This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
On my way in today I saw a young woman, clad in a dressing gown, fag in mouth outside the hospital entrance. She was standing right next to a sign proclaiming "This is a no smoking zone" I sometimes wonder if there's any hope for humanity
In reply to mypyrex:
Seems to happen at all hospitals and in answer to your question, I hope so but probably not
Seems to happen at all hospitals and in answer to your question, I hope so but probably not
In reply to mypyrex:
I have been in and out of about 4 local hospitals ( visiting) recently, and it seems to be the same in them all, patients out in the wind and sometimes in the rain smoking.
My own aunt was desperate to get back home,as she was not able to walk in hospital, so no cigs. When she got home she found that she did not have enough lung power to draw on a cigarette. As she was in hospital over a month I would have thought the craving would have gone, but apparently not!
I have been in and out of about 4 local hospitals ( visiting) recently, and it seems to be the same in them all, patients out in the wind and sometimes in the rain smoking.
My own aunt was desperate to get back home,as she was not able to walk in hospital, so no cigs. When she got home she found that she did not have enough lung power to draw on a cigarette. As she was in hospital over a month I would have thought the craving would have gone, but apparently not!
In reply to Jim C:
Really frustrating but these are the people who are 'super addicted' not even multiple hospitalizations for COPD/lung infections/lung cancer stop them smoking.
D
Really frustrating but these are the people who are 'super addicted' not even multiple hospitalizations for COPD/lung infections/lung cancer stop them smoking.
D
In reply to mypyrex:
If ever there was a time when smoking is in any way justified it has to be when you're in hospital, quite possibly the most stressful and unpleasant experiences any of us will ever encounter.
As a non smoker it really pi$$es me off that hospitals don't make suitable provision for smokers, the attitude always smacks of puritanism and self righteousness to me.
Yes we should do everything we can to discourage and eliminate smoking, but hospitals aren't the place to do it.
If ever there was a time when smoking is in any way justified it has to be when you're in hospital, quite possibly the most stressful and unpleasant experiences any of us will ever encounter.
As a non smoker it really pi$$es me off that hospitals don't make suitable provision for smokers, the attitude always smacks of puritanism and self righteousness to me.
Yes we should do everything we can to discourage and eliminate smoking, but hospitals aren't the place to do it.
In reply to Jim C:
... and often with their 'drip' or oxygen bottle on a wheeled stand.
Still I suppose they think the amount of tax they've paid for their fags over the years gives them the right to do so.
Makes my blood boil to think my taxes are paying for their treatment when I struggle to get an appointment to see my GP.
Can't grumble about the NHS too much. They were bloody marvellous with my late Mum -- brought her back from the brink and she still had a a couple of pretty good years after that.
> I have been in and out of about 4 local hospitals ( visiting) recently, and it seems to be the same in them all, patients out in the wind and sometimes in the rain smoking.
... and often with their 'drip' or oxygen bottle on a wheeled stand.
Still I suppose they think the amount of tax they've paid for their fags over the years gives them the right to do so.
Makes my blood boil to think my taxes are paying for their treatment when I struggle to get an appointment to see my GP.
Can't grumble about the NHS too much. They were bloody marvellous with my late Mum -- brought her back from the brink and she still had a a couple of pretty good years after that.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
This must be a "troll" as it has been a while since I heard anything as stupid!!
Yes, lets waste NHS time and money pandering to people who want to poison themsleves??
Whilst we are on lets insist the NHS provide booze for alcoholics and hourly burgers and milk shakes for the obese..
This must be a "troll" as it has been a while since I heard anything as stupid!!
Yes, lets waste NHS time and money pandering to people who want to poison themsleves??
Whilst we are on lets insist the NHS provide booze for alcoholics and hourly burgers and milk shakes for the obese..
In reply to mgco3:
Yes, and lets fix Climbers broken Limbs so they can be dumb ass enough to go Climbing again. Had a car crash? Well we will sort you out if you Promise you will never get in a car again. bloody Spongers!
Yes, and lets fix Climbers broken Limbs so they can be dumb ass enough to go Climbing again. Had a car crash? Well we will sort you out if you Promise you will never get in a car again. bloody Spongers!
In reply to mgco3:
Not a troll in any way shape or form. He's not suggesting giving them the supplies. Just somewhere to smoke that's not the main entrance.
Being in hospital is not the easiest time to quit. It's stressful, painful and often bad news is received. Patches only help so far.
I'm a non smoker and can't stand the habit but I do understand why patients and relatives dont give up. The hospital I work at was recently torn to shreds for providing smoking shelters but anything had to be an improvement on the then situation of smoking outside the childrens playroom window!
Not a troll in any way shape or form. He's not suggesting giving them the supplies. Just somewhere to smoke that's not the main entrance.
Being in hospital is not the easiest time to quit. It's stressful, painful and often bad news is received. Patches only help so far.
I'm a non smoker and can't stand the habit but I do understand why patients and relatives dont give up. The hospital I work at was recently torn to shreds for providing smoking shelters but anything had to be an improvement on the then situation of smoking outside the childrens playroom window!
In reply to mgco3:
>
The NHS wouldn`t be providing their smokes though, would they?
So no time or money wasted there.
You seem to be looking for something to be annoyed by, so how about having to walk through a cloud of second-hand smoke from those puffing away outside the hospital entrance? Does that wind you up too?
>
> Yes, lets waste NHS time and money pandering to people who want to poison themsleves??
> Whilst we are on lets insist the NHS provide booze for alcoholics and hourly burgers and milk shakes for the obese..
The NHS wouldn`t be providing their smokes though, would they?
So no time or money wasted there.
You seem to be looking for something to be annoyed by, so how about having to walk through a cloud of second-hand smoke from those puffing away outside the hospital entrance? Does that wind you up too?
In reply to Choss:
Not another troll FFS.
Equating Climbing accidents with smoking deaths??
If as many people were killed climbing as died through smoking I would agree but as I doubt that the climbing deaths reach double figures whereas smoking accounts for about 100,000 UK deaths per year.
Not another troll FFS.
Equating Climbing accidents with smoking deaths??
If as many people were killed climbing as died through smoking I would agree but as I doubt that the climbing deaths reach double figures whereas smoking accounts for about 100,000 UK deaths per year.
In reply to mgco3:
well, you quote all the figures you Like, but every single climbing Injury is easily avoidable. Dont Know why the NHS sort out their Irresponsible selfish behaviour.
well, you quote all the figures you Like, but every single climbing Injury is easily avoidable. Dont Know why the NHS sort out their Irresponsible selfish behaviour.
Post edited at 19:03
In reply to Kirriemuir:
I have had the misfortune to spend a lot of time in hospitals over the last 10 years or so( visiting as well as receiving treatment).
The NHS is stretched to its limit and I see absolutely no reason to pander to people who continue to habitually harm themsleves at the expense of others.
Insisiting that we provide shelters (they arent free and dont build themsleves) for smokers is rediculous. And yes I agree with the hospital entrance problem. That could be solved by banning smoking anywhere near hospitals.
Whilst we are at it lets stop wasting money on gastric band operations for people who feed themselves with a shovel whilst people who need hip replacements have to wait in pain.
I have had the misfortune to spend a lot of time in hospitals over the last 10 years or so( visiting as well as receiving treatment).
The NHS is stretched to its limit and I see absolutely no reason to pander to people who continue to habitually harm themsleves at the expense of others.
Insisiting that we provide shelters (they arent free and dont build themsleves) for smokers is rediculous. And yes I agree with the hospital entrance problem. That could be solved by banning smoking anywhere near hospitals.
Whilst we are at it lets stop wasting money on gastric band operations for people who feed themselves with a shovel whilst people who need hip replacements have to wait in pain.
In reply to Choss:
But you expect the NHS to "sort out" smokers behaviour???
> well, you quote all the figures you Like, but every single climbing Injury is easily avoidable. Dont Know why the NHS sort out their Irresponsible selfish behaviour.
But you expect the NHS to "sort out" smokers behaviour???
In reply to mgco3:
Im being Deliberately inflammatory to Point out that you are letting your own personal Moral Judgement Which is no more or less Valid than what i outlined for climbers, cloud your judgement about whether hospital patients can get a perfectly Legal smoke when they need it most.
> But you expect the NHS to "sort out" smokers behaviour???
Im being Deliberately inflammatory to Point out that you are letting your own personal Moral Judgement Which is no more or less Valid than what i outlined for climbers, cloud your judgement about whether hospital patients can get a perfectly Legal smoke when they need it most.
In reply to mgco3:
If youre that anti smoking, dont pick on smokers, campaign to get smoking made illegal.
If youre that anti smoking, dont pick on smokers, campaign to get smoking made illegal.
In reply to mypyrex:
Because that is humanity's biggest issue? Move on.
> On my way in today I saw a young woman, clad in a dressing gown, fag in mouth outside the hospital entrance. She was standing right next to a sign proclaiming "This is a no smoking zone" I sometimes wonder if there's any hope for humanity
Because that is humanity's biggest issue? Move on.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
My mother was a nurse, and was a heavy smoker, ( a lot of nurses smoked) Our family GP was a heavy smoker too. My father would pick our mother up from her shifts at the hospital, and he would smoke in the grounds waiting for her to arrive. The first thing she would do would light up a cigarette, and get into the car, and we would all drive home from hospital in a smoke filled car!
My father as a heavy smoker was latterly back IN hospital ( in isolation with no immune system) but regularly went 'missing,' and was found to have left the grounds to get cigs,
So whilst I am against smoking, and agree with no smoking in hospital grounds, I have seen it from my parent's own addicted view.
