On 8/19/15 11:31 AM, micky wrote:
In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 20:09:01 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote:

On 8/18/2015 3:32 PM, tony944 wrote:


There is ZERO evidence that second hand smoke can harm you.
Government created that myth.

Yeah, the government created the myth that there was witchcraft in Salem
in 1692, and they used statistics to prove it.

Anyone who claims there is ZERO evidence of something like this is
blowing smoke, so to speak.

Like the Gabonese in 1913? They'd been exporting tobacco for 300
years. They smoked so much that Schweitzer often treated them for
nicotine poisoning. Like the Inuit in 1902? Tobacco had been their
favorite trade item for more than a century.

http://blog.godreports.com/2011/09/observations-by-missionary-doctors-100-years-ago-offer-clues-to-fighting-cancer-and-other-diseases/

I believe Schweitzer treated 200,000 patients. To his surprise, he
couldn't find any cancer. Doctors treating the Inuit over a period of
decades reported the same thing. That direct evidence is more meaningful
than the indirect evidence statisticians present.


OTOH, from a smoker's perspective, I've found that second-hand smoke is
a very good buy. You can get some at yard sales, flea markets and
Goodwill Indurstries,

In America, second-hand smoke is a health hazard. What was the
difference between modern nations and Gabon or Greenland a century ago?
The Gabonese lived in well-ventilated huts, while the Inuit burned fat
in lamps to purify the air. Industrialized nations had glass windows
and electric lights. If you were addicted to farting, the best you
could do was to mask the odor by lighting a cigarette.

That's the correlation between smoking and health problems in
industrialized nations but not primitive ones. It's not the smoke but
what it masks.

Nowadays, when people complain about second- and third-hand smoke,
they're trying to divert attention from the real cause of the stench. He
who smelt it, dealt it.