al wrote:
On Dec 24, 7:55 pm, Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-12-24 19:06:24 +0000, al said:





On Dec 24, 5:17 pm, Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-12-24 15:17:45 +0000, al said:

Hi
Why not burn one of those scented candles instead of trying to
hermetically seal a room?

They are even more revolting thatn cigarette smoke.

Or maybe just open a window, or learn to live with it -there are
much greater sources of pollution to deal with :-)

Very few.

There's no reason to "live with" cigarette smoke at all.

Multiple occupancy and attached dwellings should be treated as
public buildings for the purpose of smoking legislation.

The amount we are talking about must be very small, surely opening a
window for 5 minutes will clear it?
Al

Even small amounts permeate the fabric of the property, get into
furnishings and generally make for an unpleasant environment.
Opening the window for 5 minutes doesn't address that because it
recurs as soon as the window is closed and somebody lights up.

Adding scents to the room doesn't help either. Those designed to
address tobacco smells simply make matters far worse. - Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Yebut we are talking the house next door here, surely the fabric of
the building on the other side of the wall will filter most of the
particles (look at walls and ceilings of a smokers house)?

Yerbut it won't filter out the evil though waves generated by smokers Al.
Even thinking about having a fag has been proved to be deadly.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

Non smokers are becoming worse than ex-smokers :-)

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint smoke
particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

Andy Hall wrote:


Exactly. I think that it would be reasonable for this to be referred
to the environmental health people.

Quite right Andy. Smokers should be prevented from carrying out a perfectly
legal activity within thier own homes.

Hanging's too good for em.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

On 24/12/2007 23:10, The Medway Handyman wrote:


Quite right Andy. Smokers should be prevented from carrying out a perfectly
legal activity within thier own homes.

Hanging's too good for em.

Clearly you're anti-anti-smoker ;-)

Now, I'm not a rabid anti-smoker, someone smoking in their own house is
fine, but I don't let guests smoke in my house, so I'm damned sure I
wouldn't like it if the neighbours' smoke was wafting through, I'd have
to do something about it.

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:06:22 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint smoke
particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

It's totally unpleasant, apart from any health issues.

--
Frank Erskine

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 17:10:24 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

Exactly. I think that it would be reasonable for this to be referred
to the environmental health people.

Andy - I thought you were against involving government-type people ;-)

I agree though.


Seasonal greetings anyway.

--
Frank Erskine

The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint smoke
particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint smoke
particles are more than just a nuisance.
Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

Won't try to tell you otherwise as obviously you are one of the people
who have been totally sucked in by the anti smoking lobbies propaganda.
A lot of the information given out about second hand smoke has no
scientifically proven figures to back it up, just a lot of spin.

Try the name 3 game: Name 3 people that have died from second hand smoke?
http://www.davehitt.com/2004/name_three.html.

And yes I do smoke and enjoy it but I have always been sensitive to
people who don't smoke, I have no time for fanatics of any persuasion.

Interesting that cases of asthma have steadily increased over the years
whilst at the same time smoking has decreased or is that what the
official figures want us to believe

http://www.asthma.org.uk/news_media/...gures_for.html

Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

I wouldn't try to tell you anything, you obviously know it all.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:06:22 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

It's totally unpleasant, apart from any health issues.

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

On 25/12/2007 10:41, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.

Even as a non-smoker, I'll concede that cigar and pipe smoke can often
be quite pleasant, never cigarettes though ...

On 2007-12-25 10:41:30 +0000, "The Medway Handyman"
said:

Frank Erskine wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:06:22 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

It's totally unpleasant, apart from any health issues.

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.

Even if it's somebody else's?

On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 10:49:32 UTC, Andy Burns
wrote:

On 25/12/2007 10:41, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.

Even as a non-smoker, I'll concede that cigar and pipe smoke can often
be quite pleasant, never cigarettes though ...