(N.b , I have them both to thank for warning/ putting me off cigarettes at a young age, but no amount of pester power from my sister of I could stop them)
My mother actually quit smoking when she retired from nursing, my father continued to smoke all his days , and died of a NON smoking related cancer at 69.
It is a tough one.
> Yes we should do everything we can to discourage and eliminate smoking, but hospitals aren't the place to do it.
My mother was a nurse, and was a heavy smoker, ( a lot of nurses smoked) Our family GP was a heavy smoker too. My father would pick our mother up from her shifts at the hospital, and he would smoke in the grounds waiting for her to arrive. The first thing she would do would light up a cigarette, and get into the car, and we would all drive home from hospital in a smoke filled car!
My father as a heavy smoker was latterly back IN hospital ( in isolation with no immune system) but regularly went 'missing,' and was found to have left the grounds to get cigs,
So whilst I am against smoking, and agree with no smoking in hospital grounds, I have seen it from my parent's own addicted view.
(N.b , I have them both to thank for warning/ putting me off cigarettes at a young age, but no amount of pester power from my sister of I could stop them)
My mother actually quit smoking when she retired from nursing, my father continued to smoke all his days , and died of a NON smoking related cancer at 69.
It is a tough one.
In reply to mgco3:
And where do you think the tax from fags goes? You sound like the sort of person every smoker wants to smoke next to on purpose
> This must be a "troll" as it has been a while since I heard anything as stupid!!
> Yes, lets waste NHS time and money pandering to people who want to poison themsleves??
> Whilst we are on lets insist the NHS provide booze for alcoholics and hourly burgers and milk shakes for the obese..
And where do you think the tax from fags goes? You sound like the sort of person every smoker wants to smoke next to on purpose
In reply to mgco3:
If it weren't for all the money paid in by smokers via tobacco tax you may not even have been able to make use of the hospitals for these last 10 years, so next time you go past a hospital and you see people in gowns and drips smoking by the door in the rain, just take a couple of minutes to stop and thank them for their sacrifice or even buy them a warm cup of tea.
If it weren't for all the money paid in by smokers via tobacco tax you may not even have been able to make use of the hospitals for these last 10 years, so next time you go past a hospital and you see people in gowns and drips smoking by the door in the rain, just take a couple of minutes to stop and thank them for their sacrifice or even buy them a warm cup of tea.
In reply to crayefish:
You tell im Steve Dave :-D
> And where do you think the tax from fags goes? You sound like the sort of person every smoker wants to smoke next to on purpose
You tell im Steve Dave :-D
In reply to Choss:
No moral judgement, just a financial one.
Smokers are knowingly harming themselves and others by their actions.
Climbers (at least all the ones that I know) dont self harm and expect others to foot the bill or have special treatment.
http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_121.pdf
Smokers cost the NHS £2.7 BILLION a year... That , in my book, is £2.7 billion too much.
http://www.nta.nhs.uk/uploads/alcoholcommentary2013final.pdf
Alcohol abuse costs £3.5 Billion to the NHS.
How many lives could be saved if we didn't waste this much money on self harm.
No moral judgement, just a financial one.
Smokers are knowingly harming themselves and others by their actions.
Climbers (at least all the ones that I know) dont self harm and expect others to foot the bill or have special treatment.
http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_121.pdf
Smokers cost the NHS £2.7 BILLION a year... That , in my book, is £2.7 billion too much.
http://www.nta.nhs.uk/uploads/alcoholcommentary2013final.pdf
Alcohol abuse costs £3.5 Billion to the NHS.
How many lives could be saved if we didn't waste this much money on self harm.
In reply to crayefish:
NO I will not. I am having to attend hospital to undergo biopsies, CT scans and eventually chemo for something which, as far as I am aware, I have done nothing to bring upon myself. I will hope, therefore that you have the intelligence to understand why I feel pissed off having to walk past somebody who is deliberately abusing their body and at the same time expecting the NHS to spend thousands on treating something that may even have been caused by that self abuse. So do NOT tell me to move on.
> Move on.
NO I will not. I am having to attend hospital to undergo biopsies, CT scans and eventually chemo for something which, as far as I am aware, I have done nothing to bring upon myself. I will hope, therefore that you have the intelligence to understand why I feel pissed off having to walk past somebody who is deliberately abusing their body and at the same time expecting the NHS to spend thousands on treating something that may even have been caused by that self abuse. So do NOT tell me to move on.
In reply to Mr Lopez:
I can find various reports, some say 10 billion raised, and a lesser amount cost to the NHS, but here is one that says 10 billion raised, over 13 billion cost. Looks like you can find whatever report that you want to prove whatever point you want .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7463690/Every-cigarette-smoked...
> If it weren't for all the money paid in by smokers via tobacco tax you may not even have been able to make use of the hospitals for these last 10 years, so next time you go past a hospital and you see people in gowns and drips smoking by the door in the rain, just take a couple of minutes to stop and thank them for their sacrifice or even buy them a warm cup of tea.
I can find various reports, some say 10 billion raised, and a lesser amount cost to the NHS, but here is one that says 10 billion raised, over 13 billion cost. Looks like you can find whatever report that you want to prove whatever point you want .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7463690/Every-cigarette-smoked...
In reply to mgco3:
Both perfectly Legal activities. The state acts as Drug pushers Licencing these products and taking a hefty cut of the Proceeds. Only fair they pay to mop up the resultant Damage.
Dont Like it, get fags and booze made illegal.
> No moral judgement, just a financial one.
> Smokers are knowingly harming themselves and others by their actions.
> Climbers (at least all the ones that I know) dont self harm and expect others to foot the bill or have special treatment.
> Smokers cost the NHS £2.7 BILLION a year... That , in my book, is £2.7 billion too much.
> Alcohol abuse costs £3.5 Billion to the NHS.
> How many lives could be saved if we didn't waste this much money on self harm.
Both perfectly Legal activities. The state acts as Drug pushers Licencing these products and taking a hefty cut of the Proceeds. Only fair they pay to mop up the resultant Damage.
Dont Like it, get fags and booze made illegal.
In reply to mgco3:
Doesn`t seem like a big deal to me...set aside a well ventilated room in the hospital somewhere, or at least some sort of bus-shelter type of thing to provide a place for smokers to have a fag in. Religious/spiritual/quiet rooms seem to be the norm in hospitals, so why not afford the same consideration for those addicted to nicotine?
How did they get those dodgy hips though? Was it through sport and exercise, or persisting in manual labour over a long period of time?
In that case, using your logic they should just be left to hobble away...or go private.
Yer not big on humanity.
Anyway, I`m glad I`ve cheered you up a bit by giving you another thing to be annoyed about
>
> Insisiting that we provide shelters (they arent free and dont build themsleves) for smokers is rediculous. And yes I agree with the hospital entrance problem. That could be solved by banning smoking anywhere near hospitals.
Doesn`t seem like a big deal to me...set aside a well ventilated room in the hospital somewhere, or at least some sort of bus-shelter type of thing to provide a place for smokers to have a fag in. Religious/spiritual/quiet rooms seem to be the norm in hospitals, so why not afford the same consideration for those addicted to nicotine?
> Whilst we are at it lets stop wasting money on gastric band operations for people who feed themselves with a shovel whilst people who need hip replacements have to wait in pain.
How did they get those dodgy hips though? Was it through sport and exercise, or persisting in manual labour over a long period of time?
In that case, using your logic they should just be left to hobble away...or go private.
Yer not big on humanity.
Anyway, I`m glad I`ve cheered you up a bit by giving you another thing to be annoyed about
In reply to Choss / crayefish:
I wondered how long it would be before the "Cigarette Tax" excusers would take before they piped up!
Next it will be the "If we banned smoking what about the poor tobacco growers who would lose their jobs" or Lets put a tax on paedophiles that will make it ok then!! Both arguments are just as stupid..
>You sound like the sort of person every smoker wants to smoke next to on purpose I have stood next to many IV heroin addicts and they smell a damn site nicer than smokers.
I wondered how long it would be before the "Cigarette Tax" excusers would take before they piped up!
Next it will be the "If we banned smoking what about the poor tobacco growers who would lose their jobs" or Lets put a tax on paedophiles that will make it ok then!! Both arguments are just as stupid..
>You sound like the sort of person every smoker wants to smoke next to on purpose I have stood next to many IV heroin addicts and they smell a damn site nicer than smokers.
In reply to mypyrex:
The thousands of pounds funded by taxes on fags by any chance? What someone else does with their body is f*ck all to do with you. And the treatment is being paid for by the taxes on the fags they bought. So yes... move on chappy
As you're clearly so anal about self inflicted ills, I assume you don't drink any alcohol either? And probably only eat vegetables that have been blessed by the Dalai Lama and washed in the milk of virgins. Bet you're fun to be around! lol
> NO I will not. I am having to attend hospital to undergo biopsies, CT scans and eventually chemo for something which, as far as I am aware, I have done nothing to bring upon myself. I will hope, therefore that you have the intelligence to understand why I feel pissed off having to walk past somebody who is deliberately abusing their body and at the same time expecting the NHS to spend thousands on treating something that may even have been caused by that self abuse. So do NOT tell me to move on.
The thousands of pounds funded by taxes on fags by any chance? What someone else does with their body is f*ck all to do with you. And the treatment is being paid for by the taxes on the fags they bought. So yes... move on chappy
As you're clearly so anal about self inflicted ills, I assume you don't drink any alcohol either? And probably only eat vegetables that have been blessed by the Dalai Lama and washed in the milk of virgins. Bet you're fun to be around! lol
In reply to mgco3:
Now youre just being silly.
