Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN.
He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. |
#2
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
|
#3
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. |
#4
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. |
#5
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote:
Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. Why don't all those others make me cough, sneeze, eyes water, hack, and other symptoms? -- .. Christopher A. Young learn more about Jesus .. www.lds.org .. .. |
#6
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. There are people who complain about someone's flatulence, so what's the point? There will always be some uptight whining liberal who thinks they should tell others how to live. |
#7
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:20:30 PM UTC-4, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. +1 That's the problem I have, the lib anti-smoking crowd are just never satisfied. Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. |
#8
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:41:37 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. The problem is to the anti-smoking crowd, the smell of smoke IS second hand smoke. |
#9
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 07/02/2016 11:04 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. True. I see a lot of this nonsense, claiming something is harmless because something else is worse. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. There's another common fallacy there (at least in speech). The idea that there is only ONE of something. I wonder how many whiffs of smoke I've been exposed to (and it's a LOT more than one). -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The only spiritual disease is righteousness, and only religious people have it." |
#10
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 07/02/2016 11:20 AM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. Again, reality refuses to be simple, and these situations do happen. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. Seeing it reminds me of the impaired breathing. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The only spiritual disease is righteousness, and only religious people have it." |
#11
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 07/02/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote:
[snip] Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. I'm not sure about cigars, but I have been around someone smoking a pipe, and it's not nearly the nasty thing a cigarette is. BTW, pot wasn't either. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The only spiritual disease is righteousness, and only religious people have it." |
#12
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:23:23 PM UTC-5, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 07/02/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote: [snip] Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. I'm not sure about cigars, but I have been around someone smoking a pipe, and it's not nearly the nasty thing a cigarette is. BTW, pot wasn't either. -- Mark Lloyd http://notstupid.us/ "The only spiritual disease is righteousness, and only religious people have it." I was told by a long time pipe smoker that if the pipe tobacco smells good burning, it tastes bad to the smoker. And the opposite it true. FWIW |
#13
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
|
#14
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
Per Mark Lloyd:
I'm not sure about cigars, but I have been around someone smoking a pipe, and it's not nearly the nasty thing a cigarette is. I kind of like the smell of cigar smoke. Doesn't mean I'd want to work with somebody sucking on a cigar all day - or share an elevator with one.... but, in an open space, I find the smell mildly pleasant. -- Pete Cresswell |
#15
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 2:04 PM, bob_villain wrote:
I was told by a long time pipe smoker that if the pipe tobacco smells good burning, it tastes bad to the smoker. And the opposite it true. FWIW Smoked a pipe for a couple of years and did not find that to be true. My wife preferred the smell of it to cigarettes, but I found myself inhaling it so I stopped completely. |
#16
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:41:33 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. Is I pointed out to Mugs, using the OSHA standard for the regulated toxins, you would have to smoke 150 cigarettes in a small room with zero ventilation to get even close. That is based on sitting in that environment for 8 hours to get to the DTLV. The show I talked about was saying you get the same kind of exposure with air fresheners, cleaning products, cosmetics and even foodstuffs. Unfortunately being CNN I could not see the end because they had to cut away to a correspondent who stood around in Bangladesh saying he still did not know anything ... for the rest of the hour. |
#17
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:43:36 -0400, Stormin Mormon
wrote: Why don't all those others make me cough, sneeze, eyes water, hack, and other symptoms? Dunno, consult your mental health provider |
#18
