Smoking ban extended to bars and pool halls in Corpus Christi

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Nobody is saying food, water, and biochemical plants shouldn't be looked at as well.

bottom line: is second hand smoke dangerous? simple yes or no.

It's not an either or topic. Is driving a car dangerous? Is fast food dangerous? Is chlorinated water dangerous?

This is the best I can do:

Do I think it's as dangerous as the other Class A carcinogens? No.

Do I think it's dangerous to be in a smoke filled bar once or twice a week? No.

Do I think it's dangerous to live or work with a chronic smoker over a period of 20, 30, 40 years? Yes.

Is it something to worry about? No.

[Blake]

It's not an either or topic. Is driving a car dangerous? Is fast food dangerous? Is chlorinated water dangerous?

it's not? then explain what those things have to do with second hand smoke

This is the best I can do:

Do I think it's as dangerous as the other Class A carcinogens? No.

Do I think it's dangerous to be in a smoke filled bar once or twice a week? No.

Do I think it's dangerous to live or work with a chronic smoker over a period of 20, 30, 40 years? Yes.

Is it something to worry about? No.

well the Surgeon General of the United States says you are wrong.

You are en led to your opinion for sure, but that's all it is......an opinion that the findings of universities and public agencies are all lying.

And when it comes to law making, sorry, but your opinion is nothing more than a turd floating in a pool when compared to what the surgeon general and the EPA have to say.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

it's not? then explain what those things have to do with second hand smoke

Logic is not your friend.

well the Surgeon General of the United States says you are wrong.

You are en led to your opinion for sure, but that's all it is......an opinion that the findings of universities and public agencies are all lying.

And when it comes to law making, sorry, but your opinion is nothing more than a turd floating in a pool when compared to what the surgeon general and the EPA have to say.

Besides discrediting the websites they are on, what have you done to counter the claims? I shouldn't say claims because it is verifiable fact that the EPA used a CI never used before in the history of the agency.

confidence interval: An interval defined by two values, called confidence limits, calculated from sample data using a procedure which ensures that the unknown true value of the quan y of interest falls between such calculated values in a specified percentage of samples. Commonly, the specified percentage is 95%; the resulting confidence interval is then called a 95% confidence interval.

Guess where I got that from?

http://www.epa.gov/emap/html/pubs/do...mglossary.html

[Blake]

Logic is not your friend.

I'm not sure you've ever even met logic.

Besides discrediting the websites they are on, what have you done to counter the claims? I shouldn't say claims because it is verifiable fact that the EPA used a CI never used before in the history of the agency.

Guess where I got that from?

http://www.epa.gov/emap/html/pubs/do...mglossary.html

In court, all I have to tell the judge and/or jury is "the EPA and the Surgeon General both state that second hand smoke is harmful".

I win. It honestly doesn't matter what other things you try to spin.

[JoeChalupa]

I can't remember the last time I remember seeing someone smoking inside an eating establishment and I like that.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

I'm not sure you've ever even met logic.

Are doctors dangerous? Simple yes or no.

http://www.healingdaily.com/Doctors-...-in-the-US.htm

In court, all I have to tell the judge and/or jury is "the EPA and the Surgeon General both state that second hand smoke is harmful".

I win. It honestly doesn't matter what other things you try to spin.

If it was determined on the amount of dodges in one thread, then yes you would win.

[BacktoBasics]

In court, all I have to tell the judge and/or jury is "the EPA and the Surgeon General both state that second hand smoke is harmful".

I win. It honestly doesn't matter what other things you try to spin.

Don't you think thats the exact point he's trying to make. Whats he's saying and with sources of proof (like them or not) that the information stated by both bodies is found to be exaggerated. In some cases completely unfounded.

He's also drawn some very logical correlations to everyday things such as gas fumes, UV sunrays yada yada and how the study takes a completely different approach to how they measure the danger of one thing (which is similar) but turn around and completely disregard the same protocol for measuring the level of danger associated with cigarette smoke.

Surely even you can question that.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

And you keep asking about funding:

Do you think the NCI or ACS or EPA is going to fund or attach their name to any study where the outcome may be in doubt??

The character assassination done on Enstrom and Kabat, who to my knowledge were two of the most respected guys in their field, should make anybody wary of going against the grain.

And to add to that, they blackballed, rather than dispute his claims, one of their own when he questioned the recent anti-smoking crusade.

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/search?q=listserv

[Blake]

Are doctors dangerous? Simple yes or no.

http://www.healingdaily.com/Doctors-...-in-the-US.htm

Look, I know you are getting desperate, but cmon, don't make you yourself look any sillier.

I know good doctors and bad doctors

Just let me know when you find good second hand smoke.

Good Lord.

If it was determined on the amount of dodges in one thread, then yes you would win.

whatever....

If it is as you say it is, why isn't Phillip Morris running ads saying how everyone is lying? Where is the national media in this? why aren't there any TV do entaries on Discovery Channel about this?

I'll tell you why.

Because no matter how blown out of proportion some of these studies may or may not get, at a base level all of us with any decent amount of common sense knows that second hand smoke is bad for you.

[jcrod]

Damn 21 pages.

I love smoking bans, I don't want to breathe and smell like that . It's your deal if you want to do it, but don't put me in harms way.

