Smoking ban and Smokers

It is very true. When was the last time you saw someone playing Russian roulette? Never would be my guess, because frankly Russian roulette is so extremely dangerous that people won’t play it.

Ten seconds on YouTube will net you videos of Eastern Europeans / Russians doing one-handed pull-ups at the top of 100m tall chimneys.  People solo climb without protection (and plenty have died as a result).  BASE jumping is largely illegal for much the same reason, the wind changes direction and it’s game over.  And of course, a syringe full of Class A never near-instantaneously killed anyone ever.

Unless you’re going to do the Ernie Pin-Dance over the definition of “extremely dangerous” vs merely “dangerous,” people do extremely dangerous shit all the time.

Because really, that’s all I’d ask.  If someone wants to smoke, at least make a token effort to stand downwind, or wait 15 minutes between tabs whilst I shove a bowl of fries down.  Then put their dog end in the bin rather than pinging it across the floor.  Is a modicum of consideration for others such an outrageous request?

So you’re accusing all smokers of is being inconsiderate bastards. When I smoked I wouldn’t have dreamt of lighting a fag in a beer garden if someone was having a meal at the next table on account of not being a ****. I’d say that 99% smokers wouldn’t either

So what you need isn’t a law against smoking in beer gardens, it’s a law against people being selfish inconsiderate  ****s

That might be difficult to enforce

Maybe you and others might want to have a word with yourselves about demonising a group of people (was it 17% of the population TJ. quoted?) on the strength of lazy sweeping generalisations?

just a thought

selfish inconsiderate ****s

That might be difficult to enforce

Yeah, as a cyclist and a driver, I can confirm this.

Passive smoking in beer gardens harms anyone who is unlucky enough to inhale the second hand smoke. Please can you point me to some research that shows passive smoking doesn’t harm anyone?

I find this whole concept of “2nd hand smoke” quite interesting, and somewhat puzzling, and think this is pretty much being used out of context and a buzz word to justify an argument.

Perhaps it has legs were the smoker and passive smoker were locked in a room together, but not in the open air, where it dissipates almost instantly, and is diluted by many millions per part.

I can accept that if you are sitting in a beer garden and can smell smoke, that doesnt necessarily mean that you are receiving or inhaling actual smoke. I mean that we can smell bacon cooking, but is that bad for you ?, given that bacon contains nitrates, which are known to be carcinogenic. But just because you can smell it is a far stretch of the imagination to suggest you are being harmed by it.

I’m a non smoker, recently quit(10 months) and now vaping away quite happily.

if you can smell it then you are inhaling it.  thats how the sense of smell worksd

Of course the risks are much lower than being in an enclosed space with a chain smoker but they are not zero

if you can smell it then you are inhaling it.  thats how the sense of smell worksd

That’s not how it works

Of course the risks are much lower than being in an enclosed space with a chain smoker but they are not zero

Lets ban everything then eh? Especially Llama’s

Unless you’re going to do the Ernie Pin-Dance over the definition of “extremely dangerous” vs merely “dangerous,”

It was you that was challenging my definition of extremely dangerous…. not the other way round!

Yeah extremely dangerous for me would be if a packet of cigarettes were likely to kill you, or someone else smoking in a beer garden.

The reality is that you can smoke two packets of cigarettes a day for twenty or thirty years and it won’t necessarily kill you. So smoking is dangerous but not as dangerous as some people appear to be suggesting.

Smoking is dangerous but the problem is that you can smoke a great deal for a very long time without necessarily dying from it, or even suffering serious long-term irreversible damage, if you stop after years of doing it.

When I go to the doctor now, they don’t ask me “do you smoke?” The question they ask is “have you ever smoked?”

That is why it is an unhealthy and dangerous habit which is so difficult to stamp out…… it doesn’t kill a large amount of people very quickly.

Well, yes. It kills a large amount of people very slowly, as you suggest. And sometimes, as is often the way with these things, it’s all fine right up until the point that it isn’t.

You can add my dad to that list. He was perfectly fine, sat at home watching Eggheads and answering all the questions. He lost his mind like throwing a light switch. Shat himself and went doolally, *snap* just like that, vascular dementia.

