• Welcome to the new B.I.R.D. Forum. Please be sure to read the "New Member / New Registered ? Please Read" thread in the Coffee Shop. This contains some important information. To become a full member ( £5.90 a year ) simply click on your user name near the top on the right I hope you enjoy the new site ................ Jaws ( John )

Smoking in Pubs...

  • Thread starter R2B2
  • Start date

Should smoking be banned in pubs etc

  • Yes - It's indisputably a health hazard to everyone

    Votes: 103 71.0%
  • No - It's an individuals right to smoke in a public place

    Votes: 42 29.0%

  • Total voters
    145

DB on CBR1100XX

Official BASH referee !
Well Chaps, two posts require..........

............a detailed reply................

First Robbo....

So what your saying is, ''a large persentage of the countrys population **must**{my stars for hilight} slowly and surly kill themselves to pay for the aillments of the larger{and growing} majority,

Errrrr....no. That's two posts you've misread now. I was stating a fact in a tongue in cheek fashion. I'll state it again: Smokers should be thanked for their net contribution to the NHS. They pay lots of taxes on earnings and fags which are spent on providing NHS services to ALL. The poor smoker never gets to benefit from all his/her contributions because they die before they get much money spent on them by the NHS. If smoking was banned altogether, there would be no saving to the NHS because we'd all live longer and consume more NHS resources with diseases and conditions with lower morbidity and a better prognosis. Is that clearer ? ie. I didn't say 'must', I said 'do' in your sentence. I have yet to criticise smokers or obese people, just stated little known facts on their help in providing monies to the NHS amongst other things.............but read on.........

Now the Fat One............

So is heart disease and all forms of cancer, obesity, Parkinsons, old age etc etc

Pray explain what 50% fatal means?

State the bleeding obvious

Now Berty Boy, either you're on a wind up or being deliberately obtuse. Either way, the percentage applies to the number of fatalities in the total number of cases, as I'm sure you really knew. ie. 100% of people developing lung cancer cases die of lung cancer: Nobody recovers. To take your example of 50% fatal, this would mean for every 10 cases of lung cancer, 50% ie. 5 would get better - They don't.

Oral cancer, my field, has only a slightly better prognosis than lung cancer. It's more prevalent in smokers esp rollies, cigars and pipe smokers ie. unfiltered. We routinely screen all patients for the first signs but if you get it at the back corner of the mouth - it's not good news. That area of the mouth is known as 'coffin corner' Quite a cute little pun there in relation to smoking.......Geddit ? Coughing ?

Heart disease, other forms of cancer and obesity are not clearly not 100% fatal by this definition. I should have thought THAT was 'stating the bleeding obvious'

Smoking kills smokers, smoking kills passive smokers - Ask Mrs Roy Castle.

Frenchie: you're having a laugh, M8. Extraction is for urine not smoke, as you well know :}

It's all flogging a dead horse anyway. All this posturing is just smokers naturally kicking against the inevitable - The majority don't want their leisure time polluted by a minority and smoking is slowly becoming socially unacceptable. There will come a time when a smoker will be as welcome as a drunk driver outside a school..............in the meantime, all the resources possible should be put into getting them to quit, deep down even they know it makes sense.
 
Last edited:

ianrobbo1

good looking AND modest
aha!!! DB,!!!

so you fell into my trap!!:rolleyes:

Yeh!! awright ya got me, I did, infact, see ''the tounge in cheek'' but you must understand, I never let things like the ''facts'' get in my way, when I'm on a ''roll'',:}
and as you say,{flicks down to make sure}''deep down even they know it makes sense,'':bow:


I do ask myself,
Ian what are they going to ban next,??,:rolleyes:
see I told you I ask myself,!!!:bang: :}

I reckon these could help with the answers,!!
 

DB on CBR1100XX

Official BASH referee !
Yeah............

............and I bit !! I've got a fekking big bump where I fell off my horse, it's soooooo high !!! :}

Berty - ahhhhhhhh borrox - nahhhhh: you deserve it !:} :f :}
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Originally posted by Wolfie
..... I just fail to see how that is funny

I see what you mean (just read thru it again). Not the best phraseology I agree.

