| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Read Plume's link....
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? |
Read Plume's link....
On 3/2/2012 11:44 AM, JustWait wrote:
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? Oh, wait a minute.. Let me answer for Plume: "Oh, so now you want more second hand smoke, just poison your kids, and puppies, WHAT ABOUT THE PUPPIES, and old people...?" snerk |
Read Plume's link....
|
Read Plume's link....
On 3/2/2012 1:22 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
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? I wonder if smoking dope is as harmful to your health as smoking cigarrettes? -- O M G |
Read Plume's link....
In article om, 5@
5.com says... On 3/2/2012 1:22 PM, iBoaterer wrote: 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? I wonder if smoking dope is as harmful to your health as smoking cigarrettes? I would guess so, if one was to smoke as much pot as a cigarette addict smokes cigarettes. But why are you in such a tizzy about pot lately? |
Read Plume's link....
On 3/2/2012 2:01 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In raweb.com, 5@ 5.com says... On 3/2/2012 1:22 PM, iBoaterer wrote: 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? I wonder if smoking dope is as harmful to your health as smoking cigarrettes? I would guess so, if one was to smoke as much pot as a cigarette addict smokes cigarettes. But why are you in such a tizzy about pot lately? I see you are a member of the noiseless patient Spider organization. Is that part of the anti cigarette pro pot movement? -- O M G |
Read Plume's link....
On 3/2/2012 2:59 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 3/2/2012 2:01 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, 5@ 5.com says... On 3/2/2012 1:22 PM, iBoaterer wrote: 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? I wonder if smoking dope is as harmful to your health as smoking cigarrettes? I would guess so, if one was to smoke as much pot as a cigarette addict smokes cigarettes. But why are you in such a tizzy about pot lately? I see you are a member of the noiseless patient Spider organization. Is that part of the anti cigarette pro pot movement? Where on earth do you get these crazy ideas in your head? From your head(er). See your header information below. Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com! news.glorb.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: iBoaterer Newsgroups: rec.boats Subject: Read Plume's link.... Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 14:59:36 -0500 *Organization: A noiseless patient Spider* Lines: 26 Message-ID: R blah blah blah |
Read Plume's link....
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? |
Read Plume's link....
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****... |
Read Plume's link....
In article m,
says... On 3/2/2012 2:59 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In aweb.com, says... On 3/2/2012 2:01 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, 5@ 5.com says... On 3/2/2012 1:22 PM, iBoaterer wrote: 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? I wonder if smoking dope is as harmful to your health as smoking cigarrettes? I would guess so, if one was to smoke as much pot as a cigarette addict smokes cigarettes. But why are you in such a tizzy about pot lately? I see you are a member of the noiseless patient Spider organization. Is that part of the anti cigarette pro pot movement? Where on earth do you get these crazy ideas in your head? From your head(er). See your header information below. Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com! news.glorb.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: iBoaterer Newsgroups: rec.boats Subject: Read Plume's link.... Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 14:59:36 -0500 *Organization: A noiseless patient Spider* Lines: 26 Message-ID: R blah blah blah And your point is? |
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??? |
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? |
Read Plume's link....
|
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. |
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. |
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. |
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... |
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... |
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. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... 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. Wanna bet? |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask. |
Read Plume's link....
In article , says...
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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! |
Read Plume's link....
In article , says...
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... Please show me peer reviewed studies backing that up. Oh, it's just your feeling, got it. |
Read Plume's link....
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks |
Read Plume's link....
On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote:
On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... 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. Wanna bet? Where are they? |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf Since we closed the pools we haven't had as many people die from gunshot wounds. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ Did you read the conclusion? http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 This is a review of a study, not a study. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Another review of a study. Need more, just ask. Sure provide me with links to the actual studies. |
Read Plume's link....
In article , says...
On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... It still hasn't provided the peer reviewed studies. |
Read Plume's link....
On 3/3/2012 7:50 PM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, wrote: In , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... It still hasn't provided the peer reviewed studies. I know... |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. Wanna bet? Where are they? I asked if you wanted to bet. YOU said I "never posted" the URLs. How about a grand? |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf Since we closed the pools we haven't had as many people die from gunshot wounds. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ Did you read the conclusion? http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 This is a review of a study, not a study. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Another review of a study. Need more, just ask. Sure provide me with links to the actual studies. Follow the articles, if you can. You'll find plenty. Now, please post some peer reviewed studies that say that second hand smoke is not harmful. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf Since we closed the pools we haven't had as many people die from gunshot wounds. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ Did you read the conclusion? http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 This is a review of a study, not a study. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Another review of a study. Need more, just ask. Sure provide me with links to the actual studies. Primary source: American Thoracic Society Source reference: Lovasi GS, et al "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure in childhood predicts early emphysema in adulthood: The MESA lung study" Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009; 179: Abstract 3965. |
Read Plume's link....