I'd go along with that. When we married, my wife smoked cigarettes. I
was very pleased when she changed to a pipe. (and it was great fun at
the end of fomal dinners)

--
The information contained in this post is copyright the
poster, and specifically may not be published in, or used by
http://www.diybanter.com

Andy Burns wrote:
On 25/12/2007 10:41, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.

Even as a non-smoker, I'll concede that cigar and pipe smoke can often
be quite pleasant, never cigarettes though ...


But the fanatics couldn't possibly concede that

pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

g

On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 11:48:50 -0000, "George"
wrote:


pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

My local hasn't.

In fact there's still a cigarette smell brought in on peoples clothes,
and wafting in from the smoking 'area' outside.

--
Frank Erskine

On 2007-12-25 11:48:50 +0000, "George" said:


pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

g

Not the ones that I visit.

It's possible to eat in some of them now as well, whereas it wasn't before.

On 25 Dec, 10:28, Bazza wrote:

Try the name 3 game: Name 3 people that have died from second hand smoke?http://www.davehitt.com/2004/name_three.html.

Isn't that a bit like the "name three living Chinese" game ?


Regards
Richard

In message , George
wrote

pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

I wonder why you didn't notice that the pubs you go to were not kept in
a hygienic condition before? If your local now smells of puke then you
should be drinking elsewhere. It is a reflection on the priority the
publican gives to cleanliness and probably reflects on his ability to
keep his beer lines and kitchen work surfaces clean.

That horrible smell of sweat is that aroma on smokers cloths that other
people in a clean atmosphere notice when a smoker is close by!

--
Alan
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com

Huge wrote:
On 2007-12-25, Bazza wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.
Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial
arsenals around for (some) asthmatics.

Won't try to tell you otherwise as obviously you are one of the
people who have been totally sucked in by the anti smoking lobbies
propaganda.

Sigh. Tobacco smoke is full of carcinogens. End of debate.

But second hand smoke isnt - us smokers filter it for you. The poison is in
the dose.

If you
brownthroats want to go on justifying your vile and antisocial habit
(and dying like flies) you go right ahead.

More non smokers die each year than smokers - (FX)maniacal laughter(FX)

After all, you fund the
NHS and the pension funds and then die, horribly and early.

At last someones twigged it. Us smokers are a benefit to society and should
be revered as such.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

geraldthehamster wrote:
On 25 Dec, 10:28, Bazza wrote:

Try the name 3 game: Name 3 people that have died from second hand
smoke?http://www.davehitt.com/2004/name_three.html.

Isn't that a bit like the "name three living Chinese" game ?

It might well be, if anyone knew what it was. Google doesn't.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

In article ,
Bazza wrote:

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

Won't try to tell you otherwise as obviously you are one of the people
who have been totally sucked in by the anti smoking lobbies propaganda.

So you are claiming that second hand tobacco smoke doesn't cause problems
for some asthmatics?

Interesting that cases of asthma have steadily increased over the years
whilst at the same time smoking has decreased or is that what the
official figures want us to believe

Not really. I'm not sure I've ever seen smoking listed as a cause of asthma.
Sure as hell triggers mine but I'd not think to claim it caused me to suffer
from it in the first place.

Darren

In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

I wouldn't try to tell you anything, you obviously know it all.


I *know* tobacco smoke is a trigger for my asthma. Not convinced it's anything
to do with the chemical make up - more the particulates I guess.

Wood smoke does the same as does rabbits fur and some cats. Odd.

Evil smelly smoke from burning tyres or plastic doesn't seem to trigger it
though (although I'm sure will kill be in other ways)

Darren

In article 4770f4c3@qaanaaq,
Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-12-25 11:48:50 +0000, "George" said:


pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

g

Not the ones that I visit.

It's possible to eat in some of them now as well, whereas it wasn't
before.

Eat well from microwave menus? Ok if you like that sort of thing. There
used to be two pubs near here that did decent home cooking - but only at
lunchtime. They both are now 'gourmet' 'pubs' with posh dining areas which
serve food all day. Straight from the microwave.
Oh - and are no longer pubs worth visiting for the sort of thing most
enjoyed pubs for.