He was in hospital for two years (which is a whole other much longer story), they managed to save his foot but had to amputate his big toe in order to stop the necrosis spreading and I think they also took a lump out of his heel. His bed routinely looked like a butcher’s table from where leg ulcers had pissed blood and pus straight through fresh dressings, the hospital staff gave up changing the bedding (and before anyone starts, I caught them out on this by taking photographs on successive days).

On his eventual release from hospital he went to a care home for another two years before he finally checked out.  Why?  Because he’d smoked all his life since he was a child.

Indeed Ernesto. I smoked 20 B&H a day for 30+ years, so just imagine my disappointment at still being alive? I thought my extended, decades long suicide attempt would have taken at least a few innocent bystanders with me, like a really, really slow motion suicide bomber

EDIT: @Cougar – I’m really sorry about your dad, but people are free to make their own decisions and do stupid things. I’ve based my life on stupidity. There has to be a balance. As the ‘war on drugs’ has shown us, banning everything is just a complete waste of time and resources, when there are much more effective way to deal with things

What health issues associated with vaping? I’ll tell you what… if there are any proven ones it’s a damn site less than smoking 20 B&H a day.

It’s almost certainly better than smoking 20 a day you’re right, but in order to have long-term data one first needs, well, long-term data. It’s not that long ago that tobacco companies were advertising which brand doctors recommended.

It was you that was challenging my definition of extremely dangerous…. not the other way round!

Huh?  I didn’t challenge anything of the sort. You said “if it was extremely dangerous no one would actually do it” which is clearly not the case.

It’s not that long ago that tobacco companies were advertising which brand doctors recommended.

It’s at the very least 50 years ago

Believe me, you notice the difference between smoking and not smoking, even if you’re still vaping. Worlds apart

Why? Because he’d smoked all his life since he was a child

Which is exactly my point. I don’t know how old your dad was when he passed away but he smoked all his life from his childhood before smoking eventually killed him.

Now put that thought into the context of people claiming that their health is allegedly at risk because sitting outside in a beer garden someone is having a cigarette.

The only reason I gave up a very heavy addiction to nicotine is precisely because I know it is dangerous. It took me many years and many attempts, now I don’t smoke nor do I vape. But I would definitely drive down to the shop right now and buy a packet of fags if I didn’t know how dangerous it is. There is no other reason that I don’t.

But let’s not exaggerate the dangers of smoking. To give context to how dangerous smoking is think of this…… ONE bacon roll is the equivalent of FOUR cigarettes with regards to shortening your life expectancy.

Or in other words smoking three cigarettes is less dangerous to your health than eating a bacon roll.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p049b6b0#:~:text=Chris%20explains%20that%20the%20cancer,terms%20of%20shortening%20life%20expectancy.

I didn’t challenge anything of the sort. You said “if it was extremely dangerous no one would actually do it” which is clearly not the case.

Yeah you did. Extremely dangerous for me is having a cardiac arrest or hitting a lamp post at 70mph.

If smoking was at that level of dangerous no one would actually do it.

You decided to challenge my definition of extremely dangerous. Which is fine of course, but it is a bit rich to talk of “Ernie Pin-Dance” as if it was me that was challenging the definition of extremely dangerous.

EDIT: @Cougar – I’m really sorry about your dad, but people are free to make their own decisions and do stupid things.

I appreciate that, but it’s unnecessary.  We never particularly got on, it was best for all concerned – including himself – when he died.

Now put that thought into the context of people claiming that their health is allegedly at risk because sitting outside in a beer garden someone is having a cigarette.

Is anyone actually claiming that?  Or is it a strawman argument from smokers and apologist ex-smokers?

Personally, my only beef is that it’s unpleasant and many – I would go so far as to say most, even – smokers are incapable of cleaning up after themselves.  As I said earlier, we went to a pub beer garden this weekend (including two smokers amongst our party).  Despite there being an ashtray in the centre of the table, the table was covered in ash.  There’s just no need for it.

Or in other words smoking three cigarettes is less dangerous to your health than eating a bacon roll.

