|
|
|
|
|
vivid
|
Joined: 6/30/2006
Msg: 176 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 1:54:35 AM | I'm looking at statistics and they say 32% will die....other stats say under 29% but even
among those, there is no certainty if the smoking was the actual cause or if the
victim would have had lung cancer without smoking. You see, lung cancer is increasing
DRAMATICALLY despite the fact that smoking has gone below 20%! Cancer is
increasing! You can be a non-smoker and you will be among the fatalaties of
lung cancer. If you live in the smog, tell me, how's it that you aren't breathing in
the 2nd hand smog?
Among the lung cancer victims, guess the percentage that were non-smokers. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 1:59:42 AM | | Smoking has gone down, but cancer has gone up... Smoking decreases... ex smokers are developing cancer becuase of their prolonged use... the charts and statistics make sense to me.. if you really think smoking has positive benefits schedual an apointment with your doctor and try not to cry when he pisses his pants laughing at you. | |
|
vivid
|
Joined: 6/30/2006
Msg: 178 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 2:16:57 AM | ^^^ you haven't even studied the data and you're making sweeping statements about
how it makes sense. The number of smokers vs the number of cancer cases point to
only one indisputable fact; the smoking is not the sole cause of lung cancer. Lung
cancer is hitting EVERYBODY.
Go research.
My doctor already knows about my smoking and she's stated I should stop; however,
I'm in amazing medical condition. I'm not surprised because I run 3 miles a day.
Let's see how often the average joe exercises. | |
|
Joy.
|
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 179 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 2:30:04 AM | Exactly Dan! Even people who quit can and more than likely will develop a smoking-related cancer down the road. Also, if you are a smoker and have to undergo major surgery, you will not recuperate as quickly since your lungs are so damaged.
They say now that second hand smoke can be equally as dangerous so I choose to not put myself in that position. And yes, you do have to wonder about parents who smoke around their small children or pregnant women who smoke. I would bet that a newborn baby whose mother had smoked during her pregnancy would be found to be addicted to nicotine just as a baby whose mother did crack during pregnancy would be addicted to the drug once he was born.
For those that think smoking rooms should be made available, the problem with that is that an entire separate ventilation system would have to be installed in that room indepdent of the rest of the building; otherwise, you would just be circulating smoke throughout the building thus exposing others to second hand smoke. Not quite sure how you find that to be fair.
And for those who said they have family members who have smoked all their lives and lived to be in their 80's and 90's, well that is just a fluke, more rare than you realize but there are always exceptions to the rule. I think the percentage of smokers who die much younger is a MUCH higher rate.
I was shocked at how many people I met at the chemo infusion center who ranged in age from 35 to 60 and were diagnosed with a smoking related cancer. My oncologist told me that they have found that people who smoked for a minimum of 6 years and up were at very high risk for developing a smoking related cancer and for each year beyond that, the risk increases immensely.
I do believe everyone has the right to live their life the way they see fit but a bit of enlightenment can never hurt anyone. I just hope all these people have VERY good insurance because being treated for cancer is not inexpensive. My insurance has now paid out over $100,000 for chemo and radiation alone, not to mention the surgery, follow up care, all the blood work you have to have done (twice weekly), the shots to boost your immunity system when going thru chemo - $3000 and $6000 depending if your red or white counts are down and the endless prescriptions. Other expenses could be in-home care if you are unable to care for yourself or multiple hospital stays for infections you might pick up during chemo since your immune system is so compromised. And of course, you are more susceptible to pneumonia so that could add a few hospital visits as well.
I certainly hope no one takes offense to my posts but believe it or not, I truly do care about my fellow man. We're all equals on this great planet and I genuinely care about people. It hurts my heart to hear of anyone having to go thru this horrible ordeal.
I'm off my soapbox now. :)
For more information and the anticipated 2006 cancer statistics provided by the American Cancer Society please read here:
http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2006PWSecured.pdf | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 4:14:22 AM | ..and allergies are a sign of a healthy immune system...
my problem has always been this.... X amount of smokers die of cancer, and Y amount of non-smokers die of cancer from secondhand smoke.... Z is the number of nonsmokers who die of cancer.. but they dont tell you that one--- is it higher, lower or the same...?