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 11:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. Third hand smoke: "Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals in third-hand smoke, 11 are carcinogens (substances capable of causing cancer.) A few of the chemicals that have been found on surfaces after smoking include nicotine, cyanide, radioactive polonium-210, lead, arsenic, butane, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and butane. A second way that toxins can be of concern with third-hand smoke is through a process called “off- gassing". Off-gassing occurs when substances from smoke that have been deposited on surfaces, such as nicotine, are released back into the air as gases. Through this process, tobacco residue that has built up on surfaces continues to emit toxins long after smoking has occurred. In addition to toxic chemicals that are present on surfaces or released into the air, a third route of exposure is when new toxins are created by the interaction of substances in THS with other chemicals present in the environment. Two examples of interactions that have been documented include: When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to create formaldehyde among other chemicals. Researchers have just begun to evaluate possible dangers, but findings thus far include: - Thirdhand smoke (THS) was found to interfere with the healing of wounds, and also "wound elasticity" - in other words, how rapidly a wound will heal and what kind of scar will be formed. - Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to diabetes.) - There is early evidence that THS may raise the risk of cancer. Nitrosamines - chemicals found in THS - above the limits recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for children aged 1 to 6 are found in 77 percent of homes which have smokers. This is thought to translate into 1 case of cancer for every 1000 people. It's important to note, however, that this research is still very young, and most chemicals in thirdhand smoke have not yet been studied in this manner. - THS exposure in mice can result in fatty liver disease, which in turn may lead to cirrhosis and heart disease. - Thirdhand smoke exposure may result in biological changes in cells that predispose to fibrosis, which raises concern that it may play a role in COPD and asthma. - Changes in how platelets combine due to THS raises concern that THS may increase the risk of blood clots and heart disease. - THS exposure in mice results in hyperactivity, and there is concern that prolonged exposure in children could result in more serious neurological conditions." https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 -- Maggie |
#19
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 11:43 AM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. Why don't all those others make me cough, sneeze, eyes water, hack, and other symptoms? VOC's can have some of the same health hazards, and they have made me ill, too. -- Maggie |
#20
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:20:30 PM UTC-4, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. +1 That's the problem I have, the lib anti-smoking crowd are just never The issue has nothing to do with politics (liberal/conservative). It's a health issue. satisfied. Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. Some things are that important that there should be no compromise. -- Maggie |
#21
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:41:37 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. The problem is to the anti-smoking crowd, the smell of smoke IS second hand smoke. No, the smell of smoke is third hand smoke, and third hand smoke causes the same illnesses as first or secondhand smoke. -- Maggie |
#22
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 12:23 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 07/02/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote: [snip] Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. I'm not sure about cigars, but I have been around someone smoking a pipe, and it's not nearly the nasty thing a cigarette is. BTW, pot wasn't either. Cigar smoke is possibly more toxic than cigarette smoke (3). Cigar smoke has: A higher level of cancer-causing substances: During the fermentation process for cigar tobacco, high concentrations of cancer-causing nitrosamines are produced. These compounds are released when a cigar is smoked. Nitrosamines are found at higher levels in cigar smoke than in cigarette smoke. More tar: For every gram of tobacco smoked, there is more cancer-causing tar in cigars than in cigarettes. A higher level of toxins: Cigar wrappers are less porous than cigarette wrappers. The nonporous cigar wrapper makes the burning of cigar tobacco less complete than the burning of cigarette tobacco. As a result, cigar smoke has higher concentrations of toxins than cigarette smoke. Furthermore, the larger size of most cigars (more tobacco) and longer smoking time result in higher exposure to many toxic substances (including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, ammonia, cadmium, and other substances). http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/c...ars-fact-sheet -- Maggie |
#23
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
|
#24
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/2/2016 4:36 PM, Muggles wrote:
https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 We all know smoking kills. Smokers are suicidal. I guess the 64k question is should we allow smokers to commit suicide or should we prevent them from jumping off the bridge. (My gut tells me to give them a nudge but...) |
#25
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck,
year 10 .........10 bucks i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking...... |
#26
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 10:48:56 AM UTC-5, wrote:
Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. Every fraking thing in our environment is attacking us all the time. We're covered with microbes that would kill us if we let our guard(immune system) down. I support the right of any ADULT to destroy their mind and body anyway they wish as long as the harm only themselves. I avoid smokers and the places they occupy because I'm terribly allergic to the tobacco smoke which is like teargas to me. I don't go to bars and places where smokers are likely to congregate. There is a smoking area outside here at the nursing and rehab center. I must avoid the hallway where the door going to the smoking area is located because smoke blows in when the door is opened. If it's a windy day, the smoke can be blown quite a distance into the building because the wheelchair bound smokers take a long time to get through the door. The center really needs an airlock in that section of hallway but it could cost them too much money and some anal sphincter is likely to prop the inner door open. I support your right to ingest the highly addictive drug nicotine. Please do it someplace away from me. ^_^ [8~{} Uncle Coughing Monster |
#28
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:36:03 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/2/2016 11:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. Third hand smoke: "Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals in third-hand smoke, 11 are carcinogens (substances capable of causing cancer.) A few of the chemicals that have been found on surfaces after smoking include nicotine, cyanide, radioactive polonium-210, lead, arsenic, butane, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and butane. A second way that toxins can be of concern with third-hand smoke is through a process called €œoff- gassing". Off-gassing occurs when substances from smoke that have been deposited on surfaces, such as nicotine, are released back into the air as gases. Through this process, tobacco residue that has built up on surfaces continues to emit toxins long after smoking has occurred. In addition to toxic chemicals that are present on surfaces or released into the air, a third route of exposure is when new toxins are created by the interaction of substances in THS with other chemicals present in the environment. Two examples of interactions that have been documented include: When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to create formaldehyde among other chemicals. Researchers have just begun to evaluate possible dangers, but findings thus far include: - Thirdhand smoke (THS) was found to interfere with the healing of wounds, and also "wound elasticity" - in other words, how rapidly a wound will heal and what kind of scar will be formed. - Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to diabetes.) - There is early evidence that THS may raise the risk of cancer. Nitrosamines - chemicals found in THS - above the limits recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for children aged 1 to 6 are found in 77 percent of homes which have smokers. This is thought to translate into 1 case of cancer for every 1000 people. It's important to note, however, that this research is still very young, and most chemicals in thirdhand smoke have not yet been studied in this manner. - THS exposure in mice can result in fatty liver disease, which in turn may lead to cirrhosis and heart disease. - Thirdhand smoke exposure may result in biological changes in cells that predispose to fibrosis, which raises concern that it may play a role in COPD and asthma. - Changes in how platelets combine due to THS raises concern that THS may increase the risk of blood clots and heart disease. - THS exposure in mice results in hyperactivity, and there is concern that prolonged exposure in children could result in more serious neurological conditions." https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 -- Maggie I'll bet every one of those "studies" went something like this. Take the tar and chemicals from the smoke of 1000 cigarettes that accumulate on the surface in some very confined space, smear it all over a mouse that is already known to be very susceptible to developing cancer, leave it there until it causes cancer. Or take some of that goo and show that in a test tube it causes something to happen. In short, I'll bet it has zero correlation to someone catching a whiff of the smell of smoke from someone smoking 25 t away. Kind of like extrapolating that catching a whiff of a bus passing once in awhile is going to kill you. |
#29
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 07/02/2016 03:38 PM, Rene wrote:
On 7/2/2016 4:36 PM, Muggles wrote: https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 We all know smoking kills. Smokers are suicidal. I guess the 64k question is should we allow smokers to commit suicide or should we prevent them from jumping off the bridge. (My gut tells me to give them a nudge but...) I believe the tobacco companies knowingly add chemicals to tobacco to make it more addictive. Once addicted, the weak-willed smokers can't break free. Smokers often claim they smoke because they choose to but really they have been unwittingly duped by big tobacco's drugs. |
#30
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:40:58 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/2/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote: On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:20:30 PM UTC-4, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. +1 That's the problem I have, the lib anti-smoking crowd are just never The issue has nothing to do with politics (liberal/conservative). It's a health issue. It has everything to do with politics and being liberal or conservative. Liberals believe they have to regulate everything and do so with relish. They want ever bigger govt, more govt programs, more govt regulators. Conservatives want less regulations and to live people as free as possible. satisfied. Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. Some things are that important that there should be no compromise. -- Maggie Sure, no compromise for liberals. That was exactly my point, you won't stop until you control EVERYTHING we do, because YOU know what is best for all the rest of us, we have no rights. Conservatives believe that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to have a cigar dinner in a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the founders saw? |
#31
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck, year 10 .........10 bucks i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking...... I hate the stink from liberals too, how about we tax them like that until they go away? |
#32
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 14:40:48 -0700 (PDT)
bob haller wrote: From: bob haller Subject: For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies. Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 14:40:48 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: G2/1.0 Newsgroups: alt.home.repair australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. You are free to move there if their system suits you better. |
#33
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 8:31:03 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:36:03 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote: Third hand smoke: "Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals in third-hand smoke, 11 are carcinogens (substances capable of causing cancer.) A few of the chemicals that have been found on surfaces after smoking include nicotine, cyanide, radioactive polonium-210, lead, arsenic, butane, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and butane. A second way that toxins can be of concern with third-hand smoke is through a process called €œoff- gassing". Off-gassing occurs when substances from smoke that have been deposited on surfaces, such as nicotine, are released back into the air as gases. Through this process, tobacco residue that has built up on surfaces continues to emit toxins long after smoking has occurred. In addition to toxic chemicals that are present on surfaces or released into the air, a third route of exposure is when new toxins are created by the interaction of substances in THS with other chemicals present in the environment. Two examples of interactions that have been documented include: When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to create formaldehyde among other chemicals. Researchers have just begun to evaluate possible dangers, but findings thus far include: - Thirdhand smoke (THS) was found to interfere with the healing of wounds, and also "wound elasticity" - in other words, how rapidly a wound will heal and what kind of scar will be formed. - Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to diabetes.) - There is early evidence that THS may raise the risk of cancer. Nitrosamines - chemicals found in THS - above the limits recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for children aged 1 to 6 are found in 77 percent of homes which have smokers. This is thought to translate into 1 case of cancer for every 1000 people. It's important to note, however, that this research is still very young, and most chemicals in thirdhand smoke have not yet been studied in this manner. - THS exposure in mice can result in fatty liver disease, which in turn may lead to cirrhosis and heart disease. - Thirdhand smoke exposure may result in biological changes in cells that predispose to fibrosis, which raises concern that it may play a role in COPD and asthma. - Changes in how platelets combine due to THS raises concern that THS may increase the risk of blood clots and heart disease. - THS exposure in mice results in hyperactivity, and there is concern that prolonged exposure in children could result in more serious neurological conditions." https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 -- Maggie I'll bet every one of those "studies" went something like this. Take the tar and chemicals from the smoke of 1000 cigarettes that accumulate on the surface in some very confined space, smear it all over a mouse that is already known to be very susceptible to developing cancer, leave it there until it causes cancer. Or take some of that goo and show that in a test tube it causes something to happen. In short, I'll bet it has zero correlation to someone catching a whiff of the smell of smoke from someone smoking 25 t away. Kind of like extrapolating that catching a whiff of a bus passing once in awhile is going to kill you. "I'll bet..." makes *you* the idiot of the day! You know nothing about the studies but choose to call them *all* bogus. And all for a stupid cigar dinner...you're a ****ing moron! |
#34
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
Per trader_4:
It has everything to do with politics and being liberal or conservative. Liberals believe they have to regulate everything and do so with relish. Like birth control and abortion, right? -- Pete Cresswell |
#35
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
(PeteCresswell) was thinking very hard :
Per trader_4: It has everything to do with politics and being liberal or conservative. Liberals believe they have to regulate everything and do so with relish. Like birth control and abortion, right? Thank you, that needed to be pointed out. |
#36
