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


On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:20:14 -0700 (PDT)
Uncle Monster wrote:

Me too but I can't hate my parents because of it because they didn't
know any better. Fraking cigarette commercials of the time touted
smoking as good for your health. (Š™_˜‰)

[8~{} Uncle Sneezing Monster

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

You Sir are "IDIOT

I join Uncle in the ranks of idiots. I had a lot
of ear infections as a child of smokers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking

Evidence
Exposure to secondhand smoke by age, race, and poverty level in the US.

Epidemiological studies show that non-smokers exposed to second-hand
smoke are at risk for many of the health problems associated with direct
smoking. Most of the research has come from studies of nonsmokers who
are married to a smoker. Those conclusions are also backed up by further
studies of workplace exposure to smoke.[53]

In 1992, a review estimated that second-hand smoke exposure was
responsible for 35,000 to 40,000 deaths per year in the United States in
the early 1980s.[54] The absolute risk increase of heart disease due to
ETS was 2.2%, while the attributable risk percent was 23%. A 2014
analysis of eighteen studies noted that "the association between
exposure to secondhand smoke and lung cancer risk is well established."[55]

Evidence shows that inhaled sidestream smoke, the main component of
second-hand smoke, is about four times more toxic than mainstream smoke.
This fact has been known to the tobacco industry since the 1980s, though
it kept its findings secret.[56][57][58][59] Some scientists believe
that the risk of passive smoking, in particular the risk of developing
coronary heart diseases, may have been substantially underestimated.[60]

In 1997, the BMJ published an analysis of 37 epidemiological studies on
the relationship between secondhand smoke exposure and lung cancer which
concluded that such exposure caused lung cancer. The increase in risk
was estimated to be 24 percent among non-smokers who lived with a
smoker.[61] A 2000 meta-analysis found a relative risk of 1.48 for lung
cancer among men exposed to secondhand smoke, and a relative risk of
1.16 among those exposed to it at work.[62] Another meta-analysis
confirmed the finding of an increased risk of lung cancer among women
with spousal exposure to secondhand smoke the following year. It found a
relative risk of lung cancer of 1.29 for women exposed to secondhand
smoke from their spouses.[63]

A minority of epidemiologists have found it hard to understand how
second-hand smoke, which is more diluted than actively inhaled smoke,
could have an effect that is such a large fraction of the added risk of
coronary heart disease among active smokers.[64][65] One proposed
explanation is that second-hand smoke is not simply a diluted version of
"mainstream" smoke, but has a different composition with more toxic
substances per gram of total particulate matter.[64] Passive smoking
appears to be capable of precipitating the acute manifestations of
cardio-vascular diseases (atherothrombosis) and may also have a negative
impact on the outcome of patients who suffer acute coronary syndromes.[66]

In 2004, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the
World Health Organization (WHO) reviewed all significant published
evidence related to tobacco smoking and cancer. It concluded:

These meta-analyses show that there is a statistically significant and
consistent association between lung cancer risk in spouses of smokers
and exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke from the spouse who smokes.
The excess risk is of the order of 20% for women and 30% for men and
remains after controlling for some potential sources of bias and
confounding.[3]

Subsequent meta-analyses have confirmed these findings.[67][68]

The National Asthma Council of Australia cites studies showing that
second-hand smoke is probably the most important indoor pollutant,
especially around young children:[69]

Smoking by either parent, particularly by the mother, increases the risk
of asthma in children.
The outlook for early childhood asthma is less favourable in smoking
households.
Children with asthma who are exposed to smoking in the home generally
have more severe disease.
Many adults with asthma identify ETS as a trigger for their symptoms.
Doctor-diagnosed asthma is more common among non-smoking adults exposed
to ETS than those not exposed. Among people with asthma, higher ETS
exposure is associated with a greater risk of severe attacks.