The state Legalises, licences, and Takes a very Large cut of all tobacco and Alcohol sales. they are the drug Dealers. we are the addicted victims of their state drug Trade.
Now youre just being silly.
The state Legalises, licences, and Takes a very Large cut of all tobacco and Alcohol sales. they are the drug Dealers. we are the addicted victims of their state drug Trade.
In reply to Jim C:
It's all in there
"tax on tobacco raised £10 billion a year for the Treasury"
"That total includes £2.7 billion of NHS care"
So that's a cool £7.3 billion up for the NHS
The rest of the figures is downright scraping the barrel...
"£2.9 billion lost in productivity during smoking breaks, the £342 million cost of cleaning up butts and £507 million spent putting out fires."
and
"Lost productivity due to the deaths of smokers and passive smoking victims costs £4.8 billion and £2.9 billion is lost in increased absenteeism, their report"
It's all in there
"tax on tobacco raised £10 billion a year for the Treasury"
"That total includes £2.7 billion of NHS care"
So that's a cool £7.3 billion up for the NHS
The rest of the figures is downright scraping the barrel...
"£2.9 billion lost in productivity during smoking breaks, the £342 million cost of cleaning up butts and £507 million spent putting out fires."
and
"Lost productivity due to the deaths of smokers and passive smoking victims costs £4.8 billion and £2.9 billion is lost in increased absenteeism, their report"
In reply to mypyrex:
Good luck with the treatment mate.. I have just had my second 3 monthly all clear after 2 big sessions of chemo and an 8 hour op last year.
If you want to e mail me I would be happy to pass on any hints and tips
Good luck with the treatment mate.. I have just had my second 3 monthly all clear after 2 big sessions of chemo and an 8 hour op last year.
If you want to e mail me I would be happy to pass on any hints and tips
In reply to crayefish:
I will not rise to your bait other than to say I hope you do not have to go through what I and my family are going through at the moment. I doubt that it's going to be easy for me but, at the end of the day my conscience is clear that my condition is not self inflicted. As for your argument that smokers contribute towards the cost of their care; in making such suggestions, you are beneath contempt.
I will not rise to your bait other than to say I hope you do not have to go through what I and my family are going through at the moment. I doubt that it's going to be easy for me but, at the end of the day my conscience is clear that my condition is not self inflicted. As for your argument that smokers contribute towards the cost of their care; in making such suggestions, you are beneath contempt.
In reply to mypyrex:
"I feel pissed off having to walk past somebody who is deliberately abusing their body and at the same time expecting the NHS to spend thousands on treating something that may even have been caused by that self abuse. So do NOT tell me to move on."
To self-abuse is to be human...we all do it to some extent.
Its a wee bit unfair to be down on the smoker, enjoying their vice and the delicious irony of doing it by the no smoking sign, when the chances are their stay in hospital has got nothing to do with their addiction.
"I feel pissed off having to walk past somebody who is deliberately abusing their body and at the same time expecting the NHS to spend thousands on treating something that may even have been caused by that self abuse. So do NOT tell me to move on."
To self-abuse is to be human...we all do it to some extent.
Its a wee bit unfair to be down on the smoker, enjoying their vice and the delicious irony of doing it by the no smoking sign, when the chances are their stay in hospital has got nothing to do with their addiction.
In reply to Choss:
Then why not quit? It's quite easy.
> Now youre just being silly.
> The state Legalises, licences, and Takes a very Large cut of all tobacco and Alcohol sales. they are the drug Dealers. we are the addicted victims of their state drug Trade.
Then why not quit? It's quite easy.
In reply to mgco3:
Thanks for that. At least you and a few others have responded with sympathy and courtesy.
> Good luck with the treatment mate.. I have just had my second 3 monthly all clear after 2 big sessions of chemo and an 8 hour op last year.
> If you want to e mail me I would be happy to pass on any hints and tips
Thanks for that. At least you and a few others have responded with sympathy and courtesy.
In reply to Choss:
A Sad indictment on life. Just because it makes someone big money it is all OK.
If I was being silly I would be lighting up a fag.
A Sad indictment on life. Just because it makes someone big money it is all OK.
If I was being silly I would be lighting up a fag.
In reply to mypyrex:
I wondered how long it would be before the "Cigarette Tax" excusers would take before they piped up!
Next it will be the "If we banned smoking what about the poor tobacco growers who would lose their jobs" or Lets put a tax on paedophiles that will make it ok then!! Both arguments are just as stupid..
The fact you can't even come up with a half coherent response speaks volumes! So smokers don't pay tax??? You're dumber than you sound...
> As for your argument that smokers contribute towards the cost of their care; in making such suggestions, you are beneath contempt.
I wondered how long it would be before the "Cigarette Tax" excusers would take before they piped up!
Next it will be the "If we banned smoking what about the poor tobacco growers who would lose their jobs" or Lets put a tax on paedophiles that will make it ok then!! Both arguments are just as stupid..
The fact you can't even come up with a half coherent response speaks volumes! So smokers don't pay tax??? You're dumber than you sound...
In reply to mgco3:
You're the one who raised the money issue, shouldn't be a surprise when everyone turns round and tells you you're wrong.
Diabetes costs the NHS £1.5 million AN HOUR...or £14 Billion a year. There are lots of arguments against smoking, saying it costs the NHS too much money is about the most ludicrous I can think of, given that the tax swamps any expenditure on treatment and leaves the NHS in credit.
People smoke, people drink, people do drugs and drive their cars too fast and eat too much fatty food...get used to it, not everyone is as perfect as you.
> I wondered how long it would be before the "Cigarette Tax" excusers would take before they piped up!
You're the one who raised the money issue, shouldn't be a surprise when everyone turns round and tells you you're wrong.
> Smokers cost the NHS £2.7 BILLION a year... That , in my book, is £2.7 billion too much.
> Alcohol abuse costs £3.5 Billion to the NHS.
Diabetes costs the NHS £1.5 million AN HOUR...or £14 Billion a year. There are lots of arguments against smoking, saying it costs the NHS too much money is about the most ludicrous I can think of, given that the tax swamps any expenditure on treatment and leaves the NHS in credit.
People smoke, people drink, people do drugs and drive their cars too fast and eat too much fatty food...get used to it, not everyone is as perfect as you.
In reply to mgco3:
youre misunderstanding me again.
why are you Having a go at addicted users of drugs? its the Dealers you should Blame. in the case of fags and booze, the Government are the pushers. they control the Trade.
you are blaming smokers and Drinkers when what you should be blaming is the state and tobacco and alcohol companies.
> A Sad indictment on life. Just because it makes someone big money it is all OK.
youre misunderstanding me again.
why are you Having a go at addicted users of drugs? its the Dealers you should Blame. in the case of fags and booze, the Government are the pushers. they control the Trade.
you are blaming smokers and Drinkers when what you should be blaming is the state and tobacco and alcohol companies.
In reply to crayefish:
I didnt say that smokers dont pay tax. Prehaps the smoke got in your eyes whilst reading my post.
Smokers do pay tax but they dont cough up enough (pardon my pun).
Your argument seems to be that any activity is accepatble if you are willing to pay tax on it.
What next??
I didnt say that smokers dont pay tax. Prehaps the smoke got in your eyes whilst reading my post.
Smokers do pay tax but they dont cough up enough (pardon my pun).
Your argument seems to be that any activity is accepatble if you are willing to pay tax on it.
What next??
In reply to Sharp:
I wish I was perfect. I am overweight but cant help it. Everytime I shag your missus she gives me a biscuit!
I wish I was perfect. I am overweight but cant help it. Everytime I shag your missus she gives me a biscuit!
In reply to mgco3:
Can you believe that the last time I posted that as a response on here, it got deleted and I got banned
> I wish I was perfect. I am overweight but cant help it. Everytime I shag your missus she gives me a biscuit!
Can you believe that the last time I posted that as a response on here, it got deleted and I got banned
In reply to mgco3:
If the activity only affects your health, why not? (Within reason of course). Hell... if someone wants to eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit, perched over the edge of a cliff... so be it. As long as they contribute to the inevitable hospital bill
Climbers are probably worse funnily enough... we pay hardly any tax for our dangerous activity (particularly winter climbing as involves a lot of mountain rescuse relatively.)
We all still like to do it though! Hence why we're all on this forum
If the activity only affects your health, why not? (Within reason of course). Hell... if someone wants to eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit, perched over the edge of a cliff... so be it. As long as they contribute to the inevitable hospital bill
Climbers are probably worse funnily enough... we pay hardly any tax for our dangerous activity (particularly winter climbing as involves a lot of mountain rescuse relatively.)
We all still like to do it though! Hence why we're all on this forum
In reply to Choss:
If people choose to use drugs af any sort that is their choice as long as they dont do it to the deterement of others.
Drinking in moderation and not fighting in the street or ending up having to be picked up by the Police / Ambulance is fine.
Smoking where it doesnt affect others, fine.
But I object strongly to either when the person doing it expects others to rush to their aid at the expense of others.
If people choose to use drugs af any sort that is their choice as long as they dont do it to the deterement of others.
Drinking in moderation and not fighting in the street or ending up having to be picked up by the Police / Ambulance is fine.
Smoking where it doesnt affect others, fine.
But I object strongly to either when the person doing it expects others to rush to their aid at the expense of others.
