Second hand smoke not as bad as we thought

[Shalcker]

Yeah but this is the exact opposite study to the OP article's point. I want to see the study that comes to the conclusion "Second hand smoke not as bad as we thought".

page 13 of your linked study claims strong evidence:

There is strong evidence that SHS exposure results in adverse health effects. There is good
evidence that implementation of the SEAA (2003) had resulted in reduced SHS exposure in
the workplace, and probably in other settings. Therefore, despite the failure of the
hospitalisation study to demonstrate unequivocal health benefits, it is likely that health
benefits due to the SEAA (2003) have occurred, and will continue to accumulate over time.

And I expect this new study the article is talking about to falsify this exact point.

Strong evidence it doesn't see (see "likely" rather then "certain")? As in "strong evidence" not actually existing in this particular study, just something held as belief of those doing it...

[Deleted]

Strong evidence it doesn't see (see "likely" rather then "certain")? As in "strong evidence" not actually existing in this particular study, just something held as belief of those doing it...

Yeah then give me the study you protect or are you just trying to make this little "likely" the reason of your OP/Article's point. I get the feeling this is indeed just a very bad blog that sees light where a good study shows it's intersubjectivity.

And debating this here with people who never have read a study will just end in "quote pls" -> "quote" -> "uhh see that adjective? it could mean something completely different!" You must realize that nothing is objective and a study is waiting/expecting for another study to falsify it.

That's why it's easy to talk about blogs but not to easy to actually talk about studies, especially when 99% of all people in the debate don't even read and understand the studies...

If you ever study this is one of the first things you learn. Also if someone wants to discuss studies you have to know those before. Same with all theories - nothing worse than people who first listen to comments and opinions before actually reading something.

[Mormolyce]

I'm more concerned about the stink and the litter it creates everywhere, personally.

[xero5141]

Mine and my girlfriend's asthma disagrees.

[Aori]

My collapsed lung episodes, asthma, allergy issues and a million other things have nothing to do with me being raised in a 4 pack a day smoking household. Never smoked in my life, the shit is vile, anytime someone is smoking near a public access point I almost flip shit every time. Seriously, I get a sense of controllable rage. Smell of smoke alone triggers headaches, nausea and my nasal passageways close up making it difficult to breath.

If you smoke, go fuck yourself, I don't care if you put it out before coming into a store, I can still smell you and it still gives me a headache.

[Shalcker]

Yeah then give me the study you protect or are you just trying to make this little "likely" the reason of your OP/Article's point.

You quoted reason for OP/article point yourself - "failure of the hospitalisation study to demonstrate unequivocal health benefits". That was the point article was making as well - that no notable health benefits are observed in many cases, or as article says this particular study shows that situation actually got somewhat worse in some areas after ban where improvement was expected.

[Deleted]

You quoted reason for OP/article point yourself - "failure of the hospitalisation study to demonstrate unequivocal health benefits". That was the point article was making as well.

Yeah you make zero sense. You just pick one sentence, not even the complete one and twist it as you want. Ignoring the full study. This is terrible. Stop please. But I guess my quote is the only thing you actually have even read from that study...

[Shalcker]

Yeah you make zero sense. You just pick one sentence, not even the complete one and twist it as you want. Ignoring the full study. This is terrible. Stop please. But I guess my quote is the only thing you actually have even read from that study...

If study provides counter-point to what your quoted from it show it.

You have chosen quote in search for something that affirms your views yourself and it actually supports point made in article... how much more willfully blind can you be really?

[Thoughtful Trolli]

This is a pretty good demonstration of what happens when people with good intentions lie.

Good intentions or bad intentions, it seems like the lying is what's causing bad shit. We've finally gotten to the point where we can't trust anything anymore, and now a well-tailored lie can lead the way to total destruction of Earth.

All I can say is people need to stop obsessing over climate change. Everyone knows its real, but nobody is gonna let it govern their life choices, or let people take away their quality of life "for the greater good," but bickering over it thinking it can be employed that way or worse being a blind gullible scientist who's trying to goad people to do better (that's worse because you don't see you're being used to govern people, you seriously see yourself as holistic) will lead to injuring people's trust even further.

It has to stop and the only way it can stop is if the proprietors of the issue just give up and stop talking about it, please.

[Deleted]

If study provides counter-point to what your quoted from it show it.

You have chosen quote in search for something that affirms your views yourself and it actually supports point made in article... how much more willfully blind can you be really?

No you don't get the study. Do I have to completely quote it? Here the conclusion part about that single chapter I quoted above:

Conclusion
In conclusion, despite some limitations and gaps in the evidence, the evaluation of the recent
smokefree legislation in New Zealand adds further evidence to the positive experiences and
outcomes from other jurisdictions such as Ireland, Norway, Scotland, New York, California
that have recently introduced similar legislation.

