Quit smoking again... it's odd, though.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 11:08 am

Its somthing I feel quite strongly about now, It should be banned, and ciggy companies should not be making millions out off killing ppl.

Post by **Best First** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 12:05 pm

KingMob wrote:I don't think Ireland had hailstorms and hurricanoes of pubs going out of business either. It seems to be a bit of an exagerated claim.

yeah, but they aren't exactly massiv efans oftheri ale there are they?

I think there is sonething of a difference, its not like you can promote 'smoking responsibly' is it? Unless you mean locking yourelf alone in an airtight room which i'm gussing the smoking companies haven't been pushing for.

On the flipside there are plenty of other things that are killing us - this is just one of the more obvious - what about stricter legeslation around recycling and packaging for example?

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 6:57 pm

But you cant become addicted to 'not recycling' , isnt that more a question of responsiblity?

Post by **Best First** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 8:57 am

how is smoking, given that it harms others around you (be it through health or just, you know, smalling), not a question of responsibility?

Equally how is people profitting off something that kills people also not a question of responsibility?

Legion · Post by **Legion** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 9:46 am

well, the government's been more than happy to take a huge amount tax money from cigarette sales over the years... they've not been too picky about the responsibility factor... hell it wasn't until the Kings Cross fire back in '87 that they decided to ban smoking on the underground...

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:08 pm

Best First wrote:how is smoking, given that it harms others around you (be it through health or just, you know, smalling), not a question of responsibility?

Equally how is people profitting off something that kills people also not a question of responsibility?

No that is the point, they are factors in an equation, but smoking adds the extra one of removing choice via adiction.

When you say other things are killing us, I agree they are, like recycling, we should be doing more, but you cant become addicted to not recycling you can just be ir-responsible to the earth and yourself ultiemately. but with smoking you lose the ablity to be responsible because your addicted.

Post by **Best First** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:08 pm

i see what you are saying but converseley i think its no gerat streach to say we are addicted to both consumerism, convenience and profiteering which in turn lead to the issues like the ones i am pointing out - as with smoking i serioulsy doubt that without legislation these things will be turned around

Predabot · Post by **Predabot** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:13 pm

I'll agree with Impy on this one. Good conversation btw, lads.

Almost... civil?

Post by **Best First** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:21 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 1:30 pm

the cosmic ballet continues...

True, its like Recyling, I know damm well i [composite word including 'f*ck'] the planet up each day, and thats bad for the obvious reaosons, yet at the same time I barely do anything other then chuck a few bottles in the bottle bank etc in a effort to feel better with myself. Just a trip around tescos buying an assortment of daily goods undoes all my good deeds for thweek due to ****** packaging, and how certain goods are manufactured. next stop, I get petrol on the way out, then its off to burger king drive through for some rain forests/de-forestation style burgers...
At least ive stopped smoking!

Legion · Post by **Legion** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:22 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:the cosmic ballet continues...

True, its like Recyling, I know damm well i **** the planet up each day, and thats bad for the obvious reaosons, yet at the same time I barely do anything other then chuck a few bottles in the bottle bank etc in a effort to feel better with myself. Just a trip around tescos buying an assortment of daily goods undoes all my good deeds for thweek due to ****** packaging, and how certain goods are manufactured. next stop, I get petrol on the way out, then its off to burger king drive through for some rain forests/de-forestation style burgers...
At least ive stopped smoking!

some concellation eh?

Post by **Kaylee** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:41 pm

IMO the government needs to get its act together on drugs/narcotics in general. Smoking is considered something very bad, yet pubs are allowed extended opening hours to ply people with booze. They need to be more consistent, rather than what seems to amount to: "this drug is bad, this one is also bad but we'll let you do it, this one's okay on weekdays, this one's illegal unless you're wearing a tie or (in the case of marijuana) this ones illegal but we don't care."

In the wider argument I also agree with Paul, we in the West have a lifestyle which is damaging to so much and to so many yet we're allowed to carry that on regardless. Sort of makes a lot of our hangups seem trivial in fact o_o;;

Post by **Denyer** » Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:58 pm

Keep the existing stuff that can currently screw people up legal (over-the-counter cough syrup, painkillers), extend that to stuff that isn't physically addictive and doesn't need to be burnt and stuck next to your face (cannabis) and ban the carcinogens carried through the air plus major physical addictants (tobacco, heroin).

Off-topic, recycling for materials themselves is often a sop to conscience -- more energy is consumed by the recycling process. However, it's necessary to prevent build-up of dumps that won't break down, and where materials are scarcer.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 12:23 am

An interesting example of where banning smoking has had a detrimental effect of the environment is airlines.

