November is Lung Cancer Awareness Month

One would think most smokers would know better. I guess we must assume most of them are to stupid to think anything will happen to them. I wonder if smokers would take a loaded gun and play Russion Roulette with it. They are doing something almost like that every day. They are truely suckers.

Quote for the day--- "Smokers Suck "---

Smoker contribute all the money for health care for children whos parents cant afford it. Non Smoker contribute nothing to this cause.!

PreachingToTheGarbage wrote:

Smoker contribute all the money for health care for children whos parents cant afford it. Non Smoker contribute nothing to this cause.!

--Total BS-- as would expcted from a Tobacco Toady.

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> --Total BS-- as would expcted from a Tobacco Toady.

What do you think the last tax increase on tobacco was for ? To pay for childrens health care.! Do some research.
Of course how would you know your blinded by your own anit smoking stupidity.!

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> --Total BS-- as would expcted from a Tobacco Toady.

Here you go.
The US Congress and President Obama passed legislation to increase federal tobacco taxes, including a 62-cent increase in the cigarette tax and an immediate increase in the tax on so-called "little cigars" to $1.01 per pack. Congress also expanded the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).

The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)– later known more simply as the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP)[1]– is a program administered by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides matching funds to states for health insurance to families with children. The program was designed with the intent to cover uninsured children in families with incomes that are modest but too high to qualify for Medicaid.

I don`t think you are a fool. But then what`s MY opinion against thousands of others?

PreachingToTheGarbage wrote:

<quoted text>What do you think the last tax increase on tobacco was for ? To pay for childrens health care.! Do some research.
Of course how would you know your blinded by your own anit smoking stupidity.!

"Tobacco Toady boy", you seem to forget the word "all". You are one dumb TOBACCO TOADY !

Ok. Smokers pay for "all" childrens Health care whos parents cannot afford it.
How is that you Obese Non Smoking FREAK.?

Also be aware of where the research money is. I wonder why it isn't being used.
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealt...

generalsn1234567 wrote:

Also be aware of where the research money is. I wonder why it isn't being used.
http://www.preventcancer.com/losing/acs/wealt...

Now wait a minute. The opening point of this spiel is that ACS is doing nothing toward prevention. Prevention is a key point to the argument for smoking regulations. They are clearly devoting a huge portion of their attention to prevention--even if the method doesn't endear them to nicotine addicts.

Time after time in post after pasted-in post, one "generalsn" or another has railed at the fact that they were spending money on prevention efforts instead of research into the areas this latest linked-in rant decries them for focusing on.

I'm so confused!

There's another thread on the Lung Cancer Month thing somewhere in the forum. Just in case anyone is really here because they are interested in the topic.

My aunt has lung cancer and everyone treats her bad. She never smoked a day in her life and no one smokes in my family. there is to much tagged on the cancer say only sokers got it what about those who have and are non-smokers. sorrry i just get frustrated about it just blowin off steam.

smurfz wrote:

My aunt has lung cancer and everyone treats her bad. She never smoked a day in her life and no one smokes in my family. there is to much tagged on the cancer say only sokers got it what about those who have and are non-smokers. sorrry i just get frustrated about it just blowin off steam.

THere's a thread here on the differences between smokers' and nonsmokers' lung cancers. Hang on a minute, while I go find a link for it, okay? Be right back...

You still there? Oh, yeah. Right.

Anyway, here is the link.

http://www.topix.net/health/smoking/2009/09/l...

Of course, it is probably full of the usual bitter, vindictive rants of terrified smokers consoling themselves by bitching at everyone else, but there might be SOMEthing useful in the mix.

discusseded wrote:

<quoted text>
Now wait a minute. The opening point of this spiel is that ACS is doing nothing toward prevention. Prevention is a key point to the argument for smoking regulations. They are clearly devoting a huge portion of their attention to prevention--even if the method doesn't endear them to nicotine addicts.
Time after time in post after pasted-in post, one "generalsn" or another has railed at the fact that they were spending money on prevention efforts instead of research into the areas this latest linked-in rant decries them for focusing on.
I'm so confused!

They are supposed to be a tax exempt charity. As it stands, they are now a "political action committee" that hires lawyers and lobbyists to FORCE people to follow their guidelines with Gestapo snitchlines and law enforcement. Political action committees are NOT tax deductable.

generalsn1234567 wrote:

<quoted text> They are supposed to be a tax exempt charity. As it stands, they are now a "political action committee" that hires lawyers and lobbyists to FORCE people to follow their guidelines with Gestapo snitchlines and law enforcement. Political action committees are NOT tax deductable.

Nice hyperbole.

Criminal organizations are not supposed to have a seat at the table in establishing government regulations. The RICO-convicted tobacco industry is to have 3 seats on the FDAs tobacco regulation scientific advisory committee. Our government FORCES that to happen. Why are you not screaming about that?

Oh, yeah. That's right. You are somehow opposed to the effect the ACS pursues and in favor of the tobacco industry's objectives.

ACS has a mission statement that involves efforts to prevent cancer. Smoking regulations are a fairly clear-cut way to further that cause.

