Smoking ban

[Zigs]

I smoke roll ups & the occasional 10 lambert & butlers. They have made it as awkward as possible for smokers in the past few years.

 

Don't think they apreciate the £10 Billion a year smokers pay towards the economy.

[Sportsman]

Sportsman,

 

I have no idea any longer (maybe never). This was 1976. Somewhere in the far East I heard that (repeated many times). My sponsor was British Tobacco Co and I was selling "Western American" (cowboy) tobacco throughout the Pacific Rim.

 

Frankly, after briefly reading, I still believe my "stuff" equal to, or to a greater extent, than yours.

 

Phone

 

I'll tell you why. At that time in Bangkok life expetancy was 54-55. Not enough time for lung cancer.

 

You are absolutely right.

When people quote statistics on death rates from this, that or the other they often "forget" that people die of other things too.

The classic is cholesterol.

It is always claimed that having high cholesterols levels causes heart disease (wrong, but never mind) and that lowering cholesterol levels chemically with statins will protect you from heart disease.

What they don't tell you is that lowering cholesterol increases the risk of dying from stroke and certain types of cancer and that men of of a certain age are statistically likely to live longer if they have high cholesterol levels.

Statistics can be manipulated to suit the purposes of anyone who is paying for them

[Steve Walker]

I don't smoke and if you come to my house neither will you

 

You should market that as a cure for tobacco addiction, you'd have a queue a mile long of people wanting to be non-smokers

[Steve Walker]

Statistics can be manipulated to suit the purposes of anyone who is paying for them

 

I blame that Richard Doll, bloody epidemiologists.

[Sportsman]

I blame that Richard Doll, bloody epidemiologists.

 

Can you imagine what might have happened if:

1 Richard Doll was slightly less scrupulous than he undoubtedly was

2 His research was funded by the tobacco companies

 

This is the current situation with statins, heart disease and pharmaceutical companies

[Andrew]

Statistics can be manipulated to suit the purposes of anyone who is paying for them

 

 

I wonder who is the biggest offender for manipulating stats is/are

 

a bit, sorry.

 

Classic one is.

Unemployed and claiming benefits, what about the unempoyed who cannot claim the dole benefits, manipulation of stats for the unemployed maybe

[Ken L]

Don't think they apreciate the £10 Billion a year smokers pay towards the economy.

 

Well, it costs the NHS £5 Billion a year to treat smoking related illnesses.

Then there's the £2 Billion a year cost to industry though smoking related absence.

Then of course, there's the cost of disability benefits (DLA and IB/ESA) for those with smoking related COPD, Heart Disease, Atherosclerosis, Oral and Lung Cancers and many other related conditions. Sadly I can't find a figure for that but suspect that it will be well into the billions. Not forgetting the cost of carers allowance for the relatives of those claiming the disability benefits.

Edit: And the cost of disabled persons tax credits for those working whilst claiming smoking related DLA.

Then there's the cost of local authority care for those disabled by their smoking and again I can't find figures for that.

 

All in all, it looks like the case for smokers supporting the economy is a bit thin.

 

as for stopping me smoking in my own personal property they can go to hell.

Very funny. There are tens of thousands of people can't smoke in their very own personal proberty because to do so would contraviene their rent agreement and see them turfed out of their home. I see them smoking on their own doorsteps in the middle of winter.

 

Back on topic.

In the last 12 months, I have twice been temporarily blinded whilst cycling on busy roads because someone has flicked ash out of a car window in front of me. I would happily see smoking in cars banned tomorrow.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Ken L

[Clifftop]

I wonder who is the biggest offender for manipulating stats is/are

 

a bit, sorry.

 

Classic one is.

Unemployed and claiming benefits, what about the unempoyed who cannot claim the dole benefits, manipulation of stats for the unemployed maybe

 

 

The unemployment figures are manipulated here. Work for one hour and you're not counted as unemployed.

 

 

1. The ABS definition of employed is: Persons aged 15 years and over who, during the reference week:

 

worked for one hour or more for pay, profit, commission or payment in kind in a job or business, or on a farm (comprising employees, employers and own account workers); or

worked for one hour or more without pay in a family business or on a farm (i.e. contributing family workers); or

were employees who had a job but were not at work and were:

away from work for less than four weeks up to the end of the reference week; or

away from work for more than four weeks up to the end of the reference week and received pay for some or all of the four weeks up to the end of the reference week; or

away from work as a standard work or shift arrangement; or

on strike or lock out; or

on workers' compensation and expected to return to their job; or

were employers or own account workers, who had a job, business or farm, but were not at work.

 

Re- Smoking. as an ex 60 a day smoker sometimes it's a bugger just trying to breath normal.

Smoking is such a huge revenue raiser that it will never be banned.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Clifftop

[Phone]

Ken L,

 

First, total BS.

 

Second, it doesn't cost NHS a thin dime.

You haven't it figured out yet that "government" (health care or otherwise) can't generate income. It's my money. While I'm at it STOP SPENDING IT will you?

Your last sentence may have just topped the all time "Phoneism". I pride myself on being quite good.

 

Andrew,

 

While I am - - - I'd still have to say religion is on top of the heap in that catagory. If not at manipulating then certainly extrapolating "facts".

 

Phone

(I don't know the equivalent of "a thin dime" in £)

[Sportsman]

If taxpayers spend more on treating tobacco related illness than tobacco sales raise in taxes then tobacco can not be said to be a net contributor, which was the claim being made.