It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Smoking Bans - Where will it end?

page: 26
33
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: ArMaP

good question ArMap

As with lung cancer - its only a theory and has yet to be proved.

Here is what is known. Some people have mental illness. There is a higher rate of smoking among people who a mental illnes (80 % or so). People who smoke and have mental illness claim that smoking controls their symptoms far better than the Big Pharma drugs that doctors offer them.

Thats it - that's all. Its a theory. An observation only. It has an established biological pathway that makes it plausible but nothing that has been absolutely proven yet. It is being researched though.

Tired of Control Freaks




posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
The B3 argument is ridiculous.

You can get all the B3 you need from commonplace foods.

I'm starting to suspect trolling as well and feeling a little foolish.


No you cannot get the B3 from modern foods. Some you can get from brown rice, and wholegrain bread. But who eats that any more.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
No you cannot get the B3 from modern foods. Some you can get from brown rice, and wholegrain bread. But who eats that any more.


I do eat wholegrain bread.

edit on 28/1/2015 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:12 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

You have gone awfully quiet ScepticScot

So now we have arrived at the truth.

The anti-smoking campaign is built on a very shaky statistical lie.

And everything that follows after that one very big whopper is just a continuation of the very same lie.

Tired of Control Freaks



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: anonentity
No you cannot get the B3 from modern foods. Some you can get from brown rice, and wholegrain bread. But who eats that any more.


I do eat wholegrain bread.


You might benefit from non gluten foods.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
You have gone awfully quiet ScepticScot

Time zones do that.


For people in Europe, people from America almost disappear in the morning and make most of their posts while we are sleeping.


So now we have arrived at the truth.

I doubt it.


The anti-smoking campaign is built on a very shaky statistical lie.

Do you mean that smoking doesn't cause any health problems?


And everything that follows after that one very big whopper is just a continuation of the very same lie.

Maybe, if you can prove that everything is based on a lie.



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 07:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity
You might benefit from non gluten foods.

Why?



posted on Jan, 28 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: anonentity

originally posted by: DelMarvel
The B3 argument is ridiculous.

You can get all the B3 you need from commonplace foods.

I'm starting to suspect trolling as well and feeling a little foolish.


No you cannot get the B3 from modern foods. Some you can get from brown rice, and wholegrain bread. But who eats that any more.


Thats hilarious. "No you can't get it, but you can get it"



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:10 AM
link   
As long as insurance companies or the taxpayer are funding public healthcare smoking will continue to be crushed. You can't opt out, you can get an exemption.

The war for public opinion was lost decades ago.

Mental exercises to 'prove' to yourself that smoking isn't harmful are as useful as rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic.

It's over folks.

The campaign is in the mop up phase.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Leonidas
As long as insurance companies or the taxpayer are funding public healthcare smoking will continue to be crushed. You can't opt out, you can get an exemption.

The war for public opinion was lost decades ago.

Mental exercises to 'prove' to yourself that smoking isn't harmful are as useful as rearranging deck-chairs on the Titanic.

It's over folks.

The campaign is in the mop up phase.


Just like it was for alcohol in 1919 right?



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: ArMaP
I would assume Tiredofcontrolfreaks knows where I live from the link to a Scottish court case and the single t in my name even without looking at my history. A less kind soul than I might suggest that if you don't get time zones maybe smoking isn't as good for brain activity as she suggests.
To be honest I am over debating with anyone who takes any study suggesting any possible benefit to nicotine (and there are benefits) to mean smoking is good for you. While at the same time assuming the mountains of evidence against smoking is a conspiracy. It makes anti-vaxers look rational.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 02:12 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

To be fair, the original premise was that the OP feels new legislation was over reaching.
To quote the OP:




So now when exposure is down to nothing more than a molecular level, when it clearly can't be about health - are the control motives of anti-smokers now clear? One helpful commenter even suggests that the children of smokers should be seized and put into a "safe orphanage" (and we have all seen how safe some orphanges are). Is it time for non-smokers to stand up and help defend the rights of a hated minority? Or will you all fall under the hammer with us?