Given the fraud and misdirection practiced by the tobacco industry in hiding the flood of money they put into anti-regulation efforts, I'd say that--stipulating (for the sake of discussion only) your accusations--the ACS has a ways to go before they can be painted more than a very faint gray in this context.

discusseded wrote:

<quoted text>
Nice hyperbole.
Criminal organizations are not supposed to have a seat at the table in establishing government regulations. The RICO-convicted tobacco industry is to have 3 seats on the FDAs tobacco regulation scientific advisory committee. Our government FORCES that to happen. Why are you not screaming about that?
Oh, yeah. That's right. You are somehow opposed to the effect the ACS pursues and in favor of the tobacco industry's objectives.
ACS has a mission statement that involves efforts to prevent cancer. Smoking regulations are a fairly clear-cut way to further that cause.
Given the fraud and misdirection practiced by the tobacco industry in hiding the flood of money they put into anti-regulation efforts, I'd say that--stipulating (for the sake of discussion only) your accusations--the ACS has a ways to go before they can be painted more than a very faint gray in this context.

CEOs, CFOs and other top Exc of Big Tobacco should be tried for mass murder. After the trial they should be dealt with in the same way society has in the past dealt with mass murders.

smurfz wrote:

My aunt has lung cancer and everyone treats her bad. She never smoked a day in her life and no one smokes in my family. there is to much tagged on the cancer say only smokers get it what about those who have and are non-smokers. sorry i just get frustrated about it just blowin off steam.

One can't help but feel badly about how many people react to persons with cancer. It makes no difference what may have caused it, it seems lots of people attach a stigma to it which is unfair. You have my 100% heartfelt sympathy, prayers & support. JC

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> One can't help but feel badly about how many people react to persons with cancer. It makes no difference what may have caused it, it seems lots of people attach a stigma to it which is unfair. You have my 100% heartfelt sympathy, prayers & support. JC

Thanks jc i was just venting but thanks anyway.

just candid wrote:

One would think most smokers would know better. I guess we must assume most of them are to stupid to think anything will happen to them. I wonder if smokers would take a loaded gun and play Russion Roulette with it. They are doing something almost like that every day. They are truely suckers.

For "the other side of the story", the part many agencies, private and public don't want you to know about just click on this link for some evidence that there very well could be some health benefits for smoking and nicotine:

http://www.forces.org/Scientific_Portal/

http://www.forces.org/Scientific_Portal/
Here's an exerpt from the above link:
Powered by reason, driven by passion
INTERNATIONAL LIBERTY NEWS NETWORK
The Forces International News Portal Please become a member
or donate what you can.
FORCES is supported solely
by the efforts of the readers.
Forces Home | Multimedia | Library | News | Scientific Evidence | Columnists | Archive | Links | Podcasts
15th November 2009.
Welcome to the new Scientific Evidence Portal on smoking. This area is meant as an educational tool to debunk misinformation and exaggerations about active and passive smoking, and it may be a valuable source of information for researchers. This archive is frequently updated, and we invite you to visit it often. If this is your first visit here, you may wish to read our section Getting The Most From The Evidence Portal
If you have new scientific evidence to add to this archive and want to submit it for consideration, please write to evidence@forces.org
Full Scientific Evidence Listing (latest postings on top)

Further Information
A response to the crisis of epidemiology | John Dunn, MD
Article Published: 2009/03/06
Details
This item is in the Ethics category of this portal
Type: Articles and Dissertations
Keywords: epidemiology, crisis, critique, junk, science
Further Information
William Corr on the pharmaceutical payroll |
Article Published: 2009/01/09
Details
This item is in the Who Pays Whom category of this portal
Funding Source: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Published By: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Keywords: William, Corr, Obama, advisor
Further Information
Denying the Undeniable: A Response to "Nicotine Nazis Strike again" | Gian Turci for the FORCES International BOD
Article Published: Dec. 2008
Details
This item is in the The FORCES position papers category of this portal
Funding Source: This work has received no funding from actors and financers of the tobacco control controversy, such as tobacco or pharmaceutical multinationals.
Published By: FORCES International
Keywords: Nazism, Fascism, Communism, Proctor, Glantz, Schneider, totalitarianism, tobacco control
Further Information
“Nicotine Nazis strike again”: a brief analysis of the use of Nazi rhetoric in attacking tobacco control advocacy | Nick K Schneider, Stanton A Glantz. Preface by Robert Proctor
Article Published: 2008
Details
This item is in the Articles on Studies and Policies category of this portal
Type: Articles and Dissertations
Funding Source: National Cancer Institute (grants CA-113710 and CA-87472)
Published By: Tobacco Control October 2008 Vol 17 No 5
Keywords: Schneider, Glantz, Proctor, Nazis, Fascists, totalitarianism, tobacco control, epidemiology
Further Information
The "Public Health" Antismoking Scam: a Paper of Dissent | FORCES International
Article Published: Dec. 2001
Details
This item is in the The FORCES position papers category of this portal
Published By: FORCES International
Keywords: scam, dissent, public health
Further Information
Next 10 >>
Showing results 1 to 10 of 409
Active Smoking
Addiction
Articles on Studies and Policies
Confounders
Dangers of Smoking Cessation
Dissent and Intimidation
Economic Damages of Smoking Bans
Ethics
ETS - Meta-Analyses
ETS - Primary Studies CVD
ETS - Primary Studies Lung Cancer
ETS and other diseases
Historical, Speeches and Political
Legal Decisions and Legal Matters
Official Reports on Active Smoking
Official Reports on Passive Smoking
Outright Fraud?
Particulate Matter: Another Scare
PYLL: Myth or Reality?
Questionnaires
Safer Cigarettes are Possible
Socio Economics
The Cost of Non Smokers to Society
The FORCES position papers
Therapeutic Effects of Smoking
Therapeutic Taxation?
Ventilation
What's Good For Smokers?
Who Pays Whom