--
*Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all?"

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 2007-12-25 17:46:15 +0000, "Dave Plowman (News)"
said:

In article 4770f4c3@qaanaaq,
Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-12-25 11:48:50 +0000, "George" said:


pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

g

Not the ones that I visit.

It's possible to eat in some of them now as well, whereas it wasn't
before.

Eat well from microwave menus? Ok if you like that sort of thing.

I certainly don't, which is why I choose carefully.


There
used to be two pubs near here that did decent home cooking - but only at
lunchtime. They both are now 'gourmet' 'pubs' with posh dining areas which
serve food all day. Straight from the microwave.

Fortunately they are easy to identify and to avoid.


Oh - and are no longer pubs worth visiting for the sort of thing most
enjoyed pubs for.

You mean that they don't look after the beer properly either?

On 25 Dec, 16:10, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:
geraldthehamster wrote:
On 25 Dec, 10:28, Bazza wrote:

Try the name 3 game: Name 3 people that have died from second hand
smoke?http://www.davehitt.com/2004/name_three.html.

Isn't that a bit like the "name three living Chinese" game ?

It might well be, *if anyone knew what it was. *Google doesn't.

It's like when someone says there are 1.3 billion Chinese. The fact
that you can't name three of them doesn't make it less true.


Regards
Richard

geraldthehamster wrote:
On 25 Dec, 16:10, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:
geraldthehamster wrote:
On 25 Dec, 10:28, Bazza wrote:

Try the name 3 game: Name 3 people that have died from second hand
smoke?http://www.davehitt.com/2004/name_three.html.

Isn't that a bit like the "name three living Chinese" game ?

It might well be, if anyone knew what it was. Google doesn't.

It's like when someone says there are 1.3 billion Chinese. The fact
that you can't name three of them doesn't make it less true.


Its nothing like that at all. We have scientific evidence that there are a
certain number of Chinese.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

George wrote in message
...

pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

g


We do a locally brewed real ale called Dogs Breath, its really nice and very
popular (4.9 ABV) but has a very short shelf life.
You can probably guess by the name what it smells like when past its best.



-

On 25 Dec 2007 17:02:04 GMT, Huge wrote:

Sigh. Tobacco smoke is full of carcinogens. End of debate.

But second hand smoke isnt

Yes it is.

And don't bother denying it. I think I'll take the word of the biochemists who
trained me over that of a handyman, thanks.

Did any of them compare the concentrations of carcinogens in the
cigarette smoke a smoker inhales via the cig in his mouth, and the
concentration at a pub or restaurant table 3 metres away, with good
normal pub ventilation, (if it's not good it could be made to be good
and that could be enforced) ? If it wasn't good, if it was smoky /
smelly I wouldn't go there.

I don't smoke BTW, and one good aspect of the ban when it came in in
Scotland (where I frequently work) was that if the place was half
decent the landlord usually had it redecorated / cleaned up.

But by and large the only think that got up my trumpet about smoking
in pubs/restaurants was the common practise of females at the next
table to hold the lighted cig with their arm outstretched at an angle
of 150 degrees from straight ahead, IE behind them, without looking
what was there, because they didn't want the smoke in their own face,
or contaminating their own food and their own clothing. Somehow this
behaviour was regarded as acceptable, "Chic" even, sort of "Hollywood
- Esque". Thinking about it a small aerosol sized fire extinguisher (I
now have one redundant from an earlier car) could easily have been
used to discourage that practise.

DG

On 2007-12-25 23:37:03 +0000, Derek Geldard said:

But by and large the only think that got up my trumpet about smoking
in pubs/restaurants was the common practise of females at the next
table to hold the lighted cig with their arm outstretched at an angle
of 150 degrees from straight ahead, IE behind them, without looking
what was there, because they didn't want the smoke in their own face,
or contaminating their own food and their own clothing. Somehow this
behaviour was regarded as acceptable, "Chic" even, sort of "Hollywood
- Esque". Thinking about it a small aerosol sized fire extinguisher (I
now have one redundant from an earlier car) could easily have been
used to discourage that practise.



