Med Student Smokers...

[39094]

---

Members don't see this ad.

we like smoking at bars

we dont want to bother anyone who is a non-smoker at bars

we wont smoke at bars, or anywhere, where you non smokers say we cant.

but you cant just say, "ok, dont smoke anywhere but your house"
thats not fair. thats not what we meant by trying to accomodate your wishes.
what we meant is: you have to actually go through the trouble of designating smoking/non smoking bars/restaurant.
Then, we will follow the rules and all will be happy.
so its not that, smoking is everywhere, or smoking is nowhere (like the laws everyone is pushing for says), its that smoking is in the right places.

and for everyone out there saying, who the hell smokes? let me tell u i used to think that way too, be all against smoking like you guys are. then i tried it and i liked it, and i plan to quit soon, but i would never take it back. and just like you are thinking "God that smoker is so stupid" lots of smokers are thinking " God that non-smoker is so anal, he needs to lighten up and live a little bit and smoke a lil something" an idea that, of course, non smokers cant understand by the fact that they are non smokers. So there are two sides here, dont beat up on the smaller group of non smokers with your conservative laws.



.

Far be it from me to disagree, but under your passive-agressive rhetoric I can see the same thing that comes out every time I whittle a smoker's argument down to what they really believe. Your, "lighten up and smoke a little" is just another way of saying, "I know I'm doing something horrible for my body that also negatively affects others, but if I get a few more people to do it, I won't feel so bad about myself." It's typical safety in numbers mentality, I've seen it a thousand times.

And all the talk about compromise, I'm not sure what compromise can be made. Shall we split up the bars, 70% for us and 30% for you? If such a compromise were possible, I think it would have happened by now. Instead, 100% of bars (minus those wonderful cities which already ban it) are filled with near-toxic levels of noxious smoke. So here's a little homework for you next time you're at the bar: ask EVERYONE in the room (especially those who work there) if they smoke, not whether it bothers them, but if they do or not. If there's even one who doesn't, then don't smoke in that room. That's about the only compromise that truly is fair. Since very few smokers are going to do that, I'm afraid non-smokers are left with little choice but to legislate where smoking is not allowed. 50 years ago it used to be customary to ask, "mind if I smoke." That doesn't happen anymore, instead it's become, "what the hell is your problem!" if someone has the guts to speak up and tell a smoker they're rude. Maybe you are one of the small minority of "polite" smokers, but I assure you VERY few people put into practice the values you espouse.

And please stop calling anti-smoking laws "conservative." History has shown that the smoking debate goes past politics. While traditionally the Republican party has been the pro-smokes party, the Democrats have taken their share of dirty tobacco money too. No, these laws are not driven by any particular ideology, they are driven by the desire of the populace to protect their health, the health of their families and the accesibility of public places.

 

[powermd]

Do any anti-smoking folks here actually advocate making smoking 100% illeagal under all circumstances? I think most of the anti-smoking crowd is quite reasonable about the issue of bans. Very few people would deny a smoker his right to do what he wants with his body, just to the extent that it affects other people.

On that issue- smoking ANYWHERE by ANYONE affects us all by the huge outlay of money spent treating smoking related illnesses in the form of Medicare/Medicaid payments. The price of a pack of cigarettes should include enough tax to cover the risk-adjusted dollars it will eventually cost to treat the smoker.

 

[39094]

Do any anti-smoking folks here actually advocate making smoking 100% illeagal under all circumstances? I think most of the anti-smoking crowd is quite reasonable about the issue of bans. Very few people would deny a smoker his right to do what he wants with his body, just to the extent that it affects other people.

On that issue- smoking ANYWHERE by ANYONE affects us all by the huge outlay of money spent treating smoking related illnesses in the form of Medicare/Medicaid payments. The price of a pack of cigarettes should include enough tax to cover the risk-adjusted dollars it will eventually cost to treat the smoker.

No doubt, I'm not talking about a ban on cigarettes, I'm talking about a ban on breathing in OTHER people's smoke. While in theory it would be a great boon to the public health of our nation to ban tobacco, the result would be horrendous and harken back to the days of prohibition. Basically it's not going to happen even if we want it to. But, that doesn't mean that non-smokers can't demand that the air they breathe be smoke free.

