Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 59514	2005-07-04 12:58:00	Health Warning: Smoking May Cause Cancer, Make You Ugly and Make You Impotent	vinref (6194)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
369468	2005-07-06 01:23:00	[QUOTE=KiwiTT_NZ]I would go along with the "Makes you Ugly". Have a look at a woman who has been smoking and she has lost of vertical wrinkles on her upper lip. This can even be seen on TV. If they have the wrinkles you can pretty sure they are or were a regular smoker.[/url] Nothing more off-putting for me than seeing a gorgeous woman light up a cigarette. Even the nomenclature is ugly - cigs, ciggies, smokes, durries, fags, rollies... By the way, what is a chuddie? I keep hearing kiwis say this word.	vinref (6194)
369469	2005-07-06 01:24:00	Well, they do say anything good in life is either illegal, immoral, or fattening Noooooooo - I can think of ONE good thing in life that is neither illegal, fattening or immoral - and yes, it begins with a S and ends with a X. OK, so it can be fattening in certain circumstances. LOL, ROFL sarel That can be immoral and illegal. People go to jail for it all the time.	Metla (12)
369470	2005-07-06 01:29:00	I find women who wear trousers to be off putting, Expecially gorgeous women in trousers. Women who do it near me I decree as pigs, Women who do it nationwide are stupid. Imo it has to stop, Peoiple can't have the right to carry on as they damn well please no matter the fact that it has no bearing on me and that I am just a pretenious ass.	Metla (12)
369471	2005-07-06 02:11:00	Nonsense. I for one am not denying anything. But to be technically correct, its not the nicotine that kills you, its all the other stuff. But again, so what. People are entitled to kill themselves if they want, and also fat people, if its not bothering them then why should it bother you? People disagree on lots of things, hunting, meat eating, driving SUVs, living in Auckland. Should we all be clones? See what I mean? denial that there is even denial taking place :) No one said nicotine kills, but it is the main ingredient causing addiction. Perhaps you may care to deny you are addicted? However we all live in a society where we impact in one way or another on other people, so in actual fact we don't have the freedom extreme supporters of liberty would like us to believe. Why should I have taxes extracted from me to pay for the illness problems arising from self inflicted obesity or nicotine addiction? I still feel guilty for the cost on society my own self-inflicted smoking illness, which is still ongoing :) That picture of Kim Hill posted a while ago illustrates some effects of chain smoking. Any way, enough, Vince Giordano is playing live from Charlie O's Times Square Restaurant at the moment and for the next 2 1/2 hours, that's much more important than this :thumbs:	Terry Porritt (14)
369472	2005-07-06 02:17:00	I suggest you move to Russia if you don't want to suport the health system, I for one am quite happy for my funds to go where needed, And are quite aware that non-smokers fill hospital beds just as well as smokers, even if it is 10 years later in their lifecycle. And I assure that nothing you do short of visiting Wanganui and poking me in the eye with a stick has any possibility on impacting on me in any way shape or form.	Metla (12)
369473	2005-07-06 02:27:00	Don't these smug non-smokers sound like good little xtian boys. At least smokers don't contribute to the road toll. And strange as it may seem to them, they are going to die the same as the rest of us.	JJJJJ (528)
369474	2005-07-06 02:35:00	1) If people are bugged by smoking then they should lobby for de-legalising it in NZ. 2) I bet this country gets far more from tobacco taxes than it spends on smoking related illnesses, and I bet only a small percentage of it goes back into health care. 3) The simple-minded Greens are the first that should be against it, seeing as they're trying to promote their so-called lean, green New Zealand. So should Greenpeace. If people are so bloody-minded against health-harming activities, then breathing itself should be banned - after all, unless you're living on top of Mt Cook, you're bound to be inhaling some sort of noxious airborne material. In fact, being born should be outlawed, because living itself is dangerous and tantamount to exposing one's self to hazards, and/or risking other's lives vis-a-vis misadventure of one kind or another.	Greg (193)