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:58:43 AM UTC-4, bob_villain wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 8:31:03 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote: On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:36:03 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote: Third hand smoke: "Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals in third-hand smoke, 11 are carcinogens (substances capable of causing cancer.) A few of the chemicals that have been found on surfaces after smoking include nicotine, cyanide, radioactive polonium-210, lead, arsenic, butane, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and butane. A second way that toxins can be of concern with third-hand smoke is through a process called €œoff- gassing". Off-gassing occurs when substances from smoke that have been deposited on surfaces, such as nicotine, are released back into the air as gases. Through this process, tobacco residue that has built up on surfaces continues to emit toxins long after smoking has occurred. In addition to toxic chemicals that are present on surfaces or released into the air, a third route of exposure is when new toxins are created by the interaction of substances in THS with other chemicals present in the environment. Two examples of interactions that have been documented include: When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to create formaldehyde among other chemicals. Researchers have just begun to evaluate possible dangers, but findings thus far include: - Thirdhand smoke (THS) was found to interfere with the healing of wounds, and also "wound elasticity" - in other words, how rapidly a wound will heal and what kind of scar will be formed. - Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to diabetes.) - There is early evidence that THS may raise the risk of cancer. Nitrosamines - chemicals found in THS - above the limits recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for children aged 1 to 6 are found in 77 percent of homes which have smokers. This is thought to translate into 1 case of cancer for every 1000 people. It's important to note, however, that this research is still very young, and most chemicals in thirdhand smoke have not yet been studied in this manner. - THS exposure in mice can result in fatty liver disease, which in turn may lead to cirrhosis and heart disease. - Thirdhand smoke exposure may result in biological changes in cells that predispose to fibrosis, which raises concern that it may play a role in COPD and asthma. - Changes in how platelets combine due to THS raises concern that THS may increase the risk of blood clots and heart disease. - THS exposure in mice results in hyperactivity, and there is concern that prolonged exposure in children could result in more serious neurological conditions." https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 -- Maggie I'll bet every one of those "studies" went something like this. Take the tar and chemicals from the smoke of 1000 cigarettes that accumulate on the surface in some very confined space, smear it all over a mouse that is already known to be very susceptible to developing cancer, leave it there until it causes cancer. Or take some of that goo and show that in a test tube it causes something to happen. In short, I'll bet it has zero correlation to someone catching a whiff of the smell of smoke from someone smoking 25 t away. Kind of like extrapolating that catching a whiff of a bus passing once in awhile is going to kill you. "I'll bet..." makes *you* the idiot of the day! You know nothing about the studies but choose to call them *all* bogus. And all for a stupid cigar dinner...you're a ****ing moron! I've seen enough of these "studies" to know what they typically do. Plus many of the studies wind up getting it wrong, few years later, it's all changed again. If you want to provide us with the actual study, I'd be happy to take a look. |
#37
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:01:04 AM UTC-4, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per trader_4: It has everything to do with politics and being liberal or conservative. Liberals believe they have to regulate everything and do so with relish. Like birth control and abortion, right? -- Pete Cresswell I don't know of any conservative movement to do anything with regard to access to birth control with the exception of abortion. And abortion is obviously a very special case because another life, who has no voice, is involved. |
#38
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/3/2016 8:22 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:42:09 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote: On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:41:37 PM UTC-4, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. The problem is to the anti-smoking crowd, the smell of smoke IS second hand smoke. No, the smell of smoke is third hand smoke, and third hand smoke causes the same illnesses as first or secondhand smoke. When you have real, scientific proof of that, not some extrapolated guesses from loons, let us know. We've had this discussion and I've already "LET" you "KNOW". I provided many links to scientific studies (proof). If you want to actually discuss what the articles have to say, I'm good with that, but don't waste my time if all you can do is make adolescent comments like you just made above. I am totally prepared to argue this topic, and have done so previously many times, and those who take the opposing side usually just GIVE UP - they either don't or can't respond to the evidence, or they resort to ad homs as their main argument. Subject: Where should smoking be illegal? Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 11:25:09 -0500 Message-ID: http://eetd.lbl.gov/node/49332 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...m&ordinalpos=1 http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/conten... c=relevance&r http://pediatrics.aappublications.or...+local +token -- Maggie |
#39