A poor argument to make to a vegetarian. (-:

Extremely dangerous for me is having a cardiac arrest or hitting a lamp post at 70mph.

Which is why no-one eats lard or drives.

You decided to challenge my definition of extremely dangerous. Which is fine of course, but it is a bit rich to talk of “Ernie Pin-Dance” as if it was me that was challenging the definition of extremely dangerous.

No I didn’t.  Rather, I tried to pre-empt exactly this sort of distraction-tactic response.

Is anyone actually claiming that?

Claiming what….. that smoking in a beer garden is dangerous to the health of others? Yes, definitely.

I have no idea why you talking of “a strawman argument” because I believe that the relative dangers of smoking should be put into reasonable context.

I don’t eat meat either btw. But understanding that a bacon roll is more dangerous than three cigarettes helps to understand the relative dangers of smoking.

Rather, I tried to pre-empt exactly this sort of distraction-tactic response.

LOL! Of course you were!!

So anyway let’s get back on topic…… what was so awful about drinking in the same pub as Daz?

A small number of people will make a noise, but I suspect, as with the indoor smoking ban, most people will cope just fine with the removal of outdoor smoking areas. It will help more people to quit by eliminating another situation where they might be encouraged to just smoke out of habit. That’s got to be a good thing for all of us.

A small number of people actually smoke because they genuinely enjoy the intrinsic qualities of smoking. For the majority it’s just a habit, developed through social practice and consuming a very addictive substance, and if they broke that habit, they wouldn’t really miss it.

I hope the ban does come in to force.

So anyway let’s get back on topic…… what was so awful about drinking in the same pub as Daz

He’s a Newcastle fan, so on the same basis that any smoker is responsible for everyone else getting cancer, all Newcastle fans are responsible for the behaviour of genocidal Middle Eastern regimes. Technically he’s a mass murderer, as are all smokers. That’s about the level of logic going on in this thread from the ‘let’s ban everything that I don’t like’ brigade

Starmer – wants to save people’s lives by banning fags in an environment where people drink alcoholic drinks whilst at the same time will probably end up killing loads of people through austerity.

It’s almost as if it doesn’t add up.

if you can smell it then you are inhaling it.  thats how the sense of smell worksd

That’s not how it works

Errmmmm – please explain how you can smell something without it getting past the smell receptors in your nose?    YOu breathe in thru your nose, the air breathed in goes past the scent receptors, You smell what is in the air.

My Father smoked, not entirely sure how much or when he started as he died of lung cancer when I was 2. He didn’t make 40. I reckon smoking is pretty dangerous, getting less people to smoke is a good thing imo. How much impact banning smoking in beer gardens I don’t know but it’s certainly not something I will lose sleep over.

Loving the ‘I smoked for 20 years and I am still alive comments’. I bet you struggle with probability too ?.

If only all the dead people could post a counter point!

Errmmmm – please explain……

I can’t speak on behalf of binners but that is certainly not how smoking risks work.

You suggested that just smelling a cigarette means that the risks “are not zero”. For all intents and purposes smelling a cigarette whilst outside causes zero risk to your health.

Who the hell when asked by a healthcare professional if they smoke answers “No, but I occasionally smell cigarettes in the beer garden of my local pub”? No one because no reasonable person would believe that it is likely to have a negative impact on someone’s health.

My dad smoked very heavily for well over half a century before it eventually killed him at the age of 75, and even then it required the help of large quantities of alcohol. So let’s not spread unnecessary hysteria over the dangers of smelling cigarettes.

Is anyone actually claiming that?  Or is it a strawman argument from smokers and apologist ex-smokers?

So you’re not worrying about it being dangerous you just want to f*** a load of people over because your own fragile sensibilities are offended by the smell of a bit of fag smoke? What do you do if someone farts in your vicinity? I suppose you’ll be banning that next?

It’s almost as if it doesn’t add up.

Well, it’s more like it’s made up.

The primary beneficiaries of a public smoking ban would be the people who smoke, not non smokers.

What do you do if someone farts in your vicinity? I suppose you’ll be banning that next?

To be fair if someone drops their guts in a pub and the culprit is identified they should be asked to leave.