In France, exposure to second-hand smoke has been estimated to cause
between 3,000[70] and 5,000 premature deaths per year, with the larger
figure cited by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin during his
announcement of a nationwide smoke-free law: "That makes more than 13
deaths a day. It is an unacceptable reality in our country in terms of
public health."[71]

There is good observational evidence that smoke-free legislation reduces
the number of hospital admissions for heart disease.[72]
Risk level

The International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health
Organization concluded in 2004 that there was sufficient evidence that
second-hand smoke caused cancer in humans.[3] Most experts conclude that
moderate, occasional exposure to second-hand smoke presents a modest but
measurable cancer risk to nonsmokers. The overall risk depends on the
effective dose received over time. The risk level is higher if
non-smokers spend many hours in an environment where cigarette smoke is
widespread, such as a business where many employees or patrons are
smoking throughout the day, or a residential care facility where
residents smoke freely.[73] Those who work in environments where smoke
is not regulated are also at higher risk. Workers particularly at risk
of exposure include those in installation repair and maintenance,
construction and extraction, and transportation.[74]

The US Surgeon General, in his 2006 report, estimated that living or
working in a place where smoking is permitted increases the non-smokers'
risk of developing heart disease by 25€“30% and lung cancer by 20€“30%.[75]
Biomarkers
Breath CO monitor displaying carbon monoxide concentration of an exhaled
breath sample (in ppm) with corresponding percent concentration of
carboxyhemoglobin displayed below.

Environmental tobacco smoke can be evaluated either by directly
measuring tobacco smoke pollutants found in the air or by using
biomarkers, an indirect measure of exposure. Carbon monoxide monitored
through breath, nicotine, cotinine, thiocyanates, and proteins are the
most specific biological markers of tobacco smoke exposure.[76][77]
Biochemical tests are a much more reliable biomarker of second-hand
smoke exposure than surveys. Certain groups of people are reluctant to
disclose their smoking status and exposure to tobacco smoke, especially
pregnant women and parents of young children. This is due to their
smoking being socially unacceptable. Also, it may be difficult for
individuals to recall their exposure to tobacco smoke.[78]

A 2007 study in the Addictive Behaviors journal found a positive
correlation between second-hand tobacco smoke exposure and
concentrations of nicotine and/or biomarkers of nicotine in the body.
Significant biological levels of nicotine from second-hand smoke
exposure were equivalent to nicotine levels from active smoking and
levels that are associated with behaviour changes due to nicotine
consumption.[79]
Cotinine

Cotinine, the metabolite of nicotine, is a biomarker of second-hand
smoke exposure. Typically, cotinine is measured in the blood, saliva,
and urine. Hair analysis has recently become a new, noninvasive
measurement technique. Cotinine accumulates in hair during hair growth,
which results in a measure of long-term, cumulative exposure to tobacco
smoke.[80] Urinary cotinine levels have been a reliable biomarker of
tobacco exposure and have been used as a reference in many
epidemiological studies. However, cotinine levels found in the urine
only reflect exposure over the preceding 48 hours. Cotinine levels of
the skin, such as the hair and nails, reflect tobacco exposure over the
previous three months and are a more reliable biomarker.[76]
Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide monitored via breath is also a reliable biomarker of
second-hand smoke exposure as well as tobacco use. With high sensitivity
and specificity, it not only provides an accurate measure, but the test
is also non-invasive, highly reproducible, and low in cost. Breath CO
monitoring measures the concentration of CO in an exhalation in parts
per million, and this can be directly correlated to the blood CO
concentration (carboxyhemoglobin).[81] Breath CO monitors can also be
used by emergency services to identify patients who are suspected of
having CO poisoning.
Pathophysiology

A 2004 study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the
World Health Organization concluded that non-smokers are exposed to the
same carcinogens as active smokers. Sidestream smoke contains more than
4,000 chemicals, including 69 known carcinogens. Of special concern are
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines, and
aromatic amines, such as 4-aminobiphenyl, all known to be highly
carcinogenic. Mainstream smoke, sidestream smoke, and second-hand smoke
contain largely the same components, however the concentration varies
depending on type of smoke.[3] Several well-established carcinogens have
been shown by the tobacco companies' own research to be present at
higher concentrations in sidestream smoke than in mainstream smoke.[82]

