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.

 

Third-hand smoke also bad for you: study

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Article


WASHINGTON (AFP) - You know smoking is bad for you. You know inhaling someone else's smoke is bad for you. Now a US study says third-hand smoke -- tobacco residue clinging to surfaces -- is also bad for you.



When a cigarette burns, nicotine is released in the form of a vapor that collects and condenses on indoor surfaces such as walls, carpeting, drapes and furniture, where it can linger for months, said the study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).



Opening a window or turning on a fan to air out a room while a cigarette burns does not eliminate the hazard of third-hand smoke. Smoking outdoors doesn't help much either.


Looks like another thing to be worried about. Im not sure how old this study is but it was posted not to long ago on the yahoo news stuff. I always thought smoking inside was pretty nasty, considering the smell and how it sticks to everything. Now there is proof its bad for you to.




posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
any form of smoking is bad for you..... period, it doesnt take a genius to figure that out, i think its funny they had to waste time to make a "study" for this,

[edit on 2/9/2010 by l neXus l]



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Follow the money.

Needless to say, just like the global warming freaks this is utter crap cooked up by somebody trying to justify their research grant.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
the GOP is just finding ways to give us news



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Oh god, this thing. I hope you realize that this is total junk science as well as old news. I suggest reading this article

www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk...

And checking out Michael Siegels blog

tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com...



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Bull, bunk and poppycock. You could have a bowel movement, mail it to the New England Journal of Medicine, and they would publish it, as long as I told them it proves smoking is bad for someone. Why don't they ever publish papers like "Jogging through Los Angeles, is worse than smoking three packs of filterless igarettes per day." "Working in a toll booth is worse than smoking two cartons a week". They won't, because theres no money to be made.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by buni11687
 

oh no!


They are starting to lay the fear mongering on a bit thick now. Third hand smoke residue?
If health officials were really worried about protecting people's health they'd be doing studies into air pollution caused by car fumes and doing studies into what toxins people ingest from.. well everything in their enviroment. Want a drink of water? Tap water contains toxins; water bottles leach toxins. Brain tumours were apparently rare before the mass use of cell phones as well. etc. Want some fresh air? Quit smoking!

..oh and step outside and breathe in all that nice fresh air.


Anyone who works in the middle of a CBD can tell you about how just 1 smoggy day can get them coughing like a pack a day smoker. Why does car pollution not make the news apart from the effect it has on the ozone layer? Third hand smoke is the least of our problems. (how are they going to make that into a scary commercial?)

..and I like how they have a pic of an ashtray at an airport terminal.. Anyone think jetfuel is good for them?


[edit on 9-2-2010 by riley]



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Ah i must quit smoking. I have been holding it off for too long.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Ridiculous. Not too long ago my daughter came home from school and was telling me that her teacher was telling this at school. She was telling the kids that if their parents smoked that they were in a way, killing other people.

Here's my view:
I'll be 34 years old this month. I started smoking when I was 12. I smoke about a pack a day, some days maybe a pack and a half.
I don't have that "dreaded smokers cough" people always refer to.
I don't choke and cough up black nasty things or burnt lung tissue like I have heard it called.
I don't have trouble breathing.
I can still play sports, run 3 miles on a treadmill, help coach my daughters softball team.
I don't have nicotine fits or suffer from withdawls if I don't have a cigarette.
I don't turn in to a big meanie-head if I don't have a cigarette.
My family:
My mother smoked when she was pregnant with all four of her children. We were all born heathy and none of us suffer from any from of illness.
Out of the 4, I am the only one that smokes.
My grandparents, all 4 of them, lived well in to their 80's, and all 4 of them smoked non-filter cigarettes all their lives. Even when pregnant.
No one in my family has any illness from smoking. No asthma, no lung cancer, no emphasyma (sp?),no heart disease, or anything else.

Now I'm not claiming that smoking is not bad for you. I just don't think i's as bad for you as some people claim.

Big tobacco companies work with the government to raise taxes on their products. Why? To make more money. The know that most people can't or won't quit smoking. And for those that do want to quit? The tobacco companies offer stop smoking programs. Gums, Patches, Hypnosis, Throat Sprays, Presription Medicines, Mints, Therapy Programs, etc. All of it cost money. MOST of it cost more money than the cigarettes themselves. Plus, they all have a high failure rate. They're not meant to work, they're meant to fail so you'll keep spending money on them or go back to smoking. It's all a sham.

Pack of Smokes: $5
Pack of Stop Smoking Gum: $45

They sell you a product. Tell you it's bad. Sell you the anecdote that they know doesn't work. They send you money saving coupons to buy more cigarettes.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by dashen
Bull, bunk and poppycock. You could have a bowel movement, mail it to the New England Journal of Medicine, and they would publish it, as long as I told them it proves smoking is bad for someone. Why don't they ever publish papers like "Jogging through Los Angeles, is worse than smoking three packs of filterless igarettes per day." "Working in a toll booth is worse than smoking two cartons a week". They won't, because theres no money to be made.