When the airlines banned smoking, they didn't see the need to spend so much time, money and energy on air purifiers, so they cut back. And the air on aircraft is now thousands of times more likely to contain harmful elements (viruses, bacterium, chemicals, etc.) than they otherwise would have been had the airlines been more (less?) health-conscious.

Post by **Kaylee** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:31 am

Denyer wrote:Keep the existing stuff that can currently screw people up legal (over-the-counter cough syrup, painkillers), extend that to stuff that isn't physically addictive and doesn't need to be burnt and stuck next to your face (cannabis) and ban the carcinogens carried through the air plus major physical addictants (tobacco, heroin).

I thought the jury was still out on most of the effects and addictive properties of cannabis?

If we're taking responsibility for third parties beind harmed by substances though (like passive smoking) then alcohol has to feature pretty high on the list? It causes all manner of problems, not in the same way as smoking, but causes problems never the less? I can't get my head around why one is as good as encouraged and the other isn't; they can both be harmful to you and people around you, so they're either both bad or both acceptable.

Maybe the government should sponsor some advertising campaigns to alert people to the dangers of alcohol, just like with cigarettes. They already do it for drink driving, why not go the whole hog? Nothing wrong with keeping people informed... yet administrations seem rather timid in taking on the issues associated with alcohol in any way beyond grandstanding speeches about antisocial behaviour.

Post by **Denyer** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 2:05 am

Karl Lynch wrote:I thought the jury was still out on most of the effects and addictive properties of cannabis?

Well, the same purchased studies have been trotted out for decades. If juries are out, they have an incentive to be so. In particular there's typically a blurring of the medical definitions of physical addiction and repetition of behaviour.

It's probably an especially bad idea to consume psychoactive substances whilst in your teens, erring on the side of caution. A small number of people have existing problems exacerbated by cannabis. The same goes for alcohol and prescription drugs, and doesn't even exclude food groups.

If there were debilitating side-effects, our parents' generations would be more screwed than they are and the sky would be closer to falling in parts of the world and cultures in which use is commonplace. (Come to think of it, that includes the UK.)

edit:

I can't get my head around why one is as good as encouraged and the other isn't

Nice to see your optimistic streak is still intact.

Smoking generates revenue but incurs a significant drain on health services. Alcohol is easier to monitor, less likely to progress to serious physical ailments, is heavily taxed, keeps a greater proportion of people more content with their lot, lacks similar crackdowns everywhere else apart from radical fundamentalist countries, etc.

Professor Smooth · Post by **Professor Smooth** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:49 am

I spent years working on a method that would effectively eliminate the desire to smoke. I went to a university to study the mental part of it and studied the martial arts to get an outside-the-box idea of how to treat it.

Basically, what I've come up with is a precise blow to the side of the head when the craving is strongest. I have yet to have a single failure with this method.

Here's a step by step:

Find somebody you trust and are comfortable talking with. Talk to them about your craving right when it strikes you. When you feel that you absolutely can not fight the craving any more, have them deliver the blow to your head. I find that the Tae Kwon Do kick, Doliapchaggi works the best, but pretty much any precision blow will work. Be careful not to hit your temple too hard (or at all) as this can cause serious injury.

Post by **Best First** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:53 am

Perhaps you could refine that:

How to quit smoking: when you feel the urge to smoke, hurl yourself from a cliff or tall building. Ensure a hard laning for maximum effect.

Post by **Kaylee** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:44 am

Denyer wrote:
Karl Lynch wrote:I thought the jury was still out on most of the effects and addictive properties of cannabis?
Well, the same purchased studies have been trotted out for decades. If juries are out, they have an incentive to be so. In particular there's typically a blurring of the medical definitions of physical addiction and repetition of behaviour.

That's true, it does seem to be anything they find out about it is always 'inconclusive'.

I can't get my head around why one is as good as encouraged and the other isn't
Nice to see your optimistic streak is still intact.

Smoking generates revenue but incurs a significant drain on health services. Alcohol is easier to monitor, less likely to progress to serious physical ailments, is heavily taxed, keeps a greater proportion of people more content with their lot, lacks similar crackdowns everywhere else apart from radical fundamentalist countries, etc.

Now that I hadn't considered, sounds like a good explanation to me though- more net income (less spent out on healthcare), looks good for public relations, is in keeping with general trends elsewhere. The government (from a rather Macheovellian pov) would be rather foolish if they did anything else! Yikes... o.o