Second-hand smoke has been shown to produce more particulate-matter (PM)
pollution than an idling low-emission diesel engine. In an experiment
conducted by the Italian National Cancer Institute, three cigarettes
were left smoldering, one after the other, in a 60 m³ garage with a
limited air exchange. The cigarettes produced PM pollution exceeding
outdoor limits, as well as PM concentrations up to 10-fold that of the
idling engine.[83]

Tobacco smoke exposure has immediate and substantial effects on blood
and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack,
particularly in people already at risk.[84] Exposure to tobacco smoke
for 30 minutes significantly reduces coronary flow velocity reserve in
healthy nonsmokers.[85]

Pulmonary emphysema can be induced in rats through acute exposure to
sidestream tobacco smoke (30 cigarettes per day) over a period of 45
days.[86] Degranulation of mast cells contributing to lung damage has
also been observed.[87]

The term "third-hand smoke" was recently coined to identify the residual
tobacco smoke contamination that remains after the cigarette is
extinguished and second-hand smoke has cleared from the air.[88][89][90]
Preliminary research suggests that by-products of third-hand smoke may
pose a health risk,[91] though the magnitude of risk, if any, remains
unknown. In October 2011, it was reported that Christus St. Frances
Cabrini Hospital in Alexandria, Louisiana would seek to eliminate
third-hand smoke beginning in July 2012, and that employees whose
clothing smelled of smoke would not be allowed to work. This prohibition
was enacted because third-hand smoke poses a special danger for the
developing brains of infants and small children.[92]

In 2008, there were more than 161,000 deaths attributed to lung cancer
in the United States. Of these deaths, an estimated 10% to 15% were
caused by factors other than first-hand smoking; equivalent to 16,000 to
24,000 deaths annually. Slightly more than half of the lung cancer
deaths caused by factors other than first-hand smoking were found in
nonsmokers. Lung cancer in non-smokers may well be considered one of the
most common cancer mortalities in the United States. Clinical
epidemiology of lung cancer has linked the primary factors closely tied
to lung cancer in non-smokers as exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke,
carcinogens including radon, and other indoor air pollutants.[93]
Opinion of public health authorities

There is widespread scientific consensus that exposure to second-hand
smoke is harmful.[4] The link between passive smoking and health risks
is accepted by every major medical and scientific organisation, including:

The World Health Organization:[3] The governments of 168 nations have
signed and currently 174 have ratified the World Health Organization
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which states that "Parties
recognize that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that
exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability."[1]
The U.S. National Institutes of Health[94]
The Centers for Disease Control[95]
The United States Surgeon General[2]
The U.S. National Cancer Institute[96]
The United States Environmental Protection Agency[97]
The California Environmental Protection Agency[9]
The American Heart Association,[98] American Lung Association,[99] and
American Cancer Society[100]
The American Medical Association[101]
The American Academy of Pediatrics[102]
The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council[103]
The United Kingdom Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health[104]

because tobacco smoke is so toxic some countries have a new tax on it. in addition to all current taxes. each year they add a buck tax, year one a dollar extra, year 10, ten dollars extra.

i believe that ever smoking around a child should get the smoker on charges for child abuse.....

i hate the stench when people smoking in vehicles get sucked into my vehicle..... YUK

the tobacco industry needs to die, just like its brought death to so many of its users.

On 8/18/2015 9:15 PM, bob haller wrote:
because tobacco smoke is so toxic some countries have a new tax on it. in addition to all current taxes. each year they add a buck tax, year one a dollar extra, year 10, ten dollars extra.

i believe that ever smoking around a child should get the smoker on charges for child abuse.....

i hate the stench when people smoking in vehicles get sucked into my vehicle..... YUK

the tobacco industry needs to die, just like its brought death to so many of its users.


In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses their
butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc crap on
the roads and grass areas.

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses their
butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc crap on
the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

Readers Digest story (quoted from memory). "we live
in a small tourist town. One of the cars drove up,
with out of state license plates. The door opened,
the occupant dumped ash tray and some other junk
onto the ground next to the car. Then got out, and
went to the tourist attraction. My husband, a
locksmith, went over to the car. He picked the lock
on the trunk, and put all the ashes, butts, and
trash into the car trunk, and closed the lid."

