Smoking. Personnel Choice or Not?
-
I think smokers have the right to smoke, but can only do so if the do not harm the non-smokers in any way. On another note, cigarettes earn $ for gahmen in taxes isnt it so?
-
the same goes for drinking and many other things.Originally posted by mrbluex:Why do people smoke? It is not free and neither is it cheap. Is it something that benefits our health? Or the opportunity cost of giving up and looking uncool is greater than having good health? Are they just addicted to it, just like drug users...?
there is no way to measure. -
Then neither should we bother about you when you get lung cancer...let you rot in hell then...Originally posted by digicharat:i love to cause people tio lung cancer.
what? buey song ah? i dun care!
tell the government to separate the country to west and east.
one side for each. dun cross over lor....
why should i walk away from non smoker when i smoke?
i dun care!
-
i dont see what's the big deal in smoking. well sure, its unhealthy etc, but many find it a form of de-stressing themselves. *have sex.smoke.booze.repeat.*
everyone dies sooner or later, its just that smokers make a choice of dying earlier than their non-smoking counterparts.but declaring certain public places smoke free is a good way to handle the problem. i just find that placing the ban on coffeeshops was way too severe. senior citizens who smokes can't drink kopi at the coffeeshops, a pasttime which im sure they have gotten used to.
just my 2cents. -
I absolutely disagree with the "no big deal" part. Of course you have the right to your actions, I have friends who smokes and dont think of them any differently. But the amusing thought is, why do people smoke when it's unhealthy?Originally posted by Rufio:i dont see what's the big deal in smoking. well sure, its unhealthy etc, but many find it a form of de-stressing themselves. *have sex.smoke.booze.repeat.*
everyone dies sooner or later, its just that smokers make a choice of dying earlier than their non-smoking counterparts.but declaring certain public places smoke free is a good way to handle the problem. i just find that placing the ban on coffeeshops was way too severe. senior citizens who smokes can't drink kopi at the coffeeshops, a pasttime which im sure they have gotten used to.
just my 2cents.
A way to relax? Doesn't really answer the question. Smoke to relax, how absurd. If so, everyone would be smoking happily away. It is a big deal (though no action on my part) because nobody with a rational mind would be smoking knowing they are harming their health and others. If smoking is a form of "relaxing" to smokers, then, may I suggest that they turn to other ways of relaxing instead of harming themselves and others?
MrBlueX
http://mrbluex.blogspot.com -
not everybody is so rational.Originally posted by mrbluex:I absolutely disagree with the "no big deal" part. Of course you have the right to your actions, I have friends who smokes and dont think of them any differently. But the amusing thought is, why do people smoke when it's unhealthy?
A way to relax? Doesn't really answer the question. Smoke to relax, how absurd. If so, everyone would be smoking happily away. It is a big deal (though no action on my part) because nobody with a rational mind would be smoking knowing they are harming their health and others. If smoking is a form of "relaxing" to smokers, then, may I suggest that they turn to other ways of relaxing instead of harming themselves and others?
MrBlueX
http://mrbluex.blogspot.com
speeding is dangerous but millions of people exceed speed limit everyday.
how about jaywalking?
how about junk food?
how about motorcars?
the list goes on and on.
have you ever smoked? how do you know smoking is not relaxing. even if it is not everybody will choose to do it. the fact that not everybody does it doesnt it is not so.
is spa relaxing? does everyone goes spa? -
People are entitled to make their own choices.Its just that smoking is one of their choices. You may find relaxation through smoking is absurd, but like dragg said, have you ever tried smoking? Maybe you tried before and didn't find it relaxing, but every human beings are different.Originally posted by mrbluex:I absolutely disagree with the "no big deal" part. Of course you have the right to your actions, I have friends who smokes and dont think of them any differently. But the amusing thought is, why do people smoke when it's unhealthy?
A way to relax? Doesn't really answer the question. Smoke to relax, how absurd. If so, everyone would be smoking happily away. It is a big deal (though no action on my part) because nobody with a rational mind would be smoking knowing they are harming their health and others. If smoking is a form of "relaxing" to smokers, then, may I suggest that they turn to other ways of relaxing instead of harming themselves and others?
MrBlueX
http://mrbluex.blogspot.com
It's like saying, i like durian, everyone also like durian? No, some people hate the smell and the taste.Why? Because every human beings have different taste in what they do and do not like. -
u really 12 smokeless ,might as well live in enclosed container 24hrs (like MJ used to in oxygen container) >>>
u dun travel bcos other countries smoke also hazard or u dun need to step out ofur house .Enjoy -
You are missing the point. This has nothing to do with whether smoking is relaxing for some. It is about smoking causing cancer and lung disease for those around them who have to inhale their second-hand smoke. It is irresponsible of smokers who ignore the health of non-smokers for the sake of their own pleasure.Originally posted by Rufio:People are entitled to make their own choices.Its just that smoking is one of their choices. You may find relaxation through smoking is absurd, but like dragg said, have you ever tried smoking? Maybe you tried before and didn't find it relaxing, but every human beings are different.
Smoking must be banned in public places. If smokers want to smoke in coffee shops and pubs, let them petition the owners to set aside a ventilated toilet cubicle for them to puff. -
you dont understand. the amount of 2nd hand smoke a person inhale in the public is not enough to cause cancer.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:You are missing the point. This has nothing to do with whether smoking is relaxing for some. It is about smoking causing cancer and lung disease for those around them who have to inhale their second-hand smoke. It is irresponsible of smokers who ignore the health of non-smokers for the sake of their own pleasure.
Smoking must be banned in public places. If smokers want to smoke in coffee shops and pubs, let them petition the owners to set aside a ventilated toilet cubicle for them to puff.
the smell irritates non smoker thats all. -
but I tot the smoke that non-smoker inhaled from smoker's puff can cause lots of damage as the smoker might be smokings for years and have lots of poison in his body already ?
-
first time i hear this.Originally posted by ghimpheng:but I tot the smoke that non-smoker inhaled from smoker's puff can cause lots of damage as the smoker might be smokings for years and have lots of poison in his body already ?
i seriously dont think so. -
I use to think that too (Like I said I am a ex-smoker). Till I went to HPB and listen in on the talk conducted there. The speaker only quoted hard facts, and it shows that the amount of poison inhaled due to 2 hand smoke is worst.Originally posted by dragg:you dont understand. the amount of 2nd hand smoke a person inhale in the public is not enough to cause cancer.
the smell irritates non smoker thats all. -
Go read the literature....the evidence is overwhelming:Originally posted by dragg:you dont understand. the amount of 2nd hand smoke a person inhale in the public is not enough to cause cancer.
the smell irritates non smoker thats all.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen, which means that there is sufficient evidence that it causes cancer in humans. Environmental tobacco smoke has also been classified as a "known human carcinogen" by the US National Toxicology Program.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp -
OMG! you are quoting the stuff the doc wasOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:Go read the literature....the evidence is overwhelming:
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen, which means that there is sufficient evidence that it causes cancer in humans. Environmental tobacco smoke has also been classified as a "known human carcinogen" by the US National Toxicology Program.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp
you work there isit?? -
Same field...I study cancer for a livingOriginally posted by lighthand:OMG! you are quoting the stuff the doc was you work there isit?? -
Yeap... ETS is indeed a known carcinogen... I couldn't agree more with you...Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Go read the literature....the evidence is overwhelming:
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen, which means that there is sufficient evidence that it causes cancer in humans. Environmental tobacco smoke has also been classified as a "known human carcinogen" by the US National Toxicology Program.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Environmental_Tobacco_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp