On 9/10/2011 2:15 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 19:51:11 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:02:33 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:32:59 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:08:17 -0400, wrote:

My non-smoking grandfather lived to 100 and cost Medicare a bundle. My
smoking parents both died young and didn't have any significant
medical bills at all. My smoking sister is pretty much on her death
bed and still not on medicare. (Dec 01, 11 based on her husband's age)

What about kids? Are they supposed to understand those dangers? How
old do they have to be? Tobacco companies have and continue to promote
smoking to kids. What about second hand smoke?

The law says they have to be 18, they should understand the danger by
then if they will ever learn.

Yes, the law says. And, the tobacco companies have routinely ignored
it.


I didn't know there were any tobacco companies in the retail business.
Where is the Altria store

Second hand smoke is mostly a nuisance, not a health hazard.
If you have 100 smokers in a small room you might have a potential
hazard but a whiff of smoke on a park bench never hurt anyone.

Wow. You should send your results to the Mayo Clinic. I'm sure they'd
be interested in reviewing them.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sec...-smoke/CC00023

Long on opinion short on facts.
Any discussion of airborne poisons that doesn't talk about threshold
limit values (an OSHA standard) is just conjecture.
There may be a dangerous concentration of second hand smoke but simply
being able to smell it (the current standard) is bull****.

I don't really smoke (maybe 6 cigars a year) but I don't think the
current persecution is warranted. That is particularly true when the
person has the ability not to go where people smoke and chooses to
just so they can be offended.
I think they should be able to put up a sign that says "this is a
smoking establishment, if you don't like it, get even with me and
spend your money somewhere else."

Smokers shouldn't go where people are unless they refrain from exhaling.