On one occasion I used a glass of water for just that purpose.
Offending object was held behind and downwards. Lifting the glass up
under same cured the problem.

Huge wrote:
On 2007-12-25, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
Huge wrote:
On 2007-12-25, Bazza wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.
Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial
arsenals around for (some) asthmatics.

Won't try to tell you otherwise as obviously you are one of the
people who have been totally sucked in by the anti smoking lobbies
propaganda.

Sigh. Tobacco smoke is full of carcinogens. End of debate.

But second hand smoke isnt

Yes it is.

And don't bother denying it. I think I'll take the word of the
biochemists who trained me over that of a handyman, thanks.

Very good. Argumentum ad verecundiam and Argumentum ad hominem in one
paragraph.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk
01634 717930
07850 597257

On 25 Dec, 21:52, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

Its nothing like that at all. *We have scientific evidence that there are a
certain number of Chinese.

Just as we have evidence of the harm caused by passive smoking.
There's a good selection of references on the Wikipedia article with
that name, for a start. Not that this helps with the OP's query ;-)


Regards
Richard

The Medway Handyman wrote:

Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

I wouldn't try to tell you anything, you obviously know it all.

In this respect the "know it all" is you, who apparently knows better
than I do what triggers my asthma and who also knows better than any
epidemiologist.

Or rather, since you're addicted you'd rather cling to your beliefs than
face facts.

The Medway Handyman wrote:
scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint smoke
particles are more than just a nuisance.

Alas only in your imagination.



No.

I smoke a LOT.

I gave up for 9 years.

I am an asthmatic.

The merest whiff of smoke would actually cause a bronchial constriction.

It's something I control now I am back smoking again. but I would never
claim that its a fallacy. It isn't.

The same as the merest whiff of mould in a house would/will put me in a
very bad situation indeed.

And some perfumes are the same, there are women who to clasp in my arms
would send me coughing and wheezing for an inhaler. And just to be
around is acutely uncomfortable

(apart from the ones who will do that to anyone anyway)

The Medway Handyman wrote:
Frank Erskine wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:06:22 GMT, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.
Alas only in your imagination.
It's totally unpleasant, apart from any health issues.

Not to me it isn't - I love the smell of fag/cigar/pipe smoke.


Actually, so di I somewhat. It doesn't like me tho.

Alan wrote:
In message , George
wrote

pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..

I wonder why you didn't notice that the pubs you go to were not kept in
a hygienic condition before? If your local now smells of puke then you
should be drinking elsewhere. It is a reflection on the priority the
publican gives to cleanliness and probably reflects on his ability to
keep his beer lines and kitchen work surfaces clean.

That horrible smell of sweat is that aroma on smokers cloths that other
people in a clean atmosphere notice when a smoker is close by!


No its not. Its the smell of bacteria feeding on excreted bodily products.

The Medway Handyman wrote:
Huge wrote:
On 2007-12-25, Bazza wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:
The Medway Handyman wrote:

scotsgal wrote:

And if you're a child or asthmatic, the chemicals in even faint
smoke particles are more than just a nuisance.
Alas only in your imagination.
Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial
arsenals around for (some) asthmatics.
Won't try to tell you otherwise as obviously you are one of the
people who have been totally sucked in by the anti smoking lobbies
propaganda.
Sigh. Tobacco smoke is full of carcinogens. End of debate.

But second hand smoke isnt - us smokers filter it for you. The poison is in
the dose.


It is, but in far lower concentrations.

It is highly irritating, but then so are many things. I remember we all
had to ecvacuate a restaurant once..thought we had been tear gassed.
Turns out they had a small fat fire and it got into the aircon.

I wouldn't mind such vehement andti-smoke ourgae, if people ALSO
accepted that the aftershaves and perfumes they use, and the soap
powders they use, can ALSO cause severe asthmatic attacks.

