Smoking Ban II (repost?)

Welcome To

Smoking Ban II (repost?)

This topic is empty.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 34 total)

← 1 2 3 →

Author

Posts
January 22, 2008 at 7:25 am

#735176
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
djprocess wrote:

Like it or not it looks like it works…

“The number of people being taken to hospital with heart attacks in Scotland has fallen significantly since the smoking ban was introduced, the most detailed study into the impact of the measure has revealed. Researchers found a 17% drop in the number of people admitted for heart attacks in the year since the ban came into force, compared with an average 3% reduction a year over the previous decade. The reduction was most marked among non-smokers, with a 20% fall, compared with a 14% drop among smokers”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/smoking/Story/0,,2166559,00.html

that doesn’t make any sence to me …..

if it was because of the smoking ban surly the somker groupe wouldn’t of had a huge reduction in heart attacks ..only some where along the stedy 3% previously ..but both non smokers AND smokers have had this massive reduction in heart attacks .. there for making this not ring true for me … it must be another factor imo..
January 22, 2008 at 9:53 am

#735180
1

quietRIOT

@quietriot

Member
i agree it works …but i still think it should be a choice for pubs to go totally smoke free….then if non smokers dont wanna go in they dont have to…

i dont think its killed the dancefloor however it was very wierd the first time i went clubbing after the ban it had a big impact…

a lot of people i know who smoke wont go out now cos they say its a waste of time freezing outside to have a fag when they can drink an smoke at home …

i think more pubs will close but to be honest i dont think thats a bad thing…there are way too many .

p.s. tarifa i cant find your pics …?
January 22, 2008 at 9:59 am

#735181
1

process

@process

Member
DaftFader wrote:

that doesn’t make any sence to me …..

if it was because of the smoking ban surly the somker groupe wouldn’t of had a huge reduction in heart attacks ..only some where along the stedy 3% previously ..but both non smokers AND smokers have had this massive reduction in heart attacks .. there for making this not ring true for me … it must be another factor imo..

could be explained by passive smoke, who knows…
January 22, 2008 at 1:13 pm

#735201
1

JonnyQuest

@jonnyquest

Member
djprocess wrote:

could be explained by passive smoke, who knows…

almost definatly, non smokers are almost never forced to inhale smokle anymore cause none of my non smoking mates come outside with me for a fag
January 22, 2008 at 1:27 pm

#735177
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
djprocess wrote:

could be explained by passive smoke, who knows…

JonnyQuest wrote:

almost definatly, non smokers are almost never forced to inhale smokle anymore cause none of my non smoking mates come outside with me for a fag

well that is true ..but the point i was making was that theres a massive decrease in heart attacks in SMOKERS in the last year .. as well as the non smokers….even tho the non smokers had a bigger decrease the smokers still had a substantual decrease with regards to past years …

i didn’t meen to sound like i thoguht it was a bad idea i just thought the evidence for the “smoking ban vs heart attacks” case was inconclusive :laugh_at:

i agree that it’s generaly a good thing health wise for non smokers …and it has made some people quit but for the smokers it kinda sux ..
January 22, 2008 at 1:28 pm

#735190
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Inactive
JonnyQuest wrote:

almost definatly, non smokers are almost never forced to inhale smokle anymore cause none of my non smoking mates come outside with me for a fag

Really? It fucks me off when it pissing down with rain and you cant get into the shelter because all the non-smokers are chatting to their mates in there.
January 22, 2008 at 2:39 pm

#735182
1

process

@process

Member
DaftFader wrote:

well that is true ..but the point i was making was that theres a massive decrease in heart attacks in SMOKERS in the last year .. as well as the non smokers….even tho the non smokers had a bigger decrease the smokers still had a substantual decrease with regards to past years …

i didn’t meen to sound like i thoguht it was a bad idea i just thought the evidence for the “smoking ban vs heart attacks” case was inconclusive :laugh_at:

i agree that it’s generaly a good thing health wise for non smokers …and it has made some people quit but for the smokers it kinda sux ..

passive smoke could explain the drop in smokers as well. as now they are only inhaling smoke when they smoke (if you know what i mean). Instead of all the time, but im no scientist.
January 22, 2008 at 4:08 pm

#735178
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
i like the ban my cloathes dont stink after a night out anymore and i’m not tempted to smoke when i’m drinkin no more.
January 22, 2008 at 4:13 pm

#735179
[deleted]

@[deleted]

Guest
djprocess wrote:

passive smoke could explain the drop in smokers as well. as now they are only inhaling smoke when they smoke (if you know what i mean). Instead of all the time, but im no scientist.

ah yeah i see what you meen .. you have converted meh :laugh_at:
January 22, 2008 at 4:55 pm

#735186
1

Raj

@raj

Member
MrAHC wrote:

i like the ban my cloathes dont stink after a night out anymore and i’m not tempted to smoke when i’m drinkin no more.

Those are my favourite things about the ban too 😉
January 22, 2008 at 5:02 pm

#735197
1

GiantMidget

@giantmidget

Member
The ban has lost all novelty now so now i think it’s the gayest thing in the world.
January 22, 2008 at 10:03 pm

#735196
1

tarifa

@tarifa

Member
april wrote:

i
p.s. tarifa i cant find your pics …?

go to ‘pictures’ on the left hand side there’s albums, most viewed then 2nd down newest (s the one of a beach with waves comin in) i’d click on each picture – makes em easier to see

good luck:wink:
January 22, 2008 at 11:18 pm

#735202
1

JonnyQuest

@jonnyquest

Member
djprocess wrote:

passive smoke could explain the drop in smokers as well. as now they are only inhaling smoke when they smoke (if you know what i mean). Instead of all the time, but im no scientist.

you should be a scientist, i had never even thought of that, its brilliant, become a scienetist
January 23, 2008 at 11:27 am

#735183
1

process

@process

Member
JonnyQuest wrote:

you should be a scientist, i had never even thought of that, its brilliant, become a scienetist

i know, i know im a genius. Id rather be an alchemist tho (it sounds better 😉
January 23, 2008 at 2:46 pm

#735198
1

GiantMidget

@giantmidget

Member
I haven’t smoked since 5am, Don’t see what the fuss is it’s a piece of piss! I hope it’s this easy later tonight!:crazy_diz
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 34 total)

← 1 2 3 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.