In reply to ThunderCat:
An old and well worn response . I shall issue an appology.
OK I am sorry, she doesn't give me a biscuit..
That OK??
An old and well worn response . I shall issue an appology.
OK I am sorry, she doesn't give me a biscuit..
That OK??
In reply to Choss:
Yes, it's always the fault of someone else.
> youre misunderstanding me again.
> why are you Having a go at addicted users of drugs? its the Dealers you should Blame. in the case of fags and booze, the Government are the pushers. they control the Trade.
> you are blaming smokers and Drinkers when what you should be blaming is the state and tobacco and alcohol companies.
Yes, it's always the fault of someone else.
In reply to mgco3:
Just a warning, don't know if I caught the mods on a bad day
> An old and well worn response . I shall issue an appology.
> OK I am sorry, she doesn't give me a biscuit..
> That OK??
Just a warning, don't know if I caught the mods on a bad day
In reply to crayefish:
So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then?? ( I do this but I dont inhale)
Climbers pay tax too, Have you seen the cost of climbing gear?? The government must be making a fortune out of loud trousers..
So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then?? ( I do this but I dont inhale)
Climbers pay tax too, Have you seen the cost of climbing gear?? The government must be making a fortune out of loud trousers..
Post edited at 20:50
In reply to Sir Chasm:
not always old chap. but in the case of addictive drugs i think we can Blame the pushers dont you?
> Yes, it's always the fault of someone else.
not always old chap. but in the case of addictive drugs i think we can Blame the pushers dont you?
In reply to mgco3:
Yeah but the tax rate isn't that high (just vat rate and business tax etc of dmm). Most of the cost of fags is tax and people spend a lot on them! Admittedly climbing is way more fun, but hard to do on the way to the office (especially in flat Holland) lol
> So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then?? ( I do this but I dont inhale)
> Climbers pay tax too, Have you seen the cost of climbing gear?? The government must be making a fortune out of loud trousers..
Yeah but the tax rate isn't that high (just vat rate and business tax etc of dmm). Most of the cost of fags is tax and people spend a lot on them! Admittedly climbing is way more fun, but hard to do on the way to the office (especially in flat Holland) lol
In reply to mgco3:
that would be more pleasant than the smoking room next to the delivery ward on the 14th Floor of guys hospital. could have used a Lick of paint and no Mistake.
> So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then??
that would be more pleasant than the smoking room next to the delivery ward on the 14th Floor of guys hospital. could have used a Lick of paint and no Mistake.
In reply to Choss:
Yes, they literally force you to buy fags, stick 'em in your gob and give you a light.
> not always old chap. but in the case of addictive drugs i think we can Blame the pushers dont you?
Yes, they literally force you to buy fags, stick 'em in your gob and give you a light.
In reply to Sir Chasm:
Buggers aint they?
> Yes, they literally force you to buy fags, stick 'em in your gob and give you a light.
Buggers aint they?
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
I work in mental health, fortunately community based, (I'm a 10 year plus ex-smoker.) My colleagues on the HDU psych ward have had a smoking ban imposed on the punters;
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/smoke-ban-not-factor-in-assaults-2...
> Yes we should do everything we can to discourage and eliminate smoking, but hospitals aren't the place to do it.
I work in mental health, fortunately community based, (I'm a 10 year plus ex-smoker.) My colleagues on the HDU psych ward have had a smoking ban imposed on the punters;
> ACT Health says a smoking ban in its mental health centres has been a success and is not a major contributor to a rise in assaults at Canberra's adult mental health unit.
> But mental health consumer groups say the smoke-free rules are causing patients more distress. The ACT Mental Health Consumer Network said it had only one client who had given a positive report on the ban since it began in January. Some patients also continue to smoke in their rooms at the adult unit or in outdoor courtyards.
> ACT Mental Health executive director Katrina Bracher said monthly monitoring of the ban across all its centres showed the new system was working. Ms Bracher said a spate of assaults at the adult mental health unit was not the result of patients being denied access to cigarettes.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/smoke-ban-not-factor-in-assaults-2...
In reply to mypyrex:
I'm very glad for my tax money to be spent helping and curing smokers, and am so grateful for an NHS which treats all comers regardless.
Second point [unrelated], I've had hospital treatment after stupid accidents - did they turn me away? No. Did I refuse treatment or go for private care? No.
I'm very glad for my tax money to be spent helping and curing smokers, and am so grateful for an NHS which treats all comers regardless.
Second point [unrelated], I've had hospital treatment after stupid accidents - did they turn me away? No. Did I refuse treatment or go for private care? No.
In reply to mgco3:
'So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then?? ( I do this but I dont inhale)'
Well if 25 - 30% of the public really, really enjoyed doing this, and it gave them pleasure and satisfaction, then yes of course there should be.
It's their hospital too, you know.
'So we should have a special room in Hospitals so anyone can eat rotting rabbits while doing a handstand in dogshit then?? ( I do this but I dont inhale)'
Well if 25 - 30% of the public really, really enjoyed doing this, and it gave them pleasure and satisfaction, then yes of course there should be.
It's their hospital too, you know.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
As usual an overstatement of the figures:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2370456/Number-smokers-UK-set-fal...
Smokers to fall to below 20% of population. So 80% of us have to pander to the minority??
In the UK 64% of the population are classed as obese. A bigger number than you are trying to use to justify "special treatment" for nicotine addicts,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25576400
So by your argument all hospitals should provide a MacDonalds then..
yer a numbty..
As usual an overstatement of the figures:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2370456/Number-smokers-UK-set-fal...
Smokers to fall to below 20% of population. So 80% of us have to pander to the minority??
In the UK 64% of the population are classed as obese. A bigger number than you are trying to use to justify "special treatment" for nicotine addicts,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25576400
So by your argument all hospitals should provide a MacDonalds then..
yer a numbty..
In reply to mgco3:
I dont think anyone is suggesting they light up on the wards but just give them somewhere sensible to go.
Makes sense to me given, as others have said, the stress of being in hospital making them go cold turkey on the cigarettes or freeze outside seems a tad dumb. By all means try and offer alternatives such as patches and get them to quit but even that may backfire due to the extra stress.
Are people banned from having additional snacks on the ward then? Outside of those waiting for surgery which require an empty stomach?
> Smokers to fall to below 20% of population. So 80% of us have to pander to the minority??
I dont think anyone is suggesting they light up on the wards but just give them somewhere sensible to go.
Makes sense to me given, as others have said, the stress of being in hospital making them go cold turkey on the cigarettes or freeze outside seems a tad dumb. By all means try and offer alternatives such as patches and get them to quit but even that may backfire due to the extra stress.
> In the UK 64% of the population are classed as obese. A bigger number than you are trying to use to justify "special treatment" for nicotine addicts
Are people banned from having additional snacks on the ward then? Outside of those waiting for surgery which require an empty stomach?
In reply to dissonance:
Smoking, even passive smoking, can have a detremental effect on anesthesia and other medication. Not only for the smoker but for others too.
At least I can sit , or lie in a bed, adjacent to an obese person who chooses to eat to excess without detrement to myself.
!Quote from Cancer.org:- The only way to fully protect non-smokers from exposure to SHS (second hand smoke) indoors is to prevent all smoking in that indoor space or building. Separating smokers from non-smokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot keep non-smokers from being exposed to SHS.
If people want to kill themselves by smoking that is their choice.
Hospitals are places to cure people not to pander to those who continue to self harm. If you want to kill yourself go home and do it..
Smoking, even passive smoking, can have a detremental effect on anesthesia and other medication. Not only for the smoker but for others too.
At least I can sit , or lie in a bed, adjacent to an obese person who chooses to eat to excess without detrement to myself.
!Quote from Cancer.org:- The only way to fully protect non-smokers from exposure to SHS (second hand smoke) indoors is to prevent all smoking in that indoor space or building. Separating smokers from non-smokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot keep non-smokers from being exposed to SHS.
If people want to kill themselves by smoking that is their choice.
Hospitals are places to cure people not to pander to those who continue to self harm. If you want to kill yourself go home and do it..
In reply to mgco3:
What do you mean, 'as usual'? Find another post where I have wildly overstated the case with spurious numbers, or stfu.
I am arguing for some common compassion for people at a deeply stressful moment in their lives who take comfort from a highly addictive and powerful drug, which is of course entirely legal and has in fact been actively encouraged for most of the last 400 years. (As a side issue, it is arguable that some/much of our extraordinary prosperity is owed to the availability of stimulants like tobacco and coffee, rather than narcotics like beer, but we'll let that pass for now. Smoking is bad, full stop.)
Hospitals certainly cater for other filthy cultural practices like halal and kosher diets, or (possibly) less offensive practices like religious worship; an air conditioned room for people to have a fag doesn't seem very unreasonable.
What do you mean, 'as usual'? Find another post where I have wildly overstated the case with spurious numbers, or stfu.
I am arguing for some common compassion for people at a deeply stressful moment in their lives who take comfort from a highly addictive and powerful drug, which is of course entirely legal and has in fact been actively encouraged for most of the last 400 years. (As a side issue, it is arguable that some/much of our extraordinary prosperity is owed to the availability of stimulants like tobacco and coffee, rather than narcotics like beer, but we'll let that pass for now. Smoking is bad, full stop.)
Hospitals certainly cater for other filthy cultural practices like halal and kosher diets, or (possibly) less offensive practices like religious worship; an air conditioned room for people to have a fag doesn't seem very unreasonable.
