In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:35:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Really? So smoking known carcinogens isn't bad for you? You should get
all of your loved ones hooked on them too, there so cool.

I don't smoke, nor does anyone in my family but that does not make me
want to engage in irrational discrimination against those who do.
There are "known carcinogens" in virtually everything around us. The
issue is in the concentration, not the mere fact it is there. All of
the anti smokers here have admitted it is the smell that offends them
and they invent the danger based on that. It is like those people who
say they are "allergic" to perfume and after shave simply because they
don't like the smell.

It has gotten to the point that people complain if they just see
people smoking, too far away to even smell the smoke.
I believe it is because they fear they will start smoking again if
they are around tobacco, not that there is any real danger present if
they had an ounce of will power.

What is irrational about me not wanting to die because of the habits of
others? Again, I could care less if someone is stupid enough to pump
toxins into their body. But when they harm me or my family, that's
different. JustWait even admitted that his wife is allowed to smoke in
one room that has an exhaust fan. Is he discrimenating against her? Yes,
the stench IS a real problem, but my family's health is the real issue
here.

There is nothing irrational about your fears, they are your fears and
your fears alone. What you don't have is the right to foist your
irrationality and fears upon the rest of society. You are free to live
on your property and live your irrational and fear filled life all alone
without interference from anyone.

Again, it WOULD be irrational for me to tell someone not to smoke
because they are harming themselves. I don't care how much someone
smokes. Go ahead, get lung cancer, throat cancer, stomach cancer. I
don't care. But smoking goes way beyond that, in that it directly harms
others. I don't have a "fear filled life". But the fact remains, second
hand smoke causes disease and death in innocent bystanders.

Where are your independently repeated and peer reviewed studies that
prove second hand smoke kills people?

I grew up in a house with two parents who smoked at least two packs or
more of cigarettes a day. So far, out of the 5 of us children there have
been no cases of lung cancer from second hand smoke. There has been one
case of lymphoma (parent) and two cases of breast cancer (sisters) but
nobody developed lung cancer. With parents smoking in the house, in the
car and every other place you would have thought that the kids would
have suffered from breathing in all of that second hand smoke.

I gave you plenty of cites with just that. You just refuse to see them.
You do realize that there IS a correlation between breast cancer and
second hand smoke, don't you? There are MANY health concerns associated
with second hand smoke. But, hell, if you don't think so, take your kids
to the airport and let them sit in the smoker's lounge for a few hours.
It's a cool, clean, safe habit after all. Your blather above is nothing
but hearsay and speculation. Are you really saying that because YOU
never got lung cancer that second hand smoke is safe? There have been
people who've survived after being doused with Agent Orange, too, does
that mean it's safe? I fell through the ice once when it was zero
degrees out, I made it home, barely, but I did. Does that mean it's safe
to walk around in zero degree weather with soaking wet clothes?

Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.

You do realize that my sisters have a genetic form of breast cancer. No,
you don't, because you are making an assumption that all breast cancer
is the same.

What are these many health concerns regarding second hand smoke?

Where are the diagnosed cases of lung cancer that are directly
attributed to second hand smoke. Not a contributing factor but, the one
main and only factor that caused the lung cancer.

My dad was doused with AO a couple of times. Freaking pilots can't
navigate to save their lives.

I remember standing outside in 25*F weather to warm up because inside
the radar huts it was about 10*F. Equipment is on, A/C is on, SOP is a
bitch. Can't operate a radar screen with a gloved finger either.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

In article , says...

On 2/25/2012 2:48 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says...

On 2/25/2012 1:44 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:35:36 -0500, wrote:
JustWait even admitted that his wife is allowed to smoke in
one room that has an exhaust fan.

Just a note to those of you reading. iBoaterer is a liar, each and every
assertion he makes about me or my family, you can automatically assume
it's a falsehood, based on conjecture, hysterics, and/or out of context
made up bull****.. Just sayin'...


