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.

 

"Thanks, Tobacco: You Killed My Mom"

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:11 AM
link   
Simple solutions?

If you ask me thats not only a horrible form of regulation on your civil freedoms, but it would cost MILLIONS of dollars to enforce those kind of laws.

All you are proposing is take away freedoms.




posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   
interesting, look at the quick replies that are so defensive

never did i say actually regulating anything

i actually stated i called for deregulation

im not saying people should not be allowed to smoke

as you are right, we should all have freedom of choice

my view is simply to think outside of the box, there are simple answers to everything

we could easily rid the world of the negative side effects of all drugs INCLUDING cigarettes much easier and cheaper then we can by continuing to fight the drug war and take all the tobacco companies to court everyday

the taxes levied on cigarettes alone if went to research in better areas could easily and cheaply change the negative effects in a relatively short amount of time

yet people jump to the defense characteristics in order to stay inside the box when there isnt a single nation or civilization that has improved by not thinking outside of the box



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:16 AM
link   
Thats irrelevant though.

Were talking about cigarettes and their effects, and ME SPECIFICALLY arguing against the banning (which PEOPLE HAVE SUGGESTED) of cigarettes.

That's all, plain and simple.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mattehinthebox
Simple solutions?

If you ask me thats not only a horrible form of regulation on your civil freedoms, but it would cost MILLIONS of dollars to enforce those kind of laws.

All you are proposing is take away freedoms.


you're sitting here complaining about millions on a worldwide economic powerhouse

the gdp of cigarettes around the world, well off my head i dont know it but i bet my life on the fact that a couple million a year, even a couple billion here and there is simply a drop in the bucket on all the advancements that would be made with the improvement of these substances


we're spending close to trillion dollar bailouts left and right
even the porn industry is trying to get in on the act
so why not think outside of the box and use our technology to make tobacco safe, rather then having this same ignorant argument?



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   
i will go on record as saying i do agree with you

banning ANYTHINg is a violation of our freedoms and isnt something that i suggest, i merely suggest that if we think logically and use the knowledge and technology available to us, we can solve even the world's greatest problems



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   
I'm not arguing against making it safe.

I'm arguing AGAINST BANNING IT.

That's all i said wasn't it?

To suggest otherwise is words from your mouth.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:21 AM
link   
I would like to add a small note, to the people who say you have the right not to smoke, you are correct but then i have the right not to be ran over by a drunk driver, but at least the driver is held countable. Guess what people smokers pay for treatment in advance in the Tax, how many people do you know who pay Cancer medical insurance? (in Advance ) I do for one!.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:24 AM
link   
i ask anyone, lets take a poll

what price would you be willing to pay to be able to smoke all the cigarettes you want and not have a single negative side effect, especially ones like lung cancer and death


is it a million?
a billion?
a trillion?

how much money has been profited off cigarettes since the beginning of time?

how much would be profited if everyone could smoke cigarettes and only enjoy the positive effects with none of the negative?


im not even including the cure for cancer in this price

im simply including the cost it would take to genetically modify tobacco with todays technology to make it so the cancer risks and everything else that goes along with it would be non-existent

can anyone really sit here on this conspiracy board and say with full beliefs that we as humans dont have that capability if we put our money into it and truly want it?

edited just to say

i guess the best way to put it is

whats the price on life?

and the old sayings true, if you cant beat em join em

with technology and knowledge today

we all know we can make it a profitable thing in the long term and short term if we eliminate the risks of smoking, its increased profit to the tobacco companies revenue would be unfathomable and dwarf whatever the cost of whatever it takes to achieve such a product

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Dramey]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:34 AM
link   
First off, cancer is NOT a result from smoking only. Cancer is from the result of cells replicating themselves and do not die off, but continue to replicate in clusters. Basic human biology 101...cells replicate, live, and then die and are replaced by new cells.

When the cells do not die off but continue to replicate, that is called CANCER.

Smoking does NOT cause cells to continue to replicate. If we put 2 and 2 together here, with all the nay saying of negative effects of smoking, the bottom line is that smoking SHOULD be killing off cells, thus would NOT be the cause of cancer!!!

Think about it.

Some people's cell regeneration are slow, others are fast. It is those who's cell regeneration rates far exceed their cell's end of life cycle, and continue to replicate new cells on top of already living exsisting cells.

Some people cannot produce enough new cells to replace the old ones. That is not cancer, that is something totally different.

