Oh This Is Bad!

[bigboab]

Originally posted by clocker+26 October 2003 - 01:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 26 October 2003 - 01:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Keikan@25 October 2003 - 18:11

No.... god...

Reasons why i can&#39;t get smokes:

1. Underaged to buy from a store
2. All my friends are "clean"
3. My mom doesn&#39;t smoke

Then I guess you&#39;ll just have to take up heroin. [/b][/quote]
If it was not for the money I would jack it in right now. Boss.

[Keikan]

Originally posted by clocker+25 October 2003 - 18:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 25 October 2003 - 18:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Keikan@25 October 2003 - 18:11

No.... god...

Reasons why i can&#39;t get smokes:

1. Underaged to buy from a store
2. All my friends are "clean"
3. My mom doesn&#39;t smoke

Then I guess you&#39;ll just have to take up heroin. [/b][/quote]
Hell no

[Celerystalksme]

Originally posted by clocker+26 October 2003 - 10:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 26 October 2003 - 10:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Keikan@25 October 2003 - 18:11

No.... god...

Reasons why i can&#39;t get smokes:

1. Underaged to buy from a store
2. All my friends are "clean"
3. My mom doesn&#39;t smoke

Then I guess you&#39;ll just have to take up heroin. [/b][/quote]


gawd that was some quick wit...

[namzuf9]

Originally posted by hobbes+26 October 2003 - 00:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes &#064; 26 October 2003 - 00:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-namzuf9@25 October 2003 - 14:10
My I direct you attention to the following articles:

www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/08/1055010873305.html+petrol+fumes+cancer&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]Petrol fumes: A direct cause of up to a fifth cancer deaths[/url]

and

www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/04/1031115886010.html+exhaust+fumes+cancer&hl=en&ie=UTF-8]Lung cancer lniked to diesil pollution.[/url]

I hope you all find this an interesting read and to be honest, working in the city (London) scares me more than smoking.

Didn&#39;t see this before.

If we elimate cars to avoid their fumes, we will have to restructure our societies and learn a new way of life.

If we eliminate cigarettes, society will press on unaffected. As a society we need a drug to escape reality. Some choose pot, others alcohol, and others religion. As a society, I do not see the role of cigarettes as being essential in that way.

If you want to go back to a world of no-electricity, no cars and no mass production, feel free. I will acknowledge and gladly accept the trade-offs that burning fossil fuels bring. The goal is to find better, cleaner ways to satisfy our energy needs. But that&#39;s a subject unto itself.

Bottom line, I don&#39;t find the comparison appropriate. [/b][/quote]
I didn&#39;t realise that using an electric car or a LPG conversion on our motor cars would have such a huge impact on society as we know it&#33;

I also acknowledge the fact that by smoking I am potentially shortening my life span and accept the trade off.

I believe the comparison is appropriate in so much of the fact that petrol or diesel powered automobiles are not essential to our daily lives, they&#39;re are alternatives.
Smoking (common tobacco) is not essential to my every day life&#39; they&#39;re are alternatives (herbal cigarettes, dope)

Driving a petrol powered car makes life easier.
Smoking makes my life easier.

Are you a non smoker?


Edit: Typo

[bigboab]

Nam If you had hung on another five hours it would have dawned on you anyway.

[hobbes]

I am talking about society, not you. We would not have to rebuild cities and change our lives because cigarettes go away. Had you never smoked, you would have found a substitute for dealing with stress. Perhaps sucking on candy instead of smoking, as most people are not allowed to drink/ smoke pot at work. I get so frustrated by my assistants who become useless if we work through a smoke break, they become careless and dangerous.

We are in agreement that energy alternatives are desirable. Even if we changed to a non-polluting source, auto related deaths would not changed by a single life.

So you cannot initially post about deaths related to cars, then switch position to health effects related to emissions. Even if we consider emissions, the incidence of lung cancer is extremely low, except in smokers, that is.

So if we elimate the health risk related to emissions, which we could if the oil companies would stop controlling our politicians, it makes the comparison completely invalid.


Edit: Sorry, forgot to answer your question. I am a nonsmoker who watched his mother got through years of frustration trying to quit. Sometimes parental examples are more effective than parental rules. I observed her and never wanted to suffer as she did.

[bigboab]

Do you people not realize it is nearly 2 in the morning in the UK. If you are going to have lengthy debates please keep it to one or two syllables.. Oh to hell I&#39;m away to change the time on all my clocks.

[namzuf9]

Originally posted by hobbes@26 October 2003 - 02:26
I am talking about society, not you. We would not have to rebuild cities and change our lives because cigarettes go away. Had you never smoked, you would have found a substitute for dealing with stress. Perhaps sucking on candy instead of smoking, as most people are not allowed to drink/ smoke pot at work. I get so frustrated by my assistants who become useless if we work through a smoke break, they become careless and dangerous.

We are in agreement that energy alternatives are desirable. Even if we changed to a non-polluting source, auto related deaths would not changed by a single life.

So you cannot initially post about deaths related to cars, then switch position to health effects related to emissions. Even if we consider emissions, the incidence of lung cancer is extremely low, except in smokers, that is.

So if we elimate the health risk related to emissions, which we could if the oil companies would stop controlling our politicians, it makes the comparison completely invalid.


Edit: Sorry, forgot to answer your question. I am a nonsmoker who watched his mother got through years of frustration trying to quit. Sometimes parental examples are more effective than parental rules. I observed her and never wanted to suffer as she did.

To be honest with you I never thought of the pollution side of automobiles until I got to work (I work for a garage in london) and caught a lungful of exhaust cos the lazy arsed boy couldn&#39;t be bothered to put an extractor on the exhaust of the car he was revving the nuts off&#33;

I agree with what you are saying about how much we would have to change if we done away with cars. But consider this. I smoke. I smoke in pubs. If you are in the same pub as me and you don&#39;t like the smoke, you can leave that pub and my smoke behind.
You drive (hypothetically, I don&#39;t know if you do) You drive in wide open spaces. I cannot escape your pollution (and others like you). I am a non driver (or ex driver to be honest) Your pollution can give me cancer but you will not be attacked (verbally, no one wants to fight) for it.

Why pick on a smoker? (not you personally but a large percentage of non smokers have a problem with smokers)

Even if we consider emissions, the incidence of lung cancer is extremely low, except in smokers, that is.

But pollution causes about a fifth of all cancer (not necessarily lung cancer) related illness according to New Scientest.

A quote from on of the links I posted:

Its findings were summarised in New Scientist, which wrote: "Up to a fifth of all cancer deaths are caused by tiny particles of pollution, most of them from vehicle exhaust.

I&#39;m enjoying this mass debate. It&#39;s nice to have conflicting views with someone and not having anyone resort to petty insults.

[hobbes]

Hey naz,

Your a good guy and I enjoy reading your posts. We all enjoy the forum for the exchange of ideas from from people all over the English speaking world.

I think your source is not only wrong, but way wrong. It is so hard to control the variables in such as situation.

No matter that, I think we have all had our say and each person can decide for himself, what they want to do.