| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#12
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... Read the first link through, all I saw was a study that said "we were successful in cutting down on second hand smoke (we think)"... Nothing to do with the discussion we were having about the effects of second hand smoke... And you wonder why I don't read his posts? Really? That's all you got out of it? Can you read? Link #1's first few sentences: Secondhand smoke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It has been associated with serious health problems in both children and adults. Efforts to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in Nebraska have included programs to prevent tobacco use among young people and campaigns for smoke-free workplaces and homes. Despite these interventions, young people continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke at an unacceptably high rate Link #2's first few: Every authoritative, peer-reviewed assessment of the scientific evidence over the years has concluded that Secondhand smoke causes a lengthening list of diseases. The only dissent has come from Big Tobacco and the scientists and organizations affiliated with it. Researchers supported by Big Tobacco are eighty-eight times more likely than independent researchers to conclude there is no evidence that Secondhand smoke is dangerous. The most current knowledge first... The first studies showing that Secondhand smoke causes respiratory problems in children were published over thirty years ago. First evidence that Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer was published in 1981. Since then, the list of dangers has steadily grown. This page sums up the major, independent, consensus statements produced by scientific bodies since 1985, most recent first. 2006 US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. California Environmental Protection Agency. Update of the landmark 1986 Surgeon General's report. Emphasizes the effects of secondhand smoke on the heart, particularly the fact that effects occur within minutes to increase the risk of a heart attack. Confirms that there is no economic effect of smokefree laws on the hospitality industry, and concludes the ventilation systems cannot control secondhand smoke. Full report Effects Causally Associated with Secondhand Smoke Lung cancer Coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Low Birth Weight Lower respiratory illnesses in infants and children Middle ear disease in children (including otitis media and chronic middle ear infusion) Respiratory symptoms in children (cough, phlegm, wheeze, and breathlessness) Asthma in children Reduced development of lung function in children Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? Can you not read??? |
|
#13
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... Read the first link through, all I saw was a study that said "we were successful in cutting down on second hand smoke (we think)"... Nothing to do with the discussion we were having about the effects of second hand smoke... And you wonder why I don't read his posts? Really? That's all you got out of it? Can you read? Link #1's first few sentences: Secondhand smoke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It has been associated with serious health problems in both children and adults. Efforts to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in Nebraska have included programs to prevent tobacco use among young people and campaigns for smoke-free workplaces and homes. Despite these interventions, young people continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke at an unacceptably high rate Link #2's first few: Every authoritative, peer-reviewed assessment of the scientific evidence over the years has concluded that Secondhand smoke causes a lengthening list of diseases. The only dissent has come from Big Tobacco and the scientists and organizations affiliated with it. Researchers supported by Big Tobacco are eighty-eight times more likely than independent researchers to conclude there is no evidence that Secondhand smoke is dangerous. The most current knowledge first... The first studies showing that Secondhand smoke causes respiratory problems in children were published over thirty years ago. First evidence that Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer was published in 1981. Since then, the list of dangers has steadily grown. This page sums up the major, independent, consensus statements produced by scientific bodies since 1985, most recent first. 2006 US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. California Environmental Protection Agency. Update of the landmark 1986 Surgeon General's report. Emphasizes the effects of secondhand smoke on the heart, particularly the fact that effects occur within minutes to increase the risk of a heart attack. Confirms that there is no economic effect of smokefree laws on the hospitality industry, and concludes the ventilation systems cannot control secondhand smoke. Full report Effects Causally Associated with Secondhand Smoke Lung cancer Coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Low Birth Weight Lower respiratory illnesses in infants and children Middle ear disease in children (including otitis media and chronic middle ear infusion) Respiratory symptoms in children (cough, phlegm, wheeze, and breathlessness) Asthma in children Reduced development of lung function in children Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? Can you not read??? Where are the links to the documents? You have read them haven't you. You do have their URLs handy? |
|
#14
