h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It is your responsibility because the default is no smoke. You are adding something to the envirnoment which is a known carcinogen, therefore it is down to you to ensure that when you add this toxic substance to the air it won't affect others around you.

I smoke, and have done for about 5 years. Both times i was pregnant, i gave up for the full nine months, and now only smoke outside my house when the kids are not around (ie at work, or when i'm down the pub) I am probably not really addicted, but i'm not ready to give up yet.

Guy does have a point - i get very angry when i see poeple smoking around children, particularly, as they can't do anythign about it. (although i have many frineds who are asthmatic and the smoking actually relieves their symptoms, as smoking relieved my bronchitis symptoms a couple of years ago)

I'm not saying its healthy, or good, but its our decision and everyone here seems to be fairly responsible about it. There are plenty of non smoking restaurents now and lots of places where you're not allowed to smoke. Anywhere with children i wouldn't smoke on principle. But telling us we are not allowed to smoke in a park etc is just fascist. Walk round us, or walk away. If you are outside you have no necessity to walk so close behind me that my smoke gets in your face - if you're walking that close behind me youre probably annoying me so much I may even be lighting a cigarrette specifically to make you back off!

Having said that, i've been on both sides of the fence, when i was pregnant and people smoked near me it was annoying. Remember the smoking carriages on trains? Even for a smoker, they're a bit too much! If you like drinking but don't like smoking it IS hard to find pubs that aren't smokey. However, if you're not smoking because of health considerations its a little hypocritical to drink instead. I think all anyone was saying is don't force us to give up our small pleasures because occasionally they upset you. If your asthma is that bad that an accidentally inhaled bit of smoke poses a serious health risk, then you must not be able to go walking in towns or anywhere where there are cars... in that case the odd smoker doesn't really make a lot of difference in the grand scheme of things!

Well now. I can walk (and cycle) round towns, although the high street locally does become a problem on about a dozen or so days per year. But when I get a faceful of smoke in a closed space I get asthma. Not life-threatening asthma, but there is no such thing as a pleasant asthma attack.

Pregnant women - now there's a thing. My wife was present at a delivery of a mother who smoked. Over 30% of the placenta was dead, and the baby had a low birthweight as a result. You did right to avoid the weed when pregnant.

But, as I have repeatedly said, I care not one jot if people poison themselves in the privacy of their own homes, or away from other people, or in designated areas. I never go to pubs because of the smoke anyway. On the other hand, with smokers now in the minority, it is not unreasonable to suppose that when you enter a building or room, you won't be subjected to unexpected smoke. And I really hate people who smoke walking along the pavement. Sorry, but I do. I'm striding along, breathing great lungfuls of air, and suddenly there is smoke. I can't take the normal avoiding procedures (shallow breathing, move away), it's just projected in my face over someone;'s shoulder and berfore I know where I am I've got a lungful of the vile stuff. Ugh.

'I am an asthma sufferer and cannot walk down a street without suffering from an attack if there are even a few cars on the road, polluting the air. I don't see why I should stay indoors because it's not my fault I have asthma, I think drivers and their cars should get off the road and be banned. Or at least stop their engines while I walk past when they see my special bright jacket.'

I agree with you that this is a ridiculous statement, and it is also ridiculous to expect smokers to stop smoking in the open air just in case they may have an asthmatic behind them! Yes, smoking kills, Yes, it is a choice to smoke and Yes, smokers are a minority. We as the UK have minority groups of different colours, cultures, races etc and they are all accepted and protected from the same laws because although they are minorities, they matter just as much as anyone else. Remember this... and don't also forget that asthma suffers are a minority aswell.
I myself am a smoker and am disabled yet I believe you should accept the life you've been dealt, and should not expect anyone to change their lifes to make yours better...

Wrong again. Cars have a utility value, cigarettes have none. If it were possible to find a single thing which cigarettes do for you which could not be achieved using some less toxic method, you can be sure that the tobacco companies would be trumpeting it loud and clear.

Cars may have a utility value, but they are also inordinately destructive. They create far more pollution than cigarette smoke, and cause far more direct deaths than smoking tobacco.
I smoke - I don't smoke around children.
I don't smoke in other people's houses - I don't smoke in my *own* house because of my daughter.
Smoking kill, and the tobacco companies are run by amoral scumbags who are directly responsible for more deaths and addictions that herion ever was.