Within the post I I'm responding to you seem to have a both side view of the issue. Although you are talking about smoking, and the OP was more about second hand smoke. I get we have drifted off of the OP, but I would be interested to know how you feel about the subject presented in the opening post. If you have responded to it before (26 pages. . . I read them all, no promise I remember them all.), just link to the post.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 02:21 AM
link   
a reply to: randomtangentsrme
A good point as the thread has wandered into a more general is smoking good /bad for you.
To answer you question I think that I would reject the premise that there is a conspiracy or campaign against smokers. Being against smoking is not the sane as being against smokers.
As for second hand smoke I would agree that there is still research needing done and a ambiguity over how bad it is, however the overwhelming balance of evidence seems to be it is harmful. Steps to restrict second smoke in certain circumstances therefore seem sensible to me.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: randomtangentsrme

The two are radically different and are a demonstration of what public campaigns work, and which don't. One was driven by moral outrage, the other by popular consent.

For those keeping score at home, the moral-outrage campaign lost and liquor - which never went away - continues to be popular.

The public was not behind prohibition in significant enough numbers for it to succeed. The public IS sufficiently behind a ban on tobacco smoke to have been able to sustain a generations-long campaign against it. The tipping point was long past and there are not enough new adopters to object in any politically or economically significant way to reverse the trend. The financial incentive to stay in this jurisdiction is nowhere near enough for the industry to mount a fight.

Prohibition and anti-smoking phenomenon are not similar. They are a case study in how to accomplish your goal, and how to fail at it.

The ship has sailed, the die is cast, the Rubicon has been crossed, the horses are out of the barn...etc, etc, etc.
edit on 29-1-2015 by Leonidas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 04:17 AM
link   
they can demonise smoking, and smokers, all they want. it DOES NOT cause cancer. the end. so it's smell seems to be a huge problem for many perfect-health nuts. tough titties. the world stinks. people stink. you want to ban cars? planes? fire?

whatever. carry on whinging, anti-smokers. i shall carry on smoking. deal with it. and keep your noses out of other peoples lives.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

If you can go to any 7/11 in the country day or night, buy cigarettes and smoke them in the car on the way home without fear of being arrested then they aren't prohibited.

If you're constantly hacking up phlegm your body isn't working right.

Simple concepts.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: randomtangentsrme

The OP misrepresented the article he/she originally cited. It was not about smoke that was just at a "molecular level" nor was it about busybodies trying to control people in their own homes for the hell of it. It was about smoke seeping into people's apartments and condos from smokers in other units.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
they can demonise smoking, and smokers, all they want. it DOES NOT cause cancer.

How can you be so sure?


so it's smell seems to be a huge problem for many perfect-health nuts.

My problem it's not the smell (I even like the smell of the smoke of some cigarettes), my problem is that smoke from cigarettes affects my lungs, reducing my capability of breathing.

Reducing the smoking problem to "it stinks" is ignoring the millions of people that are really affected by it, regardless of cars, planes, whatever also producing smoke.


i shall carry on smoking. deal with it. and keep your noses out of other peoples lives.

As long as you don't force me to breath your smoke I don't care if you smoke or not.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
This thread seems to have swerved off course from the OP...whether or not delicious, delicious, seductive and loving cigars and cigarettes are bad for you was not the question raised. The question was "Smoking Bans - Where Will it End"?

It will end when all tobacco smoke has been banned everywhere. Period.

It's over folks. All that's left is the mop-up operation. Enjoy every public or private drag off your tobacco of choice, revel in it's growing scarcity. Savour it, remember where you were at the time...

Smokers are a spent force with little or no political power what-so-ever so there is no going back.

The rest is noise, it is just a matter of time.


edit on 29-1-2015 by Leonidas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Leonidas

I quite agree Leonidas - that was the intention of smoking bans in the first place. It was never about health. Never about whether tobacco has benefits or is the greatest evil ever invented.

It was always about straight up Prohibition, manipulation, control over the population and of course MONEY MONEY MONEY - billions of it!


It was always driven by Puritans who hate the idea that someone, somewhere, might be enjoying themselves. The self-rightous, sour-pussed few who always seem to be left wanting just "one more regulation" away from Utopia

But the "sound is beginning"

www.dailymail.co.uk... election.html





Ukip is planning to overturn the ban on smoking in pubs and introduce a 35p tax rate as part of its 100 election promises in advance of May's poll. Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... election.html#ixzz3QF18a9Jz Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Tired of Control Freaks




top topics



 
33
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join