Why do you care what iBoater or anyone else in the newsgroup says. You
take these assholes too seriously. We are all here for entertainment
purposes.



Just don't think is cricket to make up stories about others family life
to make a point... But I just wanted to make the point that I deny
everything and anything he says about the way we live our lives here...

Stop talking about your family and develop a thicker skin.

The funny thing is, I only repeated with HE said!! I want him to show
where I lied about anything, then apologize when he can't.

Why do you want an apology? Do you really care what some guy on USENET
says about you? Does it affect your life that much that you want an
apology from him?

Grow up, grow a pair and be a man.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:56:59 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:35:36 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

Really? So smoking known carcinogens isn't bad for you? You should get
all of your loved ones hooked on them too, there so cool.

I don't smoke, nor does anyone in my family but that does not make me
want to engage in irrational discrimination against those who do.
There are "known carcinogens" in virtually everything around us. The
issue is in the concentration, not the mere fact it is there. All of
the anti smokers here have admitted it is the smell that offends them
and they invent the danger based on that. It is like those people who
say they are "allergic" to perfume and after shave simply because they
don't like the smell.

It has gotten to the point that people complain if they just see
people smoking, too far away to even smell the smoke.
I believe it is because they fear they will start smoking again if
they are around tobacco, not that there is any real danger present if
they had an ounce of will power.

What is irrational about me not wanting to die because of the habits of
others? Again, I could care less if someone is stupid enough to pump
toxins into their body. But when they harm me or my family, that's
different. JustWait even admitted that his wife is allowed to smoke in
one room that has an exhaust fan. Is he discrimenating against her? Yes,
the stench IS a real problem, but my family's health is the real issue
here.

In most cases the smell is the ONLY issue. Maybe you don't understand
how OSHA establishes limit values but without that science applied to
cigarette smoke, it is just emotion.

It's just an emotion when someone forces me to inhale a substance KNOWN
to cause MANY diseases?

Your complaint is with mother nature, not with man.

On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote:


Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.


What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate
medical research?

In article ,
says...

In article , says...

On 2/25/2012 8:53 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:56:59 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:35:36 -0500, wrote:

Really? So smoking known carcinogens isn't bad for you? You should get
all of your loved ones hooked on them too, there so cool.

I don't smoke, nor does anyone in my family but that does not make me
want to engage in irrational discrimination against those who do.
There are "known carcinogens" in virtually everything around us. The
issue is in the concentration, not the mere fact it is there. All of
the anti smokers here have admitted it is the smell that offends them
and they invent the danger based on that. It is like those people who
say they are "allergic" to perfume and after shave simply because they
don't like the smell.

It has gotten to the point that people complain if they just see
people smoking, too far away to even smell the smoke.
I believe it is because they fear they will start smoking again if
they are around tobacco, not that there is any real danger present if
they had an ounce of will power.

What is irrational about me not wanting to die because of the habits of
others? Again, I could care less if someone is stupid enough to pump
toxins into their body. But when they harm me or my family, that's
different. JustWait even admitted that his wife is allowed to smoke in
one room that has an exhaust fan. Is he discrimenating against her? Yes,
the stench IS a real problem, but my family's health is the real issue
here.

In most cases the smell is the ONLY issue. Maybe you don't understand
how OSHA establishes limit values but without that science applied to
cigarette smoke, it is just emotion.


It really get's me. Now there is a town in California trying to ban
smoking even in your own back yard because one intolerant neighbor
complained about another neighbor... That is just ridiculous but still
just the kind of selfish intolerance I expect from California. Yay, we
support choice! As long as you make the same choice as we do!!!

As I've stated here many, many times. Smoke your brains out. It's a
great addiction! The problem is, if you smoke in public you are forcing
someone to breath in a substance known to cause many diseases. Take your
kids to an airport and let them hang around in the smoker's lounge for a
few hours, it's good for them!