I speak from personal expirence and can assure you that 3rd hand smoke can indeed be harmfull (well in large amounts anyway).My family owned a bungalow with a tenant that came with the property when my father bought it at auction(sitting tenant on a protected lease) she was in her late sixties when we got it and was a very very heavy smoker.The house stunk of smoke.Any way she did cut down smoking but still smoked right up to her death aged 79 which was natural and non smoking related( unbelievably).When we went in to do a re-furb I was amazed at how yellow everything in the house was especially doors and ceilings.The ceiling in the lounge was completely yellow. It was my job to decorate and I knew the nicotine would bleed through any paint I applied so decided to clean using sugar soap.Wow that stuff sure works but when cleaning the ceiling the horrible yellow nicotine that had built up from over 40 years of puffing was now running down my arms.Very soon my hands and arms became very red and sore and lasted for at least a couple of days.A direct result of the nicotine's poison on my skin. I abandoned the nicotine cleaning(which i had nearly finished) and had no other choice than to use white undercoat to paint over the ceilings which did stop the nicotine coming through and emulsion over that. So Sir not all Bull, bunk and poppycock .

[edit on 9-2-2010 by tarifa37]



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Firstly, how do you know that you weren't in fact stripping lead paint all over yourself? How do you know that you werent experiencing something else, such as mold or mildew? Moreover, how do you know that the yellowing was in fact caused by nicotine, and not one of the many other chemicals present in many brands of cigarettes? I for one, used to be a painter in Manhattan. I learned early on, if you are painting a room white in Manhattan, don't leave the windows open from the moment the paint hits the wall till it is completely dry, if not, all the soot from the air outside will turn it grey, overnight. Smoke em if you got em.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   
poison chemical residue is bad?? Some one give these scientist a metal. I collect my tabaco pipe residue and rub it on people for giggle.s



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Lophe
 


Then according to the above paper, if it is at all true, you sir are a cold blooded Murderer.
Shame on you.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


I agree wth Dashen. While I don't doubt your story at all, I do find it hard to believe that your skin irritation was a result from 40 years of built up nicotine on a ceiling.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
1 question for now.

The radioactive contamination on tobacco for decades.

Question: how many of the countless of studies done took into account this radioactivity in their results?

A multitude of radioactive isotopes were found in tobacco.

Includes for example uranium, thorium, strontium, radon, lead.

EPA's public ruling is that for one, radon is a confirmed cause of lung cancer.

See what I mean?

Glaring confounding factors seemingly ignored.

Note: I'm not talking about the analysis identifying the isotopes. But the mostly cited, actual medical studies used to reach the current consensus.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by dashen
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Firstly, how do you know that you weren't in fact stripping lead paint all over yourself? How do you know that you werent experiencing something else, such as mold or mildew? Moreover, how do you know that the yellowing was in fact caused by nicotine, and not one of the many other chemicals present in many brands of cigarettes?


I wasn't stripping paint I was cleaning the yellow nicotine that was left behind by the smoke with sugar soap( sugar soap is a fantastic powder you mix with warm water to clean grease and dirt off walls before painting ,it won't strip paint).The room that was worse hit was the living room where she spent nearly all of her time .Even sleeping there in her chair like many very old people do instead of going to bed. I am sure there must be a lot of pub landlords who deciding after the smoking ban came into force to redecorate their pubs discovered that years of smokers had left there mark on the decoration.We now do not let to people who smoke because of the damage it does to decoration. I was getting fed up repainting ceilings after only 1 or 2 years of occupation from smokers. The ceilings in my own house are pristine white and were last done 9 years ago, guess what its because we don't smoke.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Detailed Perfection
reply to post by tarifa37
 


I agree wth Dashen. While I don't doubt your story at all, I do find it hard to believe that your skin irritation was a result from 40 years of built up nicotine on a ceiling.


Well think about it forty years of smoke left nicotine deposits over the ceiling that when rejuvenated by the warm soapy water dripped very concentrated nicotine on to my hands and arms causing some sort of chemical reaction on my skin. Oh and I'm not allergic to nicotine I used to smoke for 10 years until I gave up nine years ago.



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tarifa37
 


Again, how do you know it was nicoteine?



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
This is ridiculous, I still haven`t seen conclusive proof that first hand smoking is bad for you. In fact, people who smoke less then 5 cigarettes a day have a benefit from it ! Because the tobacco smoke and tar it contains lays a thin layer on the inside of your lungs preventing other pollution and microcrobes to enter your blood stream.

And another thing, didn`t our early ancestors discovered fire and didn`t they use it to heat themselves with campfires in and outside of caves and dwellings ? If it were all so bad for you, how come we made it this far ?

I`m sick of this kind of news, everyone should tolerate as much as humanly possible, until someone brings in the smoker. I`ll smoke as long as I can, even if it`s the last thing I do :-)



posted on Feb, 9 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
yeah, I agree with most people here. I am not a smoker, but here are my thoughts on it:

Everything in Moderation: don't smoke 5 packs a day. One cigarette every once in a while would be fine. The body can handle a lot of stuff thrown at it.

There are much worse pollutants out there in the world. Also, like I said, the human body can handle mild amounts of discomfort.

I think I make sense, tell me if I don't.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join