On Sun, 15 May 2016 21:28:07 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 5/15/2016 6:31 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 15 May 2016 17:44:16 -0500, Muggles


{{ geesh }} I'm conservative, not a freaky liberal.

Then quit talking like a granola eater.

I can't stand granola.



Go to the CDC website. You know, the Center for Disease Control? Or, how
about the Cancer Society?? Or even GOOGLE secondhand smoke for yourself.

There you go. You posted data from 2 different ANTI smoking
organizations with the track record of a hooker with a side career of
embezzler. I asked you to provide unbiased sources..and there you go
tossing the two worst biased sources into the mix. Are you that
stupid? Or you dont read well?

Picky picky. Go find yourself a website or 2 that recommends smoking is
good for you.

Why? Its likely NOT good for you. But on the other hand..for 75%+ of
all smokers..it has little effects on ones health, one way or another.
The remainder have other health issues that the smoking may have some
effect on.

A perfect case in point is that 115 yr old lady who smokes a pack and
change a day. Doesnt seem to have harmed her in the slightest now
does it?

Gunner



I've already posted info from 2 different sites. Take your pick -
search the info for yourself.

I have searched the info myself. And I ignore the CDC and the Cancer
Society because they have a long track record of bias and
frankly..lies. On the same order as Planned Parenthood.

See my last comment ^