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
|
|
#15
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... Read the first link through, all I saw was a study that said "we were successful in cutting down on second hand smoke (we think)"... Nothing to do with the discussion we were having about the effects of second hand smoke... And you wonder why I don't read his posts? Really? That's all you got out of it? Can you read? Link #1's first few sentences: Secondhand smoke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It has been associated with serious health problems in both children and adults. Efforts to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in Nebraska have included programs to prevent tobacco use among young people and campaigns for smoke-free workplaces and homes. Despite these interventions, young people continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke at an unacceptably high rate Link #2's first few: Every authoritative, peer-reviewed assessment of the scientific evidence over the years has concluded that Secondhand smoke causes a lengthening list of diseases. The only dissent has come from Big Tobacco and the scientists and organizations affiliated with it. Researchers supported by Big Tobacco are eighty-eight times more likely than independent researchers to conclude there is no evidence that Secondhand smoke is dangerous. The most current knowledge first... The first studies showing that Secondhand smoke causes respiratory problems in children were published over thirty years ago. First evidence that Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer was published in 1981. Since then, the list of dangers has steadily grown. This page sums up the major, independent, consensus statements produced by scientific bodies since 1985, most recent first. 2006 US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. California Environmental Protection Agency. Update of the landmark 1986 Surgeon General's report. Emphasizes the effects of secondhand smoke on the heart, particularly the fact that effects occur within minutes to increase the risk of a heart attack. Confirms that there is no economic effect of smokefree laws on the hospitality industry, and concludes the ventilation systems cannot control secondhand smoke. Full report Effects Causally Associated with Secondhand Smoke Lung cancer Coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Low Birth Weight Lower respiratory illnesses in infants and children Middle ear disease in children (including otitis media and chronic middle ear infusion) Respiratory symptoms in children (cough, phlegm, wheeze, and breathlessness) Asthma in children Reduced development of lung function in children Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? Can you not read??? Where are the links to the documents? You have read them haven't you. You do have their URLs handy? I've posted the TWICE. |
|
#16
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... On 3/2/2012 7:41 PM, BAR wrote: Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? More importantly, nobody ever said second hand smoke was good for anybody... That's what sucks about dealing with Plume, he can't have a reasonable debate without the bull****... Well, let's clear it up. Either it's good for you or it's not good for you. Which is it? We should destroy all gasoline and diesel engines if you are concerned with polluting the air. Why aren't you going after all types of pollution. |
|
#17
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... Read the first link through, all I saw was a study that said "we were successful in cutting down on second hand smoke (we think)"... Nothing to do with the discussion we were having about the effects of second hand smoke... And you wonder why I don't read his posts? Really? That's all you got out of it? Can you read? Link #1's first few sentences: Secondhand smoke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It has been associated with serious health problems in both children and adults. Efforts to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in Nebraska have included programs to prevent tobacco use among young people and campaigns for smoke-free workplaces and homes. Despite these interventions, young people continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke at an unacceptably high rate Link #2's first few: Every authoritative, peer-reviewed assessment of the scientific evidence over the years has concluded that Secondhand smoke causes a lengthening list of diseases. The only dissent has come from Big Tobacco and the scientists and organizations affiliated with it. Researchers supported by Big Tobacco are eighty-eight times more likely than independent researchers to conclude there is no evidence that Secondhand smoke is dangerous. The most current knowledge first... The first studies showing that Secondhand smoke causes respiratory problems in children were published over thirty years ago. First evidence that Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer was published in 1981. Since then, the list of dangers has steadily grown. This page sums up the major, independent, consensus statements produced by scientific bodies since 1985, most recent first. 2006 US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. California Environmental Protection Agency. Update of the landmark 1986 Surgeon General's report. Emphasizes the effects of secondhand smoke on the heart, particularly the fact that effects occur within minutes to increase the risk of a heart attack. Confirms that there is no economic effect of smokefree laws on the hospitality industry, and concludes the ventilation systems cannot control secondhand smoke. Full report Effects Causally Associated with Secondhand Smoke Lung cancer Coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Low Birth Weight Lower respiratory illnesses in infants and children Middle ear disease in children (including otitis media and chronic middle ear infusion) Respiratory symptoms in children (cough, phlegm, wheeze, and breathlessness) Asthma in children Reduced development of lung function in children Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? Can you not read??? Where are the links to the documents? You have read them haven't you. You do have their URLs handy? I've posted the TWICE. You never posted to URLs. |
