Comments (Page 52)
|
My last post was for LLC or whoever wrote that post about having an enclosed room for smokers.
|
|
Actually, there are people gathering signatures to get strip clubs on the ballot. And I don't think that they're trying to get more of 'em, if you know what I mean. But if you can't smoke up in a strip club, why bother going anyway? ;-) |
|
While I encourage you to quitting greater consideraton, I would certainly agree that it IS what the Issue 5 sponsors wanted all along. They make no secret of that. But I suspect that the next movement to ban tobacco smoking will be geared toward homes with minor children. And, while I disagree with the intrusiveness, I would agree that the medical reports give indication that it's better for kids to be reared in a non-smoking environment. Their exposure to ETS, or SHS, is more than just casual. But they will also use the passage of Issue 5 as a precedent, and that will bear significant weight with a lot of easily-swayed people. For the kids' sake, I would hope that smoking adults smoke responsibly... not like when I was a kid.(I will never forget that cigarette burn, even though it was an accident, and nothing all that serious.) But that's your likely next smoking ban target. |
|
|
I will not be visiting Ohio bars and restaurants after Dec. 7th. Please share the scientific evidence that second hand smoke is in fact killing people. It seems the bars would be carting out bodies on an hourly basis if this were true. The so called evidence has been slanted and out right lied about to make this an allleged health issue when it is really about power and control. Visit forces.org to read about the alleged scientific proof or should I say lack of proof of the second hand smoke scam. I do plan on visiting Kentucky when I want to get out of the house for an enjoyable meal, drink and smoke. Another tip is buy your cigarettes in Ky. or Indiana....they are a lot cheaper. Why should Ohio benefit from my smoking if I can't smoke here?
|
|
I hope that post wasn't for me. I didn't vote for issue 5, I voted against it. What I said it would have a good compromise, but the people who voted for issue 5 don't want to compromise. |
|
|
I got somethin u can smoke.
|
|
I hope it does some good. I'm on it.:-) |
|
DONE! I will forward it also to all my business associates around the State of Ohio. |
|
| |
|
Hey NW Ohio. I'm just sure that after Dec. 7 your lungs will be safe breathing this wonderful clean Ohio air. I invite you to refer me to a study that has scientific proof that second hand smoke has any statistically significant health effects. Your lungs aren't your problem, it is your heart.
|
|
I was just at a tavern, the owner said he is going to allow smoking thru the 1st of the year. Little reprieve :) |
|
Maybe. Apparently the enforcement guidelines aren't in place yet, and the Director has until June 7, 2007 to adopt said rules. BUT, all "public places" and "places of employment" will be required to post the sign conspicuously at the entrance, and remove ALL ashtrays from the premises by December 7. Link: http://www.odh.ohio.gov/alerts/ohiosmokingban... |
|
|
|
|
|
That article brings up a point that I missed.
The sign that says NO SMOKING, blah blah blah MUST be posted at every entrance to YOUR CHURCH. Prominently displayed. It will be everywhere you look. Good going, guys. You really should have read before you voted. Here's your sign. |
|
Of course, you could just NOT SMOKE when it's too nasty to go outdoors. I'm not allowed to drink at work. I wait till I'm done working and drink then. But you will stand out in the freezing cold to smoke a damn cigarette... QUIT! |
|
If we ban smoking in public, then we must ban breastfeeding in public???? Why do I get the odd feeling YOU would like that outcome in any case. Unfortunately for you, smoking continues to face increasing restrictions, even as society grows more tolerant of public breastfeeding. Sorry if that's a bummer for you. |
|
What does that mean exactly? That they won't smoke at all when their kids are around? Somehow, I think you probably have different notion of "smoking responsibly." Can you spell it out for me? |
|
Here you go... 1981: The Hirayama Study. Takeshi Hirayama, chief of epidemiology of the Research Institute at Tokyo's National Cancer Center, and his associates studied for fourteen years 92,000 nonsmoking wives of smoking husbands to learn what their risk was of contracting lung cancer, compared to a similarly sized control group married to nonsmokers. Nonsmoking wives married to axsmokers or current smokers of up to fourteen cigarettes a day showed a 40 percent elevated risk of lung cancer over wives married to nonsmokers; those married to husbands smoking fifteen to nineteen cigarettes a day had a 60 percent higher risk; and those whose husbands smoked a pack or more a day had a 90 percent heightened risk. The findings were savaged by letters to the BMJ (by, among others, Theodore Sterling, whose projects received $5M in CTR funds between 1973 and 1990),-- and by the Tobacco Institute in full page ads all across the US. Meanwhile, Brown and Williamson documents show that, although the tobacco industry was publicly attacking Hirayama's paper, several of its own experts were privately admitting that his conclusions were valid. B&W counsel J. Wells said both German and British scientists paid by the tobacco industry had reviewed the work and "they believe Hirayama is a good scientist and that his non-smoking wives publication is correct."15 (J. Wells, Re Smoking and Health - Tim Finnegan, Memo to E. Pepples, 1981, 24 July) Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: a study from Japan (BMJ, V. 282: pp. 183-185, 17 January 1981 |
|
Only because you made him stand there. Such coercion makes the human spirit rebel and refuse to obey your command to QUIT! |
|
I think you need to quote more recent findings. 1971-1891 everyone smoked, they even had smoking rooms at school then. Even in 1988 when I had my oldest child they had a smoking room on the maternity floor. But without "VOTERS" intervention, it all took care of its self. All the people who voted for Issue 5 need to realize the ramificaitons of what it means. You voted to take away any Cigar Bar in the State of Ohio, why stay open if you cant use what you sell? Huka (sp) Bars in order to keep smoking have to get rid of anything not Huka? You can smoke a bowl of tobacco but god forbid you have a beverage with it, it might just skew your 80% tobacco sales. The little Veteran who helped fight for your freedom, please salute him as he shivers in the cold outside his favorite restaurant. People should have really thought ahead to what this meant. |
|
Very Nice! Now I have something to read on my way into Christmas Mass. |
|
|
Tell me when this thread is updated: |
|
Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.
| Topic | Updated | Last By | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
3 min | Wake Up | 16 |
|
|
3 min | Phil Gray | 94,340 |
|
|
3 min | TruthBeTold | 19,356 |
|
|
3 min | Spartan 2 | 72 |
|
|
7 min | nyna | 675 |
|
|
7 min | killedjoe | 3,413 |
|
|
10 min | Robert Palmer | 4,254 |
|
|
2 hr | pantydog | 4,355 |