Smoking will have different effects on different people. But if you really want the absolute truth to it all, when you smell the exaust of the vehicle in front of you through your car's vents, guess what...those fumes are far more toxic to your health than any 2nd hand smoke.

Also, 2nd hand smoke does not contain even a fraction of the cigarette contents when exhaled. The reason for that is because the smoker has captured 90 percent of those contents in that drag of smoke in their lungs. Basically, when a smoker exhales, they 'filter' out 90 percent of what you call bad elements of the cigarette smoke.

So putting the 2 and 2 together side by side, that vehicle exaust fumes your sniffing in at the stop light or in slow moving heavy traffic, is NOT filtered, you are sucking in 100 percent of the extreme exaust toxic fumes compared to the 10 percent of content exausted by a smoker.

Learn the facts my friend. Thank us smokers that we filter out that much of the contents you are so worried about..and go bark up the right tree about the 100 percent toxic fumes you breath in when in traffic.



Cheers!!!!


(lights up another)



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:36 AM
link   
Just some rambling on this topic...and some of the replies...

We smoke just outside malls and stores cause that is where they put the ashtrays.

If everyone were to stop smoking immediately and forever...just watch your taxes skyrocket.

Yes...drugs should be legal (crack, coke, etc.). The same as alcohol and smoking. But...YOU have to be responsible for your actions.

No...no one put a cigarette in my hand and yes, I understood the dangers that existed when I smoked my first cigarette. However, I didn't know that a giant business was intentionally trying to hook me for life to something dangerous. Big tobacco owes hooked smokers something.

Ohhh...one last one. The government makes huge amounts of money off tobacco companies. So, if nothing else, they are an accessory to the crime. Much like the states and towns that are taking down cameras at traffic lights cause their income from tickets have gone down.

Just my two (or five) cents.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:38 AM
link   

oriignal post by Ramey......
we could easily rid the world of the negative side effects of all drugs INCLUDING cigarettes much easier and cheaper then we can by continuing to fight the drug war and take all the tobacco companies to court everyday..


Yeah but that isn't going to shut up the anti-smoking brigade and their supposed fog of cigarette smoke that they have to live in 24/7, now is it.

So they should use "all that technology" to invent a gadget that you put on the end of your cigarette to diffuse the smoke. Patent pending.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   
Next thing you know, some people will try to take away my McDonald's Big Mac....oooops...never mind.

[edit on 1/28/2009 by WeAreAWAKE]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Flighty
 


EXACTLY

now we're on the same page

sounds funny but its completely possible

we're on a conspiracy board so ill just use the example of the moon race
they said they're going to the moon in 10 years, they did it whether it was a hoax or not

tobacco companies/governments could easily invest in the advancement of this creating jobs and economies and make even more money then they do now

then the conspiracy for that one is that they just faked that and ciggarettes were really still bad for you because people would be getting cancer from other things
and we all know other things still cause cancer too

but isnt the logical thing to at least start 1 by 1 eliminating the causes of cancer


what better to do then start getting rid of problems by making our problems profitable



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
now i might piss people off but bear with me, i appriciate the health concerns against smoking but its free choice and we should let people make their own choices.

Also im pissed off so my grammar might not be good.

ok for those who would like to see tobacco made illegal, make cigs illegal while your gov is the biggest 'dealer' ever? haha they will just get agencys to sell it on the black market and street corners and still get their money just like everything else. and then spend your tax money on a new WAR ON TOBACCO! Land of the free indeed. Haha!

I can't beleive there are stupid people on ATS uneducated enough to still be asking to have more rights taken away. Think here morons. Regardless of your opinion, giving people power over your actions is bad, epescialy if you are of such an opinion against something, if you feel so strongly about it your probably not going to do it, so now you are just interfering in others peoples business, which you have no right to do, if im not smoking in front of you or making you breathe in 2nd hand smoke get out my face!


can you show it was tobaccco and not the chemicals they put in it that killed her?

sorry but this pisses me off, its just another example of sheep brainwashed by the machine.

free thought, free choice, even if some are bad, or do you want us all in our little illuminati 1984 world, living under camera, in little boxes, with a RFID chip that tracks us, bugs us, conrolls us, and fines us anytime we swear or smoke?

hahahahahahaha

hahahahaha

oh yeah, and hahahahahaha

To be honest im dissapointed

You all on ATS should be well informed of the NWO and should not be encouraging more clampdowns in social/human behavior, this drive against smoking is just another step towards the NWO's new world order of boredom. By the time these people are finished they will be fining us for having fun or being happy!

