Secondhand smoke is harmless

[supertrunker]

"Well it seems a fairly straightforward cause-and-effect. [really?]

it didn't cause him many [how many?] problems, because I always put down my window a bit to let most of the smoke out."

So you agree there's little danger from SHS, until children are about 9 and then you have to knock it off? Using a car window; so his attendance improved at that age because you drove him to school?

If you then follow my logic and vaping is between 10- 100 - 1000 times safer than smoking, then vape like mad!

T

 

[AndriaD]

"Well it seems a fairly straightforward cause-and-effect. [really?]

it didn't cause him many [how many?] problems, because I always put down my window a bit to let most of the smoke out."

So you agree there's little danger from SHS, until children are about 9 and then you have to knock it off? Using a car window; so his attendance improved at that age because you drove him to school?

If you then follow my logic and vaping is between 10- 100 - 1000 times safer than smoking, then vape like mad!

T

No idea what you're on about, with the 2nd hand smoke. I did the best I could. And I do vape "like mad," at least as much as my asthmatic lungs can handle. And no one ever complains about my 2nd hand vapor.

Andria

 

[ReigntheGamer]

What just happened here? Someone flipped a switch and half the board is at eachothers throat over secondhand smoking?

Man your googlestations - it's article wars!

This. ^^

Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

 

[supertrunker]

No idea what you're on about, with the 2nd hand smoke. I did the best I could. And I do vape "like mad," at least as much as my asthmatic lungs can handle. And no one ever complains about my 2nd hand vapor.

Andria

The top two lines were quoting you Andria, and i know the troubles you have had getting to where you are today. But that does not make it scientific fact.

Kind regards

T

 

[jdm1982]

i don't need to see a scientific study to have a general idea that its far from harmless.

if its written on the net, its got to be true, right?

45000 deaths annually in canada alone. if its that deadly to breath in first hand, i cannot see how its virtually harmless after its exhailed.

if you need a scientist to tell you that, then best of luck to you.

 

[Lessifer]

I can't believe anyone would say or think that second hand vaping is harmless. To me it just sounds like an exuse to continue vaping.
Does this statement sound familiar? is it true?
What I find hard to believe is that people are willing to believe government institutions about smoking yet think they are lying to us about vaping. They are either trustworthy and vaping is bad or they are willing to lie for political reasons in which case the least you can do is look at the evidence and make an informed decision rather than just believing everything you hear.

Main difference being there is no sidestream vapor, unless your mod is auto firing, and then you have bigger issues to worry about. To me it's all about risk levels. Some of my decisions are based on science, some on rational speculation.

 

[supertrunker]

i don't need to see a scientific study to have a general idea that its far from harmless.

if its written on the net, its got to be true, right?

45000 deaths annually in canada alone. if its that deadly to breath in first hand, i cannot see how its virtually harmless after its exhailed.

if you need a scientist to tell you that, then best of luck to you.

I do need that, maybe move to a place with a lower death rate?

Deaths, estimates, by province and territory

Where do you get your figures from?

T

 

[jdm1982]

I do need that, maybe move to a place with a lower death rate?

Deaths, estimates, by province and territory

Where do you get your figures from?

T

directly from the surgeons general warning that was on the cigarette packs id buy. i guess big tobacco was overestimating there death tolls?sounds likely.

 

[Rickajho]

Why is second hand smoke being discussed on a Vape forum?

Bcuz - in case you haven't noticed - the ANTZ have already been trying to make a short-hop connection that exhaled vapor is the "same thing" as second hand smoke and should be banned accordingly.

i know a girl that didnt smoke a day in her life and died of lung cancer. she lived with a pack a day smoker.granted people can get cancer regardless, thats enough anecdotal evidence i need to know you don't want to be breathing in 'harmless' second hand smoke

This is Elaine Keller's take on lies and statstics about that. http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ut-my-dad-has-lung-cancer-6.html#post14139702

The reality is 65% of lung cancer cases are attributable to never smokers and ex-smokers, even long term ex-smokers. Although smoking does increase your odds, the more realistic bottom line is if you have a pair of lungs you have a statistical chance of getting lung cancer - smoker, second hand exposure, or not. The typical problem with trying to parse out the "research" is the lack of direct evidence provided regarding the second hand smoke theories.

 

[jdm1982]

lol ok, keep fighting the good fight folks. believe what you want to believe. I can only speak for myself.what chances you want to take based on internet articles is totally your call. I take the chance on vaping, you guys think sitting around breathing second hand smoke is a non-risk. to each there own.

 

[Frank Castle]

Smoking and second hand smoke has been blamed for everything from respiratory problems to cancer, hair loss, and erectile dysfunction. Is it overdone? Yeah. Sure, the anti smoking people have overdone it to the point that I, for one, just want them to shut up. Seriously, if there was a nuclear war tomorrow and humans managed to survive there would be a few that "linked" the event to smoking.

This does not mean that smoking or second hand smoke is harmless. It just takes simple logic. You cannot spend your life breathing in smoke all the time without effect to yourself and those around you. Like JDM just said, you place your bets where you want. I will place mine on the vape.

 

[supertrunker]

i quantify risk thus: vaping < SHS < smoking < eating the wife's cooking!



T

 

[jdm1982]

also, to the gentleman asking where i got such numbers, this is where;


noted, its based on the year ;1996. that i did not realize before.

if thats an overblown number, i cannot argue that point one way or the other. im just showing where i seen it.

 

[supertrunker]

nice to see the figures from 1996!

T

 

[jdm1982]

nice to see the figures from 1996!

T

so the 45000 deaths are null and void because it was 1996.

point taken.

 

[supertrunker]

People die whether they smoke or not. Always.

The premise of the thread is to debate whether SHS causes it or is harmless. I've seen no evidence that suggests it is harmful anymore than farting in public.

T

 

[danibanani]

I thought this link was interesting. And if you scroll down the page, there is information on e-cigs as well:
Cardiovascular Effects of Secondhand Smoke

This article on e-cigs was interesting as well:
E-Cigarettes

 

[supertrunker]

Stanton Glanz! ahh yeah!

Stanton Glantz – liar or innumerate? New evidence says: both! | Anti-THR Lies and related topics

t

 

[jdm1982]

People die whether they smoke or not. Always.

The premise of the thread is to debate whether SHS causes it or is harmless. I've seen no evidence that suggests it is harmful anymore than farting in public.

T

and you have come to the logical conclusion that no one was ever legitimitely harmed by second hand smoke. gotcha. to each there own i guess.

 

[WattWick]

People die whether they smoke or not. Always.

The premise of the thread is to debate whether SHS causes it or is harmless. I've seen no evidence that suggests it is harmful anymore than farting in public.

T

Ever seen a ceiling yellowed by farts? If yes, please don't answer. I don't want to know.