Smoking - Page 18

This thread has gotten long. Would you be so kind as to help me find it?

I don't think I'd have enough patience to look through 52 pages for it.

Secondhand smoke is classified as a "known human carcinogen" (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.

Secondhand smoke is classified as a "known human carcinogen" (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.

Campfires and various cooking techniques contain many of the same chemicals?

Where was it proven to cause death?

Campfires and various cooking techniques contain many of the same chemicals?

Oh no it does not, sir.

Other kinds of smoke do not include: cadmium, tar, toluene, arsenic, acetone, phenol, ammonia, etc. And most importantly, it does not have nicotine.

Is nicotine dangerous in the quantities of second-hand tobacco smoke?

smoke <== make me more stupid (I'm already stupid, can't be even more stupid than this.. seriously lol..)

Is nicotine dangerous in the quantities of second-hand tobacco smoke?

Well I'm sure it must be, unless the American Cancer Society, Center for Disease Control, and WHO are all wrong.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says that, "There is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure. Even brief exposure can be dangerous."

And...

Secondhand smoke exposure causes heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults.

Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their heart disease risk by 25–30% and their lung cancer risk by 20–30%.

Breathing secondhand smoke has immediate harmful effects on the cardiovascular system that can increase the risk of heart attack. People who already have heart disease are at especially high risk.

So no actual deaths?

So no actual deaths?

This is what the American Cancer Society says...

Secondhand smoke can be harmful in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

• an estimated 35,000 deaths from heart disease in people who live with smokers but are not current smokers
• about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in nonsmoking adults

Estimated, but not actual.

So no actual deaths?

yeah but thats th same for many things

no-one dies from smoking, they die from its effects (cancer etc...) in the same way that no-one dies from AIDS, they die from other things because they have no immune system

and secondhand smoke is pretty bad, i have friends who work in pubs/clubs and they get really wheezy and sick and they dont smoke

i don't get weezy and i am 24 hours in clubs and pubs for god sake stop makin a big deal for smokers you are shutting them of you people so care about smoker's feelings for god sake if you are sooooo damaged of second hand smoke then just step away from them if you were at place and someone came to you and lit a cigarette then you can tell me to put it off but if he was standin and smokin and you headed to him then you should shut the ..... up and leave!!!!!

not a bad suggestion

yea it is

Im a smoker myself. wakeke

In my point of view smokers have to consider the non-smokers. Indeed second hand smoke is harmful. I usually throw my newly lighted cigarretes when is see kids in the area.

I hate second hand smoke as well its irritating my nose.

how's that if u r a smoker u can be a second hand smoker ???? :S

Well I'm sure it must be, unless the American Cancer Society, Center for Disease Control, and WHO are all wrong.

I'm not sure about the ACS, but I've heard some questionable stuff on the CDC, and considering that I've seen evidence that WHO rewrote the African definition of the disease AIDS so that it doesn't require any of the three key components that make up the American definition, merely some of the same symptoms, I'd be a bit suspicious on that as well.

[For those who care, the three components are: Presence of Human Immunodeficiency Virus {HIV}, T-cell count below a specific mark {Sorry, can't recall what it is at the moment}, and presence of an 'opportunistic' disease.]

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says that, "There is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure. Even brief exposure can be dangerous."

Due to the fact that it's smoke, laden with CO, CO2, etc...sure. But given the earlier argument about the substances that remain inside the discarded butt, how much of the toxins are even being turned into smoke in the first place? And I refer you again to the issue of hormesis on the 'no-threshold' argument.

Secondhand smoke exposure causes heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults.

Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their heart disease risk by 25–30% and their lung cancer risk by 20–30%.

Were all other risk factors taken into consideration when dealing with these values? Is there no other way in which the rates could have increased?

Breathing secondhand smoke has immediate harmful effects on the cardiovascular system that can increase the risk of heart attack. People who already have heart disease are at especially high risk.

Immediate effects? Such as, oh, CO/CO2 bonding to the Hemoglobin in the blood and locking O2 out? Or are you specifically positing that the carcinogins have an immediate effect on the bloodstream?

And on the issue of the substances within cigarettes being carcinogenic, are the researchers dealing with it considering them as mutagenic substances, or are they dealing with them as substances able to spawn aneuploidy?

This is what the American Cancer Society says...