And I agree with you on the charging of taxes for packs of cigarettes. Once again though, this only works in theory and poorly in practice. In reality, the money gained by tobacco taxes never gets into healthcare and is instead squandered by the states on more $1000 haircuts for the various politicans who regulate the spending of these monies. It also does little to discourage smoking, except make smokers just that much poorer.

No, the best way to reduce smoking is to make tobacco smoking a socially unacceptable practice. I have no qualms with saying that smokers should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. For those who tell me to "lighten up," I say you should hang your head in shame. You know you're doing something harmful to yourself and others, why hide behind "I'm just living life to its fullest?" When smoking becomes as socially acceptable as drinking one's own urine out of a thermos (which would actually be a lot healthier than lighting up), we might see some real progress in getting people to quit. I think we've seen a bit of that already as smoking moves closer and closer towards that direction. Let's keep it moving people! Don't be afraid to stand up for your rights as non-smokers!

 

[Hoya11]

you think your smarter than you are buddy bite your tongue your making yourself look foolish... people smoke.. deal

 

[39094]

you think your smarter than you are buddy bite your tongue your making yourself look foolish... people smoke.. deal

I believe it's "you're" making yourself look foolish, not "your."

At least I back up my beliefs with cogent argument and logical discourse. The last resort of someone who has no way to support their position is to exclaim, "yeah, well your a *******! [sic]"

All I can say is I'd rather be accused of looking foolish by standing up against a clearly serious risk to the health of our nation than be accused of looking foolish for having a cigarette dangling out of my mouth.

 

[phllystyl]

because we are all infantile and need the government to help us determine what is and is not good for us?

nice one.

 

[39094]

because we are all infantile and need the government to help us determine what is and is not good for us? nice one.

No, but apparently smokers are too infantile to know that their disgusting habit bothers others. Were this not the case, nobody would smoke in public. I can't tell you how many times smokers sit right outside the hospital, directly under a 3 foot by 3 foot sign which says, "NO SMOKING! FRESH AIR INTAKES" without a clue in the world. Then, when you tell them to please stop, they cop an attitude at you. This has happened to me TIME AND AGAIN. Maybe it's not true of all smokers, but I'd say 90% of those I've talked to have this attitude.

So, to clarify: YES, you ARE bothering people when you smoke in public places. The government doesn't need to decide for you what you put in your body, feel free to drink horse pee or smoke rat turds for all I care. BUT, when your infantile intellect can't comprehend that the stuff you are puffing out into the room is making others sick, then I'm afraid the rest of us have no choice but to rely on the government or some other control mechanism to keep you from doing it.

 

[IV Doc]

doesn't it suck when you walk out the door, like five people are smoking.

 

[SaltySqueegee]

doesn't it suck when you walk out the door, like five people are smoking.

like, yah... totally... 😉

 

[MoosePilot]

No, but apparently smokers are too infantile to know that their disgusting habit bothers others. Were this not the case, nobody would smoke in public. I can't tell you how many times smokers sit right outside the hospital, directly under a 3 foot by 3 foot sign which says, "NO SMOKING! FRESH AIR INTAKES" without a clue in the world. Then, when you tell them to please stop, they cop an attitude at you. This has happened to me TIME AND AGAIN. Maybe it's not true of all smokers, but I'd say 90% of those I've talked to have this attitude.

So, to clarify: YES, you ARE bothering people when you smoke in public places. The government doesn't need to decide for you what you put in your body, feel free to drink horse pee or smoke rat turds for all I care. BUT, when your infantile intellect can't comprehend that the stuff you are puffing out into the room is making others sick, then I'm afraid the rest of us have no choice but to rely on the government or some other control mechanism to keep you from doing it.

Exactly, well put. Thank you.

 

[NiteOwl]

These posts remind me of a joke I read once:

Your pleasure is cigaretes. The residue of your pleasure is smoke. This smoke contaminates my hair and clothes, not to mention my lungs. This all takes place without my consent. I have a pleasure too, I enjoy a beer now and then. The residue of my pleasure is urine. How would you feel if I peed on your head without your consent?

