Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
Ban Cigarettes... (Read 16229 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47344
At my desk.
Call for ban on smoking in mum's taxi
Reply #45 - Feb 4th, 2008 at 11:57am
 
http://news.smh.com.au/call-for-ban-on-smoking-in-mums-taxi/20080204-1pyh.html

Lighting up cigarettes in cars carrying children should be outlawed nationwide with urgency to protect the lungs of young Australians, cancer experts say.

Cancer Council Australia has used World Cancer Day to urge the federal government to follow the lead of Tasmania and South Australia by banning smoking at the wheel with kids onboard.

Chief executive Professor Ian Olver said it was incongruous that a country like Australia, which had introduced measures such as immunisation to improve child health, would allow children to be exposed to dangerous levels of second-hand tobacco smoke.

"Studies show smoking in cars, even with the window down, produces at least as much harmful second-hand smoke as the smokiest bar," Prof Olver said.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
tman(Guest)
Guest


Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #46 - Feb 5th, 2008 at 4:37am
 
A ban on cigarettes doesn't go far enough.   Smokers should be shot and killed on sight of them with a cigarette. Who cares if smokers are only hurting themselves. Smokers are stupid and it is the government’s right to kill stupid people to protect them from themselves. Another side benefit would be; people would not walk around with pens or pencils in their mouths, because they could be mistaken for cigarettes. This is a benefit since someone could seriously hurt themselves if they fall face first into the ground with a pen in their mouth.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Ray_A
Senior Member
****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 334
Gender: male
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #47 - Feb 5th, 2008 at 7:19am
 
Surprise, fit smokers live longer than unfit non-smokers.

Quote:
Being physically fit is such a powerful force for health that even smokers with high blood pressure and high cholesterol who are in good aerobic shape tend to live longer than nonsmoking couch potatoes who are otherwise healthy, a study found.


http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/HEALTH/fitness/fit11.html

So should it be ban smoking, or ban couch potatoes?

One caveat:

Quote:
"Being fit seems to offset some of the impact of these (risk factors)," he added. "But it's important to emphasize it doesn't cancel them out. So if you're a smoker, your risk of dying of lung cancer is still far ahead of the rest of the population who don't smoke."


Back to top
 

"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them." &&&&--- Eric Hoffer. &&
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47344
At my desk.
Geneva bans smoking in public places
Reply #48 - Feb 25th, 2008 at 10:07am
 
http://news.smh.com.au/geneva-bans-smoking-in-public-places/20080225-1uiw.html

Geneva, home to the United Nations' European headquarters and scores of banks catering to the very rich, will ban smoking in public places following a referendum on Sunday, the Swiss news agency ATS said.

Some 79 per cent of voters in Switzerland's second-largest city supported the prohibition, which the local government said it would quickly put in place, ATS said.

Switzerland has lagged behind other European countries such as Ireland, Britain and neighbouring France and Italy in barring smoking in restaurants, bars and offices. Smoking has been forbidden on the Swiss public transport network for two years.

Geneva will be the sixth of the Alpine country's 26 cantons to institute a ban on smoking in public places.

The Geneva-based World Health Organisation (WHO) has called on governments worldwide to protect their citizens from tobacco smoke. It estimates that by 2030, more than eight million people will die from tobacco-related causes each year.

Switzerland's devolved political system means citizens frequently vote on issues ranging from immigration policy to public transport costs.

Geneva voters also approved an initiative on Sunday banning dangerous dogs, and requiring owners of dogs weighing more than 25kg to get a permit to walk them in public.

They opted against a proposal to make buses and trams free.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Ray_A
Senior Member
****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 334
Gender: male
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #49 - Feb 25th, 2008 at 11:09am
 
When the ban on smoking came into force last year (in NSW) clubs and pubs lost some patrons, so they installed pokie machines outside under cover. Some people just don't play the pokies without a cig. Designated smoking areas inside clubs were never going to work, because smoke still drifted towards non-smoking areas, somewhat like the original airline policy which had designated smoking areas, then a complete ban on smoking on aircraft. It will be of interest to see how much further the bans go.

Interesting comments: http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/takala/040907

Quote:
If smoking is illegal on people's "private" property, where people are permitted to leave whenever they please, what's the premise? There are many. The primary one is that people are not allowed to harm themselves to any large extent; the extent, of course, being one defined by the State. What prohibitions will logically be required after smoking has been outlawed? Prohibition of non-educational programming on television? A government committee to ensure that the educational content in a given program does indeed outweigh the negative consequences of exposure to the television screen? What about computer usage? What of music? Almost everyone has heard one of the occasional studies proving that non-classical music has a harmful effect on plants. Will certain music be outlawed? What about food? Of course, we're already in the process of outlawing "big fat."

Back to top
 

"People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them." &&&&--- Eric Hoffer. &&
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47344
At my desk.
NSW may ban smoking in cars with kids
Reply #50 - Feb 28th, 2008 at 1:57pm
 
http://news.smh.com.au/nsw-may-ban-smoking-in-cars-with-kids/20080228-1vj3.html

Bans on smoking in cars carrying children and new restrictions on cigarette displays at shop counters are among reforms being considered by the NSW government.