In article , says...
On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... I KNEW you'd try to figure out a way to **** on them!! Please show just what facts posted in the articles that you believe to be untrue and why. Then post some peer reviewed studies that say second hand smoke is not harmful. Now, what is "I feel" about this, taken right from one of the URL's I posted: In a large cohort of nonsmokers, early signs of emphysema were noticeable on CT scans among those who had lived with one or more smokers in childhood, according to Gina Lovasi, Ph.D., of Columbia University. Those signs -- a significant increase in the number of "air-like spaces" -- were not accompanied by any clinical symptoms, Dr. Lovasi said at the annual meeting of the American Thoracic Society. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... It still hasn't provided the peer reviewed studies. Bull****. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. Wanna bet? Where are they? I asked if you wanted to bet. YOU said I "never posted" the URLs. How about a grand? I said you never posted the URL's and you responded "Wanna bet?" and you responded with the tripe above. Provide a link to the article where you originally posted the URLs. No, I am not "gonna bet" you any money. If you are sure that you posted the URLs then provide a link to the article, USENET article. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf Since we closed the pools we haven't had as many people die from gunshot wounds. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ Did you read the conclusion? http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 This is a review of a study, not a study. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Another review of a study. Need more, just ask. Sure provide me with links to the actual studies. Follow the articles, if you can. You'll find plenty. Now, please post some peer reviewed studies that say that second hand smoke is not harmful. Here I'll make it easy for you. Provde a link to the MSDS for second hand smoke that enables reading of the MSDS. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... In article , says... 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. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf Since we closed the pools we haven't had as many people die from gunshot wounds. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ Did you read the conclusion? http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 This is a review of a study, not a study. http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Another review of a study. Need more, just ask. Sure provide me with links to the actual studies. Primary source: American Thoracic Society Source reference: Lovasi GS, et al "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure in childhood predicts early emphysema in adulthood: The MESA lung study" Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2009; 179: Abstract 3965. Where is the URL? You have failed to provide a URL. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... I KNEW you'd try to figure out a way to **** on them!! Please show just what facts posted in the articles that you believe to be untrue and why. Then post some peer reviewed studies that say second hand smoke is not harmful. Now, what is "I feel" about this, taken right from one of the URL's I posted: In a large cohort of nonsmokers, early signs of emphysema were noticeable on CT scans among those who had lived with one or more smokers in childhood, according to Gina Lovasi, Ph.D., of Columbia University. How was the large cohort of nonsmokers selected? What other medical conditions did they have? Did any of them have any other types of lung deformities or deficiencies that were not detectable until they were autopsied? Without knowing who they selected for the study and who they excluded from the study you cannot trust the study. You wouldn't trust a study written by Republicans and peer reviewed by Republicans that said Democrats are stupid would you? Those signs -- a significant increase in the number of "air-like spaces" -- were not accompanied by any clinical symptoms, Dr. Lovasi said at the annual meeting of the American Thoracic Society. |
Read Plume's link....
In article ,
says... In article , says... In article , says... On 3/3/2012 4:21 PM, oscar wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:03:27 -0500, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... 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... Here you go, and BAR too!! Now, please post your "peer reviewed articles" that claim that second hand smoke is not harmful. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/SHSBibliography.pdf http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2483572/ http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ATS/14294 http://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/m...ng-050907.html Need more, just ask! More more more Thanks All propaganda... full of "may cause" and "thought to cause" and "we think".. and of course... "I Feel" which is the basis of all of these studies...;) I have read several of them now, not one has really been what it was supposed to be... It still hasn't provided the peer reviewed studies. Bull****. Where are the URLs to the peer reviewed studies. The the article reviews. But the peer reviewed studies. You do know what a peer reviewed study is don't you? It is the study itself, not somebody else's editorial on the study. Studies have graphs and descriptions of the data collected and how it was collected. I read "Science" each month and that contains peer reviewed studies. I read various IEEE periodicals that have peer reviewed studies. A peer reviewed study is a study, the actual study, that has been reviewed by peers of the person or persons who performed and wrote the study. Where is the study itself!!!!! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:56 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com