All my friends just go outside every so often, you want to smoke you deal with it.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

If it is as you say it is, why isn't Phillip Morris running ads saying how everyone is lying? Where is the national media in this? why aren't there any TV do entaries on Discovery Channel about this?

I'll tell you why.

Because no matter how blown out of proportion some of these studies may or may not get, at a base level all of us with any decent amount of common sense knows that second hand smoke is bad for you.

Fear sells.

And thanks for finally admitting it's based on perception.

[Blake]

Fear sells.

And thanks for finally admitting it's based on perception.

no, it's based on the surgeon general, jeenyus.

you're welcome.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

no, it's based on the surgeon general, jeenyus.

you're welcome.

Which is based on the EPA's report.

Which you continually keep forgetting to respond to.

Or any other question I've posed in this thread.

[BacktoBasics]

If it is as you say it is, why isn't Phillip Morris running ads saying how everyone is lying? Where is the national media in this? why aren't there any TV do entaries on Discovery Channel about this?

Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Right now the government is taxing the piss out of cigarettes. Its a system that somewhat works. There is really no reason they couldn't go down the same path as dope and make a ton of money off the war on tobacco.

The heavy players work within the system because the system allows them to profit millions if not billions of dollars. This is why you see all the major cigarette players running underage anti-smoking ad after anti-smoking ad per their agreement...along with the label warnings.

If they put up a fight and attempt to hold the government hostage in a battle of wits there's no question they'll lose their right to legally traffic the drug.

Out of all of your points and your entire stance I would have been certain that even you understood the politics envolved with this kind of money. I shouldn't have overestimated your common sense again.

There have been scores of do entaries on everything from Kennedy's assination to NASA faking the moon landing that have been pulled at the demand of the government. Not to mention the amount of revenue from advertising that you might lose by running a pro-smoking do entary. The fight against smoking is probably larger than the interest in anti-marijuana. You always have to keep in mind who pays your bills and their beliefs.

[Alex Jones]

You notice all the non smokers in this topic are for the NWO?

[BacktoBasics]

You notice all the smokers in this topic are for the NWO?

You're doing it wrong . At the very least it would be the other way around you. Learn to run your troll propery.

[T Park.]

You're doing it wrong .

That was fresh, what year is that from 2002?

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

Just let me know when you find good second hand smoke.

Apparently, if we can find "good" radon and "good" asbestos, then it shouldn't be a problem to find "good" SHS.

It's the dosage/response table that all other carcinogens are held to, except of course your favorite, silly.

I'm done. I think I've made my point extremely clear and kicking around Blake is getting stale.

[The Club]

I'm done. I think I've made my point

And then there was two...............

[Blake]

Don't bite the hand that feeds you. Right now the government is taxing the piss out of cigarettes. Its a system that somewhat works. There is really no reason they couldn't go down the same path as dope and make a ton of money off the war on tobacco.

The heavy players work within the system because the system allows them to profit millions if not billions of dollars. This is why you see all the major cigarette players running underage anti-smoking ad after anti-smoking ad per their agreement...along with the label warnings.

If they put up a fight and attempt to hold the government hostage in a battle of wits there's no question they'll lose their right to legally traffic the drug.

Out of all of your points and your entire stance I would have been certain that even you understood the politics envolved with this kind of money. I shouldn't have overestimated your common sense again.

There have been scores of do entaries on everything from Kennedy's assination to NASA faking the moon landing that have been pulled at the demand of the government. Not to mention the amount of revenue from advertising that you might lose by running a pro-smoking do entary. The fight against smoking is probably larger than the interest in anti-marijuana. You always have to keep in mind who pays your bills and their beliefs.

you forgot the 9/11 theories

[Blake]

Apparently, if we can find "good" radon and "good" asbestos, then it shouldn't be a problem to find "good" SHS.

It's the dosage/response table that all other carcinogens are held to, except of course your favorite, silly.

I'm done. I think I've made my point extremely clear and kicking around Blake is getting stale.

"it shouldn't be a problem to find good SHS"?

yeah, I'd say you are long since done.

And you need to check the footprints on your own ass before you go around bragging how you think you kicked someone elses.

[DisgruntledLionFan#54,927]

"it shouldn't be a problem to find good SHS"?

yeah, I'd say you are long since done.

And you need to check the footprints on your own ass before you go around bragging how you think you kicked someone elses.

I lied.


Did the quotes throw you off? Figured they would. By good I meant acceptable levels.


You haven't answered one question, sweetie. All you've done is repeated the company line and danced around all the relevant points.

You aren't going to answer them because 1) You can't. 2) It would destroy your entire basis for believing SHS is harmful.

Oh, besides the fact that "you just know" or that it's "common knowledge". Where do you think that "common knowledge" came from, Einstein? Wouldn't have started with the EPA report, would it?

Nah, that's way too old for an enlightened man like yourself to even consider.

[JIM LAMPLEY]

Just when you thought DisgruntledLionFan#54,927 was out,
he comes back strong with a right hook!

[LARRY MERCHANT]

I'm sorry Jim....but........I...feel...back...to...basics... .still....has ...the ....upper....hand....in...this...debate.....

[Emanuel Steward]

Both you crackers are full of ! Blake has scoreboard on all these fools!!