NSW Assistant Health Minister (Cancer) Verity Firth says the reform package includes tougher rules for the registration and licensing of tobacco retailers and a broad review of tobacco marketing and gimmicks.

Ms Firth said the proposals would go out for public comment and a forum would be held for stakeholders to contribute their views.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Musician35
Ex Member


Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #51 - Feb 29th, 2008 at 11:33am
 
Quote:
A ban on cigarettes doesn't go far enough.   Smokers should be shot and killed on sight of them with a cigarette. Who cares if smokers are only hurting themselves. Smokers are stupid and it is the government’s right to kill stupid people to protect them from themselves. Another side benefit would be; people would not walk around with pens or pencils in their mouths, because they could be mistaken for cigarettes. This is a benefit since someone could seriously hurt themselves if they fall face first into the ground with a pen in their mouth.


Warning-This post could cause smokers to die coughing


Yeah. They make an excellent case for relaxing torture regulations, and anti-discrimination legislation. Maybe there should be a bounty on smokers too Cheesy

Smokers are also ugly, sub-human and .....they smell too!

Of course in their favour, they do have the decency to die prematurely and save society a fortune  Grin

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/07/18/wsmok18.xml
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #52 - Feb 29th, 2008 at 2:18pm
 
Quote:
Smokers should be shot and killed on sight of them with a cigarette. Who cares if smokers are only hurting themselves. Smokers are stupid and it is the government’s right to kill stupid people to protect them from themselves.



LOL.

I recall watching a news coverage on TV about the Washington snipers in the US. The camera panned across to an office building where in the background admist the sparodic shooting were 4 office workers hiding against some columns having a smoke. It was surreal. They're willing to risk their lives for the fag fix.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Acid Monkey
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Goth Father

Posts: 1064
EU
Gender: male
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #53 - Feb 29th, 2008 at 2:18pm
 
fag = f@g
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47344
At my desk.
Sex hormones 'hit smoke success'
Reply #54 - Apr 22nd, 2008 at 4:52pm
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7355353.stm

A successful attempt to quit smoking may depend on where women are in their monthly cycle, say scientists.

Those trying before ovulation were more likely to reach for a cigarette again than those trying at other times, US scientists claimed.

The researchers looked at a total of 200 women, who were asked to give up smoking either in the "follicular" stage of their cycle - the period leading up to ovulation, when an egg is produced by the ovary, or the "luteal" stage, the roughly two-week stage that completes the cycle.

Each stage is marked by differences in the hormones produced by the body.

After 30 days, 86% of the women who starting trying to give up during their follicular phase had "relapsed", and smoked at least one cigarette.

This compared to 66% of the group who had started in their luteal phase.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Amadd
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Mo

Posts: 6217
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #55 - Apr 28th, 2008 at 1:31am
 
How about banning enjoyment in any shape or form?
Statistics show that actions which bring short term enjoyment are usually detrimental to one's health in the long term. Statistics also show that a lack of short term enjoyment can be detrimental to one's long term enjoyment of life.

A workmate of mine had a problem with alcohol. He kicked that addiction but he became a pokie addict. After a few years he gradually increased his drinks (and smoking) whilst playing the pokies...then he had a heart attack and gave up the lot.







Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 28th, 2008 at 1:42am by Amadd »  
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #56 - Apr 28th, 2008 at 4:44am
 
Quote:
How about banning enjoyment in any shape or form?
Statistics show that actions which bring short term enjoyment are usually detrimental to one's health in the long term. Statistics also show that a lack of short term enjoyment can be detrimental to one's long term enjoyment of life.


Yes well that's what it's coming down to.  Closet smoking is my only vice (now) and as much as I've tried to stop, haven't been able to.  Judged by society as disgusting, weak, stinky, selfish etc. - some of us were brought up & brainwashed on the B & H ads as teenagers and while we were trying to look sophisticated, became hooked at the same time.

But good news for all those people out there who hate smokers - Rudd has been advised to increase the excise on cigarettes - which by the way is high enough now to cover any medical costs associated with smoking and give the government a healthy profit as well.

As the cost now is almost prohibiive, us tobacco junkies will have to resort to growing our own.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NorthOfNorth
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male
Re: Ban Cigarettes...
Reply #57 - Apr 28th, 2008 at 8:53am
 
mantra wrote on Apr 28th, 2008 at 4:44am:
Quote:
How about banning enjoyment in any shape or form?
Statistics show that actions which bring short term enjoyment are usually detrimental to one's health in the long term. Statistics also show that a lack of short term enjoyment can be detrimental to one's long term enjoyment of life.


Yes well that's what it's coming down to.  Closet smoking is my only vice (now) and as much as I've tried to stop, haven't been able to.  Judged by society as disgusting, weak, stinky, selfish etc. - some of us were brought up & brainwashed on the B & H ads as teenagers and while we were trying to look sophisticated, became hooked at the same time.

But good news for all those people out there who hate smokers - Rudd has been advised to increase the excise on cigarettes - which by the way is high enough now to cover any medical costs associated with smoking and give the government a healthy profit as well.

As the cost now is almost prohibiive, us tobacco junkies will have to resort to growing our own.


The last thing left now is to restrict sales to registered outlets only (the old tobacconists store) and also restrict the number licences of these premises to 1 per X thousand per suburb.

Back to top
 

Conviction is the art of being certain
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print