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc
crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

Readers Digest story (quoted from memory). "we live
in a small tourist town. One of the cars drove up,
with out of state license plates. The door opened,
the occupant dumped ash tray and some other junk
onto the ground next to the car. Then got out, and
went to the tourist attraction. My husband, a
locksmith, went over to the car. He picked the lock
on the trunk, and put all the ashes, butts, and
trash into the car trunk, and closed the lid."

Now THAT's a fine story. Once in a while there is justice.

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:31:11 PM UTC-5, SBH wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:15 PM, bob haller wrote:
because tobacco smoke is so toxic some countries have a new tax on it. in addition to all current taxes. each year they add a buck tax, year one a dollar extra, year 10, ten dollars extra.

i believe that ever smoking around a child should get the smoker on charges for child abuse.....

i hate the stench when people smoking in vehicles get sucked into my vehicle..... YUK

the tobacco industry needs to die, just like its brought death to so many of its users.


In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses their
butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc crap on
the roads and grass areas.

I've seen it cause grass fires on the sides and medians of the interstate highways in my area. I saw a trailer full of hay burn on the side of the interstate when the dumbass driving the truck towing the trailer flicked his lit cigarette out the window at 70 mph. I have to wonder if Californiastan is on fire because of smokers mindlessly flicking their lit cigarettes out the windows of their vehicles while traveling the roads and highways? (à²*_à²*)

[8~{} Uncle Disgusted Monster

Uncle Monster wrote:

And the wacko's just keep on coming!

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 12:18:15 AM UTC-5, Bob F wrote:
Uncle Monster wrote:

And the wacko's just keep on coming!

Perhaps there should be a hunting season for wackos? You could kill a limited numbers of wackos to cull the population of really sick wackos. Perhaps wacko hunting lions that would entice a wacko to come out of hiding to pet the big kitty? �̯͡�﴿

[8~{} Uncle Wacko Monster

On 8/19/2015 12:47 AM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 8:31:11 PM UTC-5, SBH wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:15 PM, bob haller wrote:
because tobacco smoke is so toxic some countries have a new tax on it. in addition to all current taxes. each year they add a buck tax, year one a dollar extra, year 10, ten dollars extra.

i believe that ever smoking around a child should get the smoker on charges for child abuse.....

i hate the stench when people smoking in vehicles get sucked into my vehicle..... YUK

the tobacco industry needs to die, just like its brought death to so many of its users.


In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses their
butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc crap on
the roads and grass areas.

I've seen it cause grass fires on the sides and medians of the interstate highways in my area. I saw a trailer full of hay burn on the side of the interstate when the dumbass driving the truck towing the trailer flicked his lit cigarette out the window at 70 mph. I have to wonder if Californiastan is on fire because of smokers mindlessly flicking their lit cigarettes out the windows of their vehicles while traveling the roads and highways? (à²*_à²*)

[8~{} Uncle Disgusted Monster


One ended up on the lap of a friend while riding his motorcycle.

On 8/18/2015 10:56 PM, Bob F wrote:
Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc
crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

Readers Digest story (quoted from memory). "we live
in a small tourist town. One of the cars drove up,
with out of state license plates. The door opened,
the occupant dumped ash tray and some other junk
onto the ground next to the car. Then got out, and
went to the tourist attraction. My husband, a
locksmith, went over to the car. He picked the lock
on the trunk, and put all the ashes, butts, and
trash into the car trunk, and closed the lid."

Now THAT's a fine story. Once in a while there is justice.


Wish I had saved the magazine, so I could scan and
post it. But, who could tell (thirty years ago) that
I'd want to scan it and post to the internet.

Thank you for your kind words. And thank you for
a very good example of correctly trimming text.
You're likely also good with spelling airs?

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

I did have occasion once to hear a smoker many years ago complain about how she
flicked a butt out the window, and it landed on the back window of her
convertable, burning a hole through that window.

The fire authorities have reported a lot of brush fires started all over my
state by butts thrown out windows this year. I saw one of those a few weeks ago
right here in Seattle.

I have been chased out of jobs three times by smokers. It is amazing how badly
second hand smoke can affect your health. Smokers denying it is just rediculous.