Just don't complain to me when it happens.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 
You seem to think I don't know what I'm talking about, so let me fill you in. First, you don't like the fact that your smoking increases my insurance costs, my medical cost, and the cost of goods and services because of the time off. I'll refer you to the CDC, the Surgeon General, and the AMA. Want to know why my insurance goes up? Because I have group insurance. The people who smoke have more respiratory infections, and therefore use their insurance for doctor visit, and to cover medications. Sooner or later that gets passed on to me in the form of higher premiums and higher co-pays. Those same people take more time off because of respiratory illness. The means I have to find another nurse or aid to take their place. So, not only do I have to pay sick pay, I am probably going to end up paying overtime, which is going to sooner or later get past on to the consumer.
Want to about vents? You've smoked all your life, now have end stage COPD and can't breathe. The doctor shoves a tube down your throat, we connect you to a ventalator, sedate you and try to get your blood gases back to a point where you can breathe on your own for awhile. Guess what? Sometimes it doesn't work, and we can't even wake you up from the sedation. Possibly you had a stroke, or heart attack while you were on the vent. It's difficult to diagnose those things when someone is sedated to keep them from pulling the tube out that's keeping them alive.
Now all this time, I've been turning you, running a tube down the tube, trying to remove the secretions that build up in your lungs, giving you baths, and cleaning your butt. At the same time, I am dealing with you family. Your wife and children are asking me if your going to be alright. They are alternatly crying their eyes out, and angry at me because I don't fix you. I just try to reassure them that we are doing the best we can and we'll try to wean you off. (The doctor loves to dump this stuff on the nurses.)
Finally the day comes when we've tried three or four times to get you off, and we can't do it. The doctor has to approach your family and asked them to make a decision. You can't continue on the vent forever. But we can't stop the vent until someone, usually the wife, makes a decision.
I have stood by many families, and offered my condolences, and no I didn't say, "If only he hadn't smoked."
George Burns, your grandmother, and my grandfather are anomalies. And your theory that lung cancer is caused by additives and allergies is hogwash. It has been proven time and time again in peer reviewed studies that the LEADING (not the only)cause of lung cancer is smoking.
Now from a strictly selfish point of view, smoke on brother, Because all you doing is giving me even greater job security. And that part about the bath? It won't be some cute blonde. I'm a 300lb bald guy with a beard, and when I need it, attitude.
But my patients and my familes love me.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:18 AM
link   
I'm a smoker, but I try not to smoke around crowds of people, etc, I do my part to be thoughtful.

I think most of the time, people complain because the smoke bothers them.

But, the people who don't walk away nicely, like how I walk away nicely to light up, they are the ones that are SELF RIGHTEOUS and will either make a rude gesture or comment.

I think most smokers try to be thoughtful, you rarely see people smoking in NON designated areas.

I just hope the non smoking crowd would just not be rude and make rude comments or gestures.

Or else next time I see your ugly face, I will point at you and laugh out loud...

We all could be rude at something.....right? Oh except for laughing at your ugly face? It's your right to be ugly.... But your 2nd and 3rd hand ugliness affects MY EYES.

K thanks.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Rizen]

[edit on 28-1-2009 by Rizen]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mynaeris
reply to post by GreyFoxSolid
 


It's always tragic when someone insists on being the judge in every matter . You seemed to have missed the movie altogether, but critiquing the plot nonetheless.

But thanks for your input. As I said before my main aim is for people who smoke to understand that their smoking habits aren't just hurting them, but has health implications (short and long term ones) for many innocent non-smokers.



You sit in a garage with a car running and I'll sit in one smoking cigarettes, who walks away?

The fat little Nazi's who think they own everything taking away my rights why they scream and complain is more disgusting than any smoke could ever be. If a bar owner wants smoking in their business, it should be their right. You don't like it? Go somewhere else.