The result from the study overall found on p103

There is strong evidence from other study types that SHS exposure has adverse health effects.
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006) Evidence presented elsewhere in this
report (section 7) strongly suggests that reductions in SHS exposure in the workplace, and
probably in other settings, occurred after implementation of the SEAA (2003). Other similar
studies from Italy and the US have shown a significant impact on AMI admissions of
smokefree legislation. (Barone-Adesi et al., 2006; Bartecchi et al., 2006; Sargent et al., 2004)
It is therefore reasonable to assume that health benefits due to the SEAA (2003) have already
occurred within the New Zealand population, and that these benefits will continue to
accumulate over time

So whatever dude, I am done with you.

[BannedForViews]

Pretty sure my asthma disagrees with this single study....

Your asthma disagrees that you'll get cancer from second hand smoke?

[Shalcker]

No you don't get the study. Do I have to completely quote it? Here the conclusion part about that single chapter I quoted above:



The result from the study overall found on p103



So whatever dude, I am done with you.

So, this particular study found no benefit, exactly as article claimed, and so assumed those benefits already happened prior to study. Thank you, so this study is adequately represented in article as far as their data is concerned, their beliefs were not the point.

Those other studies they mention also seem to be touched in article.

[Iamanerd]

You have to be pretty fucking dumb to think that second hand smoke doesn't cause any issues whatsoever. Whether that's heart issues or lung issues or cancer. Seriously, live with a smoker (in my case, it was my mom, luckily she quit) and for years I had asthma issues while running etc. I hated the smell and still do, shit when I deal with clients who smoke I can smell it a mile away. I mean all the research that has been put into smoking and its affects and here we are trying to say second hand smoke doesn't affect others? Get the fuck out of here, seriously you must be quite fucking clueless. Also to the guy comparing smoking to someone with BO or a homeless person, are you fucking clueless as well? Their BO doesn't leave a smell that stays for ages, and it doesn't you know cause headaches/breathing issues over a period of time along with a bunch of other health issues.

I don;t care if people smoke, just do it away from the rest of us who don't want to breath that shit it along with having the smell on our clothes, if you smoke around me I'll tell you to fuck off.

[Kithelle]

Even if it's not as bad as we though I'd rather have keep the ban in place.

I agree...still don't like that anti-smokers lied to push their agenda.

[Alfakennyone]

If everyone on the planet went vegetarian right this moment, we would be already be flooded with natural disasters, and possibly even dealing with the ragnarök before long!

Some of the most common vegetables out there cost much more to produce, in terms of resource per calorie, than meat. Eggplant, celery, and cucumbers look particularly bad when compared to pork or chicken. Lettuce alone causes three times more greenhouse gas emission than bacon.

The irony is that growing vegetables releases more harmful gas into the atmosphere than smoking cigarettes, really.

Okay and I was talking about consumption, that affects only the consumer.

The smell of alcohol makes me feel sick as well, don't see me screaming for it to be banned in public places. What about cars? Let's ban them!! Just a case of people gonna bitch coz they can bitch.l

The smell won't get you drunk or affect you negatively. So, completely different.

[Sunaka]

A good tobacco is a lovely smell and people who wander into it should show more appreciation instead of acting like a little snowflake.

Or, yanno, some of us have their throats close up around nearly any smoke whatsoever. I don't even have asthma and cigarette smoke makes it nearly impossible to breathe. So ya, screw this noise.

I'm fine with smelling unburnt tobacco. I actually like the smell. I'm not a fan of any smell relating to pot. But I can at least mostly breathe around potheads. I have choking fits being anywhere near tobacco smoke, even outside.

- - - Updated - - -

unless you perhaps still buy into 60 year old "research" from tobacco companies claiming smoking isn't dangerous in the first place.

Or flat-out beneficial, as some of the ads used to tout.

[niil945]

...if you smoke around me I'll tell you to fuck off.

And what, exactly, are you going to do when someone tells you the exact same thing while laughing at you for raging? Call the cops? Assault them? Oh that's right, nothing.

[Iamanerd]

And what, exactly, are you going to do when someone tells you the exact same thing while laughing at you for raging? Call the cops? Assault them? Oh that's right, nothing.

Depends on the location, if you're at where I work? Well security will take care of it, and if you work there have fun getting fired. Again Depends on the location, if it's outside in a dedicated smoking area I won't be there to begin with. But hey continue to make up some delusional scenario in your head there bud, hope those ciggs are treating you well. Just because I'd tell someone to fuck off doesn't mean I'm going to assault them, on top of that I make sure not to hang around areas where they can smoke. But hey continue to laugh at people that you are adversely affecting their health because you need your fix.

[Zeta333]

it still should be banned from public areas. that shit's vile.

smoking should be banned outright. Shit kills far to many people.

[6k MMR Lolicon]

Okay and I was talking about consumption, that affects only the consumer.

How do you consume something that has not been produced? Your argument was that vegetarianism does not affect the others around you, but that was wrong. The greenhouse gas emissions that result from the cultivation of lettuce are a veritable blight on the ozone layer, which has all sorts of consequences on an individual level. Sunscreen, anyone?

Or flat-out beneficial, as some of the ads used to tout.

There are small, but notable benefits to smoking - protection from osteoporosis and a lowered risk of acquiring Parkinson's disease being chief among them. Nicotine is also an appetite suppressant, which helps stave off obesity.