Planning a smoking area?

[Gandelf]

Yeah but it's been a very entertaining thread!
& Moley said he hates all smokers which is a totally uncool thing to say which is why he's last. Luckily he has good taste in music else I'd have to go round hammering all his grassy hummocks

OK then, I really, really, really despise, loath, hate all smokers and think they should all be rounded up, put on an island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, then a a nuclear bomb dropped on them.

I also like The Monkees, The Beatles, Kate Bush, Peter Gabriel and Jamiroquai.

...and I started this thread.

Does that make an difference to the overall positions?

[Sharkith]

Now your talking. Most of the science on percpetions of risk is really interesting the difference between the experts and the public in particular are interesting. Like I said above Gandelf you cannot avoid risk. A tiny proportion of risk associated with cigarette smoke is a big thing for you but you regularly expose your self and others in this life to much much greater risk when you hop into your car. Is that acceptible to you? How many people must die before we ban car use?

Can you see the paradox?

/hands Gandy the pipe to smoke with him....

[Gandelf]

Now your talking. Most of the science on percpetions of risk is really interesting the difference between the experts and the public in particular are interesting. Like I said above Gandelf you cannot avoid risk. A tiny proportion of risk associated with cigarette smoke is a big thing for you but you regularly expose your self and others in this life to much much greater risk when you hop into your car.

Can you see the paradox?

/hands Gandy the pipe to smoke with him....

I guess that makes me a hypocrite then? I can live with that. Ban smokers first, then we can move onto something new.

[Sharkith]

I guess that makes me a hypocrite then? I can live with that. Ban smokers first, then we can move onto something new.

Not at all Gandelf it makes things what you already knew. Life is complicated and full of contradictions. Risk is an important part of life and cannot be avoided completely. We should change what we can but try not to victimise others whilst we do it. Well thats how I would conclude.

[Elrandhir]

I guess that makes me a hypocrite then? I can live with that. Ban smokers first, then we can move onto something new.

True, why add more to an already pretty high risk of getting a bad illness.

I don't really care about people who smoke though, unless they do so in the same room as me, ban the Tobacco itself is what they should do, because it dosent add anything but bad health.

I am a Tobacco user, and I still say this, my use don't effect others atall though because it's Snuff, but it's still something that is bad for you'r body, even though it aint as bad as smokeing.

People in this Thread make loads of excuses it seems, and anyone who does that can never be right.

[Labbe]

Xest, people like you make me sleep bad at night. No sleep can cause illness/accidents that can lead to death
I vote for a ban.

[Ovi]

Ban smokers first, then we can move onto something new.

Nooo, we should ban smokers AND look at other things.

There are a lot of smokers here who seem to be intent on justifying smoking because other things are bad for you too. Of course that is true, but that isn't a reason why smoking shouldn't be banned, that is a separate argument.

Also the basic risk does make a difference. If you have 1% chance of getting cancer and smoking increase that chance by 25% you now have 1.25% chance. If the basic risk is 50% the same 25% increase now puts you at 62.5%.

I might consider that I will accept the 0.25% chance, considering what I would get out of smoking, however with the 12.5% chance I may well think that's too much.

[Haarewin]

isnt the chance of developing cancer 33.3%? 1 in 3 people or something along those lines. so if smoking increases your risk by '25%' to developing cancer, the risk is then ~41%. (according to cancer research UK, smoking increases the risk by 29%, so the "risk of developing cancer" would be more like ~43%).

[Elrandhir]

isnt the chance of developing cancer 33.3%? 1 in 3 people or something along those lines. so if smoking increases your risk by '25%' to developing cancer, the risk is then ~41%. (according to cancer research UK, smoking increases the risk by 29%, so the "risk of developing cancer" would be more like ~43%).

It is probably something like that yes, it is very common that we do get it sometime in our lifetime nowadays.

And if you smoke alot I could see 29% to be accurate also, I don't think people realise how common it actually is, but they should more or less everyone knows people who have had it or died in Cancer.

I know that it aint 1% Chance as some have said, thats for sure.

[Sharkith]

Not according to the rates published here:

http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/incidence/risk/?a=5441

It is considerably less than your both claiming. A 25% increase is not that significant or meaningful to be honest.