Should we ban smoking in Australia?

[Bungle_Bear]

Cigarettes without tobacco?

This

 

[elephunky]

Cigarettes without tobacco?

I am talking about the chemicals they add like pesticides etc

 

[ebia]

I am talking about the chemicals they add like pesticides etc

Nicotine is the strongest poison in a cigarette

 

[TheDag]

I do not think there would be a need to man tobacco sales entirely if they just stopped these companies from the use of the deadly poisons in cigarettes.

thats what really does the damage. Sure nicotine is addictive but there is very little harm from tobacco itself. The chemicals added in is what does the harm. At least that is what I have been led to believe from a source I consider reliable. Will see if I can find it.

 

[elephunky]

thats what really does the damage. Sure nicotine is addictive but there is very little harm from tobacco itself. The chemicals added in is what does the harm. At least that is what I have been led to believe from a source I consider reliable. Will see if I can find it.

When we were taught about the dangers of smoking in school, the focus was on the chemicals they put in cigarettes.

 

[ebia]

When we were taught about the dangers of smoking in school, the focus was on the chemicals they put in cigarettes.

"Anti-smoking advocates highlight the long-term health effects, like cancer and emphysema, that result from a lifetime of smoking or chewing tobacco -- but these maladies are the result of chemicals in cigarettes other than nicotine. Unfortunately, the fact that nicotine alone is an extremely toxic poison often goes unmentioned. Not many people realize that nicotine is also sold commercially in the form of a pesticide! And every year, many children go to the emergency room after eating cigarettes or cigarette butts. Sixty milligrams of nicotine (about the amount in three or four cigarettes if all of the nicotine were absorbed) will kill an adult, but consuming only one cigarette's worth of nicotine is enough to make a toddler severely ill."

 

[Bungle_Bear]

There are enough harmful chemicals in tobacco to kill you without worrying about additives. And as ebia keeps pointing out, nicotine is the worst offender and is found naturally in tobacco.

http://www.leffingwell.com/download/tobacco_chemistry.pdf

 

[elephunky]

I believe that if they sold cigarettes or pouches with pure tobacco then there wouldnt be nearly as many health issues associated with smoking, this of course may cause sales to drop which they wouldnt want since they are making too much money out of it.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I believe that if they sold cigarettes or pouches with pure tobacco then there wouldnt be nearly as many health issues associated with smoking, this of course may cause sales to drop which they wouldnt want since they are making too much money out of it.

You're advocating the sale of cigars (most of which do not have additives). Perhaps not as dangerous as cigarettes but still increased risk of various cancers and cardiovascular disease.

 

[tgg]

What's your thoughts on banning smoking here altogether?

Remember kiddies: GOD HATES F.AGS!

(I'm being sarcastic here as I'm referring to the UK slang for cigarettes!).

Can something be done regarding getting rid of political correctness and censorship on this forum?!

 

[TheDag]

Can something be done regarding getting rid of political correctness and censorship on this forum?!

yeah start your own forum. Simple.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

yeah start your own forum. Simple.

That wouldn't have any effect on PC or censorship on CF, it would only provide a different forum with different rules

We all signed up to the rules, much as some of them seem a little ridiculous. But like tgg I'd like to see them upheld as they stand, not used to justify mods closing threads they don't like.

 

[TheDag]

That wouldn't have any effect on PC or censorship on CF, it would only provide a different forum with different rules

We all signed up to the rules, much as some of them seem a little ridiculous. But like tgg I'd like to see them upheld as they stand, not used to justify mods closing threads they don't like.

True that it would not change anything here but it is the obvious solution. If you don't like it start your own forum and make your own rules.

I think some of the rules are silly and they close threads that are useful and fairly civil but do break the rules. Can't really complain about that. I guess you are saying they are selectively enforcing rules. That is not closingthreads that support their view. Do you have evidence of this? I mean actual proof that is their motivation?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

I think some of the rules are silly and they close threads that are useful and fairly civil but do break the rules. Can't really complain about that.

Agreed.

I guess you are saying they are selectively enforcing rules. That is not closingthreads that support their view. Do you have evidence of this? I mean actual proof that is their motivation?

Proof of motivation? No. Not sure how I could prove that! What we have is threads closed with a statement that a certain rule has been broken when it hasn't. Could just be a case of poorly worded rules, of course. Hence my request that the rules be enforced "as they stand".

The usual culprit is "promoting homosexuality". I think the mods do not understand the difference between promoting and accepting.

 

[TheDag]

The usual culprit is "promoting homosexuality". I think the mods do not understand the difference between promoting and accepting.

Not sure what you mean here in this example. Yes there is a difference between promoting and accepting generally speaking. However if you want them to follow the rules as they stand then this part of the rules explains it

**Promotion is defined as encouragement of the progress, growth, or acceptance of something including advertising and publicity.

 

[elephunky]

How on earth does a discussion about banning smoking end with a commend on the difference between promoting and accepting homosexuality lol

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Not sure what you mean here in this example. Yes there is a difference between promoting and accepting generally speaking. However if you want them to follow the rules as they stand then this part of the rules explains it

Indeed. What I'm getting at is that if I say "I accept homosexuality" it is seen to be promotion of acceptance. Basically, expression of opinion about homosexuality is deemed to be active encouragement. That's pretty lame. Compare that to the many threads discussing, for instance, internet downloads and copyright theft. There are those who say "download whatever you like, it's not theft" but the threads remain open. Read whatever motivation you want into that, but it's weirdly inconsistent.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

How on earth does a discussion about banning smoking end with a commend on the difference between promoting and accepting homosexuality lol

The conversation had run dry and a new one started. Just like real life

 

[tgg]

How on earth does a discussion about banning smoking end with a commend on the difference between promoting and accepting homosexuality lol

In Australia and America, the word "f.ag" is used as a derogatory term towards a gay person (usually a male). In the UK and Ireland, however, it is slang word for "cigarette".

Same goes for the word "f.aggot". In the UK and Ireland it refers to burning twigs, whereas in the US and Australia it is also another derogatory term for a gay or effeminate person.

Hope that this answers your question.

I personally believe that God hates cigarettes because the body is the vessel of the Holy Spirit and we are to keep it clean and well maintained. Then again, in a book I've got called "Hemp For Health" it also says when discussing religious and spiritual issues related to cannabis the author Chris Conrad says "The body is a temple. Don't be afraid to burn a little incense" even though he is against drug abuse.

 

[TheDag]

Indeed. What I'm getting at is that if I say "I accept homosexuality" it is seen to be promotion of acceptance. Basically, expression of opinion about homosexuality is deemed to be active encouragement. That's pretty lame.

I agree that it is lame but it is still stated in the rules.

Compare that to the many threads discussing, for instance, internet downloads and copyright theft. There are those who say "download whatever you like, it's not theft" but the threads remain open. Read whatever motivation you want into that, but it's weirdly inconsistent.

I get what you mean but bear in mind there are over 200 movies and tv shows I can download without doing anything illegal. that is i have those shows and I am allowed to make copies for my private use so context in those discussions would be key. having never seen any I can't comment one way or the other. have you reported those threads? If not then start reporting them. If so I would be asking why no action is taken but in the appropiate manner eg via private message. I have seen threads that discuss accepting abortion go on for over 400 posts before it comes to the attention of the mods.