This joke is funny and true. I am not saying that all smoking should be banned. But the idea of making smoking sections completely separate is a good idea.
Also, I don't really get why doctors smoke either. I guess its like others here have said, just because they know the consequenses doesn't meant they will stop. Its the same reasoning as why do some doctors not wear seatbelts? Especially ER doctors that see what happens when you don't.

 

[CaptainJack02]

We have to go outside to smoke, we have to pay 5 dollars per pack, but seeing that beautiful swirl of smoke rise up from your cig, inhaling deeply and feeling like you're in the moment makes it all worth it. There's a reason people were allowed a cig before being executed, in the old days.

LEave us alone, you fascists.

 

[Newquagmire]

Everone is welcome to destroy their body in any way they see fit, but when they bring that into the public domain and force those who do not wish to participate to bear the consequences of their actions, that's when I start to get pissed.

Rationalize your habits all you want, just don't force them on me and we'll get along fine.

the problem with your statement is that people are NOT welcome to destroy their body in any way they see fit. suicide is still considered an illegal act.

so where do we stop with this "my right supercedes your right" business? smoking? driving under the influence? driving gas-guzzling, emission-spewing SUVs? eating french fries? eating red meat?

as sombody already mentioned with smoking: a vegan objects to my consumption of meat, which in excess has negative effects on my long-term health. i'm going to run up my medicaid/are bill. does this mean we should ban the consumption of red meat? should we ban it in public places only?

no. the USA is already one of the few places in the world where the "right" of non-smokers can supercede the "right" of smokers, and it's increasingly moving in that direction (e.g. california, new york city, madison).

so a few med students wants to have a smoke break. let them have their pleasures. and while you're minding your own business, start taking public transportation and adopt a vegan lifestyle.

 

[39094]

the problem with your statement is that people are NOT welcome to destroy their body in any way they see fit. suicide is still considered an illegal act.

so where do we stop with this "my right supercedes your right" business? smoking? driving under the influence? driving gas-guzzling, emission-spewing SUVs? eating french fries? eating red meat?

as sombody already mentioned with smoking: a vegan objects to my consumption of meat, which in excess has negative effects on my long-term health. i'm going to run up my medicaid/are bill. does this mean we should ban the consumption of red meat? should we ban it in public places only?

no. the USA is already one of the few places in the world where the "right" of non-smokers can supercede the "right" of smokers, and it's increasingly moving in that direction (e.g. california, new york city, madison).

so a few med students wants to have a smoke break. let them have their pleasures. and while you're minding your own business, start taking public transportation and adopt a vegan lifestyle.

Perhaps you should scroll back a few posts of mine and actually read my argument before you criticize it. Especially read the part where I talk about ramming burgers down your throat.

Your comparison to a vegan vs. a carnivore is not only poorly thought out, but completely without a basic foundation in logic. Yes, a vegan probably objects when I go out and eat a steak at a restaurant. I also object when you light up right next to me. Here's the difference though: When I eat a steak, no blood and steak particles end up in the stomach of the vegan sitting next to me. BUT when you light up, TONS of nasty tar-laden, Polonium-210 containing, heterocyclic amine coated and wretched smelling particles end up in my lungs. You know what, if there was an epidemic of people ramming steaks down the throat of vegans, I think the public would be up in arms. Yet, if you smoke right next to me and I have to breathe that crap it's somehow OK?

Here's the deal, as a smoker in public YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS. None, nada, zilch. That doesn't apply to a smoker at home or a smoker in a specially ventilated room I might add, only to a smoker who decides to blow his or her nastiness for all to ingest. As soon as you do that, you've passed the line of what's acceptable in my book, because your act is DIRECTLY affecting not only my ability to breathe, but my HEALTH as well.

Where does the "your rights supercede my rights" stop? It stops when your freedom to do as you please prevents me from doing the same. My not smoking has no effect on you, but your smoking DOES have an effect on me therefore your rights bow to mine.