A small number of people actually smoke because they genuinely enjoy the intrinsic qualities of smoking. For the majority it’s just a habit

Sorry this is total bollocks. Understandable though as you clearly see smokers as sad pathetic victims who need to be saved from themselves, rather than rational human beings capable of deciding what they want to do and what they consume.

The primary beneficiaries of a public smoking ban would be the people who smoke

I doubt smokers are grateful for your concern. They probably want you to mind your own business and stop thinking you’re superior to them.

To be fair if someone drops their guts in a pub and the culprit is identified they should be asked to leave.

I don’t disagree, but what about a beer garden?

But understanding that a bacon roll is more dangerous than three cigarettes helps to understand the relative dangers of smoking.

It does, but also it’s not really the point in my opinion.

If I go to a pub and someone eats a bacon roll next to me, I don’t also eat 1% of the bacon roll. I can do my thing and go home completely un-baconed.

I’m not here to tell anyone to stop smoking as their actions by and large don’t affect me (long term NHS cost savings notwithstanding). It just so happens that pub gardens are probably the last place that I might want to go to where those actions do affect me. Obviously the health effects are likely to be minimal, it’s more that I just really really don’t like the smell.

Loving the ‘I smoked for 20 years and I am still alive comments’.

reminds me of the rocket scientists who claim the Covid vaccine was pointless because they didn’t have it & they didn’t die :)

Considering how great it is there seem to be a lot of ex-smokers on this thread! Why do you no longer smoke? If you have young children/grandchildren, would you be happy if they grew up into lifelong smokers? Do you not think phasing it out gradually is a good idea for the benefit of everybody? (I appreciate there are still some people here who want the freedom to quietly kill themselves, but do you not think younger generations would be better off if they never start smoking in the first place?)

There is some nonsense spouted about smoking on this board.

Never mind beer gardens, I can remember threads about neighbours smoking weed inside and that it was poisoning their kids because they could occasionally get a whiff.

There is no SIGNIFICANT risk from smelling cigarette smoke in a beer garden.

An ICE produces large quantities of poisonous gases, in confined environment it would quickly kill you. Does anyone worry about the pub car park next to the beer garden?

Putting black pepper on your food is far more likely to be a risk to your health.

indeed ~gobuchal – that “SIGNIFICANT” is an extremely important word.  :-)

Does anyone worry about the pub car park next to the beer garden?

I think yo have probably heard me rant about cars enough to know I do

The primary beneficiaries of a public smoking ban would be the people who smoke, not non smokers.

I await next weeks proposal to ban chips, the primary beneficiaries of that being fatties

#Savetheporkersfromthemselves #closethechippys

It’s almost certainly better than smoking 20 a day you’re right, but in order to have long-term data one first needs, well, long-term data. It’s not that long ago that tobacco companies were advertising which brand doctors recommended.

To a degree. But we are now far more aware of the biomarkers of harm associated with smoking, and these are largely absence, Or hugely decreased in vapers.

Apart from the nicotine which is still in the bloodstream with all the known harmful effects on the cardiovascular system.  that aspect we know.

I was of the understanding that nicotine was harmless? It was just the delivery system that was the problem?

Do you have a source for the harm of nicotine?

I suppose this boils down to one simple question with a yes/no answer…

Do you feel that the whole of society should be forced, by threat of prosecution if necessary, to behave as you instruct them?

And depending on your answer to that question you may want to address your messiah complex and propensity towards dictatorial behaviour

With one vocal poster on this thread, we’ve been down this road before…

This proposal doesn’t really seem like it’s directly about the risks of second-hand smoke in public spaces to me. It feels mostly like a nudge policy, intended to make smoking just that much more of a hassle, hopefully encouraging more people to quit and fewer people to take it up in the first place.

A quick Google threw up this document: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alcohol-drugs-and-tobacco-commissioning-support-pack/tobacco-commissioning-support-pack-2019-to-2020-principles-and-indicators

Right near the top it says:

In addition to the human cost, smoking costs the economy £14.7 billion per year, £2.5 billion of which falls to the NHS.

I can see why the government might want to reduce the amount of people smoking in the country.