In reply to mypyrex:
Smoking outside hospitals, bane of my working life!
When the ban came in the Trust I work for blithely dictated that the nursing staff would be policing it. Well, not in my lifetime they won't. Not unless they want their lights punching out.
I work in a Neonatal Unit (premature babies) and whilst we're inside trying to safe lives and promote developement the poor unfortunate scarp of humanities parents are outside destressing with a cancer stick. And they wonder they the babies so small and stick!
And another thing. The urban myth that if a mother smokes in pregnancy they'll have a small baby and avoid stretch marks etc has many believers.
I see some class acts having a smoke; drip stand and catheter bag in situ whilst inside every bit of diligence and care is made to save and improve their offsprings lives.
Sometimes I don't know why we bother. Grrrrr........
Smoking outside hospitals, bane of my working life!
When the ban came in the Trust I work for blithely dictated that the nursing staff would be policing it. Well, not in my lifetime they won't. Not unless they want their lights punching out.
I work in a Neonatal Unit (premature babies) and whilst we're inside trying to safe lives and promote developement the poor unfortunate scarp of humanities parents are outside destressing with a cancer stick. And they wonder they the babies so small and stick!
And another thing. The urban myth that if a mother smokes in pregnancy they'll have a small baby and avoid stretch marks etc has many believers.
I see some class acts having a smoke; drip stand and catheter bag in situ whilst inside every bit of diligence and care is made to save and improve their offsprings lives.
Sometimes I don't know why we bother. Grrrrr........
In reply to mypyrex:
To be honest I see this everyday. Normally there's a woman sat on a wheelchair in a dressing gown, connected to a drip. Smoking is not always the cause of admission. I have no problem with her . Also the stressed people who have ill relatives inside. Yes, there should be a covered area for these people. A spinal hospital in wales used to have a smoking room. That is the way forward. The smokers aren't doing me harm. The obese are.
To be honest I see this everyday. Normally there's a woman sat on a wheelchair in a dressing gown, connected to a drip. Smoking is not always the cause of admission. I have no problem with her . Also the stressed people who have ill relatives inside. Yes, there should be a covered area for these people. A spinal hospital in wales used to have a smoking room. That is the way forward. The smokers aren't doing me harm. The obese are.
Many have missed the point of my OP. Notwithstanding my abhorrence of smoking ANYWHERE, I was doing nothing more than highlighting the irony of somebody standing beside a no smoking sign with a cigarette in their mouth(slowly killing themselves AND making life unpleasant for those who have to pass in close proximity to them)
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
The "as usual" was a generalisation meaning usually people who support something overstate the figures and not you specifically.
What about compassion for people who chose not toself harm?Why tf should they suffer because of people who are too stupid not to self harm and yet think that everyone should jump through hoops to help them when they do bugger all to help themsleves.
Somone insisting on Kosher or Halal food isnt likely to harm my health. Some selfish addict who insists on poisoning themself and anyone else in range will. You can kill yourself whichever way you chose but dont insist on forcing your filthy addiction on others.
Drunk drivers kill less people than smokers do. Lets legalise drunk driving then!! eedjit!
The "as usual" was a generalisation meaning usually people who support something overstate the figures and not you specifically.
What about compassion for people who chose not toself harm?Why tf should they suffer because of people who are too stupid not to self harm and yet think that everyone should jump through hoops to help them when they do bugger all to help themsleves.
Somone insisting on Kosher or Halal food isnt likely to harm my health. Some selfish addict who insists on poisoning themself and anyone else in range will. You can kill yourself whichever way you chose but dont insist on forcing your filthy addiction on others.
Drunk drivers kill less people than smokers do. Lets legalise drunk driving then!! eedjit!
In reply to mgco3:
+1
> The "as usual" was a generalisation meaning usually people who support something overstate the figures and not you specifically.
> What about compassion for people who chose not toself harm?Why tf should they suffer because of people who are too stupid not to self harm and yet think that everyone should jump through hoops to help them when they do bugger all to help themsleves.
> Somone insisting on Kosher or Halal food isnt likely to harm my health. Some selfish addict who insists on poisoning themself and anyone else in range will. You can kill yourself whichever way you chose but dont insist on forcing your filthy addiction on others.
> Drunk drivers kill less people than smokers do. Lets legalise drunk driving then!! eedjit!
+1
In reply to mgco3:
I know I am not an idiot, you might choose to reflect on that.
You have missed my point on several levels. The main one of which is that if smokers need to smoke - and they do, and it is countenanced by law - then there should be somewhere that they can THAT DOES NOT INTEFERE WITH OTHERS.
Just like people who want to pray can go somewhere - paid for by taxpayers - where I don't have to watch them.
I know I am not an idiot, you might choose to reflect on that.
You have missed my point on several levels. The main one of which is that if smokers need to smoke - and they do, and it is countenanced by law - then there should be somewhere that they can THAT DOES NOT INTEFERE WITH OTHERS.
Just like people who want to pray can go somewhere - paid for by taxpayers - where I don't have to watch them.
In reply to Mr Lopez:
>So what are you thoughts about practical double boots?
As I havent been able to find a pair that go with my helitrope and mauve faux fur gillet I am unable to say!
>So what are you thoughts about practical double boots?
As I havent been able to find a pair that go with my helitrope and mauve faux fur gillet I am unable to say!
In reply to mgco3:
Just as a matter of interest, from reading your views on here...what is your position on people who self harm or attempt suicide?
Just as a matter of interest, from reading your views on here...what is your position on people who self harm or attempt suicide?
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
It should surely be the responsibility of smokers to ensure that THEY find somewhere where their habit does not impact upon others. Smoking is optional; breathing is not.
> - then there should be somewhere that they can THAT DOES NOT INTEFERE WITH OTHERS.
It should surely be the responsibility of smokers to ensure that THEY find somewhere where their habit does not impact upon others. Smoking is optional; breathing is not.
In reply to mypyrex:
Your OP was insensitive, thoughtless, patronising, predictable and trivial. Because of your circumstances I won't engage with you on this topic any more.
Your OP was insensitive, thoughtless, patronising, predictable and trivial. Because of your circumstances I won't engage with you on this topic any more.
In reply to mypyrex:
Erm...aren't these people in hospital (or visiting sick relatives)? So your solution is people should be excluded from hospital treatment unless they give up smoking?
Whilst it is of course possible to give up smoking (ie it's "optional"), can you, from sitting on your high horse, upon your saddle of pure self-righteousness, perhaps contemplate that when you're suffering the stress of you or a loved one being seriously ill might, just might, not be the easiest time to do so?
> It should surely be the responsibility of smokers to ensure that THEY find somewhere where their habit does not impact upon others. Smoking is optional; breathing is not.
Erm...aren't these people in hospital (or visiting sick relatives)? So your solution is people should be excluded from hospital treatment unless they give up smoking?
Whilst it is of course possible to give up smoking (ie it's "optional"), can you, from sitting on your high horse, upon your saddle of pure self-righteousness, perhaps contemplate that when you're suffering the stress of you or a loved one being seriously ill might, just might, not be the easiest time to do so?
In reply to mypyrex:
I hope you cycle or walk to hospital and everywhere else, otherwise the word 'hypocrisy' may start flying about
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/04april/Pages/air-pollution-exhaust-death-estim...
> (In reply to Rob Exile Ward)
>
> [...]
>
> It should surely be the responsibility of smokers to ensure that THEY find somewhere where their habit does not impact upon others. Smoking is optional; breathing is not.
>
> [...]
>
> It should surely be the responsibility of smokers to ensure that THEY find somewhere where their habit does not impact upon others. Smoking is optional; breathing is not.
I hope you cycle or walk to hospital and everywhere else, otherwise the word 'hypocrisy' may start flying about
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/04april/Pages/air-pollution-exhaust-death-estim...
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
You continue to argue for money to be spent to help people indulge in an addiction. An addiction that will , in all likelyhood, kill them in a horrible painful manner and will almost certainly harm others too!! Then I will , again, state. You are an idiot..
People praying wont kill me or others. You can pray in the same room as someone who isnt praying and you wont harm their health.
The areas set aside for people to pray are also used for speaking to bereaved relatives and dont need special ventilation ,ash trays etc.
Why TF should we spend NHS money SPECIFICALLy for addicts. Money that could be better spent on healthcare for the deserving
You continue to argue for money to be spent to help people indulge in an addiction. An addiction that will , in all likelyhood, kill them in a horrible painful manner and will almost certainly harm others too!! Then I will , again, state. You are an idiot..
People praying wont kill me or others. You can pray in the same room as someone who isnt praying and you wont harm their health.
The areas set aside for people to pray are also used for speaking to bereaved relatives and dont need special ventilation ,ash trays etc.
Why TF should we spend NHS money SPECIFICALLy for addicts. Money that could be better spent on healthcare for the deserving
In reply to mgco3:
Well thats one way to cut the costs. Only treat those who are "deserving" (so long as I get to define that).
You seem rather angry about it all. Are you an exsmoker by any chance?
> Why TF should we spend NHS money SPECIFICALLy for addicts. Money that could be better spent on healthcare for the deserving
Well thats one way to cut the costs. Only treat those who are "deserving" (so long as I get to define that).
You seem rather angry about it all. Are you an exsmoker by any chance?
In reply to mgco3: i think the NHS spends money SPECIFICALLY on methodone for smack addicts as well. And clean needles to stop the spread of blood diseases amongst intravenous drug users.
I assume they should stop that sort of thing in your world of caring and tolerance?