Ive had people come up to me when smoking outside and be blatantly rude:
Imagine if I did the same to someone wearing woolworths number 0 for the
same reasons 'its making my child wheeze'

AND driving ropund the M25 with all the diesel fumes is FAR FAR more
carcinogenic, and ALWAYS gives me a sore throat and asthma for a day.


If you
brownthroats want to go on justifying your vile and antisocial habit
(and dying like flies) you go right ahead.

More non smokers die each year than smokers - (FX)maniacal laughter(FX)

After all, you fund the
NHS and the pension funds and then die, horribly and early.

At last someones twigged it. Us smokers are a benefit to society and should
be revered as such.


Indeed.

scotsgal wrote:
On Dec 24, 5:10�pm, Andy Hall wrote:
On 2007-12-24 14:59:27 +0000, geraldthehamster said:





On 24 Dec, 00:44, scotsgal wrote:
The smoke was seeping through the flat door,
the old chimney/fireplace, floorboards and then into the gaps between
the walls (it is a Victorian property, so the boards have shrunk,
allowing the smoke to permeate). I draught-proofed the door with
rubber sealing strip from a DIY store, filled problem gaps between
skirting and wall with nice and cheap polyfilla (from powder) and
laminate/skirting gaps with polycell flexible/decorator's filler (or
decorator's caulk) to allow movement. It took AGES to do it but it was
worth it. Yes, you are correct that when you block one gap, the smoke
finds another, but the amount of smoke entering your property will be
reduced and after that, the best solution if you want to eradicate it
is to keep going until you have sealed everything that you can!
Yes, but should you have to? An older property is bound to leak in
those places. Isn't it incumbent on your neighbours not to cause a
nuisance by filling your property up with smoke? Quiet enjoyment and
all that.
Regards
Richard
Exactly. �I think that it would be reasonable for this to be referred
to the environmental health people.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text

Um, I actually posted on this site to help others with the same
problem and get practical advice myself. Of course you would expect
air to move around in old buildings, but I am not trying to
'hermetically seal' it

You should be. That is the cure, that is what the building regulations
say you should do.




and it is recommended practice nowadays to
draught-proof your property using caulk or sealant anyway to save
energy. I get along very well with my neighbour so I don't think it's
an issue for environmental health - you can stop people smoking in
public places but people who own their own home can do as they please.


Yes, and thanks for a sane attitude, BUT the problem is one that you
must solved by caulking and sealing.

dmc wrote:
In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Steve Firth wrote:

Umm no, wishful thinking on your part. And don't try to tell me
otherwise, tobacco smoke is one of the most noxious chemcial arsenals
around for (some) asthmatics.

I wouldn't try to tell you anything, you obviously know it all.


I *know* tobacco smoke is a trigger for my asthma. Not convinced it's anything
to do with the chemical make up - more the particulates I guess.

Wood smoke does the same as does rabbits fur and some cats. Odd.

Evil smelly smoke from burning tyres or plastic doesn't seem to trigger it
though (although I'm sure will kill be in other ways)

Darren

Same here.

Strangely the fresh smoke from my own DIY cigarettes is not as bad as
the stale smoke from other peoples. It induces coughing which clears out
the crud. I suppose.

In message , The Natural
Philosopher wrote
Alan wrote:
In message , George
wrote

pubs have smelt of sweat and puke
since the smoking ban..
I wonder why you didn't notice that the pubs you go to were not kept
in a hygienic condition before? If your local now smells of puke then
you should be drinking elsewhere. It is a reflection on the priority
the publican gives to cleanliness and probably reflects on his
ability to keep his beer lines and kitchen work surfaces clean.
That horrible smell of sweat is that aroma on smokers cloths that
other people in a clean atmosphere notice when a smoker is close by!


No its not. Its the smell of bacteria feeding on excreted bodily products.


If contributors to the group are frequenting pubs where people are
spewing up all the time and cannot be bothered to wash, or use a
deodorant, then they really should considering moving their custom to a
venue where civilised people drink.


--
Aland
news2006 {at} amac {dot} f2s {dot} com