Hellfire for all eternity

[gengrant]

Look more closely at what you are quoting from me. I never mentioned a gun.

so, if not a gun, what other "weapon" capable of discharge could you be talking about?

[con's fly is open]

Millana, there are several smoking rooms in the international part of the Vancouver airport... AFTER you check through the metal detectors. Before that you have to wander outside.
As to the actual flight, I don't know whether or not they offer nicotine gum on board. Take some just in case. Hamish, do you know?

PS: I just went 32 hours without a smoke, a personal Chinese record. Then I read this thread: after a minute all I saw was"smoking blh blh blh cigarettes blah blah blah smoke"

Sigh. Not sure how I'm gonna quit, but I know I've gotta. This is the second cold I've had since I got here, and both began with a smoking-induced sore throat. Still don't know whether Zyban is available here.

[Jollyjunklass]

I hear you Con,
32 hours eh, that's a hard go. Very hard. Scares the crap out of me. I know what you mean by quitting, every time I even think about it I can't wrap my head around it. When it's been going on for more years then it hasn't it is difficult. But, people do it, so there is hope. My grandmother had her breast removed from cancer and she still couldn't stop. However, my mom was able to stop after smoking for 40 years. So, you tell me, is there a method to this madness.

[acjade]

My mother is also an exsmoker.
I made the flight just fine without one Millana. It helps if you get on board tired so that as soon as the muzak starts you fall asleep.

[Lager]

I've heard---maybe Hamish knows --that when smoking was banned completely the airlines saved cash by reducing cabin pressure. So air quality was actually BETTER when smoking was allowed in limited areas.


Doesn't really bug me on planes for some reason---I'll get more frantic for a smoke in a movie...

[gengrant]

not sure if anyone cares, but did anyone hear about the guy who was using the nicotine patch and went to see his doc cause he was worried when he ran out of places to put them...seems that he was not told to remove the old one, so he was just adding them to a "fresh" spot on his body...now the instructions tell the user to remove old patch before putting on new one!

duh!?!

[Newbs]

Was his name "Krusty the Klown"?

[gengrant]

so, if not a gun, what other "weapon" capable of discharge could you be talking about?

Hamish, when are you going to answer my question? It's kinda hard to argue with myself...

[gengrant]

found this interesting tidbit on MSNBC's website...

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8221386/

so, if that's the case, I should expect a huge refund from the USAnian government because:

the remedy is not only forward-looking and aimed at future violations, but will act directly to prevent and restrain ongoing wrongful conduct of decades-long duration

they've been m'kaying me for years!

[Nate M]

Well, it was the tobacco companies that were technically overcharged, not you. I highly doubt that if they got all this money back, (assuming the tobacco industry actually ever paid them 130 billion dollars, which I highly doubt), chances of the tobacco companies giving something to you are extremely unlikely, in my opinion. They'd probably just funnel it all into their next "hook the kids" campaign.

[Mr Nobody]

tall said:

so, if not a gun, what other "weapon" capable of discharge could you be talking about?

Hamish, when are you going to answer my question? It's kinda hard to argue with myself...

Well, off the top of my head, there are bombs, bows, crossbows, springloaded knives, them springloaded spikes, landmines, mortars, tasers, lasers, masers, subsonic projectors, mace and pepper spray, biological weapons, chemical and gas weapons and so on.

And of course firearms that are not guns.

And the military grade wind-up thingy.

I am not entering into the argument though, since Hamish is already doing what I would better than I can. I am sure Hamish will respond in good time.

[Hamish]

tall said:

so, if not a gun, what other "weapon" capable of discharge could you be talking about?

Hamish, when are you going to answer my question? It's kinda hard to argue with myself...

Sorry, I missed this.

Tobacco smoke fits the description I gave, and not by accident I might add.

[Mr Nobody]

I put it into the category of gas weapons, myself. Or biological weapons.

Or maybe just air pollution.

[Hamish]

lagerlout2006 said:

I've heard---maybe Hamish knows --that when smoking was banned completely the airlines saved cash by reducing cabin pressure. So air quality was actually BETTER when smoking was allowed in limited areas.

Nope. Not true to my knowledge.

Cabin pressure in an aircraft is regulated by "outflow valves" that control the rate at which air is exchanged in the cabin. It is true that economies can be achieved by reducing the speed with which the total air volume in the passenger cabin is completely exchanged. That is done. However, I vividly recall what the cabin air was like before smoking was banned and can testify that air quality is much better now.

By the way, one look at an outflow valve as it was being serviced during the days of smoking in flight might have persuaded some people to give the habit up. The sight of the crap that collected in the valve as air went through it certainly gagged most people who saw it.

[gengrant]

Tobacco smoke fits the description I gave

and so does automobile exhaust, but you have not said whether or not you want to ban all gas-powered transportation...

where is the logic...exhaust from automobiles is much more polluting than cigarette smoke! AND, more people die each year from auto accidents than smokers and those exposed to SHS combined!

[Hamish]

WOW!!

Three strikes in ONE SWING!

Tobacco kills TEN TIMES as many peole as do cars.

This from The Journal Of The American Medical Association.

jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/291/10/1238

Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000
Ali H. Mokdad, PhD; James S. Marks, MD, MPH; Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc; Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH

JAMA. 2004;291:1238-1245.