On 8/19/2015 9:47 AM, Bob F wrote:
I did have occasion once to hear a smoker many years ago complain about how she
flicked a butt out the window, and it landed on the back window of her
convertable, burning a hole through that window.

The fire authorities have reported a lot of brush fires started all over my
state by butts thrown out windows this year. I saw one of those a few weeks ago
right here in Seattle.

I have been chased out of jobs three times by smokers. It is amazing how badly
second hand smoke can affect your health. Smokers denying it is just rediculous.



When I was a kid and the family was traveling somewhere, the car windows
were usually always down in the back seat because my parents were
smoking and thought if the windows down like that then the smoke
wouldn't be bad. The problem was every time they flicked their ashes
out the barely opened front window those hot ashes would come right back
in the car and hit one of us kids in the face. We'd complain about it
to no avail, though. We were just kids.

--
Maggie

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.

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


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,

Muggles wrote:
On 8/19/2015 9:47 AM, Bob F wrote:
I did have occasion once to hear a smoker many years ago complain
about how she flicked a butt out the window, and it landed on the
back window of her convertable, burning a hole through that window.

The fire authorities have reported a lot of brush fires started all
over my state by butts thrown out windows this year. I saw one of
those a few weeks ago right here in Seattle.

I have been chased out of jobs three times by smokers. It is amazing
how badly second hand smoke can affect your health. Smokers denying
it is just rediculous.



When I was a kid and the family was traveling somewhere, the car
windows were usually always down in the back seat because my parents
were smoking and thought if the windows down like that then the smoke
wouldn't be bad. The problem was every time they flicked their ashes
out the barely opened front window those hot ashes would come right
back in the car and hit one of us kids in the face. We'd complain
about it to no avail, though. We were just kids.

Uggh!

In alt.home.repair, on Tue, 18 Aug 2015 19:56:45 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc
crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

Readers Digest story (quoted from memory). "we live
in a small tourist town. One of the cars drove up,
with out of state license plates. The door opened,
the occupant dumped ash tray and some other junk
onto the ground next to the car. Then got out, and
went to the tourist attraction. My husband, a
locksmith, went over to the car. He picked the lock
on the trunk, and put all the ashes, butts, and
trash into the car trunk, and closed the lid."

Now THAT's a fine story. Once in a while there is justice.

Not cigarettes, but once i was walkign through a parking lot between
cars when just before I got there, through an open passenger window came
a McDonalds-style bag, onto the ground, and cardboard, wrappers,
napkins, everyone poured out onto the blacktop. I stopped, leaned down
and looked into the window, girl in the passenger seat, guy driving, and
said to both, mostly to her "You really are a pig, aren't you? " Very
clearly, distinctly, I'm sure they heard every word.

Then I straighted up and walked at normal pace to the Radio Shack, where
I was headed and where I hit for at least 20 minutes until I figured he
was gone. When I came out, neither was around. I don't know that he
followed me or anything, but I thought he might feel he had to if the
girl was watching.

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.

On 8/18/15 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
On 8/18/2015 9:15 PM, bob haller wrote:
because tobacco smoke is so toxic some countries have a new tax on it.
in addition to all current taxes. each year they add a buck tax, year
one a dollar extra, year 10, ten dollars extra.

i believe that ever smoking around a child should get the smoker on
charges for child abuse.....

i hate the stench when people smoking in vehicles get sucked into my
vehicle..... YUK

the tobacco industry needs to die, just like its brought death to so
many of its users.


In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses their
butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of misc crap on
the roads and grass areas.

Easily solved by a deposit on cigarette butts. That way they can be
recycled, saving tobacco plants clearcut tobacco loggers. If the
megarich toss butts out windows, students can pick them up to pay their
way through college.

On 8/19/2015 11:38 AM, micky wrote:


Not cigarettes, but once i was walkign through a parking lot between
cars when just before I got there, through an open passenger window came
a McDonalds-style bag, onto the ground, and cardboard, wrappers,
napkins, everyone poured out onto the blacktop. I stopped, leaned down
and looked into the window, girl in the passenger seat, guy driving, and
said to both, mostly to her "You really are a pig, aren't you? " Very
clearly, distinctly, I'm sure they heard every word.