Secondhand smoke can be harmful in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

* an estimated 35,000 deaths from heart disease in people who live with smokers but are not current smokers
* about 3,400 lung cancer deaths in nonsmoking adults

Italicized for emphasis...
From what I've seen, this means that an eighty-year old man who dies of a heart attack while shoveling snow could, if his son or daughter occasionally lights one up, be classified in this category.

And again, can you prove that the lung cancer deaths were the responsibility of the secondhand smoke, with no other complicating factors?

But, i heard on the news that a county of England avoided the new smoking ban!
they did it by not appearing to the smoking ban document signing (where all of the county councils sign the law document or summit) so they can still smoke in work places and pubs/clubs for 10 more days. I feel sorry for the people who live there that can't stand smoke.

In my point of view smokers have to consider the non-smokers. Indeed second hand smoke is harmful. I usually throw my newly lighted cigarretes when is see kids in the area.

that's a good thing to do... though i'd just move somewhere else...

Due to the fact that it's smoke, laden with CO, CO2, etc...sure. But given the earlier argument about the substances that remain inside the discarded butt, how much of the toxins are even being turned into smoke in the first place? And I refer you again to the issue of hormesis on the 'no-threshold' argument.

Were all other risk factors taken into consideration when dealing with these values? Is there no other way in which the rates could have increased?

Immediate effects? Such as, oh, CO/CO2 bonding to the Hemoglobin in the blood and locking O2 out? Or are you specifically positing that the carcinogins have an immediate effect on the bloodstream?

And on the issue of the substances within cigarettes being carcinogenic, are the researchers dealing with it considering them as mutagenic substances, or are they dealing with them as substances able to spawn aneuploidy?

Italicized for emphasis...
From what I've seen, this means that an eighty-year old man who dies of a heart attack while shoveling snow could, if his son or daughter occasionally lights one up, be classified in this category.

And again, can you prove that the lung cancer deaths were the responsibility of the secondhand smoke, with no other complicating factors?

I don't know the answer to these questions. I was just quoting things that I read from the CDC, WHO, and ACS.

Well a cigarette is a complex thing. Made of many different chemicals included within the tabacoo and others which are added. Also the paper should be taken into consideration, because that has a special chemical on it i believe. I am a non-smoker, so i don't really know.
But i have seen enough cigarette ends to last a life time, especially at major traffic lights. I've seen piles of them just lying on the side of the roads. Apart from killing you eventually from the adverse effects of smoking, huge litter problems are caused, which is just plain wrong. People smoke quite close to bins, but still can't be bothered to walk 4 steps to a bin to put the cigarette end in it, disgrasfull.

how's that if u r a smoker u can be a second hand smoker ???? :S

smokers get 1st and second hand smoking.

yup...

yeah but thats th same for many things

no-one dies from smoking, they die from its effects (cancer etc...) in the same way that no-one dies from AIDS, they die from other things because they have no immune system

and secondhand smoke is pretty bad, i have friends who work in pubs/clubs and they get really wheezy and sick and they dont smoke

Why do they continue to work in pubs/clubs?

smokers get 1st and second hand smoking.

so wut u r tellin me is when i used to smoke years ago i was both smoker and secondhand smoker??!!! and i quited that still makes me a second hand smoker and that means that people who smoke gets more damaged than people who are secondhand smokers cause they know how it feels to be one of both teams hahaha

so wut u r tellin me is when i used to smoke years ago i was both smoker and secondhand smoker??!!! and i quited that still makes me a second hand smoker and that means that people who smoke gets more damaged than people who are secondhand smokers cause they know how it feels to be one of both teams hahaha

Ok seriously, punctuation?

Of course every smoker is also a secondhand smoker.

Secondhand smoke comes from sidestream smoke (which is smoke that comes from the end of a lighted cigarette, pipe, or cigar) and mainstream smoke (smoke that is exhaled by the smoker). And of course, every smoker inhales their own smoke involuntarily; which is defined as secondhand smoking.

nd to anyone who is planning to quit smoking don't use nicotine's patches or gums they are so full of crap if u wanna quit just determine ur mind like me and you will do fine

i don't inhale my own smoke cause i blow away from me i don't want to smell like cigarettes

i don't inhale my own smoke cause i blow away from me i don't want to smell like cigarettes

Well sorry to burst your bubble, but everyone who smokes smell like cigarettes. Unless they take a shower and put on some clean clothes after they light up.