Do you drive a car with an engine in it? Do you operate any equipment
with an engine it it? Do you benefit from anything that uses an engine?
Why are you polluting the air I have to breath? Stop you are killing
people.

In article , dump-on-
says...

On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote:


Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.


What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate
medical research?

You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's
qualifications?

On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote:


Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.


What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate
medical research?

You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's
qualifications?




I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical
research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable
qualifications.

On 2/26/2012 11:30 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote:


Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.


What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate
medical research?

You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's
qualifications?




I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical
research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable
qualifications.


And that might be relevant if you could show him some "peer-reviewed
medical research in scientific publications".

On 2/26/2012 11:01 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

In , says...

On 2/25/2012 8:53 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 11:56:59 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:35:36 -0500, wrote:

Really? So smoking known carcinogens isn't bad for you? You should get
all of your loved ones hooked on them too, there so cool.

I don't smoke, nor does anyone in my family but that does not make me
want to engage in irrational discrimination against those who do.
There are "known carcinogens" in virtually everything around us. The
issue is in the concentration, not the mere fact it is there. All of
the anti smokers here have admitted it is the smell that offends them
and they invent the danger based on that. It is like those people who
say they are "allergic" to perfume and after shave simply because they
don't like the smell.

It has gotten to the point that people complain if they just see
people smoking, too far away to even smell the smoke.
I believe it is because they fear they will start smoking again if
they are around tobacco, not that there is any real danger present if
they had an ounce of will power.

What is irrational about me not wanting to die because of the habits of
others? Again, I could care less if someone is stupid enough to pump
toxins into their body. But when they harm me or my family, that's
different. JustWait even admitted that his wife is allowed to smoke in
one room that has an exhaust fan. Is he discrimenating against her? Yes,
the stench IS a real problem, but my family's health is the real issue
here.

In most cases the smell is the ONLY issue. Maybe you don't understand
how OSHA establishes limit values but without that science applied to
cigarette smoke, it is just emotion.


It really get's me. Now there is a town in California trying to ban
smoking even in your own back yard because one intolerant neighbor
complained about another neighbor... That is just ridiculous but still
just the kind of selfish intolerance I expect from California. Yay, we
support choice! As long as you make the same choice as we do!!!

As I've stated here many, many times. Smoke your brains out. It's a
great addiction! The problem is, if you smoke in public you are forcing
someone to breath in a substance known to cause many diseases. Take your
kids to an airport and let them hang around in the smoker's lounge for a
few hours, it's good for them!

Do you drive a car with an engine in it? Do you operate any equipment
with an engine it it? Do you benefit from anything that uses an engine?
Why are you polluting the air I have to breath? Stop you are killing
people.



But they like cars, probably NASCAR fans some of them. They don't like
cigarettes.

There will probably be more pollutants put into the air in 3 1/2 hours
this afternoon in Daytona Florida, than the combined lifetime amount of
cigarette smoke from every smoker in the stands watching, maybe we
should ban the Daytona 500.. Oh wait, the "sentiment" isn't against
them... uh, yet...

On 2/26/12 11:36 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 2/26/2012 11:30 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 2/26/12 11:20 AM, BAR wrote:
In articlebeCdnXwnuLSUytfSnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@earthlink .com, dump-on-
says...

On 2/26/12 10:56 AM, BAR wrote:


Where are the independently duplicated and peer reviewed research that
shows that second hand smoke causes health problems?

The medical and scientific fields are rife with incorrect conclusions,
sub-standard methods and politically driven persons.


What are your qualifications to find, understand, and judge legitimate
medical research?

You are too funny. What are you qualifications to question anyone else's
qualifications?




I think if you are going to try to challenge peer-reviewed medical
research in scientific publications, you ought to have some recognizable
qualifications.


And that might be relevant if you could show him some "peer-reviewed
medical research in scientific publications".

Why? He doesn't have the medical/scientific qualifications to judge it.
I don't, and I have two university degrees.

--
http://tinyurl.com/7mhuxdj