Then I straighted up and walked at normal pace to the Radio Shack, where
I was headed and where I hit for at least 20 minutes until I figured he
was gone. When I came out, neither was around. I don't know that he
followed me or anything, but I thought he might feel he had to if the
girl was watching.


If I could stop and pick up every butt an inconsiderate smoker throws
out the window and fling it back, I would. If stuck in traffic and I
have that opportunity, I often do it or I simply tell them what an
inconsiderate **** they are.

I also saw a women in the car in front of me, while we were stopped at a
light, open her door and toss something out. When we started moving, I
edged slowly and saw the garbage she tossed. I grabbed it and followed
her, which wasn't long cause she pulled into the next Rite Aid parking
lot passed that light we waited. I told her she's an inconsiderate
disgusting **** and threw her trash back in her car as she walked into
the store. Her reply continued with "you don't know me". All I said was,
"I do know you're an inconsiderate ****".

Idiots like that should be shot.

On 8/19/2015 2:35 PM, J Burns wrote:


Easily solved by a deposit on cigarette butts. That way they can be
recycled, saving tobacco plants clearcut tobacco loggers. If the
megarich toss butts out windows, students can pick them up to pay their
way through college.

Not on the freeways.

On 8/19/2015 2:31 PM, J Burns wrote:



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.

Hell no, I'm proud of mine.

On Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 9:47:31 AM UTC-5, Bob F wrote:
I did have occasion once to hear a smoker many years ago complain about how she
flicked a butt out the window, and it landed on the back window of her
convertable, burning a hole through that window.

The fire authorities have reported a lot of brush fires started all over my
state by butts thrown out windows this year. I saw one of those a few weeks ago
right here in Seattle.

I have been chased out of jobs three times by smokers. It is amazing how badly
second hand smoke can affect your health. Smokers denying it is just rediculous.

I've walked away from high paying jobs because of smokers. It wasn't worth going to jail for grinding their lit cigarettes into their eyes. o_O

[8~{} Uncle Grinder Monster

J Burns wrote:
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.

As if cancer is the only risk of second hand smoke.

Just a little light reading.
http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimp...ations/SHS.pdf

On 8/19/15 7:59 PM, Bob F wrote:
Just a little light reading.
http://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimp...ations/SHS.pdf

"Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of
them myself; in which case the remark often attributed to Disraeli would
often apply with justice and force: 'There are three kinds of lies:
lies, damned lies, and statistics."

The WHO is a political organization. They start with the conclusion
somebody wants, then shuffle statistics to support it. In this case it's
a smokescreen, hiding the fact that they have protected the cigarette
market in the EU.

In the 1970s, the Swedish government found that smokeless tobacco was
statistically much safer than cigarettes, and the dangers came from
fermentation and substances introduced in manufacturing. They funded
research to see if safe smokeless tobacco could be manufactured.

Unlike tobacco in general, the Swedish product is regulated as if it
were food; all ingredients are on the label. Extensive statistical
research of users showed that it caused no health problems.

The WHO ignored the research and condemned it by pulling up old data
from other forms of smokeless tobacco. EU nations except Sweden, Norway,
and Finland were forced to outlaw it.

The lucrative cigarette market was preserved through the intervention of
the WHO, at a terrible cost to the health of cigarette addicts with no
alternative.

As the difference in health statistics between Scandinavia and the rest
of the EU became clear, the WHO was forced to admit they'd had no basis
to condemn the Swedish product. They analyzed the data and announced
that it was safe. However, it remains illegal in the EU except
Scandinavia. The WHO had served its function in protecting the cigarette
market.

Stormin Mormon
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:48:03 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

No, it's not. Field dressing... not being a litter bug. I've seen more
mcdonalds crap on our roads than I do cig butts. That and empty alcohol
containers.



--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

Yes we see lots of trash along the roads, but cigarettes butts are one that
cause fires at many places,
those people I would not summons, but put in jail for six months minimum.

"Diesel" wrote in message
...

Stormin Mormon
Wed, 19 Aug 2015 01:48:03 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

No, it's not. Field dressing... not being a litter bug. I've seen more
mcdonalds crap on our roads than I do cig butts. That and empty alcohol
containers.



