Cigar Weekly

cigarfan · 02-10-2005, 08:56 PM

For full details, check out CigarCyclopedia.com , Feb 10 News and Views.

The British Medical Journal published a study, led by Imperial College (London, England) researcher Dr. Paolo Vineis..dealing with 2nd hand smoke in 10 European countries.
Although his studies of a particular group (ages 35-74) finds incidents of lung cancer, upper respiratory cancer and deaths from emphysema, the GRAND total (according to his figures) comes to ..one tenth of one percent. (.01 percent).
Yet this percentage is not mentioned, and the study concludes that smoking is dangerous, and passive smoking is 30% more likely to cause cancer than for non smokers.
Who's blowing smoke, now?

I encourage you folks to read this article, it's very interesting.
I've had read of similar studies that not only don't support studies on 2nd hand smoke causing cancer, but completely contradict the studies that conclude this. Yet we don't see much publicity about these studies.

BTW, I don't smoke cigarettes, or represent ANY tobacco company in any way, shape or form. Nor am I suggesting smoking cigarettes is not harmful to the smoker's health. Just talking about the 2nd hand smoke issue here.
I'm fed up with all the prejudice against smokers, even cigarette smokers, cause the prejudice filters over to cigar smokers too. It's very aggravating that all the facts are not being published. Guess that wouldn't be PC.

gui_tarzan · 02-11-2005, 04:21 AM

Could it be that Euro cigarettes don't have the same additives in them American cigarettes do? Just a thought.

sd_smoker · 02-11-2005, 07:06 AM

The WHO (World Health Organization) performed a study a few years back that showed that statistically there was no real risk associated with second hand smoke. Since those weren't the results they were hoping for, they kept quiet about it hoping no one would notice.

You can read the details here: http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html

02-11-2005, 03:16 PM

The more noise thise govt agancies make about second hand smoke the more they can avoid the real problems with Radon and Deisel fuel. mb

cigarfan · 02-11-2005, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by uncle mikey

The more noise thise govt agancies make about second hand smoke the more they can avoid the real problems with Radon and Deisel fuel. mb

So....the govt is using a "smokescreen"?

02-11-2005, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cigarfan

Quote:

Originally Posted by uncle mikey

The more noise thise govt agancies make about second hand smoke the more they can avoid the real problems with Radon and Deisel fuel. mb

So....the govt is using a "smokescreen"?

A good point. But it's hurtin all us out here. mb

schuellk · 02-11-2005, 03:43 PM

Unfortunately, they don't even have much of a case with diesel fuel any more. The emissions requirements for new production engines, particularly in California, are requiring cleaner air coming out of the exhaust pipe than goes into the intake. (again, LA is one of the most hypocritical on this subject).

Mowee · 02-11-2005, 08:00 PM

When OSHA did a study of 2nd hand smoke they found out non smoking restaurants had more smoke than smoking ones. The smoking ones had air cleaners...non smoking ones did not. And there was more ETS in the non smoking cuz of food prep than in smoking ones. What a crock.

cigarfan · 02-11-2005, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mowee

When OSHA did a study of 2nd hand smoke they found out non smoking restaurants had more smoke than smoking ones. The smoking ones had air cleaners...non smoking ones did not. And there was more ETS in the non smoking cuz of food prep than in smoking ones. What a crock.

This is the first I've heard of this. But let some half cocked study get published, and we'll get part of the story..plastered everywhere.

02-12-2005, 05:44 AM

I think as adults, (except for fvfanmc LOL), we would all agree that the hobby we enjoy may not be as healthy as breathing clear o2 but it is after all an adult choice.

More then the issue of health and profits for insurance companies, has to be the issue of Freedom of Choice. A business person who makes the choice to invest his/her capitol shold have the choice to determine who they want as customers. Should a restaurant or bar owner choose to be smoke free then I have a choice wheather or not to frequent that establishment. When law comes into effect banning that recreation I no longer have a choice.