If smoking is such a deplorable evil, why do we allow cars.. which produce 1000x the pollutants per day that a smoker generates...? | |
|
Joy.
|
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 181 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 4:30:37 AM | If you read that report, it shows that among all types of cancer, lung cancer has the highest rate of being detected this year, the highest death rate and the lowest overall survival rate.
Breast cancer is in 2nd place but smoking related cancers are 100% avoidable according to the report. | |
|
kmhstx
|
Joined: 8/23/2005
Msg: 182 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 4:34:11 AM | I'm back lol
Acouple things....for the people out there finding these random studies about smoking having positive benefits.
I will share with you a concept that I use at work.....the cure only works if it doesn't damage everything else beyond compare. So there is a balance. We only give enough radiation to kill the cancer...if we gave more we would be increasing the risk of causing cancer.
So in the case of smoking I think the harm far far far out way any possible benefits that could come from it (if any?).
Secondly....
People keep saying that nonsmoker get just as much cancer as smokers, or that car exhaust all these other things......so why shouldn't I smoke.
OF course non smokers get cancer, and sure pollution might play a part. The idea is what is preventable. If you stop smoking your risk goes down if you start smoking your risk goes up. Its that simple, cause and effect. Sure there are some people who can smoke and will never have to visit the doctor their whole life. But those are definitally in the minority.
And second hand smoking....well right now I have a patient on treatment...and he is an ex-smoker, (head and neck cancer..often...smoking related)....and his wife still has not quit. He has developed his side effects atleast a week earlier than most patients, most likely due to going home to a smoking environment. Smokers if this was your spouse...someone you loved, and he/she was very sick what would you do? Continue to live in denial? | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 6:55:21 AM | This is neither pro nor con on smoking ,just an observation based on experience. a friend of mine took a job at Baylor hospital. First day on the job the doctor asked if she had ever done an autopsy. She said no and he said ,"come on let's go". He opened up a 52 year-old woman
and when he removed a lung, it was coal-black, like charcoal. My friend said "My God, a smoker?"doc said with a smile"nope!..never smoked in her life!...... He went on to say...
"People don't realize it..... but to live in a city like Dallas is to take in the amount of pollution equivalent to TWO PACKS A DAY!!!!!!!"
Small town for me here on out................... | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 7:38:55 AM | Dan_p13 said:
Smoking has gone down, but cancer has gone up... Smoking decreases... ex smokers are developing cancer becuase of their prolonged use... the charts and statistics make sense to me.. if you really think smoking has positive benefits schedual an apointment with your doctor and try not to cry when he pisses his pants laughing at you.
Yeah, exactly. You don't even need statistics or research to tell you that sucking concentrated amounts of a smoke laced with at least 20 known carcinogens into your lungs doesn't exactly fall into the same category as taking vitamins.  Here we have a wonderfully designed breathing system whose sole purpose is to extract oxygen from the air, and deliver it to your blood, in order that you can continue to live. Anyone with 2 brain cells could tell you that sucking tobacco smoke into those lungs day-in and day-out, impairing what they are designed to do, will have some adverse effects, to put it mildly.
Quitting smoking won't change your chances of getting lung cancer overnight.....especially if you've smoked 2 packs a day for 30 years. It takes time. The triggers that start cancer may have been activated long ago, and now no matter whether you quit or not, it's still going to happen. What's the best thing you can do? NEVER EVEN START. So cancer is going up, regardless of people having quit smoking....even for years. Damage has been done. The same applies to non-smokers who are around smokers and breathing in their smoke. My parents smoked in the house when I was a child, and continued to do so until I left home at 19. Who knows what damage that did?