--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

"tony944"
Wed, 23 Sep 2015
17:20:20 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Yes we see lots of trash along the roads, but cigarettes butts are
one that cause fires at many places,
those people I would not summons, but put in jail for six months
minimum.

jail for six months? Okay, if you pay for it and, I mean all of the
costs associated with that prisoner. What do you think putting
someone in jail for six months for littering is going to accomplish?

Other than costing me and other tax payers more money for a system
that doesn't work, and, giving them a criminal record that will make
their ability to be a productive member of society that much more
difficult. Seems counter productive to me.

Send someone in as a litter bug, they'll come out with a masters
degree in other aspects of crime. litter bug was annoying enough. A
large fine should do the trick, WITHOUT costing me as a tax payer
more money! I don't wanna house em, feed em, clothe em for six months
on my dime because they're a litter bug. They can pay big fines and
work for a living, instead of my supporting them in jail.

That's assuming we have room to house them in the first place. I'm
not okay with letting violent criminals out to let them in. Even if
it is to teach them a lesson. taking a large amount of money from
them will actually teach a lesson without costing me and other tax
payers. It's a win win. I'm not okay with wasting my money to put a
pothead in jail either. Unless said pothead was toaking while driving
or something else that places OTHERS IN HARMS WAY. If that's not what
he's doing, I don't wanna pay for his three squares a day either. I
don't wanna let some wife beating asshole out to make room for the
pothead or the litter bug, either. They can work, Pay a nice large
fine. Win win.








--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

On 9/23/2015 1:20 PM, tony944 wrote:
Stormin Mormon
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

No, it's not. Field dressing... not being a litter bug. I've seen more
mcdonalds crap on our roads than I do cig butts. That and empty alcohol
containers.


From what I see, smokers, most of them. Flipping
butts out the window of cars.


-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

Diesel wrote:
"tony944"
Wed, 23 Sep 2015
17:20:20 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Yes we see lots of trash along the roads, but cigarettes butts are
one that cause fires at many places,
those people I would not summons, but put in jail for six months
minimum.

jail for six months? Okay, if you pay for it and, I mean all of the
costs associated with that prisoner. What do you think putting
someone in jail for six months for littering is going to accomplish?

Other than costing me and other tax payers more money for a system
that doesn't work, and, giving them a criminal record that will make
their ability to be a productive member of society that much more
difficult. Seems counter productive to me.

Send someone in as a litter bug, they'll come out with a masters
degree in other aspects of crime. litter bug was annoying enough. A
large fine should do the trick, WITHOUT costing me as a tax payer
more money! I don't wanna house em, feed em, clothe em for six months
on my dime because they're a litter bug. They can pay big fines and
work for a living, instead of my supporting them in jail.

That's assuming we have room to house them in the first place. I'm
not okay with letting violent criminals out to let them in. Even if
it is to teach them a lesson. taking a large amount of money from
them will actually teach a lesson without costing me and other tax
payers. It's a win win. I'm not okay with wasting my money to put a
pothead in jail either. Unless said pothead was toaking while driving
or something else that places OTHERS IN HARMS WAY. If that's not what
he's doing, I don't wanna pay for his three squares a day either. I
don't wanna let some wife beating asshole out to make room for the
pothead or the litter bug, either. They can work, Pay a nice large
fine. Win win.

Tony Hwang
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:47:47 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

[snip my own post]

Tony... You quoted what I wrote, but I see no reply...?



--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

Stormin Mormon
Wed, 23 Sep 2015 23:01:13 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/23/2015 1:20 PM, tony944 wrote:
Stormin Mormon
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker
tosses their butt out the window of their car adding to the
eyesore of misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

No, it's not. Field dressing... not being a litter bug. I've seen
more mcdonalds crap on our roads than I do cig butts. That and
empty alcohol containers.


From what I see, smokers, most of them. Flipping
butts out the window of cars.

That's rude. They have an ashtray. If you lightup in my truck and toss
it out the window when you're finished, you will be walking.