What I meant was funny peculiar, as in it's odd to see the fervour of defence in something that smokers must know (deep down) is so dangerous to health.

It didn't mean funny ha-ha. :yo:
 
F

frenchuk

Guest
if we stopped doing anything dangerous to health according to scientists etc etc, we wouldn't do anything... let's face it, life is a 100% fatality activity... and we're all BIKERS for heaven's sake, not exaactly the safest activity is it?
Meanwhile, I find it interesting to observe that some people are totally oblivious to what other people's observations. I must have said 10 times now extraction AND separate smoking / non-smoking areas would solve the problem, but I guess obsession and fear makes people blind. Anthropologically speaking, this forum sure is fascinating.
DB you are right about smoking slowly becoming socially unacceptable... just like biking, and any activity out of the norm and deemed unsocial behaviour by the silent majority.
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Re: DB~~~~~point of order..................

Originally posted by fat bert
As for Smokers being the minority - figures please?

12 million cig smokers out of population of 66 million.

One in two long-term smokers will die prematurely as a result of smoking - half of these in middle age. Most die from one of the three main smoking associated diseases: Lung Cancer, Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (Bronchitis and Emphysema), and Coronary Heart Disease.

364,000 patients are admitted to NHS hospitals every year due to diseases caused by smoking, or 1,000 per day.

In 1997/98 cigarette smoking caused 480,000 patients to consult their GP's for heart disease, 20,000 for stroke and nearly 600,000 for COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease).

It's all here... http://www.ash.org.uk/ plus a LOT more.

But the real shocking stats are those concerning the children:

Most children who smoke are influenced by their parents and older siblings (!)

1% of 11 year old secondary school kids smoke. This rises to 22% at age 15.

Half of all teenagers who currently smoke will die from smoking diseases if they continue to smoke into adulthood, on average 21 years before the national average.

In households where parents smoke, young children have a 72% increased risk of contracting smoking related respiratory illnesses.

Cotinine is found in the saliva of children whose parents smoke.

In Britain 450 children start smoking every day.
______________________________________

Holy Feck! I knew the figures would be surprising, but I didn't expect them to be that shocking, especially the kids stats. There is a lot more on the site link above. All the stats are compiled from case history studies. 11 million have seen the light and given up.
 
F

frenchuk

Guest
and now for the figures on alcohol, just to compare...
but hey, alcohol is socially acceptable!
Oh, and figures on polution-related ilnesses while we're at it...
One figure I can give you for free: 100% of living people die. So, life being so dangerous, let's ban it.
 

ianrobbo1

good looking AND modest
Originally posted by frenchuk
and now for the figures on alcohol, just to compare...
but hey, alcohol is socially acceptable!
Oh, and figures on polution-related ilnesses while we're at it...
One figure I can give you for free: 100% of living people die. So, life being so dangerous, let's ban it.

or EXTRACT IT,:rolleyes:

and the question that started THIS thread was what,??:dunno: :rolleyes:
 

Samster

chamon motherf*cker
I've been smoke free for 9days now - isn't too much of a problem really, just need the right mindset...................

But, seen as the smokers are losing the vote by about half.........here's a little one liner I used to use in restaurants if people turned their nose up and muttered under their breath about my enjoyable habit:

"Excuse me.........................do you mind not eating whilst I smoke please"...............bwahahaaahaaaa.........well I used to think it was funny.........:}

450 kids start smoking each day - and 7000 people are giving up each day.
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Originally posted by frenchuk
I find it interesting to observe that some people are totally oblivious to what other people's observations. I must have said 10 times now extraction AND separate smoking / non-smoking areas would solve the problem

It's nothing to do with people being oblivious to what you're saying, Pierre...

... it's just that most of us realise that for virtually ALL small to average sized businesses this is just not affordable, or cost effective. And it's just not practical - they simply do not work well enough to achieve the result you idealistically believe they would. To acheive what you're thinking would require such a rate of air exchange it would be ridiculous. Imagine heating all that incoming air in the cold months! It's a no go. Accept it! (although I agree with you in principle).