I assume they should stop that sort of thing in your world of caring and tolerance?
In reply to mgco3: 'You continue to argue for money to be spent to help people indulge in an addiction. '
Hmm. We spend money to help people indulge in their addiction to sky fairies and mediaeval animal torturing practices - a spare room here or there for someone to satisfy a different but equally powerful addiction doesn't seem a huge additional burden.
You've missed the point several times so I will re-iterate. The NHS should do everything it can to eliminate smoking. But banning it in hospitals - when people are at their most vulnerable and distressed - is utterly the wrong time to do it.
But you and MP don't seen to have very much compassion or empathy so the point will I'm sure be wasted.
Hmm. We spend money to help people indulge in their addiction to sky fairies and mediaeval animal torturing practices - a spare room here or there for someone to satisfy a different but equally powerful addiction doesn't seem a huge additional burden.
You've missed the point several times so I will re-iterate. The NHS should do everything it can to eliminate smoking. But banning it in hospitals - when people are at their most vulnerable and distressed - is utterly the wrong time to do it.
But you and MP don't seen to have very much compassion or empathy so the point will I'm sure be wasted.
In reply to abr1966:
Quite simply, they need help.
What they DONT need is a shelter to enable them , or allow them to do it out of the wind and rain !! Or a special box to collect their used razor blades!!
People who self harm dont normally harm others. Smokers do,
> Just as a matter of interest, from reading your views on here...what is your position on people who self harm or attempt suicide?
Quite simply, they need help.
What they DONT need is a shelter to enable them , or allow them to do it out of the wind and rain !! Or a special box to collect their used razor blades!!
People who self harm dont normally harm others. Smokers do,
In reply to mgco3:
And you harm others when you drive (and when you use the internet).
> Quite simply, they need help.
> What they DONT need is a shelter to enable them , or allow them to do it out of the wind and rain !! Or a special box to collect their used razor blades!!
> People who self harm dont normally harm others. Smokers do,
And you harm others when you drive (and when you use the internet).
In reply to andy:
Interestingly enough I listened to an ex drugs cop on the radio today who stated that all that was achieved with Methodone was to turn lots of Heroin addicts into Methodone addicts.
I have no problems if people want to kill themsleves by any means as long as they dont harm anyone else. I certainly dont think we should spend money to allow them to do it in comfort or offer some sort of safety factor.
Interestingly enough I listened to an ex drugs cop on the radio today who stated that all that was achieved with Methodone was to turn lots of Heroin addicts into Methodone addicts.
I have no problems if people want to kill themsleves by any means as long as they dont harm anyone else. I certainly dont think we should spend money to allow them to do it in comfort or offer some sort of safety factor.
In reply to mgco3:
Will there be some sort of committee of "right thinking people" who decide who "our" money should be spent on?
Ooh - we do - parliament. I think we vote for them don't we? Maybe you and MP should stand on a "no treatment for people I don't approve of" ticket?
Will there be some sort of committee of "right thinking people" who decide who "our" money should be spent on?
Ooh - we do - parliament. I think we vote for them don't we? Maybe you and MP should stand on a "no treatment for people I don't approve of" ticket?
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
Sorry to disagree.
Banning it in hospitals is the VERY place to ban it FFS. If someone was bleeding you would not expect the NHS to keep pumping blood into them and not stem the bleeding.
I have seen people in Cancer wards that have had tumours removed from their lungs who insist on being wheeled in a wheel chair to the door for a fag..
IF you cant see the hypocrisy in this then I would hazard a guess that you smoke!! Addicts tend to use any excuse to justify their habits,,
Sorry to disagree.
Banning it in hospitals is the VERY place to ban it FFS. If someone was bleeding you would not expect the NHS to keep pumping blood into them and not stem the bleeding.
I have seen people in Cancer wards that have had tumours removed from their lungs who insist on being wheeled in a wheel chair to the door for a fag..
IF you cant see the hypocrisy in this then I would hazard a guess that you smoke!! Addicts tend to use any excuse to justify their habits,,
In reply to mgco3:
'IF you cant see the hypocrisy in this then I would hazard a guess that you smoke!! '
Hypocrisy isn't the correct word in this context but I'll leave you to research that.
Between 1974 and 1988 I was a 20, 30 and often 40+ a day smoker, then gave up, and haven't smoked since. So your point is?
'IF you cant see the hypocrisy in this then I would hazard a guess that you smoke!! '
Hypocrisy isn't the correct word in this context but I'll leave you to research that.
Between 1974 and 1988 I was a 20, 30 and often 40+ a day smoker, then gave up, and haven't smoked since. So your point is?
In reply to Sir Chasm:
Bit of a difference there. Global warming etc, but man collectively is trying to address those issues
Bit of a difference there. Global warming etc, but man collectively is trying to address those issues
In reply to mgco3:
No, pollution from your car and pollution from the energy production for your drivel - there's a handy link further up.
> Bit of a difference there. Global warming etc, but man collectively is trying to address those issues
No, pollution from your car and pollution from the energy production for your drivel - there's a handy link further up.
In reply to mgco3:
Wow, i get to post this twice in one thread http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/04april/Pages/air-pollution-exhaust-death-estim...
You kill 13,000 people in the UK every year with the disgusting fumes you produce with your car. In comparison i only kill 11,000 people with my second hand smoke. You win this time...
P.s. And the NHS is using my money, which i pay in tobacco tax, to build car parks for your filthy killing machines. Wish they stopped pandering the minorities intent in poisoning us all
> Bit of a difference there. Global warming etc, but man collectively is trying to address those issues
Wow, i get to post this twice in one thread http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/04april/Pages/air-pollution-exhaust-death-estim...
You kill 13,000 people in the UK every year with the disgusting fumes you produce with your car. In comparison i only kill 11,000 people with my second hand smoke. You win this time...
P.s. And the NHS is using my money, which i pay in tobacco tax, to build car parks for your filthy killing machines. Wish they stopped pandering the minorities intent in poisoning us all
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
Hypocrisy:-
the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
Hospitals claiming to sure people then allowing them to smoke! Yes Hypocrisy.
My point is that the NHS resource is limited. ANY money wasted pandering to addicts is wrong and should be stopped immediately.
Hypocrisy:-
the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case.
Hospitals claiming to sure people then allowing them to smoke! Yes Hypocrisy.
My point is that the NHS resource is limited. ANY money wasted pandering to addicts is wrong and should be stopped immediately.
In reply to mgco3:
I am not sure you quite grasp what addict means?
So someone is seriously ill and if you think the best solution is to increase their stress levels by insisting they go cold turkey on the cigarettes?
You cant see any flaw there?
Also this pandering, does that mean no support to any addicts at all?
> My point is that the NHS resource is limited. ANY money wasted pandering to addicts is wrong and should be stopped immediately.
I am not sure you quite grasp what addict means?
So someone is seriously ill and if you think the best solution is to increase their stress levels by insisting they go cold turkey on the cigarettes?
You cant see any flaw there?
Also this pandering, does that mean no support to any addicts at all?
In reply to mgco3:
It's a rare person who could kill themselves without harming someone else
What about spending money trying to help people who are in an unfortunate situation?
> I have no problems if people want to kill themsleves by any means as long as they dont harm anyone else.
It's a rare person who could kill themselves without harming someone else
> I certainly dont think we should spend money to allow them to do it in comfort or offer some sort of safety factor.
What about spending money trying to help people who are in an unfortunate situation?
In reply to dissonance:
I think it depends what they're addicted to - the committee will decide...
> Also this pandering, does that mean no support to any addicts at all?
I think it depends what they're addicted to - the committee will decide...
In reply to Mr Lopez:
Your 11,000 is actually 100,000 so my car trumps your fags.
Put the fag out and check your facts.
Your 11,000 is actually 100,000 so my car trumps your fags.
Put the fag out and check your facts.
In reply to nufkin:
Another thread methinks. This one is about Smoking and Hospitals
> It's a rare person who could kill themselves without harming someone else
> What about spending money trying to help people who are in an unfortunate situation?
Another thread methinks. This one is about Smoking and Hospitals
In reply to andy:
'the committee will decide...'
Can I apply to join? I have lots of opinions (as you know...) Fortunately, they're all correct!
'the committee will decide...'
Can I apply to join? I have lots of opinions (as you know...) Fortunately, they're all correct!
In reply to mgco3:
How about an unbiased source like, let's say, cancer research (irony alert for the hard of thinking "unbiased")
Every year, second-hand smoke kills about 11,000 people in the UK from lung cancer, heart disease and strokes.
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/smokingandtobacco...
How about an unbiased source like, let's say, cancer research (irony alert for the hard of thinking "unbiased")
Every year, second-hand smoke kills about 11,000 people in the UK from lung cancer, heart disease and strokes.
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/smokingandtobacco...
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
Are you an extraterrestrial lizard?
> (In reply to andy)
>
> Can I apply to join?
>
> Can I apply to join?
Are you an extraterrestrial lizard?
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
As I'm sure you're fully aware, Rob, I'd have you and your hippy-wooly-liberal ideas on the committee in an instant - but sadly I don't think that our friends upthread would really describe you as "a right thinking person" (for which I think one should read "agrees with me"), so you might be disbarred on the grounds of being overly concerned with "them" and not "us" (or indeed maybe not even being being one of "us").
As I'm sure you're fully aware, Rob, I'd have you and your hippy-wooly-liberal ideas on the committee in an instant - but sadly I don't think that our friends upthread would really describe you as "a right thinking person" (for which I think one should read "agrees with me"), so you might be disbarred on the grounds of being overly concerned with "them" and not "us" (or indeed maybe not even being being one of "us").
