| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Sid the manager |
Posted - 20 June 2007 : 11:04:48
Hello Boy Yes Yes Have The old skinny heads at Haslands sorted anything out for us chuffers at the club does anyone know ??
Hello |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Rolfy |
Posted - 06 July 2007 : 12:57:54
OK, not sure about the American study, if you could send me the link i'll read it, but the IARC/WHO view is as follows. "Involuntary smoking (exposure to secondhand or 'environmental' tobacco smoke) is carcinogenic to
humans (Group 1)." Group 1 contains substances which are carcinogenic to humans and includes asbestos, ****nic, formaldehyde, solar radiation, aluminium, radium, plutonium, mustard gas, HIV and many more. 69 group 1 chemicals are found in cigarette smoke. The report on carcinogenicity of secondhand smoke was updated in 2004, and is available here. http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/volume83.pdf
...and millsey, i've got 2 degrees... |
| joemills |
Posted - 06 July 2007 : 10:47:48
Yeah Rolfy, Yeah!!
Give someone a degree and a badge and they turn into Hitler.
|
| Sid the manager |
Posted - 06 July 2007 : 09:09:28
Yes Yes Mr Rolty Head You ask who conducted the research well the two biggest studies were carried out in 1998 by the World Health Organisation & International Agency for Research on Cancer,and in 2003 a 40 year long study into 35,000 none smokers living with smokers carried out by the American Cancer Society was completed in each case evidence inescapably showed that passive smoking posed no significant risk. The American Cancer Society refused to allow the report to be published an only did so after a lenghty cout case.
Sir Richard Doll own Comment in 2001 "The effects of other peoples tabacco smoke even in a confined area is so small thatit doesnt worry me" (this is from the report that is so readily quoted by the anti smoking lobby although only the bits that suit them.
As a medical practitioner and obviously intellegent man you must admit that at least the claims made by the anti smokers are at least disputable
Yes Yes I am in danger of becoming a policytition
Hello
How do any of your surveys compare to these |
| budgie |
Posted - 05 July 2007 : 21:41:13
You can't trust medical practitioners. They can't even make a good bomb or set fire to themselves properly.
Who's a pretty boy then??? |
| halifaxbeest |
Posted - 05 July 2007 : 12:35:45
"think for yourself light up". You little tinker, thought you'd sneak irony past me!
I just called to say I love MMUUURRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH 3:-O |
| Sid the manager |
Posted - 05 July 2007 : 09:23:50
Yes Yes Sadam I would take you up on that but I am supposed to have yellow teeth smell like a steam engine and be unattractive to women just like Stu Cormack and Mick Armstrong. I have been off work twice in my life once for a rupture and once with a broken leg, apart from that I have never had a day off so Mr medical practitioner think of your health dont get head washed think for yourself light up.
Yes Yes Hello |
| Sid the manager |
Posted - 05 July 2007 : 09:22:43
Yes Yes Sadam I would take you up on that but I am supposed to have yellow teeth smell like a steam engine and be unattractive to women just like Stu Cormack and Mick Armstrong. I have been off work twice in my life once for a rupture and once with a broken leg, apart from that I have never had a day off so Mr medical practitioner think of your health dont get head washed think for yourself light up.
Yes Yes Hello |
| Rolfy |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 16:16:20
quote:
Originally posted by Nerve Gas
Sid I'd ask you round to my house for a smoke, but I can't find it!
It wasn't me
...lost in a cloud of smoke!! |
| Nerve Gas |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 15:03:48
Sid I'd ask you round to my house for a smoke, but I can't find it!
It wasn't me |
| legaulois |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 13:50:07
Rolfy it will probably get built at the same time as the floodlights !! Lol
|
| Rolfy |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 13:06:39
I can't do the building, just advice on what complies with the legislation etc. They said they would appreciate the advice, but haven't heard anything back. Have also offered to do food safety and health and safety audits of the club, but still waiting to hear.
And i don't have a political bias, but i am a health practitioner and anything which has the potential to improve the health of the population as much as this has my support. |
| Ze German |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 11:56:28
Rolfy,
What did the club say about your proposal to build Sid his own personal bus shelter? |
| Sid the manager |
Posted - 04 July 2007 : 11:45:59
Yes Yes mr beeatsy head I understand that a lot of people like to be in a smoke free atmosphere and best of luck to them there are plenty of ways this can be achieved without the completely over the top way the government has gone about this. I am a big supporter of the Derby rugby club and so are a lot of other smokers I for one WILL withdraw my support from any organisation that does not at least try to accomodate smokers, its not a matter of smoking its about my right to do somthing that is not against the law.
I have no real political bias as you oviously have, Regards the surveys you ask who commissioned them this government commissioned 75 into the effect of smoking as I have already said thgis government has only used the 18 who found a link the other 57 are ignored but thats no surprise remember the Iraq dossiers
the world bank is a bank of statistics its non political and is regarded as the definative record of statistics.
Anyway I am glad this has started some activity during a dull close season have you any thoughts on what we should all ban next
Hello |
| Rolfy |
Posted - 03 July 2007 : 17:14:30
quote:
Originally posted by Sid the manager
Yes Yes boy no figures well that figures, since 2001 there have been 75 studies comissioned to establish links between smoking and cancer 51 of them found no link and 6 found that you were less likely to suffer cancer if you smoked that leaves 18 who found a link ????
Japan has the HIGHEST per head tobacco consumption in the world it also has the LOWEST rate of cancer and heart disease How does that work.
But consider another thought the government has taken the rights of 14 million smokers away. will it be one of your rights next? already we have the start of attacks by the lobby brigade on alchohol, fishing, music in pubs, boxing and oh yes RUGBY
BUT ITS A FREE COUNTRY
Log on www.freedom2choose.co.uk
Yes Yes Hello
So where is this research, and how does it compare to the 70 odd studies that i directed you to? and who exactly were they commission by?
The government hasn't taken the rights of 14m smokers away, it is protecting the rights of all the people who were subjected to secondhand smoke in their workplace. If you read the human rights act is says that you are entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of your priovacy, as long as it doesn't adversely affect anyone else. so you are still able to sit at home and smoke yourself to death or go outside where the affect is diminished somewhat, but you shouldn't be doing it in places where you are affecting other people, many of whom are doing low paid jobs because they have to. is their health less important than others?
i quite like rubbing bits of asbestos together to see the dust it gives off, and i'm perfectly entitled to do this at home, but imagine if i came and did it at your place of work. secondhand smoke has been shown to contain over 50 chemicals which are carcinogenic, including polonium 210 and benzene, nice
i do however understand that smokers do still want to smoke and we could do with the money, so i have offered my services to the club to help set up a smoking shelter of some description, it seems to me a section of the balcony could have a roof added pretty easily to make it a smoking shelter. otherwise, as norm says there's plenty of outside you can use
|
| sadam |
Posted - 03 July 2007 : 15:46:08
quote:
Originally posted by halifaxbeest
......attempting to murder en masse?
I just called to say I love MMUUURRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHH 3:-O
All is not lost!!!! You still have mass murder!!! ahhhh I can sleep, headless but happy. |
