posted
It seems like every time I'm watching TV, browsing the web or even walking down the street there are dozens of anti-smoker ads, all attacking smokers as irresponsible people contributing directly to the deaths of millions, and it's really starting to piss me off.
Note that I'm distinguishing between anti-smoking and anti-smoker ads. In my lifetime, I've seen many effective, responsible, reasonable anti-smoking campaigns ranging from the informative (yes, cigarettes are harmful to your body and they CAN kill you) to the imploring (talk to your kids about smoking. Do not buy cigarettes for minors). I have no problem with these ads: I think they contribute to the general awareness of the populace and serve as a reminder to parents and friends that they often have the power to influence a person's decisions regarding their health.
What I have a problem with is this new trend of aggressive ads pointing at smokers and calling them irresponsible, disgusting or even murderers. Recent anti-smoking advertising campaigns have decided to focus on making smokers look like terrible human beings. If you smoke, you smell and taste like a rotting, maggot-infested animal carcass and should be shunned by society! If you smoke, you're contributing to the murder of my grandparents! Give me a break.
These ads are doing more than attempting to discourage smokers: they're attempting to mobilize people AGAINST smokers. It's like there's some force in America using slag campaigns to belittle and eventually eliminate a segment of the populace. Blacks? Jews? Mexicans?
Nope, this time it's the smokers. I honestly wonder at what the motivations and goals of the people behind the ads are. Regardless of what their intentions may be, I know that every time I see one of these ridiculous ads, I just want to smoke more - and possibly put out my cigarettes in the lawns, bedrooms and faces of the people behind these campaigns.
What do you think is motivating these campaigns? Do you think they're effective? How do they make you feel? Am I the only one who finds them obnoxious and offensive?
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you are right that they are going about it the wrong way. Kids want to be well-liked and similar to those that are popular, cool, famous, or rich, etc. In my experience, among lower income kids, smokers are still thought of as being cool and adult-like.
I bet the motivations of the anti-smoker campaigns is to work against that perception.
I agree that anti-smoker ads as opposed to anti-smoking ads are not appropriate because they do attempt to breed disgust of people not behaviors.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Boon
unregistered
posted
Obviously, the previous ads haven't worked well enough* so they're trying to use peer pressure to make you quit. I don't think they're trying to "eliminate a segment of the populace" so much as trying to modify the behaviour through public shaming. Help any?
*'cause if they did, no one would smoke.
IP: Logged |
quote:I think you are right that they are going about it the wrong way. Kids want to be well-liked and similar to those that are popular, cool, famous, or rich, etc. In my experience, among lower income kids, smokers are still thought of as being cool and adult-like.
On the one hand, I think you may be right about this: I don't know for certain, as it's been a long time since I've had any experience with being young enough to be influenced and I've never been lower class.
On the other hand, I think it's just as likely they're intensifying the rebellious-cool aspect of underage smoking.
quote:Obviously, the previous ads haven't worked well enough*...
*'cause if they did, no one would smoke.
The NCJRS and NHS have both been releasing statistics for years indicating a decline in the number of smokers in America.
quote:...so they're trying to use peer pressure to make you quit. I don't think they're trying to "eliminate a segment of the populace" so much as trying to modify the behaviour through public shaming. Help any?
Not in the case of anyone I know, no. It's having the polar opposite effect.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not for no good reason that shunning is one of the worst things a society can do to its members.
I don't like it either, but I'll tell you that it doesn't make me sad that smoking is now no longer allowed in any public building in the state. Restaurants, bowling alleys, bars... it's so nice to go out dancing and not have to wear a cloud of cigarette smoke around me for the next few days. It's beyond a nasty habit. It's socially obnoxious and should be discouraged as such. How often do we go on about how reprehensible cell phone talking drivers are? Same thing, IMO. It's not just that they do it, but it has a clear social impact beyond them.