In reply to andy:
The decision should be quite simple.
1) A hip replacement for a pensioner who has cronic pain through a lifetime of hard work
2) A lung transplant for a long term smoker who refuses to quit.
Not a hard decision methinks,
> Will there be some sort of committee of "right thinking people" who decide who "our" money should be spent on?
> Ooh - we do - parliament. I think we vote for them don't we? Maybe you and MP should stand on a "no treatment for people I don't approve of" ticket?
The decision should be quite simple.
1) A hip replacement for a pensioner who has cronic pain through a lifetime of hard work
2) A lung transplant for a long term smoker who refuses to quit.
Not a hard decision methinks,
In reply to mgco3:
They already make that choice, actually:
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-transplant/Pages/Introduction.aspx
What if they gave up and then started again, though? Would you take their lungs off them and give them to someone more deserving? It's a bloody nightmare making shit up as you go along, isn't it?
> The decision should be quite simple.
> 1) A hip replacement for a pensioner who has cronic pain through a lifetime of hard work
> 2) A lung transplant for a long term smoker who refuses to quit.
> Not a hard decision methinks,
They already make that choice, actually:
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-transplant/Pages/Introduction.aspx
What if they gave up and then started again, though? Would you take their lungs off them and give them to someone more deserving? It's a bloody nightmare making shit up as you go along, isn't it?
In reply to mgco3:
Careful what you wish for.
Not long ago it was proposed something like this, where treatment would be given or denied depending on "value to society" or some such bollocks, and under that plan 2 may have got treatment, but 1 wouldn't.
Careful what you wish for.
Not long ago it was proposed something like this, where treatment would be given or denied depending on "value to society" or some such bollocks, and under that plan 2 may have got treatment, but 1 wouldn't.
Post edited at 23:11
In reply to dissonance:
I suppose that depends on what is more likely to kill them... A bit of stress that can be mitigated by a fragment of will power and/or medication, or something delivering a bucket load of carcinogens, miscellaneous toxins whilst also reducing their blood oxygenation.
I am always left in a state of disbelief when the hospital/smoking thread comes around. They wouldn't let a heron or smack addict keep drugging up whilst in for treatment and they're probably less harmful to the healing process that smoking.
> So someone is seriously ill and if you think the best solution is to increase their stress levels by insisting they go cold turkey on the cigarettes?
I suppose that depends on what is more likely to kill them... A bit of stress that can be mitigated by a fragment of will power and/or medication, or something delivering a bucket load of carcinogens, miscellaneous toxins whilst also reducing their blood oxygenation.
I am always left in a state of disbelief when the hospital/smoking thread comes around. They wouldn't let a heron or smack addict keep drugging up whilst in for treatment and they're probably less harmful to the healing process that smoking.
In reply to mgco3:
What about if this pensioner smokes 10 cigarettes a day? Should we demand they go cold turkey and make the experience even more unpleasant for them?
> 1) A hip replacement for a pensioner who has cronic pain through a lifetime of hard work
What about if this pensioner smokes 10 cigarettes a day? Should we demand they go cold turkey and make the experience even more unpleasant for them?
In reply to Mr Lopez:
www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_107.pdf
http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/improving-and-protecting-health/tobacc...
Your 11,000 figure is only second hand smoking deaths.
Unbiased enough for ya?
From the BMA:-
An estimated 461,700 hospital admissions for people aged 35 years and older were estimated to be attributable to smoking in england alone.
And yet people are arguing for places for people to indulge their damaging habit in comfort!!!! Words fail,
www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_107.pdf
http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/improving-and-protecting-health/tobacc...
Your 11,000 figure is only second hand smoking deaths.
Unbiased enough for ya?
From the BMA:-
An estimated 461,700 hospital admissions for people aged 35 years and older were estimated to be attributable to smoking in england alone.
And yet people are arguing for places for people to indulge their damaging habit in comfort!!!! Words fail,
In reply to dissonance:
Addict:- Someone who repeats an action or activity despite negative consequences.
Yes support addicts but dont perpetuate their addiction FFS.
Should we also provide alchohol in hospital for alcoholics ??
Addict:- Someone who repeats an action or activity despite negative consequences.
Yes support addicts but dont perpetuate their addiction FFS.
Should we also provide alchohol in hospital for alcoholics ??
In reply to mgco3: I thought you didn't have a problem with people harming themselves? It's only the bits that harm you personally that you're worried about, isn't it? In which case it's 11,000.
Otherwise we're back into the self-harm/climbing/riding motorbikes thing where the committee's going to have to decide who to treat depending on whether it approves of what got them into hospital. I suppose we could simply just base the decision on how much tax someone's paid over their lifetime, as that seems to be the measure by which most "right thinking people" measure worth (see above worthy pensioner with dodgy hip). But how much tax has the nasty smoker paid on his or her fags? Oooh - brain ache!!!
Otherwise we're back into the self-harm/climbing/riding motorbikes thing where the committee's going to have to decide who to treat depending on whether it approves of what got them into hospital. I suppose we could simply just base the decision on how much tax someone's paid over their lifetime, as that seems to be the measure by which most "right thinking people" measure worth (see above worthy pensioner with dodgy hip). But how much tax has the nasty smoker paid on his or her fags? Oooh - brain ache!!!
In reply to mgco3:
Did you just make that up? I think there might be something about a physical dependency in the definition somewhere...
I'm not aware of any hospitals that prescribe 20 B&H for people, are there? I wouldn't know - never been in hospital - some committee or other banned me...
> Addict:- Someone who repeats an action or activity despite negative consequences.
Did you just make that up? I think there might be something about a physical dependency in the definition somewhere...
> Should we also provide alchohol in hospital for alcoholics ??
I'm not aware of any hospitals that prescribe 20 B&H for people, are there? I wouldn't know - never been in hospital - some committee or other banned me...
In reply to andy:
I dont know about making shit up as I go along but then I am not in "Marketing"
If your best offer is "Would you take their lungs off them and give them to someone more deserving?" then the "Teenie weenie bank wont get bigger!!
I dont know about making shit up as I go along but then I am not in "Marketing"
If your best offer is "Would you take their lungs off them and give them to someone more deserving?" then the "Teenie weenie bank wont get bigger!!
In reply to mgco3:
Exactly what i said. You kill 13,000 people with your second hand exhaust fumes, i kill 11,000 people with my second hand smoke. Do you follow me or am i going too fast?
Their choice. And since we already established that these people have paid in enough to cover their own treatment with enough doss to spare to pay for yours and mypyrex's as well, you should really be grateful rather than bitter
It gets damn cold outside in the winter
> (In reply to Mr Lopez)
>
>
> www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_107.pdf
>
> http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/improving-and-protecting-health/tobacc...
>
> Your 11,000 figure is only second hand smoking deaths.
>
>
> www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_107.pdf
>
> http://bma.org.uk/working-for-change/improving-and-protecting-health/tobacc...
>
> Your 11,000 figure is only second hand smoking deaths.
Exactly what i said. You kill 13,000 people with your second hand exhaust fumes, i kill 11,000 people with my second hand smoke. Do you follow me or am i going too fast?
> An estimated 461,700 hospital admissions for people aged 35 years and older were estimated to be attributable to smoking in england alone.
Their choice. And since we already established that these people have paid in enough to cover their own treatment with enough doss to spare to pay for yours and mypyrex's as well, you should really be grateful rather than bitter
> And yet people are arguing for places for people to indulge their damaging habit in comfort!!!! Words fail,
It gets damn cold outside in the winter
In reply to andy:
Physical Dependancy?? You 're the guy who wrote some of the monty python scripts surely!
Think yourself lucky some of us have had the "pleasure" of many hospital visits.
> Did you just make that up? I think there might be something about a physical dependency in the definition somewhere...
> I'm not aware of any hospitals that prescribe 20 B&H for people, are there? I wouldn't know - never been in hospital - some committee or other banned me...
Physical Dependancy?? You 're the guy who wrote some of the monty python scripts surely!
Think yourself lucky some of us have had the "pleasure" of many hospital visits.
In reply to mgco3: Are you stalking me, sweetie?
I'm flattered. Really. I am.
It's a shame you probably spend most of your time in your pants banging your keyboard with your fists as you get ever more frothed up about "our" money being wasted on "them" or you could have come and hung about outside my house too.
Profile's a bit old by the way - different sector, different area. Soz, like.
I'm flattered. Really. I am.
It's a shame you probably spend most of your time in your pants banging your keyboard with your fists as you get ever more frothed up about "our" money being wasted on "them" or you could have come and hung about outside my house too.
Profile's a bit old by the way - different sector, different area. Soz, like.
In reply to mgco3:
Gosh - well, I take it all back! Sod 'em - and there was me believing all along that nicotine created some kind of physical dependency in smokers. D'you mean it's all lies peddled by...erm..."them"...to get...well... "us" to pay for their treatment and stuff? When really they could all just pack it in tomorrow, and the only reason they do it is because they want to look like the Marlboro Man?
Thanks!
Oh - no...wait...newborns whose mothers smoke in pregnancy can exhibit withdrawal symptoms when they're born when they stop getting the nicotine in their mum's bloodstream. That can't be right, can it? Does that mean the little bastards are making it up as well? The FIENDS!!!
> Physical Dependancy?? You 're the guy who wrote some of the monty python scripts surely!