Context Modifiable behavioral risk factors are leading causes of mortality in the United States. Quantifying these will provide insight into the effects of recent trends and the implications of missed prevention opportunities.

Objectives To identify and quantify the leading causes of mortality in the United States.

Design Comprehensive MEDLINE search of English-language articles that identified epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory studies linking risk behaviors and mortality. The search was initially restricted to articles published during or after 1990, but we later included relevant articles published in 1980 to December 31, 2002. Prevalence and relative risk were identified during the literature search. We used 2000 mortality data reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to identify the causes and number of deaths. The estimates of cause of death were computed by multiplying estimates of the cause-attributable fraction of preventable deaths with the total mortality data.

Main Outcome Measures Actual causes of death.

Results The leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435 000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400 000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85 000 deaths; 3.5%). Other actual causes of death were microbial agents (75 000), toxic agents (55 000), motor vehicle crashes (43 000), incidents involving firearms (29 000), sexual behaviors (20 000), and illicit use of drugs (17 000).

Conclusions These analyses show that smoking remains the leading cause of mortality. However, poor diet and physical inactivity may soon overtake tobacco as the leading cause of death. These findings, along with escalating health care costs and aging population, argue persuasively that the need to establish a more preventive orientation in the US health care and public health systems has become more urgent.


Author Affiliations: Division of Adult and Community Health (Dr Mokdad), Office of the Director (Drs Marks and Stroup), National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion and Office of the Director (Dr Gerberding), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Ga.

[Jollyjunklass]

I feel you guys are getting a touch ridiculous with your comparisons, by that I mean Hamish and Bond. Like I said, do either one of you drive? Give it up, more smoke comes out of your exhaust sytems than my mouth, in the wide open air. Start bitching about shutting down all the factories and every other thing that pollutes the environment.

Lay off the smokers, we have our rights if you don't like it , stand back. Comparing smoking to weapons, give me a break.

Join the tree huggers and focus on some real issues.

[Nate M]

The idea that "smoking is a right", like the right to go to school, the right to free speech, etc, is quite possibly the greatest PR campaign ever devised.

[Raoul Duke]

This is a mutually unwinnable scenario, kids. How about if we not argue with anyone at all?

Millana, I can't imagine why you'd ever be cooped up for 30-some hours. No flights are that long and even the most Naziesque airport has a door somewhere. For the flight part Con is on the money- Nicorette gum, available in any North American drugstore to the best of my knowledge, will keep the twitching awfuls away. A good book, a personal CD player, and a big box of fresh cannabis brownies or cookies for the flight will do the rest.

If I can make it through a Pacific crossing without a cigarette, anyone can make it through a Pacific crossing without a cigarette.

[gengrant]

How about if we not argue with anyone at all?

sorry, but you know I have to throw out some unfounded fact so that Hammy will blast us with a long-winded rant followed by 8 different sources to back himself up! j/k Hammy...have one on me



Just noticed the ads at the top o' the page:

"God loves you," "Students creating peace," "Master the possible," "World Peace"

Raoul, how do you get those ads to coincide with the topic so well?

[Nate M]

I'm kind of upset actually. For some reason, I can't ever see the ads here anymore. What gives? I'm missing tons of ad jokes, here.

[Hamish]

admin said:

If I can make it through a Pacific crossing without a cigarette, anyone can make it through a Pacific crossing without a cigarette.

Don't fall for it guys.

That was when I first met Raoul.

I was Captain on that flight.

We had him shackled, loaded into a horse stall, and put in the belly under sedation. He was “boarded” and “disembarked” by forklift.

His bill of lading was entitled “Gorilla of unknown gender.”

At the time he was wearing a medicated diaper. Did they ever find a cure for those sores?

[con's fly is open]

The confusion is over SSD- Secondhand Smoking Diseases. They have proven that you can get the same stuff from other people's cigarettes if you're trapped around them all the time. Thus far they've shown this in people who live with smokers, career bar waitresses et. al. They do NOT know how much exposure it takes to be affected.

This can be taken to the point of hysteria. In the Van smoking room there is a sign declaring that they never clean the room out of concern FOR THE HEALTH OF THE CLEANERS. Apparently those west coast babies can't slip on a filter mask. I discovered an ashtray fire, but clearly no one was going to come and pour a jug of water into the offending ashtray. 2 hours later when I came back, it was still raging. Probably still is.

[Mr Nobody]

Well, I am sorry, Millan, but I haven't argued anything. I just think that smoking is another form of air pollution and I am not in favour of it. If you had read previous threads on my attitude towards it you would not be making that statement.

And you may not realize this but people put out nearly as much green house gas each year as a car. Well, about 2/3. So stop breathing and farting guys!

Shutting down factories etc would kill something like 90% of the planetary population.

Tree hugging is silly. It is only aesthetic. 90% of Oxygen is produced in the sea. Not trees. The whole lungs of the planet thing is crap. I love to see forests but I am not confused about the issues.

How about that?

I wasn't going to join the discussion until then.

And yes, I agree with Nate. OK, back into my box.

I do, however, suspect Raoul's impartiality on this subject.

[gengrant]

OK, back into my box.

quick, hand me a couple nails...!

I'm not arguing that secondhand smoke isn't nasty and obnoxious (not to mention, noxious), just that if a person is in a public place that allows smoking, they shouldn't be chastised for lighting up.