Will ban go up in smoke?

It should go up in smoke

I can't believe Confederate has not seen this yet

it should go up in smoke

who cares??

Ban it wrote:

it should go up in smoke

Aye, it ought to indeed. Click on this URL for medical and scientific information regarding some health benefits for smoking and nicotine. None of these reports were financed by the tabacco industry.

http://www.forces.org/evidence/index.htm

http://www.forces.org/evidence/index.htm

Here's an exerpt from the above link:

Powered by reason, driven by passion

Click on the banner to donate now


The Evidence
The scientific archive that debunks 50 years of superstitions on smoking




HOME PAGE
Information and ContactsAbout us
FAQ

Epidemiological

Miserable Gains - or: the fraud of the potential years of life lost
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF CONTINUING STUDIES ON SMOKING AND HEALTH
ADDICTIVENESS OF NICOTINE
TOBACCO-ATTRIBUTED DEATHS
THERAPEUTIC EFFECTS OF SMOKING
MODERATE SMOKING IS NO HEALTH RISK
SMOKING AND LUNG CANCER
SMOKING AND BIRTH DEFECTS
SMOKING AND BRAIN CANCER
SMOKING AND HEART - ATHEROSCLEROSIS
SMOKING AND EMPHYSEMA
SMOKING AND CHRONIC PULMONARY OBSTRUCTION
SMOKING, LIFE EXPECTANCY, AND HEALTH SURVEYS


Hystorical

ANTISMOKING CAMPAIGN IN NAZI GERMANY

Assorted

OTHER ASSORTED EVIDENCE

Comparative

SMOKING AS A SOURCE OF POLLUTION,
COMPARED WITH OTHER SOURCES

Awards













THE EVIDENCE ARCHIVE
Welcome to FORCES' Evidence section. Here you'll find a collection of material -- with particular emphasis on scientific evidence -- that explodes many of the most cherished claims of the antismoker industry.

These claims have been advanced to gather public support for smoking bans, high taxes, employment discrimination, and even the advocacy of legal action against neighbours who smoke in their own apartments!
Passive smoking

STUDIES, AND HUGE BIBLIOGRAPHY ON SECONDHAND SMOKE
THE PASSIVE SMOKE WHOPPER


INDOOR AIR QUALITY: BETTER WITH SMOKING AND VENTILATION



DIMENSIONAL ERRORS OF METAPHORICAL MEASUREMENTS. CAN THEY BE RESOLVED?


October 31, 2006 - In this letter to the Editor just published by the International Journal of Epidemiology, Gio Gori, a distinguished epidemiologists, questions once again the validity of multifactorial, questionnaire-based, self-reported epidemiology as a scientific tool and as a base for any kind of honest public policy. The problem of this kind of epidemiology is always the same: the researchers do not know what they have measured. Reducing self-reported, personal memories of exposure to numbers is the great cheat, for numbers can indeed be processed, but what do they mean? What do they represent, in the end? The quantification of vague memories? And how much can memories be affected by on-going propagandas and cultural fear mongering - such as the frauds against smoking, for example? Already for this simple reason alone any and all studies based on this kind of trash methodology must be discarded - regardless of their results and/or of the issues they are dealing with. It just so happen that the overwhelming majority of "studies" on eating, drinking, smoking and other lifestyles belongs to this kind. It follows therefore that all the "epidemics" concerning lifestyle are either an intentional fraud by the health authorities or they are based on such unreliable data to make them a fraud for all intents and purposes. And THIS is the institutional dishonesty and incompetence we are facing today with "public health" and its propaganda tool, the media.
... AND THEY CALL THIS

Well, I hope more modern scientific and medical studies will put a stop to the HEALTH NAZI'S attempts to dominate, manipulate and control our lives!!

I am a smoker... of tobacco and an ecig. I have kids... I don't like eating in smokey places and I don't like taking my kids there either.

But I do like going to bars with my husband... enjoying a cocktail... having a smoke... talking with other adults... and being... well adults! No Dora. No Blues Clues. No little butts to wipe.

The free market should be left to decide what it wants. I am a part of that free market and while I frequent non-smoking establishments for certain reasons, I as frequent smoking establishments.

Who cares if I smell like an ashtray at the end of a night out. I also smell like the drink that was spilled on me by a very intoxicated person (I am not a big drinker at all). And several times, I have had to throw out my shoes because someone has puked in my vicinity. But it's a bar!!! I KNOW this going in there!

Why do I feel like my children have more choices than I do?

If all these bans had a one year expiration, many restaurants might remain smoke free. Also, most bars would probably comply knowing that it would end, possibly even remaining smoke free. If that were the case, the ban would have been a resounding success without threatening lawmakers careers.