Good comparison with the car thing though, unfortunately that only adds to my argument. We have plenty of laws which govern the emissions on our vehicles and any toxic emissions in general. These laws are designed to protect our health, but when they apply to cigarettes they're somehow unacceptable?

I won't even get into the cost to the healthcare system and the right to die issues you brought up because those could easily be discussed in separate threads at length.

 

[Hoya11]

i think the logic that you failed to see is this:

the thing that you are hurting when you eat meat... is what the meat used to be before it was meat

so by that logic, it is ok to kill an animal and eat it cause you are hungry.
but if someone smokes around you, look out.

 

[39094]

i think the logic that you failed to see is this:

the thing that you are hurting when you eat meat... is what the meat used to be before it was meat

so by that logic, it is ok to kill an animal and eat it cause you are hungry.
but if someone smokes around you, look out.

Um, what?

I know you're a freaking addict, but since when do you "need" your smokes like I need to eat?

And think of the poor tobacco plants! Oh the humanity! By your logic what gives you the right to chop them down and smoke them!

Maybe you're right though, with a comment like that it's pretty clear that some humans ARE dumber than animals and would do better to just be taken out of the food chain..... !

 

[Hoya11]

what was so hard to understand..?

(and you dont NEED to eat meat)

let me spell it out for you

you chosing to kill an animal because it tastes good, yet complaining about a smoker getting smoke on you, is a conflict. What gives you the right to complain about a little bitty incident like smoke being near you, when you are killing other animals for your own selfish purposes?

in other words, you are saying
"Hey be considerate of others, dont smoke!"
"Hey animal i am feeling hungry im going to kill you, thats what consideration i have for you"

so you see, you are breaking the cardinal rule of:
do unto others as youd have done to you

and take a look at the thread you are in, no one here is stupid, try to let outside ideas sink in, just keep an open mind it all i am saying, dont be all angry man.

 

[39094]

what was so hard to understand..?

(and you dont NEED to eat meat)

let me spell it out for you

you chosing to kill an animal because it tastes good, yet complaining about a smoker getting smoke on you, is a conflict. What gives you the right to complain about a little bitty incident like smoke being near you, when you are killing other animals for your own selfish purposes?

in other words, you are saying
"Hey be considerate of others, dont smoke!"
"Hey animal i am feeling hungry im going to kill you, thats what consideration i have for you"

so you see, you are breaking the cardinal rule of:
do unto others as youd have done to you

and take a look at the thread you are in, no one here is stupid, try to let outside ideas sink in, just keep an open mind it all i am saying, dont be all angry man.

This argument has nothing to do with smoking, you're relating apples to oranges here. If you want to start a thread about why eating meat is evil and why we should all be vegetarians, feel free to do so.

All I can figure from your argument is that your trying to show some kind of moral superiority because you don't eat meat, therefore the fact that you blow smoke in my face is ok because I'm a blood-thirsty murderer of animals.

I can't even begin to go into what's wrong with this line of reasoning. If I were a vegetarian and asked you to stop smoking in my face would I then be justified in your eyes?

This isn't about moral superiority. I'm not going to sit here and argue whether humans and animals have the same rights, that's a different discussion. What I will argue is that my rights as a human being are the same rights that you have, and those include not being forced to pollute my body simply because the guy next to me needs his daily nic fix. As somebody said previously (great post by the way) if I drink a beer and then take a piss on your face, I'd probably be arrested. But if the byproduct of your habit gets in my lungs, it's somehow ok?

 

[Hoya11]

im nota vegetarian i was just clearing up what someone else was saying

and i mean do u really feel like u got ur head pissed on when u breath in smoke?? i mean seriously

 

[39094]

im nota vegetarian i was just clearing up what someone else was saying

and i mean do u really feel like u got ur head pissed on when u breath in smoke?? i mean seriously

Yes, I find both acts equally nauseating, and I'm not alone in that belief. This is the whole reason why I post on this thread: trying to make smokers realize that their disgusting habit SERIOUSLY affects others and that non-smokers are sick and tired of it.

 

[velo]

smoking is just one of those things I get to dislike and even better I get to look down my nose at people who do it.