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
reply to post by RFBurns
 
You seem to think I don't know what I'm talking about, so let me fill you in. First, you don't like the fact that your smoking increases my insurance costs, my medical cost, and the cost of goods and services because of the time off. I'll refer you to the CDC, the Surgeon General, and the AMA. Want to know why my insurance goes up? Because I have group insurance. The people who smoke have more respiratory infections, and therefore use their insurance for doctor visit, and to cover medications. Sooner or later that gets passed on to me in the form of higher premiums and higher co-pays. Those same people take more time off because of respiratory illness. The means I have to find another nurse or aid to take their place. So, not only do I have to pay sick pay, I am probably going to end up paying overtime, which is going to sooner or later get past on to the consumer.
Want to about vents? You've smoked all your life, now have end stage COPD and can't breathe. The doctor shoves a tube down your throat, we connect you to a ventalator, sedate you and try to get your blood gases back to a point where you can breathe on your own for awhile. Guess what? Sometimes it doesn't work, and we can't even wake you up from the sedation. Possibly you had a stroke, or heart attack while you were on the vent. It's difficult to diagnose those things when someone is sedated to keep them from pulling the tube out that's keeping them alive.
Now all this time, I've been turning you, running a tube down the tube, trying to remove the secretions that build up in your lungs, giving you baths, and cleaning your butt. At the same time, I am dealing with you family. Your wife and children are asking me if your going to be alright. They are alternatly crying their eyes out, and angry at me because I don't fix you. I just try to reassure them that we are doing the best we can and we'll try to wean you off. (The doctor loves to dump this stuff on the nurses.)
Finally the day comes when we've tried three or four times to get you off, and we can't do it. The doctor has to approach your family and asked them to make a decision. You can't continue on the vent forever. But we can't stop the vent until someone, usually the wife, makes a decision.
I have stood by many families, and offered my condolences, and no I didn't say, "If only he hadn't smoked."
George Burns, your grandmother, and my grandfather are anomalies. And your theory that lung cancer is caused by additives and allergies is hogwash. It has been proven time and time again in peer reviewed studies that the LEADING (not the only)cause of lung cancer is smoking.
Now from a strictly selfish point of view, smoke on brother, Because all you doing is giving me even greater job security. And that part about the bath? It won't be some cute blonde. I'm a 300lb bald guy with a beard, and when I need it, attitude.
But my patients and my familes love me.



i chose to quote this rather than reply to because i feel this deserves extra attention

its really hard to break it down much more plainly then that, and thats putting it mildly, people like you and others who have seen 1st hand what the outcomes are from such problems can truly understand how it impacts so much more then just the smokers life

unfortunately there will always be those who are too stubborn and fool hearty to ever have it affect them or change their minds, that is what is wrong with us as human beings

hopefully someday we will evolve to be truly intelligent, not only a select few greats like genius's we worship, but hopefully one day all be such genius's and then debates like these wouldnt even be necessary

well put post much respect for a very well said post



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   
www.google.com...


Radioactive Polonium found in tobacco (also found throughout the food chain in trace amounts... cancer's rise explained?) Association Researchers say that the interdiction of cellular apoptosis by Nicotine, which prolongs mutated/damaged cells lives further (apoptosis insures longevity by causing damaged cells to die and replace with new regenerated cells, in the body), plus the long term consequences of Polonium 210 from the Tobacco plants, which provide over 75 mRads of Radiation Per Day (that's the same as between 3 and 50 Chest-X-Rays will give you, every Pack of Cigarettes you smoke) applied directly to the Lungs, and the resulting damage to your Lungs, prolonged by the Nicotine, lead to virtually ALL Lung Cancers among Smokers today.


It seems that what is becoming the usual culprit, lying and cover stories have made tobacco rather than its fertilizer the perceived problem. The abundance of straw man arguments and deception have exaggerated the situation. Governments chasing false problems with even more false solutions seems to rule the day in an insane totalitarian dictatorship of psychological warfare. We have a tremendous carbon credit scam achieving nothing to solve any problem, while the data about authentic health crises are suppressed such as GMO foods, aspartame, and MSG.

The reason we have so many problems is because the free press has long ago abandoned any hard hitting journalism exposing abuses of the public interest, and a government that hates liability and other related issues so much that it sacrifices the public well being.



[edit on 28-1-2009 by SkipShipman]



posted on Jan, 28 2009 @ 07:29 AM
link   
Are we to believe, that through 10,000 years of history, man did not develop a certain immunity and defense against smoke from fires? It seems to me that anyone who did not have at least some immunity to smoke all those years ago would have died out young, thus not replicating their genes.

Some facts:

The #1 victim from lung cancer is non-smokers. Followed by smokers who have quit, followed by smokers.

Smoking reduces your chances of alzheimers by over 75%

Smoking reduces your chances of Parkinsons by over 75%

Smokers are more likely to survive a heart attack than non-smokers.

Any of these facts can be found if one does a search for "beneficial effects of smoking" on the web. And, the results found will be from medical journals, not studies payed for by tobacco companies.

Don't believe me? Look it up for yourself.




top topics



 
6
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join