369475	2005-07-06 02:48:00	I consider myself to be a curtious smoker, never smoked in a restraurant, dont smoke in the house(for the kids), exhale away from others, wont smoke in my car if there are non smokers in it . . . . . I really wish all smokers were as considerate as you . Recently I had to work on a couple of computers at a house occupied by two women chain smokers for a few hours . Talk about torture, I could hardly breathe and spent half of the time sneezing my head off . My clothes and hair absolutely stank after leaving and the smell took a few days to leave the car . :yuck: Interestingly enough, after bringing one of their computers home to work on I kept accusing other members of the family of smoking or socialising with smokers and went around sniffing everyone to find out who it was (I have a very acute sense of smell) but could not find the culprit . It wasn't until the next day that I realised that it was the poor computer that reeked of smoke! It was all clogged up with dust inside, which I cleaned out before it went home, that reeked of the stale smoke . :horrified	FoxyMX (5)
369476	2005-07-06 03:17:00	1) If people are bugged by smoking then they should lobby for de-legalising it in NZ. <..snip..> 3) The simple-minded Greens are the first that should be against [smoking], seeing as they're trying to promote their so-called lean, green New Zealand. So should Greenpeace.Now.. your first point is an excellent idea, Who is with me? on 3.. If the Greens lobbied to ban tobacco, they would loose some of the more "free thinking" supporters who, more or less, vote Nandor. -Qyiet	qyiet (6730)
369477	2005-07-06 04:17:00	At least smokers don't contribute to the road toll. Not so sure about that one - especially if smoking while driving, which could provide the same distraction as cellphones. Therefore one may argue that, with other factors held constant, more road accidents and fatalities would actually be caused by smokers than non-smokers. A couple of points from reading earlier posts (and I'm not trying to 'get at' anyone): I, too, don't care if other people choose to smoke. If they are prepared to throw money away to (what I believe to be) unethical companies that make money out of incubating their clients' adverse health effects, then that's their choice. Nothing personal. But what I am against are those who display such arrogance as to pollute other people's airspace without a care in the world as to what other people think - like those lighting up in doorways and bus stops and blowing great jets of smoke into the air, and those that walk along footpaths trailing their smoke behind them. I appreciate the consideration from the likes of Plod - taking care to smoke outside away from non-smokers. I just hope that 'outside' does not mean 'just outside the doorway' so that people have to run a gauntlet of smoke in order to enter or exit a building. The smoking legislation introduced in December has helped to make cafes, pubs & restaurants more pleasant to dine in, but it hasn't quite helped with the 'gauntlet' situation. As for the argument over other things that can contribute to an early death, the effects of people eating unhealthy food has no effect on third parties, so it's not so much of a problem. More of an issue of personal responsibility. As for vehicle exhaust, manufacturers nowadays (and for the last few years) have been striving to engineer their new vehicles with lower emissions and cleaner-burning engines. That excludes the developments in alternative fuels, such as hydrogen tanks and fuel cells. Fuel companies in turn are striving for cleaner-burning fuel with less pollutants. But what efforts are cigarette companies making to make the air cleaner? (And yes, I regularly commute on foot and by bus.) Like many others, I do believe that we live in a free, democratic society. The greater majority of us are non-smokers. Smokers are a minority, therefore I believe the freedom of walking anywhere in public with air free of cigarette smoke is more important than the rights of smokers to smoke where and when they please. Note that this does not mean that I'm against smokers doing what they do - just that their smoking shouldn't be to the detriment of the air quality of non-smokers' airspaces. One more thought: If smokers really want to get the most out of smoking, why don't most of them keep the smoke inside themselves? It seems to be a waste that most of the time the cigarette is smouldering away, and that probably most of the smoke inhaled is soon exhaled. Just my thoughts. Dont take them personally. -D. McG	D. McG (3023)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9