People who compare it to pollution from cars, to a certain degree, have a point. But like it or not, we need cars to get to our jobs, and trucks to deliver our goods. I hate that kind of pollution too. I wish we could get rid of fossil-fuel modes of transportation. But the fact is: we need cars. For most of us, they're essential to our lives. The same can't be said for smoking. Although nicotine addicts might tell you different 
To me, it falls under simple common sense. You don't need scientific research to tell you that sucking in cigarette smoke is eventually going to have negative effects on you. It's the same common sense that tells you that playing on the freeway isn't exactly good for your health. You might be able to dodge for a while, but sooner or later..... | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 8:53:33 AM | all I knowis that every time I come in contact with cigerette smoke I get an institanous headache. Even from the smallest amounts: my nose burns, in my throat i can taste the dang smoke, my eyes burn and water, I start coughing and don't feel well for nearly 1 hour afterwards. It sucks to be around people who smoke.
BTW... I watched a discover channel episode that was done on how they make cigerettes. Do you know that EVERY CIGERETTE THAT IS MANUFACTURED IN THE USA has over 61 individual chemicals in it. That is 61 chemicals sprayed on each tobacco plant as it is being processed and getting ready for packaging.
Now let me ask you this: If every scientist, government agency and other do gooder companies tell you to wash the pesticides of your food and don't get it on your skin, eyes ect. because of the adverse effects of the chemiclas - how can the tobacco companies get away with DELIBERATELY SPRAYING THE TOBACCO PLANTS WITH 61 CHEMICALS( some more toxic than pesticides) before packaging them for your smoking pleasure?
The tobacco plant is bad to a degree. But it is the chemicals that are causing the cancer. Read the labels of all your chemicals in your house and they all say pretty much the same thing. "This is dangerous to your health or may cause cancer or adverse side effects". But it shouldn't be a problem for you if you inhale it? Come on!
And on last thing on my soap box:
If you smoke, you are an addict. You ARE using drugs. Chemicals are drugs by a different name.
Drug users crave their drug. Smokers crave their chemicals.
Drug users will spend thier last dollar on drugs. So do smokers.
Drug users will beg borrow and plead to get their next fix. So do smokers.
Drug users will endure bad things to get thier next fix. So do smokers.
Drug users end up doing drugs by themselves. So do smokers cause alot of ppl just don't want ot be around it.
Drug users don't care about themselves. Neither do smokers. (Yellow teeth & nails, stink)
Drug users spend alot of money on thier recreation. So do smokers.
That's my opinion. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 8:59:41 AM | i've heard the whole argument of "pollutants" from other sources, ie emissions, etc, and my stance still stands:
smoking is horrible for you. i don't care if there are other harmful chemicals in the air, bottom line is i don't want to be around smokers. my eyes swell to the size of balloons, and i get migraine headaches from cigarette smoke. not a pleasant experience.
not to mention, when you smoke your breath, your clothes, your hair, and just about everything about you smells like ass.
i share my office at work with two smokers. when they come back in from having a cigarette, i have to leave for a few minutes. the smell is just too disgusting. | |
|
tarok
|
Joined: 11/30/2005
Msg: 187 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 9:03:42 AM | | the study is false with information smoking will have long negative health issues on your life | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 9:19:55 AM | you MUST BE A FRIGGING IDIOT !! the smoke has clouded your brain in tar and 400 other toxins ,where do you think the second hand smoke comes from ?? you smokers !!! and to tell you the truth ,i have no idea what kind of tobacco there growing these days its more like stink weed , ITS A SHAME THAT IF I GO TO A MALL OR PUBLIC PLACE YOU IDIOTS ARE OUTSIDE IN ANY WEATHER SMOKING AND I HAVE TO WALK BY SMELLING THAT FOUL CRAP id rather you smoke horse shit it would smell better
ive seen people with throat cancer ,no voice boxes etc its too late and i was told that after the fact they wouldn't take $500 to smoke a cigarettand the billions it costs in health issues ,go figure, thats why its a disese
YA THINK !!! | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 9:44:31 AM | People continue to amaze me.
Smoking is not good for you. You will only gain weight when you stop smoking if you can not put the fork down. Just because you are healthy now, does not mean that in 10 years you will be. IT WILL CATCH UP WITH YOU.
Why be so ignorant? Accept that you are slowly killing yourselves and go on with life. Stop lying to yourself and others.
Kids of smokers have MORE ASTHMA ISSUES.