Its bad for you, its annoying for me, and I'm sorry its just not cool.

Yes, you look cool smoking in a bar....but when you're huddled outside of the building in the middle of winter trying desperately to get some nicotine into your body, that's when I laugh at your addicted ass

 

[Philo Beddo]

Consider this:

As a doctor, you will be taking care of many patients who because of their addiction to red meat and cigarrettes, are going to end up vegetables.

Now find a bong and consider it again.

Once more.

Now take a break to scarf some cheetos.

 

[fpr85]

I was sitting next to this girl in Accounting class who smelled of a combination of cheeze-ballz and ciggarette butts. Disgusting! Not to mention she had a stubble and two big zits on the end of her nose, along with the yellow teeth she attained from smoking(and perhaps from the cheeze-ballz too )

 

[Newquagmire]

Here's the deal, as a smoker in public YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS. None, nada, zilch.

You are in the minority that thinks this way.

The basic question of where one's rights begin and another's right's end is pervasive in our nation's entire foundation. Freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom to have an abortion, etc.

 

[Fermata]

If you wanna smoke, then go ahead...

But ffs, DON'T STAND RIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE DOOR THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO WALK THROUGH WHEN YOU DO IT.

FFS. It's a common courtesy.

 

[39094]

You are in the minority that thinks this way.

The basic question of where one's rights begin and another's right's end is pervasive in our nation's entire foundation. Freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom to have an abortion, etc.

No my friend, you might want to ask around about that one, because most non-smokers I know don't think smokers have a right to smoke in their face. That, and we more than doubly outnumber the smokers.

My freedom of speech ends when I yell fire in a crowded theater, my freedom to bear arms ends when I decide to tote my shotgun onto an airplane, and as far as abortion goes, nobody else has the right to tell you what to do with your own body. Just like you don't have the right to force me to harm my body by breathing your smoke.

As in all the examples above, your rights end when your actions cause harm to others. You ARE causing harm to others when you smoke, that's proven, documented and anyone who argues that secondhand smoke is a myth is either ignorant on the truth or having a serious nic fit.

So I say again, I don't want to smell your smoke, I don't want to breathe your carcinogens, and neither do most other people. Therefore, when you are in public and decide to light up, don't go crying about your "rights" when we non-smokers tell you to stop or pass legislation which does the same.

 

[ilim01]

I agree with you Getyanshi 100%

My father has smoked all his life and ever since I've learned of the horrendous effects I've been trying to get him to stop, but to no avail,

I feel really frustrated because if god forbid he later develops a smoking related disease, I will feel guilty knowing that perhaps there was something more I could have done...

With all the knowledge that we now have (that the cigarette companies have been trying to conceal all these years) smoking should definately be illegal !!

 

[velo]

I agree with you Getyanshi 100%

My father has smoked all his life and ever since I've learned of the horrendous effects I've been trying to get him to stop, but to no avail,

I feel really frustrated because if god forbid he later develops a smoking related disease, I will feel guilty knowing that perhaps there was something more I could have done...

With all the knowledge that we now have (that the cigarette companies have been trying to conceal all these years) smoking should definately be illegal !!

Are you trying to get people to yell at you? Smoking should not be illegal. People have the right...nay the duty, to do stupid ****. Smoking is a bad thing, as I said before I think its disgusting and its probably the worst single thing you could do for your health. But illegal? People have the right to make the wrong decisions...its that whole free will thing....

 

[ilim01]

I didnt feel I said anything especially offensive for ppl to yell at me

but according to your reasoning, should cocaine, heroine, LSD or any of the other illegal substance be legal, to let ppl "make their own decisions" ?

 

[Gerg]

It's not tobacco's fault that it has a better lobby than other drugs.

 

[Gerg]

As an afterthought, I think those commercials that tell you about all the "bad" chemicals that are in cigarette smoke that you're inhaleing are helarious!

I may be a bit of a nerd, but I thought it was the niftiest thing in Ochem when I learned how to read the back of my soda cans, toothpaste tubes, and yes, chemical bottles.