--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 6:12:22 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:
Tony Hwang
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:47:47 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

[snip my own post]

Tony... You quoted what I wrote, but I see no reply...?

--


Tony is a very nice guy who's telepathic. Sometimes he forgets that us mere mortals don't have that ability. OOPS! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Mental Monster

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 6:12:21 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:
Stormin Mormon
Wed, 23 Sep 2015 23:01:13 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 9/23/2015 1:20 PM, tony944 wrote:
Stormin Mormon
On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker
tosses their butt out the window of their car adding to the
eyesore of misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.

No, it's not. Field dressing... not being a litter bug. I've seen
more mcdonalds crap on our roads than I do cig butts. That and
empty alcohol containers.


From what I see, smokers, most of them. Flipping
butts out the window of cars.

That's rude. They have an ashtray. If you lightup in my truck and toss
it out the window when you're finished, you will be walking.

--


Smokers suck!........Then they blow. ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Stinky Monster

"Uncle Monster" wrote in message
...

On Friday, September 25, 2015 at 6:12:22 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:
Tony Hwang
Thu, 24 Sep 2015 00:47:47 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

[snip my own post]

Tony... You quoted what I wrote, but I see no reply...?

--


Tony is a very nice guy who's telepathic. Sometimes he forgets that us mere
mortals don't have that ability. OOPS! ^_^

[8~{} Uncle Mental Monster

* So sorry Uncle I do not read all postings and yes some time other people
may have similar respond
and some times I delete what it is all said, Well as old song say keep on
trucking.

australia has a new tobacco tax.

a buck a pack, that increases another buck each year.

year one one dollar, year 10 10 bucks tacked onto whatever taxes already existed.

this will cut smoking dramatically.

anyone smoking around a child should be charged with child abuse, since thats what it is......

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.


Just because you gave up cigs to smoke cock doesn't make you an
authority. But it does make you a faggot.
LOL

On 9/27/2015 1:19 PM, bob haller wrote:
australia has a new tobacco tax.

a buck a pack, that increases another buck each year.

year one one dollar, year 10 10 bucks tacked onto whatever taxes already existed.

this will cut smoking dramatically.

anyone smoking around a child should be charged with child abuse, since thats what it is......


Make no mistake, smoking is nasty but I would rather smoke cigarettes than eat refined carbohydrates and GMO food soaked in glyphosate.

On 09/27/2015 12:38 PM, Rick wrote:

[snip]


Make no mistake, smoking is nasty but I would rather smoke cigarettes
than eat refined carbohydrates and GMO food soaked in glyphosate.


There's a BIG difference there. With bad food you hurt yourself. With
cigarettes you hurt others (including things like putting toxic
particles in other people's lungs). I don't mind you smoking as long as
you keep that **** to yourself.

--
89 days until the winter celebration (Friday December 25, 2015 12:00:00
AM for 1 day).

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" -- Peter
Sellers in Dr. Strangelove

Colonel Edmund Burke wrote in news:mu990d$tqr$1
@dont-email.me:

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.


Just because you gave up cigs to smoke cock doesn't make you an
authority. But it does make you a faggot.
LOL


you sound like an expert on smoking cock and what it takes to be a faggot

On 9/27/2015 4:52 PM, % wrote:
Colonel Edmund Burke wrote in news:mu990d$tqr$1
@dont-email.me:

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.


Just because you gave up cigs to smoke cock doesn't make you an
authority. But it does make you a faggot.
LOL


you sound like an expert on smoking cock and what it takes to be a faggot

And you know this because you are expert?
LOL

Colonel Edmund Burke wrote in
:

On 9/27/2015 4:52 PM, % wrote:
Colonel Edmund Burke wrote in
news:mu990d$tqr$1 @dont-email.me:

On 8/18/2015 9:30 PM, Meanie wrote:
In addition, it ****es me off when an inconsiderate smoker tosses
their butt out the window of their car adding to the eyesore of
misc crap on the roads and grass areas.

Of course, that's pretty much all of them.


Just because you gave up cigs to smoke cock doesn't make you an
authority. But it does make you a faggot.
LOL


you sound like an expert on smoking cock and what it takes to be a
faggot

And you know this because you are expert?
LOL

so