But let me say this - if you complain about smoking in public THEN WALK EVERYWHERE!
I don't drive, my partner doesn't drive - and we are frequently looked upon as somehow weird because we decide to use public transport. We could afford a car, but choose not to. We have a daughter, and have decided not to personally add lead and carbon monoxide pollution to her world, regardless of what I choose to inhale into my lungs.
Smoking in a park when the park is surrounded with roads and internal combustion engines is the least of your worries.

I think that if someones going to smoke, before they light up they should ask if its ok, that way when people complain later, the smoker can say "well I did ask"

It seems you may have skimped on your reserach before launching your attack: I think you will find that my normal method of transport - a bicycle - emits very little pollution.

This year I have cycled about 2,500 miles, driven about the same, and travelled around 1,500 miles by train.

Well done by all the travelling but just a note about a recent survey I saw. If all the people who use double decker buses drove a car each they would emit less poisonous gasses than the bus! Of course this is based on an old bus and new cars, which just happens to generally be the case!!
At the end of the day I'm a smoker and I'm going to smoke wherever I am allowed, and all non smokers can go stand behind the bus and breathe lovely fresh air!! Coz that's where I definitely won't be...

Smoking in public is a freedom issue. You see it as the freedom to smoke, I see it as individual smokers arbitrarily removing the freedom of those around them to breathe smoke-free air.

Ultimately I would prefer all air to be free of toxic fumes. The fact that transport emits toxic fumes is not an argument for making it worse by adding cigarette smoke, but for making it better by reducing emissions.

Just to end the debate for who is responsible for what:

Note (Tg are Teragrammes 10^9)
Figures with a (?) can vary significantly

Global Atmospheric Emission per year

CO2 (830000 Tg/y)
Ranking:
1. Breathing, Biological decomposition 50%
2. Sea 45%
3. Anthropogenic sources <5%

CO (3400 Tg/y)
Ranking:
1. Oxidation of Hydrocarbons in Atmosphere 40% (?)
2. Natural sources 30%
3. Combustion Motors 20%

Hydrocarbons (1000 Tg/y)
(excluding Methane, per carbon unit)
1. Trees 90%
2. Cars <5%

Methane (500 Tg/y)
Ranking:
1. Swamps and Geothermal activity 30%
2. Ricefields 25% (?)
3. Ruminant Animals 25%
4. Termites 25%

SO2 (400 Tg/y)
Ranking:
1. Combustion of Petrol and Coal 50%
2. Biological decomposition 30%
3. Volcanoes 20%

Note that the gross part of the "pollutants" are from natural sources (That does not excuse anything we additionally let go into the atmosphere)

More unconventional wisdom:

Some Faecapentaenes (The stinking stuff in a flatus are carcinogenic)

Most of the vegetables and fruit you eat are treated with agrochemicals and pesticides (otherwise the global production of food would drop by 40% - and some people are already starving). Many pesticides yield toxic metabolites.

Agglomeration of toxines in Fish.

The frying oil for the french-fries contain various unsaturated fatty acids, some even contain polycyclic arenes (which are very carcinogenic)

The list is endless.

The problem is that it's fashy to bash smokers these days.

In the 1950s it was un-american not to smoke.

Bye,

HELL

Ah, another one who's skimped on their research. I eat organic, because of the pesticide residues. My argument against smoking is not about global-scale pollution but about localised carcinogenic emissions. Another researcher has said that fags are too toxic for him to smoke at home around his kids - but he's happy to smoke in the park around my kids. Pardon me if I'm not absolutely overwhelmed by this self-sacrifice.

Even so-called organic food is full with agrochemicals. Sad but true.

The argument on global pollution was aimed at the "Driving against smoking controversy" not saying "smokers don't pollute". I perfectly understand your argument, that the local pollution caused by a smoker can irritate, but globally it's negligible.

What are fags?

About toxicity: Beware of flatulence, excessive exposition to sun-light, Peanuts (50% of the peanuts are contaminated with a natural fungus - which name I forgot - but metabolites again are carcinogenic), Fireplaces, Swamps etc...