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/3/2016 8:30 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:36:03 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard. Third hand smoke: "Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals in third-hand smoke, 11 are carcinogens (substances capable of causing cancer.) A few of the chemicals that have been found on surfaces after smoking include nicotine, cyanide, radioactive polonium-210, lead, arsenic, butane, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and butane. A second way that toxins can be of concern with third-hand smoke is through a process called €œoff- gassing". Off-gassing occurs when substances from smoke that have been deposited on surfaces, such as nicotine, are released back into the air as gases. Through this process, tobacco residue that has built up on surfaces continues to emit toxins long after smoking has occurred. In addition to toxic chemicals that are present on surfaces or released into the air, a third route of exposure is when new toxins are created by the interaction of substances in THS with other chemicals present in the environment. Two examples of interactions that have been documented include: When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to create formaldehyde among other chemicals. Researchers have just begun to evaluate possible dangers, but findings thus far include: - Thirdhand smoke (THS) was found to interfere with the healing of wounds, and also "wound elasticity" - in other words, how rapidly a wound will heal and what kind of scar will be formed. - Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to diabetes.) - There is early evidence that THS may raise the risk of cancer. Nitrosamines - chemicals found in THS - above the limits recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency for children aged 1 to 6 are found in 77 percent of homes which have smokers. This is thought to translate into 1 case of cancer for every 1000 people. It's important to note, however, that this research is still very young, and most chemicals in thirdhand smoke have not yet been studied in this manner. - THS exposure in mice can result in fatty liver disease, which in turn may lead to cirrhosis and heart disease. - Thirdhand smoke exposure may result in biological changes in cells that predispose to fibrosis, which raises concern that it may play a role in COPD and asthma. - Changes in how platelets combine due to THS raises concern that THS may increase the risk of blood clots and heart disease. - THS exposure in mice results in hyperactivity, and there is concern that prolonged exposure in children could result in more serious neurological conditions." https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867 -- Maggie I'll bet every one of those "studies" went something like this. Take the tar and chemicals from the smoke of 1000 cigarettes that accumulate on the surface in some very confined space, smear it all over a mouse that is already known to be very susceptible to developing cancer, leave it there until it causes cancer. Or take some of that goo and show that in a test tube it causes something to happen. In short, I'll bet it has zero correlation to someone catching a whiff of the smell of smoke from someone smoking 25 t away. Kind of like extrapolating that catching a whiff of a bus passing once in awhile is going to kill you. What exactly qualifies as a "whiff of smoke"?? Get back to me when you have some concise scientific proof. -- Maggie |
#40
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
For all of you "second hand smoke" ninnies.
On 7/3/2016 8:40 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:40:58 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote: On 7/2/2016 12:05 PM, trader_4 wrote: On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:20:30 PM UTC-4, Vic Smith wrote: On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote: Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN. He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in a whiff of smoke. That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space with two chain smokers is more than a whiff. As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to. There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke downwind 50 feet away. People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing. That's what I assume he's talking about. +1 That's the problem I have, the lib anti-smoking crowd are just never The issue has nothing to do with politics (liberal/conservative). It's a health issue. It has everything to do with politics and being liberal or conservative. Liberals believe they have to regulate everything and do so with relish. They want ever bigger govt, more govt programs, more govt regulators. Conservatives want less regulations and to live people as free as possible. satisfied. Like banning smoking even if I want to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant once a month. Whatever restrictions there are, it's never enough, no compromise is possible. Some things are that important that there should be no compromise. Sure, no compromise for liberals. That was exactly my point, you won't stop until you control EVERYTHING we do, because YOU know what is best for all the rest of us, we have no rights. Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come straight out and said I'm a conservative? Conservatives believe that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to have a cigar dinner in a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the founders saw? Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense says that if smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a GOOD idea to limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't want to be exposed to hazardous waste. -- Maggie |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Welfare Recipient: "I Get to Sit Home… I Get to Smoke Weed… We Still Gonna Get Paid" | Metalworking | |||
Girl "invents" flashlight that is powered by the heat of a hand | Metalworking | |||
Anyone Sell "High Volume" Hand Tools such as Ingersoll Drivers, etc? | Metalworking | |||
I am looking for a local source for "Rockwool" / "Mineral Wool" /"Safe & Sound" / "AFB" | Home Repair | |||
Hand tools: any reason to bother with imperial, and what brands are"quality"? | UK diy |