When a smoker lights up or exhales, these chemicals are released into the air. When children breathe in these chemicals, it can cause damage to their lungs and affect their ability to breathe properly and can cause health problems in children and fetuses including:
* Bronchitis and other respiratory infections
* Severe coughing and wheezing
* Ear infections
* Death due to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome
* Low birth weight or other birth defects
* Asthma
*Every day, almost 1,200 Americans die from smoking.
*Smokers are about twice as likely to die from cancer as non-smokers.
*Smokers are about three times as likely to die from heart attacks as non-smokers.
*Among 1,000 young men who smoke:
* One will be murdered
* Six will die in traffic accidents
* 250 will die from smoking-related diseases
*Tobacco use kills more people than the total number killed by AIDS, alcohol abuse, motor vehicle accidents, homicide, illegal drug abuse, and suicide combined. Even if the number of smoking-related deaths were cut in half, they would still kill more people than all of the other causes.
Now those are the FACTS^^
So are you still going to try to convince me it is good for you??
lmfao
troublemaker>
I know the sun can cause cancer. I am not going to sit here and say it is good for me and that it would never kill me...unlike you smokers who seem to think it will never happen to you. I accept my fate and me being in the sun does not endanger anyone but myself...unlike the 2nd hand smoke you give out to the world. | |
|
vivid
|
Joined: 6/30/2006
Msg: 190 | |
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 10:04:55 AM |
Yeah, exactly. You don't even need statistics or research to tell you that sucking concentrated amounts of a smoke laced with at least 20 known carcinogens into your lungs doesn't exactly fall into the same category as taking vitamins
I truly believe that some people are more suseptible to cancer than others and
just so this doesn't become a skirmish I'm going to declare, based on my family
history of smoking and lack of cancer - I AM BULLET PROOF!...NO WAY I BELIEVE
I CAN DEVELOP CANCER. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 10:07:56 AM | I AM BULLET PROOF!...NO WAY I BELIEVE
I CAN DEVELOP CANCER.
Saying something like that is just temting fate or God, careful..I would be watching out for lighting stricks if I was you. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 10:10:13 AM | ^^^^^ look who's talking! dont know if i've ever seen someone as smokin as fb!  | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 10:18:35 AM | lol see the condecending atitude , "unlike you smokers" like we are a group of parasitic lifeforms.how come its alright for u to sit under a sunn tan, gettin skin cancer because the gov set off to many nuclear bombs n deleted the ozone layer yet yas dont go harassing the gov over that which has a far more detrimental effect on the entire earth nvr mind ur lungs, u make it sound like im promoting smoking, which i wasnt, i was merely defending my right to smoke,which i do have, and just becasue u dont so something doesnt give u the right to make others who choose to enjoy it not do it, no matter your overrated statistical excuses.now ive heard about the asthma issue as well and yah to bad for them ok boohoo the stats saying ur gonna get bronchitis, asthma etc wellya know if that was a fact i woulda had one of em by now but i havent ever had bromchitis n i smoked 24 yrs.diseases are genetic and u may or may not get em sure smokin doesnt really do aything good for u long term,but nothin does , if ur so adamant bout fresh air get an oxygen tank n use that , just dont tell me im the sole reason u have asthma,or any other disease is cause i have a cig, theres such a thing as poor gene pools ,which give lower resistance to diseases,
u know smokers may defend there right to smoke, but they know its not doin em any good
non smokers however seem to imagine a world of non smokers would b free of lung cancer and a virtual paradise
smokers in the end arent the ones tryin to force non smokers to sit in there smoke
one day when another freedom is attacked n prohibition rears its head outa the slime then youll see how fast your next freedom disappears, it might b fast food or drinking booze or ........................................ | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 11:52:22 AM |
ok now since everyone says non smokers are more likel to get lung cancer than a smoker
I know when I smoked I was always pissed that the damn non-smokers got my second hand smoke for free..if they got half my smoke they should pay for half the pack!
Hahahaha but I quit because I can't jog 4 km without my heart nearly exploding out of my chest..yet this woman at least 10 years my senior is going at the same rate and her heart rate was far lower than mine..that was an eye opener. I'd kind of like to live to see my kids grow up become sereal killers and take out a mall..hahhahaha just messing with you. I know there are always going to be smokers but I don't want my children to have smell it.