|
#18
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
On 3/3/2012 8:57 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... In , says... In , says... In , says... Read the first link through, all I saw was a study that said "we were successful in cutting down on second hand smoke (we think)"... Nothing to do with the discussion we were having about the effects of second hand smoke... And you wonder why I don't read his posts? Really? That's all you got out of it? Can you read? Link #1's first few sentences: Secondhand smoke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. It has been associated with serious health problems in both children and adults. Efforts to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in Nebraska have included programs to prevent tobacco use among young people and campaigns for smoke-free workplaces and homes. Despite these interventions, young people continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke at an unacceptably high rate Link #2's first few: Every authoritative, peer-reviewed assessment of the scientific evidence over the years has concluded that Secondhand smoke causes a lengthening list of diseases. The only dissent has come from Big Tobacco and the scientists and organizations affiliated with it. Researchers supported by Big Tobacco are eighty-eight times more likely than independent researchers to conclude there is no evidence that Secondhand smoke is dangerous. The most current knowledge first... The first studies showing that Secondhand smoke causes respiratory problems in children were published over thirty years ago. First evidence that Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer was published in 1981. Since then, the list of dangers has steadily grown. This page sums up the major, independent, consensus statements produced by scientific bodies since 1985, most recent first. 2006 US Surgeon General. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. California Environmental Protection Agency. Update of the landmark 1986 Surgeon General's report. Emphasizes the effects of secondhand smoke on the heart, particularly the fact that effects occur within minutes to increase the risk of a heart attack. Confirms that there is no economic effect of smokefree laws on the hospitality industry, and concludes the ventilation systems cannot control secondhand smoke. Full report Effects Causally Associated with Secondhand Smoke Lung cancer Coronary heart disease morbidity and mortality Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Low Birth Weight Lower respiratory illnesses in infants and children Middle ear disease in children (including otitis media and chronic middle ear infusion) Respiratory symptoms in children (cough, phlegm, wheeze, and breathlessness) Asthma in children Reduced development of lung function in children Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? Can you not read??? Where are the links to the documents? You have read them haven't you. You do have their URLs handy? He posted a list, I spent some good time reading the first one, but it had NOTHING to do with the effects of second hand smoke.... Just a feel good article to explain another $tudy at another university. Feel good seems to be the most reliable science for them. Just like Global Taxing... |
|
#19
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
On 3/3/2012 10:13 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... In , says... On 3/2/2012 7:41 PM, BAR wrote: Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? More importantly, nobody ever said second hand smoke was good for anybody... That's what sucks about dealing with Plume, he can't have a reasonable debate without the bull****... Well, let's clear it up. Either it's good for you or it's not good for you. Which is it? We should destroy all gasoline and diesel engines if you are concerned with polluting the air. Why aren't you going after all types of pollution. Because that side of the isle reacts to feelings and desires, not logic and law... |
|
#20
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... On 3/2/2012 7:41 PM, BAR wrote: Yep, keep telling yourself that second hand smoke is good for your children. Where is the data? More importantly, nobody ever said second hand smoke was good for anybody... That's what sucks about dealing with Plume, he can't have a reasonable debate without the bull****... Well, let's clear it up. Either it's good for you or it's not good for you. Which is it? We should destroy all gasoline and diesel engines if you are concerned with polluting the air. Why aren't you going after all types of pollution. Marked as stupid and hysterical. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| For plume and others who like charts | General | |||
| De plume | General | |||
| Here's a link for you to read | General | |||
![iBoaterer[_2_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Linear Mode