They start listing off the chemicals, and then what they are found in.
Like "Cabon Monoxide, which is part of car exhaust" When they could say "Carbon Monoxide, just like the naturally occuring neurotransmitter in your body". Science. 1993 Jan 15;259(5093):381-4.

Granted that whole heme interaction might cause some adverse effects when it gets into the bloodstream.... but that's a more developed arguement for a different time.

 

[ItsGavinC]

Are you trying to get people to yell at you? Smoking should not be illegal. People have the right...nay the duty, to do stupid ****. Smoking is a bad thing, as I said before I think its disgusting and its probably the worst single thing you could do for your health. But illegal? People have the right to make the wrong decisions...its that whole free will thing....

... and we have the right, as a society, to keep paying for their stupid and wrong decisions. Paying over and over and over again.

 

[fpr85]

From what I understand second-hand smoke is supposed to be just as bad (even worse) as smoking itself.

 

[velo]

I didnt feel I said anything especially offensive for ppl to yell at me

but according to your reasoning, should cocaine, heroine, LSD or any of the other illegal substance be legal, to let ppl "make their own decisions" ?

marijuanna yes IMO, but the others you listed have powerful psychoactive effects and shouldn't be readily available to the public, just as legal drugs like morphine aren't available to the public at large without going through a physician.

 

[Gerg]

So the Friends of Palestine organization at my school sponsered a Hooka Night on Tuesday. I wanted to go, but like most people who've traveled 2000 miles to come to medical school, my only friends are people in my class.

I couldn't get anybody to go with me, because none of them smoked Tobacco. Not even the occassional Sheesha! Damn..

 

[Doc Hef]

From what I understand second-hand smoke is supposed to be just as bad (even worse) as smoking itself.

I have heard this also, but don't actually know why. Anyone know why exactly?

 

[Dr Sum Day]

As a pt, I wouldn't like it if their stinky, cigarette-smelling breath was blown on me, like when they're listening to your heart, etc. Bad breath is bad enough, but to add smoke to it! I hope I can carry my sonicare everywhere.

 

[v-tach]

All this talk about smoking reminds me of something I saw while I was in London last year doing a school project. The British Heart Foundation had this public-service announcement about smoking. It started off with some people sitting around in a pub smoking, and the narrator talking about how every cigarette you smoke causes fatty material to build up in your arteries. Then you see this yellowish white gunk falling out the ends of the cigarettes, and then it cuts to a lab where somebody has a section of a large artery and is squeezing fatty gunk out of it and the narrator is saying "this much was found in the artery of a 32-year-old smoker". Then it cuts back to the pub, where the smokers seem a bit disturbed at this, and finally gives the BHF stop-smoking phone number with the tagline "We'll help you give up before you clog up completely". Whenever I was watching TV with someone and this commercial came on, the person would always be totally disgusted--it was always interesting to see their reactions.

 

[39094]

I think that all med students who smoke should be assigned the cadaver with the black lungs and multiple lung metastases, but even then most of them probably wouldn't get the clue.

But then, I'm "crazy" and should go smoke some weed and chill out 🙄

 

[Hoya11]

god you are sooo smart, how do the rest of us not see it?

 

[fpr85]

I have heard this also, but don't actually know why. Anyone know why exactly?

Something about it not getting filtered (since we're not sucking on the cigarrette, or not being filtered as it goes through the non-smokers body... not entirely sure) -- could be myth though, just like shaving makes your hair grow back faster, thicker, and bushier

 

[39094]

god you are sooo smart, how do the rest of us not see it?

I dunno, probably cause smoking causes blindness?

Actually I'm serious, which is what makes the comeback kinda sad......

http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/conditions/03/05/smoking.blindness.reut/

 

[GeddyLee]

Well if cigarettes should be illegal, alcohol should be illegal too. I'm sure the number of deaths of non-drinkers at the hands of the drunk far outnumber the number of wrongful deaths proven to be caused by second-hand smoke. Of course, since lots of med students like to party with a little alcohol, the number coming out against it will be far less than the smokers. Personally, I hate the idea of the government making new laws to prohibit personal activities like this.