If you want to live absolutely free of gaseous dangers you would have to live inside of a plastic bubble or so.

Life most normally ends with death. And that (if it's natural) is most normally caused by cancer or arterio-pulmonar diseases. Even if people didn't smoke around you. Sad, but true.

Smoking or not smoking is a question of politeness IMO. People can talk nicely to each other, can't they? Ask before you light a cigarette - and if the answer is no - don't get annoyed. Get outside have a smoke, relax and come back. Smoking in parks or around children in the outside world: What's the problem? It's certainly not the toxic fumes. I think the kids get less annoyed than their parents... Perhaps because the parents are afraid of the bad example, or because they want to use the kids as an argument for something that they are against anyway.

HELL

LOL, this is the kind of pathetic and irresponsible comments to come out of a non-smoker. As has already been proved, when you breathe the 'fresh outdoor air' you're being damaged more by all other toxins in the air than the ones coming from fags.
And I really don't know why we all bother arguing this case over and over again. We will all die in the end, smokers will just die younger missing out on those last few years of coordination loss/memory loss/pooing in your pants and dribbling mashed food everywhere!

Was this a reply to my post?

What are fags?

Bye,

HELL

No, this was a reply to posting no 32. And fags = cigarettes!!

Well, he seems to very concerned about his health. And I do understand the irritation caused by fags in closed or small rooms, or in cars or in air-conditioned rooms. I hate it, I get instantaneous headache...

But in the outside, it's irrelevant.

Many people don't like the SIGHT of a smoking person. They think it's immoral, irresponsible and ugly. On one hand it's perfectly OK to be ugly, and on a second thought what's wrong with being irresponsible as long as you only damage yourself, additionally one can ask: What IS immoral in the first place? There's NO straight answer for this. So, for that reason, the only way to justify their anger is to use the "only damaging yourself" loophole with the 'kids' and 'pollution' argument.

This argument is easily defused if you think about all the other dangers around... Dont throw stones, yet. Let me explain.

What about intravenous drugs. They don't produce fumes. but would you let your kids play in a place where smutty junkies hang around? Of course not. Why? A similar problem: Would you let your kids play in an area where homeless people hang around? Probably not. Why? It's certainly not because of the fumes.

With cigarettes it's slightly different. Smokers are not dangerous elements of society - they don't have to steal to pay for their addiction, they will not kill for food. The danger is not immediate. But you don't want them around. You don't want to see people smoking.

Remark: The "YOUs" are not aimed at anyone in particular. It's just my poor writing style. Sorry for that.

Bye,

HELL

Congratulations on a direct hit - about eight feet to the left of the point

- tobacco smoke can cause lung cancer
- tobacco smoke can cause heart disease
- tobacco smoke can cause asthma attacks
- tobacco smoke is addictive
- tobacco smoke smells vile

People are perfectly welcome to smoke in private. The majority of people do not smoke, therefore it is basic courtesy not to inflict tobacco smoke on them.

The hypocrisy of those who do not smoke around their own children but will smoke in public (i.e. around other people's children) is breathtaking.

> - tobacco smoke can cause lung cancer

ANY smoke can do that

> - tobacco smoke can cause heart disease

ANY smoke can do that

> - tobacco smoke can cause asthma attacks

ANY smoke can do that

> - tobacco smoke is addictive

That's the smoker's problem

> - tobacco smoke smells vile

ANY smoke smalles vile

Replace tobacco with incense... It's the same. Don't lock on cigarette smoke just because you don't like the SIGHT of someone relaxing with a cigarette.

> People are perfectly welcome to smoke in private. The majority of > people do not smoke, therefore it is basic courtesy not
> to inflict tobacco smoke on them.

I agree. So in closed rooms: no smoking unless everyone says it's OK

> The hypocrisy of those who do not smoke around their own children > but will smoke in public (i.e. around other people's
> children) is breathtaking.

I agree. Smoking in public even in front of children is no problem.

HELL

You say any smoke can cause these problems but which has the higher risk? In most cases you will find it to be tobacco smoke, especially when looking very locally.