other than simply saying so.

[Astarial]

It's one thing to argue that the cost and practical problems of outlawing cigarettes would be an enormous boondoggle that causes more problems than it solves. But you need to provide some evidence that it would actually increase smoking rates, other than simply saying so.

Was that to me?

I wasn't trying to say that it would increase smoking rates, and I don't have any kind of evidence for that claim (as smoking hasn't been made illegal anywhere that I know of, yet). But turning it illegal makes the act more attractive, in the same way that most of the teenagers who smoke pot (whom I know) do it both because they like the high and because they like the thrill of being "rebels."

[PainRack]

Is this from C Everett Koop? He stopped being the surgeon general in 89, so I'm not sure if it was him or his successor?

I don't know about the ultimate source, but I referred to it out of Geoffrey M Cooper, The cancer book: A guide to understanding the causes, prevention and treatment of cancer..
And the source in the references was as stated.

1. We pay way more in cigarette taxes than you pay for our healthcare, so leave us alone!

No you don't. Healthcare isn't measured in money alone. Its measured in time, oppurtinity costs as well as resources that could have been used to fight other diseases, now expended on smoking related diseases. Furthermore, the goal of healthcare ISN"T to treat you. Its to get a healthy population.

Secondly, you're costing the populace more than just money in healthcare. You're costing society lost productivity, as people die from cancers and absenteeisms rates due to diseases like pneumonia, increased susceptibility to colds and etc rack up.

3. Jeanne Clement was the world's longest living person, and yet she smoke til she was 100, and lived to be 120!

And little jimmy there died when he was 10 seconds old and he never even took a breath of cigarette smoke.

Reduced life expectancy is counted from the increased rates of cancer and other diseases such as arterio-sclerosis. If you bump the odds, congrats for winning the lottery. Me personally, I rather play the actual lottery. The pay-off for winning those odds are much better.

[Shrykull]

1. We pay way more in cigarette taxes than you pay for our healthcare, so leave us alone!

No you don't. Healthcare isn't measured in money alone. Its measured in time, oppurtinity costs as well as resources that could have been used to fight other diseases, now expended on smoking related diseases. Furthermore, the goal of healthcare ISN"T to treat you. Its to get a healthy population.

I'm really not sure even it's true if they do, I've been looking some people have given me some links but not anything that directly compares cigarette tax revenue and healthcare costs for smokers in the US. I think my calc's were wrong too.

[chitoryu12]

Jeanne Clement was the world's longest living person, and yet she smoke til she was 100, and lived to be 120!

It was also said that the "attention kept her going". Out of fear for her health, on her 122nd birthday they prevented her from seeing visitors. This, they said, "allowed" her to die. And it was true, because just five months after her birthday she died.

Also, she actually smoked untill she was 117, a bit of a difference, eh?

[Darth Wong]

3. Jeanne Clement was the world's longest living person, and yet she smoke til she was 100, and lived to be 120!

And First Lt. Brady Van Engelen survived a gunshot wound to the head in Iraq, one year after being profiled in Time magazine. I guess that means the "medical establishment" is overstating the health risks of being shot in the head! Hooray for anecdotal evidence in the face of medical science!

[Darth Servo]

1. We pay way more in cigarette taxes than you pay for our healthcare, so leave us alone!

These people can go fuck themselves. The fact that I have to pay ANYTHING to support their medical costs means they're assholes.

4. Einstein smoked a pipe, so are all smokers stupid?

Its a testament to their stupidity that they don't realize a) we didn't know just how fucking stupid smoking was in Einstein's day and b) a person can be brilliant in area 'x' but a moron in area 'y' (example: people with a physics degree who still subscribe to ID bullshit).

[Shrykull]

3. Jeanne Clement was the world's longest living person, and yet she smoke til she was 100, and lived to be 120!

And First Lt. Brady Van Engelen survived a gunshot wound to the head in Iraq, one year after being profiled in Time magazine. I guess that means the "medical establishment" is overstating the health risks of being shot in the head! Hooray for anecdotal evidence in the face of medical science!

Oh, now, that's not REMOTELY comparable! Jeanne survived a lifetime of first hand cigarette smoking, whereas Van Engelen was only shot once in the head! If he was shot repeatedly in the head you'd have yourself a case, but not with that outlandish example.

Besides, the only part of your brain you REALLY need is your Medulla oblongata to control respiration, heart rate, and blood pressure and other vital processes, losing a large portion of your cerebrum may make you deaf, blind, and perhaps unable to feel, smell or taste, but won't kill you (except perhaps by bleeding) But maybe it will change you and you will quit smoking.

[Shrykull]

Another issue is do you think Pregnant women should be allowed to smoke and drink?

Let's assume that she doesn't want to abort the baby (which is another issue) should she have the right to smoke, drink, and possibly maim the child for life after it's born, because it's "her" body? Definitely not.

[Darth Servo]

Another issue is do you think Pregnant women should be allowed to smoke and drink?

Do people also discuss if parents should be allowed to bash their new-born baby's head in with a baseball bat?

[General Zod]

Another issue is do you think Pregnant women should be allowed to smoke and drink?

Let's assume that she doesn't want to abort the baby (which is another issue) should she have the right to smoke, drink, and possibly maim the child for life after it's born, because it's "her" body? Definitely not.

If you're honestly so stupid you have to seriously ask this question then you should automatically forefit your rights to reproduction.

[Cairber]

I was actually surprised to learn that there are a lot of OBs in this country that tell pregnant women who smoke not to quit because the stress of that could affect the pregnancy...The March of Dimes addresses this on their website and I believe the college of OBGYNS also took up the issue and decided that telling women not to quit was a bad idea. It doesn't seem like the actual doctors are listening though, at least not according to the women I have spoken to about this.

[Darth Wong]

I was actually surprised to learn that there are a lot of OBs in this country that tell pregnant women who smoke not to quit because the stress of that could affect the pregnancy...The March of Dimes addresses this on their website and I believe the college of OBGYNS also took up the issue and decided that telling women not to quit was a bad idea. It doesn't seem like the actual doctors are listening though, at least not according to the women I have spoken to about this.

I wonder if there is any demographic or geographical pattern to the doctors who are saying this.

[Zac Naloen]

I was actually surprised to learn that there are a lot of OBs in this country that tell pregnant women who smoke not to quit because the stress of that could affect the pregnancy...The March of Dimes addresses this on their website and I believe the college of OBGYNS also took up the issue and decided that telling women not to quit was a bad idea. It doesn't seem like the actual doctors are listening though, at least not according to the women I have spoken to about this.

My sister was told that 4 cigarettes a day won't cause any harm to the baby, as she was finding it extremely difficult to quit. I don't know if this is true, and the baby was born slightly small and premature (6lb iirc), but that could just be due to it being 4 weeks premature.

[General Zod]

My sister was told that 4 cigarettes a day won't cause any harm to the baby, as she was finding it extremely difficult to quit. I don't know if this is true, and the baby was born slightly small and premature (6lb iirc), but that could just be due to it being 4 weeks premature.

The problem with doing any sort of drugs while pregnant is that there is a considerable risk of having the baby being born addicted to the drug in question. I wouldn't exactly call that harmless.