Gosh - well, I take it all back! Sod 'em - and there was me believing all along that nicotine created some kind of physical dependency in smokers. D'you mean it's all lies peddled by...erm..."them"...to get...well... "us" to pay for their treatment and stuff? When really they could all just pack it in tomorrow, and the only reason they do it is because they want to look like the Marlboro Man?
Thanks!
Oh - no...wait...newborns whose mothers smoke in pregnancy can exhibit withdrawal symptoms when they're born when they stop getting the nicotine in their mum's bloodstream. That can't be right, can it? Does that mean the little bastards are making it up as well? The FIENDS!!!
Post edited at 23:53
In reply to Mr Lopez:
Your maths is flawed old fruit.
If your 11,000 excludes all those who smoke then you would have to exclude all those who drive from the 13,000
AS there are approximately 26 million cars on the road in the UK I leave you to (try and) do the math. hint take 26 million from 13,000
Cold in winter. Warm yer hands around yer filthy fag then.
Your maths is flawed old fruit.
If your 11,000 excludes all those who smoke then you would have to exclude all those who drive from the 13,000
AS there are approximately 26 million cars on the road in the UK I leave you to (try and) do the math. hint take 26 million from 13,000
Cold in winter. Warm yer hands around yer filthy fag then.
In reply to andy:
Many people give it up. Addicts use any and every excuse to continue "using".
You are physically dependant on eating, drinking and breathing and will die without. Smokers are NOT physically dependant on nicotine. They wont die if they dont get it. They will eventually loose the craving. Craving is NOT a physical dependency FFS.
I crave for good lookin wimin but I wont die without them ( just as well at my age too)
Man up and give up the fags.
Many people give it up. Addicts use any and every excuse to continue "using".
You are physically dependant on eating, drinking and breathing and will die without. Smokers are NOT physically dependant on nicotine. They wont die if they dont get it. They will eventually loose the craving. Craving is NOT a physical dependency FFS.
I crave for good lookin wimin but I wont die without them ( just as well at my age too)
Man up and give up the fags.
In reply to mgco3:
That is a fair point - but you did start banging on about 450,000 admissions, which does include smokers - but your point about drivers is right (don't necessarily think you take 26 million from 13 - are there really that many cars in the UK?).
> Your maths is flawed old fruit.
> If your 11,000 excludes all those who smoke then you would have to exclude all those who drive from the 13,000
> AS there are approximately 26 million cars on the road in the UK I leave you to (try and) do the math. hint take 26 million from 13,000
That is a fair point - but you did start banging on about 450,000 admissions, which does include smokers - but your point about drivers is right (don't necessarily think you take 26 million from 13 - are there really that many cars in the UK?).
In reply to mgco3:
And this goes right back to Rob's (and others') original point that you seem to be struggling with - if someone's in hospital that may not (not saying is never not) be the easiest time for them to give up smoking as in some people it helps them deal with stress etc. A "physical dependency" doesn't have to mean you'll die if you don't get it - it's just that it can be harder than just "manning up" - do a bit of reading around - there's plenty of studies into the "physical dependency" that nicotine causes.
I don't smoke, by the way - I'm just a bit happier than some people to have the NHS spend some of my taxes on people who do things I don't approve of, like riding motorbikes. I'd also like the NHS to spend stacks of money on helping people to stop, or not start, smoking (and indeed stop them from riding motorbikes).
> Many people give it up. Addicts use any and every excuse to continue "using".
> You are physically dependant on eating, drinking and breathing and will die without. Smokers are NOT physically dependant on nicotine. They wont die if they dont get it. They will eventually loose the craving. Craving is NOT a physical dependency FFS.
> I crave for good lookin wimin but I wont die without them ( just as well at my age too)
> Man up and give up the fags.
And this goes right back to Rob's (and others') original point that you seem to be struggling with - if someone's in hospital that may not (not saying is never not) be the easiest time for them to give up smoking as in some people it helps them deal with stress etc. A "physical dependency" doesn't have to mean you'll die if you don't get it - it's just that it can be harder than just "manning up" - do a bit of reading around - there's plenty of studies into the "physical dependency" that nicotine causes.
I don't smoke, by the way - I'm just a bit happier than some people to have the NHS spend some of my taxes on people who do things I don't approve of, like riding motorbikes. I'd also like the NHS to spend stacks of money on helping people to stop, or not start, smoking (and indeed stop them from riding motorbikes).
Post edited at 00:04
In reply to andy:
People call it stalking, I call it selective walking!!
Maybe a different "Sector" but you havent lost your "Marketing hype" addiction.
My image-centric presence isnt producing the ROI if social signals on your radar are of me in pants.
Never wear them sweetcheeks!
People call it stalking, I call it selective walking!!
Maybe a different "Sector" but you havent lost your "Marketing hype" addiction.
My image-centric presence isnt producing the ROI if social signals on your radar are of me in pants.
Never wear them sweetcheeks!
In reply to mgco3:
Nah, good try but it's flawed logic. We are talking about the effects our respective actions have on others. How many people partake in those actions is not relevant to the number of people they have an effect on.
Nah, good try but it's flawed logic. We are talking about the effects our respective actions have on others. How many people partake in those actions is not relevant to the number of people they have an effect on.
In reply to andy:
26 million?? 2 hits on Google brought the same figure so It as good a guess as anyones
26 million?? 2 hits on Google brought the same figure so It as good a guess as anyones
In reply to mgco3:
Wasn't disputing it - just seems a stupidly large number for a population of what, 60 million, of whom probably nearly half can't drive?
> 26 million?? 2 hits on Google brought the same figure so It as good a guess as anyones
Wasn't disputing it - just seems a stupidly large number for a population of what, 60 million, of whom probably nearly half can't drive?
In reply to Mr Lopez:
You cant argue one logical state for one set of figures and a different for the other.
You cannot quote a figure for one set of people EXCLUDING the people who create the "polution" and then INCLUDE the people who create in the other set.
Illogical Mr Spock..
If you INCLUDE smokers who's smoke affects themsleves (as well as others)the figure is 100,000. Far in excess of your puny figure
> Nah, good try but it's flawed logic. We are talking about the effects our respective actions have on others. How many people partake in those actions is not relevant to the number of people they have an effect on.
You cant argue one logical state for one set of figures and a different for the other.
You cannot quote a figure for one set of people EXCLUDING the people who create the "polution" and then INCLUDE the people who create in the other set.
Illogical Mr Spock..
If you INCLUDE smokers who's smoke affects themsleves (as well as others)the figure is 100,000. Far in excess of your puny figure
In reply to andy:
But still own a car! boom boom!
> Wasn't disputing it - just seems a stupidly large number for a population of what, 60 million, of whom probably nearly half can't drive?
But still own a car! boom boom!
In reply to andy:
Sorry but I am not struggling with the point at all.
If they are ill and in hospital that is the VERY time to stop them making themselves even more ill!!
An alcoholic is just as "dependent" ( and I use the word loosly) on alchol as a smoker is on nicotine and yet no one in their right mind would condone allowing an alcoholic to drink in hospital.
Sorry but I am not struggling with the point at all.
If they are ill and in hospital that is the VERY time to stop them making themselves even more ill!!
An alcoholic is just as "dependent" ( and I use the word loosly) on alchol as a smoker is on nicotine and yet no one in their right mind would condone allowing an alcoholic to drink in hospital.
In reply to mgco3:
First hand smoke affects only me. Second hand smoke affects everyone. Car exhaust fumes affects everyone. If you crash against a tree that affects only you.
Like for like it's second hand smoke vs exhaust fumes.
First hand smoke affects only me. Second hand smoke affects everyone. Car exhaust fumes affects everyone. If you crash against a tree that affects only you.
Like for like it's second hand smoke vs exhaust fumes.
In reply to Mr Lopez:
However you spin it, you are on to a looser with this argument.
Fossil fuel related air pollution negatively affects my quality of life far more than second hand smoke. The numbers being quoted are for total air pollution - including heating and power generation - and not just cars.
But if you tok the source of that air pollution away my quality of life would suffer far more as society crumbled and decayed around me to pre-industrial levels as a key step in our very means of generating wealth (getting people to work) was destroyed. We'd be reduced back to living in mass slums in walking distance of the work. The NHS would be a shadow of its former self.
On the other hand if you took smoking away, a vey small fraction of the UKs spending would change. This is the bit people saying "Smokers pay XXX into the NHS" miss. The money would not disappear with the end of smoking, it would simply be spent - and taxed - elsewhere.
> Like for like it's second hand smoke vs exhaust fumes.
However you spin it, you are on to a looser with this argument.
Fossil fuel related air pollution negatively affects my quality of life far more than second hand smoke. The numbers being quoted are for total air pollution - including heating and power generation - and not just cars.
But if you tok the source of that air pollution away my quality of life would suffer far more as society crumbled and decayed around me to pre-industrial levels as a key step in our very means of generating wealth (getting people to work) was destroyed. We'd be reduced back to living in mass slums in walking distance of the work. The NHS would be a shadow of its former self.
On the other hand if you took smoking away, a vey small fraction of the UKs spending would change. This is the bit people saying "Smokers pay XXX into the NHS" miss. The money would not disappear with the end of smoking, it would simply be spent - and taxed - elsewhere.
Post edited at 08:14
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Finding Focus - Life Behind The Lens of a Climbing Photographer
This week's Friday Night Video is a portrait of a prolific climbing photographer from Wedge Climbing. Sam Pratt is well known in both the outdoor and competition scene but if you haven't heard of him, you've likely seen...
26 Apr
Loading Notifications...