It may feel like 'discrimination', but I'm quickly getting over it.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
What ads are you referring to? I'd always interpreted the Truth and other such ad campaigns to be targetted at Tobacco *Companies*, not individual smokers. But I could be wrong.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Truth ads are aimed at smokers and potential smokers, to try and open their eyes to the truth about smoking, smoking companies, and what they are doing to themselves and the world around them. They've been wildly effective, and I hope they continue.
I don't recall ever seeing an anti-smoker ad that actually attacked the smoker him/herself as an object of scorn. Depending on how the ad went though, I can't say I'd disagree with the sentiment. I think smoking should be illegal in all public places, be they businesses, parks, or wherever. If you want to smoke, smoke in your own home. Unless you have children. Smoking around children is nothing less than child abuse, and should be punished as such.
Smoking isn't just social rudeness, or a bad habit, it's consuming and then expelling POISON into the air around you. Anyone else in the area who breathes in that poison is harmed by it. I don't think there needs to be an ad campaign specifically against smokers like that, it's a waste of money. Focus on the truth about what smoking is and what it does to potential smokers to get them to not start.
I have little sympathy for smokers for most everything else though.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's like there's some force in America using slag campaigns to belittle and eventually eliminate a segment of the populace. Blacks? Jews? Mexicans?
Were you born a smoker?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really don't think anyone is going to change his or her mind about smoking because of a commercial.
Posts: 484 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You might be surprised. Recent studies and research have shown the drop-off in new smokers, and the increased numbers of quitters is at least in part to information campaigns, The Truth being labeled as the most successful ever.
They're PSAs, only edgy and in your face. I think they work.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't like it either, but I'll tell you that it doesn't make me sad that smoking is now no longer allowed in any public building in the state. Restaurants, bowling alleys, bars... it's so nice to go out dancing and not have to wear a cloud of cigarette smoke around me for the next few days. It's beyond a nasty habit. It's socially obnoxious and should be discouraged as such. How often do we go on about how reprehensible cell phone talking drivers are? Same thing, IMO. It's not just that they do it, but it has a clear social impact beyond them.
So, basically, you don't feel it would be unjust for people annoyed/offended by loud noise at inappropriate times to start smear campaigns against people who bring their babies into public transportation? Or, to give an example with a health issue, what about people with severe animal allergies launching slag campaigns against pet owners' right to walk their dogs or take their animals outside?
The typical response is twofold: perpetrators should be responsible about their actions, and the "victims" need to suck it up and deal. I fail to see why smoking should be treated differently.
quote:I think smoking should be illegal in all public places, be they businesses, parks, or wherever.
So what about in a person's backyard - still their own property, but in an open area?
There are methods of accomplishing an anti-smoking agenda without slag campaigns. The past decade has shown that it is VERY possible to legislate against smokers' rights, which I have much less of a problem with. I don't AGREE with it, but I don't take offense that people are actively legislating against smokers. I live in Seattle, where smoking is now illegal in all enclosed places, public and private, except residences, as is smoking within 25 feet of the entryway of said places, [edit to add] and I don't have a problem with that.
quote:Smoking isn't just social rudeness, or a bad habit, it's consuming and then expelling POISON into the air around you. Anyone else in the area who breathes in that poison is harmed by it.
Until there has been even one well-designed, conclusive study about the effects of second hand smoke on human beings, I maintain that this is propaganda.
Besides, there are tens of thousands of businesses, excluding tobacco companies, across the nation that will retail various forms of poison to you, and the sale of those products isn't even regulated.
What about automobiles and their owners? Car exhaust is far more toxic than cigarette smoke is.
quote:Were you born a smoker?
Would you prefer I use religious examples instead?
quote:Until there has been even one well-designed, conclusive study about the effects of second hand smoke on human beings, I maintain that this is propaganda.
quote: Public health officials have concluded that secondhand smoke from cigarettes causes disease, including lung cancer and heart disease, in non-smoking adults, as well as causes conditions in children such as asthma, respiratory infections, cough, wheeze, otitis media (middle ear infection) and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. In addition, public health officials have concluded that secondhand smoke can exacerbate adult asthma and cause eye, throat and nasal irritation.