And to those who think "how can you tell the patient to stop smoking when you the doctor smoke?." Get a grip. No one ever said doctors were supposed to be perfect, nor role models to their patients. Doctoring is a job, like any other. For role modeling, I require more money.

 

[39094]

Well if cigarettes should be illegal, alcohol should be illegal too. I'm sure the number of deaths of non-drinkers at the hands of the drunk far outnumber the number of wrongful deaths proven to be caused by second-hand smoke. Of course, since lots of med students like to party with a little alcohol, the number coming out against it will be far less than the smokers. Personally, I hate the idea of the government making new laws to prohibit personal activities like this.

And to those who think "how can you tell the patient to stop smoking when you the doctor smoke?." Get a grip. No one ever said doctors were supposed to be perfect, nor role models to their patients. Doctoring is a job, like any other. For role modeling, I require more money.

Ugh, you should read a thread before you start posting in it. This thread has primarily been about banning smoking in public places, not about forcing doctors or anybody else not to smoke.

Read back a few posts and then post again if you like.

 

[pbn2au]

From what I understand second-hand smoke is supposed to be just as bad (even worse) as smoking itself.

This is mostly due to incomplete combustion of the tobacco and sundry additives, producing "more toxic" compounds than would be found had someone inhaled and better combusted the cigarette. It's bad stuff either way, but insufficient oxygen makes things much worse.

It is analogous to car exhaust. An insufficient amount of oxygen is used to combust hydrocarbon fuel in car engines, and CO, NOx?s, et cetera result. (bad) Were you to build a perfectly stoichiometrically balanced engine, the overwhelming majority of exhaust products would be water and CO2 (good)

PAHs, nitrosamines, Po210 ? the beginning of a long list of scary stuff. A fun science experiment is to blow cigarette smoke into an organic liquid (EtOAc works well) and then run it through a GC/MS. Looks like the NYC skyline?

 

[velo]

Ugh, you should read a thread before you start posting in it. This thread has primarily been about banning smoking in public places, not about forcing doctors or anybody else not to smoke.

Read back a few posts and then post again if you like.

well yes, but making cigarettes illegal was discussed.
I'm going to assume he was refering to this post and the discussion that followed.

With all the knowledge that we now have (that the cigarette companies have been trying to conceal all these years) smoking should definately be illegal !!

 

[39094]

well yes, but making cigarettes illegal was discussed.
I'm going to assume he was refering to this post and the discussion that followed.

Fair enough, fair enough, didn't mean to come off quite so harsh.

But, to recap, there's lot of things that should be illegal, but never will be nor would it be possible to make them illegal if we even wanted to. If we were all smart enough not to destroy ourselves though they wouldn't HAVE to be illegal.

 

[vikaskoth]

Ugh, you should read a thread before you start posting in it. This thread has primarily been about banning smoking in public places, not about forcing doctors or anybody else not to smoke.

Read back a few posts and then post again if you like.

thread is called "med student smokers," Some Doctors and Med students smoke because it provides a short term relief of stress and all you smart people know being a doctor or med student is stressfull. This thread just turned into a public smoking forum cause some people jus love to btich and moan. Go be state legislators if you wanna ban smoking, or get your mph and make truth commercials

 

[39094]

thread is called "med student smokers," Some Doctors and Med students smoke because it provides a short term relief of stress and all you smart people know being a doctor or med student is stressfull. This thread just turned into a public smoking forum cause some people jus love to btich and moan. Go be state legislators if you wanna ban smoking, or get your mph and make truth commercials

Hard to make truth commercials when all the tobacco settlement money alloted for them instead gets funneled to buying extra limos for the governor.

 

[Doc Hef]

I agree with getianshi. Also, most of the government has a love/hate relationship with tobacky. They act like they disagree with the practice, but they love the tax money it brings in. I'm sure they had the right motives when they raised the tax on cigs a while ago... But I think that it was an amazing idea - get money from the settlements while agreeing that cigs are addictive, but then turn around and raise the taxes on those cigs b/c they know all the addicted people will just keep on buyin them.
Man, if only studying were addictive...