One might argue that this society is governed by majority rule but are we smokers really in the minority? When our government posts figures as to the number of smokers in the US they include children under the age of 18 therefore making the number of smokers appear lower. In reality that group of children and seniors over the age of 70 (who for health reasons have stopped smoking along with a variety of other endeavours), are taken out of the mix then smokers more closely represent a higher number of the adult population. This fact concealed causes smokers to have voting apathy and therefor our voices are not really heard. mb

02-10-2005, 08:56 PM	#1
cigarfan Herf God Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Mississippi Posts: 10,822	New 2nd Hand Smoke study: Who's blowing smoke? For full details, check out CigarCyclopedia.com , Feb 10 News and Views. The British Medical Journal published a study, led by Imperial College (London, England) researcher Dr. Paolo Vineis..dealing with 2nd hand smoke in 10 European countries. Although his studies of a particular group (ages 35-74) finds incidents of lung cancer, upper respiratory cancer and deaths from emphysema, the GRAND total (according to his figures) comes to ..one tenth of one percent. (.01 percent). Yet this percentage is not mentioned, and the study concludes that smoking is dangerous, and passive smoking is 30% more likely to cause cancer than for non smokers. Who's blowing smoke, now? I encourage you folks to read this article, it's very interesting. I've had read of similar studies that not only don't support studies on 2nd hand smoke causing cancer, but completely contradict the studies that conclude this. Yet we don't see much publicity about these studies. BTW, I don't smoke cigarettes, or represent ANY tobacco company in any way, shape or form. Nor am I suggesting smoking cigarettes is not harmful to the smoker's health. Just talking about the 2nd hand smoke issue here. I'm fed up with all the prejudice against smokers, even cigarette smokers, cause the prejudice filters over to cigar smokers too. It's very aggravating that all the facts are not being published. Guess that wouldn't be PC. __________________ It's not an optical illusion, it just looks like one.

02-11-2005, 04:21 AM	#2
gui_tarzan Herf God Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The 26th state Posts: 28,796	Could it be that Euro cigarettes don't have the same additives in them American cigarettes do? Just a thought. __________________ Jim...<>< The four most dangerous words in the US government: "and for other purposes" I am an AJ Fernandez ho...

02-11-2005, 07:06 AM	#3
sd_smoker Club Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: OKC Posts: 4,336	The WHO (World Health Organization) performed a study a few years back that showed that statistically there was no real risk associated with second hand smoke. Since those weren't the results they were hoping for, they kept quiet about it hoping no one would notice. You can read the details here: http://www.davehitt.com/facts/who.html __________________ "Personal charisma is a force that undermines institutions as often as it sustains them. Political institutions need the more reliable buttresses of tradition and duty. Mass emotionalism and celebrity-worship are hostile to any constitutional system."

02-11-2005, 08:00 PM	#8
Mowee Contributing Editor Club Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Dallas, TX USA Posts: 2,782	When OSHA did a study of 2nd hand smoke they found out non smoking restaurants had more smoke than smoking ones. The smoking ones had air cleaners...non smoking ones did not. And there was more ETS in the non smoking cuz of food prep than in smoking ones. What a crock. __________________ Herfin in Dallas? Let us know! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dfw-cigarsociety/

02-11-2005, 03:16 PM	#4
uncle mikey Guest Posts: n/a	The more noise thise govt agancies make about second hand smoke the more they can avoid the real problems with Radon and Deisel fuel. mb

02-11-2005, 03:43 PM	#7
schuellk Club Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 1,151	Unfortunately, they don't even have much of a case with diesel fuel any more. The emissions requirements for new production engines, particularly in California, are requiring cleaner air coming out of the exhaust pipe than goes into the intake. (again, LA is one of the most hypocritical on this subject).

02-12-2005, 05:44 AM	#10
uncle mikey Guest Posts: n/a	I think as adults, (except for fvfanmc LOL), we would all agree that the hobby we enjoy may not be as healthy as breathing clear o2 but it is after all an adult choice. More then the issue of health and profits for insurance companies, has to be the issue of Freedom of Choice. A business person who makes the choice to invest his/her capitol shold have the choice to determine who they want as customers. Should a restaurant or bar owner choose to be smoke free then I have a choice wheather or not to frequent that establishment. When law comes into effect banning that recreation I no longer have a choice. One might argue that this society is governed by majority rule but are we smokers really in the minority? When our government posts figures as to the number of smokers in the US they include children under the age of 18 therefore making the number of smokers appear lower. In reality that group of children and seniors over the age of 70 (who for health reasons have stopped smoking along with a variety of other endeavours), are taken out of the mix then smokers more closely represent a higher number of the adult population. This fact concealed causes smokers to have voting apathy and therefor our voices are not really heard. mb