Look, an example. I went up to the Matlock meet the other week. The venue had a ventilation system running. There was about 25 people there (30 max). It was a fairly large & tall, open plan room on two levels, with a central staircase. The next day, the clothes I wore were STINKING of that stale smoke smell, and it took days before my leather jacket smelt of leather again!! It's indicative of the situation in nearly all enclosed places.

D'you see what I'm saying...
 
F

frenchuk

Guest
rob of course I see what you're saying... not affordable: I already covered that so won't insult anyone's intelligence by repeating my answer. efficiency: of course the air will never be as good even with extractors as when there's no smoke to start with, but it's better than nothing and in most restaurants equipped with those and separate areas smoking is not an issue.
 

ALonaBIRD

Registered User
Funniest thing i saw about smoking statistics was about sleep patterns.



one program said dont smoke before bedtime cos it is a stimulant and you will have problems sleeping

next night another program said dont smoke when you are driving cos it makes you drowsy and you might fall asleep at the wheel


HMMMMMMMMMMMMM wonder whisch one was right :dunno: :dunno: :dunno:

what i reckon is they will blame smoke for any bloody thing :bandit:


yeah i know smoking will most likely kill me but do they have to blame it on every feckin thing that goes wrong :mad:
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Originally posted by frenchuk
of course the air will never be as good even with extractors as when there's no smoke to start with

I knew you would see common sense in the end Pierre, LMFAO!!

I rest my case.
 

ianrobbo1

good looking AND modest
Originally posted by Rob P XX
I knew you would see common sense in the end Pierre, LMFAO!!

I rest my case.


I rest his case as well Pierre,:bow: :k
 
F

frenchuk

Guest
rob, I take it you're gonna stop riding your bike and driving your car then, since with none of those there would be much less polution - polution bad for babies too you know!
let's see how you like it when the anti-polution lobby imposes the stop on petrol and forces us to use battery-powered motorbikes... Well of course that won't happen, because governemnt can tax us on ciggies and make more money (nobody stops because of more tax on something) but they can't stop petrol sales because they would then loose their 85% markup, and petrol lobby is more powerful than tobacco lobby...
 

Wolfie

Is a lunp
It's all here... http://www.ash.org.uk/ plus a LOT more.

Of course it is rob , they are the anti smoking lobby, they are not gonna give both sides a view are they???

Please find the pro smoking people and compare their facts and figures.

lets see both sides of the coin.
 

DB on CBR1100XX

Official BASH referee !
Frenchie...........

.............you're missing the fundamental point in all this.

Nobody denies smokers the right to smoke, that's properly their choice. What they don't have the right to is to force other people to take part in the smokers' activities through passive smoking.

As alluded to in my earlier post, extraction is fekking crap and doesn't work.

Separate areas is one possible solution ie. discrete rooms not 'areas' cos smoke mixes with air - Yes !! Really !! Difficult and impractical ain't it So BAN IT IN PUBLIC AREAS - Hoooooooooooray !!!!!! We got there !!!! :}
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Originally posted by Wolfie
they are not gonna give both sides a view are they???

I can see the point you're trying to make Wolfie, but the figures there are not views, - they are statistics. Compiled from case studies and records from a variety of sources over many years. So it should all be reasonable sound info...
 
R

R2B2

Guest
Originally posted by frenchuk
rob, I take it you're gonna stop riding your bike and driving your car then...

WTF has that to do with this issue. C'mon Pierre, be fair now. I haven't once in this thread suggested anybody should stop smoking... If you and others wanna smoke with the depth of (proven) knowledge that's in the public domain in this day and age - be my guest. I've only supprorted the notion that it shouldn't happen in an enclosed public place. That is reasonable and fair.

Bertie asked for figures - I dug 'em out. They were bound to be uncomfortable reminders for those that smoke.

Keep it on track mate!
 

Wolfie

Is a lunp
they are statistics

yep they are.

and of course you can not make statistics say what you want can you????

So it should all be reasonable sound info...

Should be yes, but.....see above


Compiled from case studies and records from a variety of sources over many years


again they left in all the cases and records they did not like didn't they????
 
Top