And before you judge me as a reformed smoker let me tell you even as a smoker I didn't smoke in public, never in the car with the kids, never inside my house even in the winter, and not one during either pregnancy, why I started agin both times is beyond me..mi vita loca et muy stupido!!!! Just because I chose to poision my own body doesn't mean my kids have to get it too. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 2:26:28 PM | noones tryin to attack non smlokers here we smokers just want to b not attacked religiously is all, id quit smoking if the right person asked i suppose , for myself its neither here nor there for me, i quit a few times n restarted cause the ex kept offering n offering n eventuall i got weak in the head
i felt no better not smoing than smokin i felt the same either way, thing is i would rather give up cigs than coffee n i know thatd b the next demand hence the obstinance on quitting the first one.i cant wear the patch cause i work n sweat n ppl have died from the patch when they broke into a sweat, climbing n crawling around pipes all day and scaling towers will make u sweat alot, my only option is cold turkey maybe instead of making smokers feel bad and guilty about it some helpful acceptance and acknowledgement wouldd b a more positive way to help them to quit,pamphlets n nasty pictures on the cig packs arent really a deterrent they merely create a seudo culture in the end of obstinate smokers feeling picked on n cast out of society
i say kill the tobacco industry completely but we know thatll nvr happen
u dotn blame the addict u blame the person supplying the drug so go after the parasites that live off the avails of tobacco otherwise by protesting the addicts u merely allow the big fish to make even more money off the addicts even illegal drugs would drop in price if they were legal cause then the stigma would b gone and the fear factor would no longer b there and it wouldnt b a taboo subjct | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 3:11:06 PM | | Playing the victim like that is just pathetic. If it's the tobacco companies who are to blame, why are the rest of us not hooked on smoking too? I grew up with 2 grandparents and a parent and several friends who smoked and wanted me to try. I knew that smoking was/is not good for you and, yeah... STUPID. So I had the common sense and the balls not to start in the first place. The same tobacco companies push cigarettes on both smokers and non-smokers, yet there are still people who don't smoke, so don't play the victim. It's very lame. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 3:40:22 PM | | everyone is hooked on something u cant look down ur nose at someone when everyone has something they r hooked on ex exercise, hockey,chips,smoking, drugs,pills, motorbikes,drinking, cars,sex , ect u have to do the best u can with the best u got. N yes cars r a addition cause u try for 1 wk to stop driving and do that every day its insane and they r giveing pollution like everything else.i dont drive but i dont wine about all that car exhast that i have to injest because millions drive.if the suppliers r not to blame then should i start wining to all the drivers out there with having those stinky cars and polluting the ozone which produces cancer too?? pretty sad of u to think ur better than some. | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 3:57:10 PM | There are now studies that prove smoking helps prevent cancer? Where are these studies...
Next you are gonna tell me abstinence causes pregnancy...
squeak | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 4:28:08 PM | | Well i semi aggree with trubble, i havent read the Chinese experts smokin or non smokin thing, so far they havent been able to directly link cancer to smoking , hense the "MAY CAUSE CANCER/LUNG DISEASE......." pick your disease. However I dont believe non smokers should to put up with cigarette smoke, but how about a comprimise... " A SMOKING BAR... ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK...!!! There smokers will have a free place to enjoy smokin inside, with other smokers, then its our choice not the non smokers or the government.. As for the government where will the tax revenues come from when every1 eventually becomes smoke free and the 30 or 40+% (i know it a lot, thats not an accurate #) of the price of cigarettes is a federal tax???? When does the governments reign of what we can or cannot do, California has "FAT TAX" (put on mcd's chips pop, chocolate)to reduce the amount of obesity in Calif, when does it stop, Red Meat isnt perfect for ya when will that be illegal? | |
|
| non smokers
Posted: 7/9/2006 8:30:35 PM | Fat tax, eh? That's awesome. Is that something Arnold did? I love it. I really, really do.
Red meat isn't the best for you, but at least there's nutritional value, unlike potatoe chips, gummy bears, chocolate bars, etc.. - good move! | |
|
|
| Page 8 of 12
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 |
|
Home
login 