Philip Morris USA believes that the public should be guided by the conclusions of public health officials regarding the health effects of secondhand smoke in deciding whether to be in places where secondhand smoke is present, or if they are smokers, when and where to smoke around others. Particular care should be exercised where children are concerned, and adults should avoid smoking around them.
We also believe that the conclusions of public health officials concerning environmental tobacco smoke are sufficient to warrant measures that regulate smoking in public places. We also believe that where smoking is permitted, the government should require the posting of warning notices that communicate public health officials' conclusions that secondhand smoke causes disease in non-smokers.
posted
I am, unfortunately, not seeing links to any studies and positions, just a quoted statement made by Phillip Morris - a corporation repeatedly highlighted by anti-smoking groups as a pack of liars.
Edit to add: and some summaries of studies, but no studies themselves.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
those ads are gross, but I sort of liked them in a sick way... also, I would never date a smoker... it would be like dating someone with super bad B.O.
Posts: 104 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Honestly, I will be really pissed if these Lousiaina Clean Air people accomplish their goals. And I don't smoke. I just don't see a problem with people smoking in bars.
quote:posted by erosomniac: Until there has been even one well-designed, conclusive study about the effects of second hand smoke on human beings, I maintain that this is propaganda.
quote:posted by Lyrhawn: I think smoking should be illegal in all public places, be they businesses, parks, or wherever.
It's worth pointing out the difference between secondhand smoke coming from one person, or even a few people, in an outdoor area, and secondhand smoke from many people in a closed room.
While I'm fairly sure that secondhand smoke can, in dense quantities in regular repetition over long periods of time (as in years), cause diseases, I'm very skeptical that it'll do anything to you worse than walking down a street.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: I am, unfortunately, not seeing links to any studies and positions, just a quoted statement made by Phillip Morris - a corporation repeatedly highlighted by anti-smoking groups as a pack of liars.
Edit to add: and some summaries of studies, but no studies themselves.
Oh give me a break, Phillip Morris is going to lie, and then be attacked by ANTI SMOKING groups for saying that SMOKING IS BAD FOR YOU!?
What crazed world of logic do you live in where that actually makes sense?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's worth pointing out the difference between secondhand smoke coming from one person, or even a few people, in an outdoor area, and secondhand smoke from many people in a closed room.
I should have been clearer in my original statement, as I tentatively agree with this statement, although I'd be interested to see some numbers on the contents of cigarette smoke before and after it has been inhaled. *adds to to-google list*
Also note: I *have* read conclusive studies on the nature of second hand smoke and its effects on existing medical conditions and can agree that second hand smoke frequently aggravates the conditions of people with respiratory illnesses/problems.
Also note: I don't think any of this has any relevance as to my original questions regarding smear campaigns by anti-smoking organizations.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Oh give me a break, Phillip Morris is going to lie, and then be attacked by ANTI SMOKING groups for saying that SMOKING IS BAD FOR YOU!?
I'll clarify: Phillip Morris has been accused (and later convicted) of lying to its current and potential customers, a demographic which, in their eyes, included everybody. Now that they've changed their public image (under court order), do you trust them any more than before? I know I don't.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The contents of after smoke are still labeled as a poisonous carcinogen.
And they were convicted of lying, because they used to say that cigarettes are just fine and won't kill you. Now they are saying they DO kill, and they ARE dangerous.
Your logic is baseless there. Edit to add: Though no, I don't trust them, but when they come out and say "Hey, buy this! Wait, it might KILL YOU!!!" that does give what their saying some credence. Obviously they aren't stupid, no multi-billion dollar company is going to lie and come out and say straight to you that buying their product will lead to a painful death.
And I agree that this doesn't address your issue on smear campaigns. But you're the one advocating fiction on the deadliness of cigarettes. All the more reason why there should be anti-smoking information campaigns out there. People still aren't informed enough.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't you just love America? Where else would a company be required to actively campaign against a product that they are legally allowed to sell.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Cigar Smoking Can Cause Cancers Of The Mouth And Throat, Even If You Do Not Inhale.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Cigar Smoking Can Cause Lung Cancer And Heart Disease.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Tobacco Use Increases The Risk of Infertility, Stillbirth And Low Birth Weight.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Cigars Are Not A Safe Alternative To Cigarettes.
SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Tobacco Smoke Increases The Risk Of Lung Cancer And Heart Disease, Even In Nonsmokers.
Seriously erosomniac, I don't follow your line of reasoning about second-hand smoke. Anyone who has been anywhere near a smoker can figure out that Second Hand Smoke is unhealthy
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The contents of after smoke are still labeled as a poisonous carcinogen.
And they were convicted of lying, because they used to say that cigarettes are just fine and won't kill you. Now they are saying they DO kill, and they ARE dangerous.
Your logic is baseless there.
I don't see how it is. My logic is that I'm not going to take anything Phillip Morris says at face value until I've seen evidence that it's true. That evidence has yet to be proven to exist to my satisfaction.
quote:Though no, I don't trust them, but when they come out and say "Hey, buy this! Wait, it might KILL YOU!!!" that does give what their saying some credence. Obviously they aren't stupid, no multi-billion dollar company is going to lie and come out and say straight to you that buying their product will lead to a painful death.
True, but I generally don't take anything someone is forced to say at face value, either.
quote:But you're the one advocating fiction on the deadliness of cigarettes. All the more reason why there should be anti-smoking information campaigns out there. People still aren't informed enough.
First: I'm by no means saying that cigarettes are not deadly to their users. I am, however, saying that the deadliness of second hand smoke has not been demonstrated to me in a convincing fashion. There are lot of organizations saying "second hand smoke will kill you and your kids," but until they've furnished satisfactory evidence in a manner easily accessible by the public , it could just as easily be a ruse to reduce the total number of smokers in the nation, the same way tobacco companies lied and said smoking won't kill you in order to increase sales. (And before the anti-conspiracy theorists start shouting "lunacy" and rolling their eyes - no, this isn't my belief, it's an example.)
I'm not advocating anything; I stated my opinion on the validity/existence of evidence regarding second hand smoke. I agree that there should be more information campaigns regarding smoking so that people can more readily make informed decisions about their own health habits, but I think those campaigns should do more than say "Hey, second hand smoke is bad for you! THIS organization and THIS organization say so!"
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ok, I found the adds Juxtapose posted to be gross and offensive. Not enough for me to want to rebel and start smoking, though. But then, smoking has never been one of the vices I find myself particularly tempted by.
I was reminded somewhat of Connie Willis's Bellwether. For any of you who have not read this book, we have various scientists working for a private corporation. The Interdepartmental Assistant, Flip, is lazy and a ditz. But when she gets an assistant (yes, an assistant to the assistant) who is actually competant, people would still rather work with Flip than her assistant because the assistant is **gasp, shock, horror of horrors** a smoker! And they are all worried about breathing in second-secondhand smoke. "That's what Flip calls the air smokers breathe out." (There's more to the book than that, but that is the relevant part.)
I agree that there is a difference between the anti-smoking campaign and the anti-smoker campaign.
Posts: 364 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I often walk near smokers when I'm headed to class. It generally causes my throat to burn, and sometimes I have trouble breathing. It's generally not a physical blockage really. The air just feels thick. I'm sure it's somewhat psychological. I have the same problem with heavy perfume. I wish people would stop wearing it, or at least stop wearing so much that I can smell it after they've left the room.
And as for health issues such as allergies...there's a reason that most public places don't allow pets. And pet dander probably won't affect people as much outdoors like smoking would. I personally think that it ought to be easier for people to take sick leave, because sick people are also a health hazard. In fact, I'd prefer a few Asian social customs such as bowing instead of shaking hands and wearing a surgical mask when one is sick and has to be out in public to be adopted here in the U.S.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, if they can use the cool factor and beautiful people to promote smoking by suggesting that smoking makes you cool (it does not) then I see nothing wrong with anti-smoking campaigns portraying smoking as "gross" and undesirable (it is).
The way I see it, if you smoke, only your mouth smells and tastes like a rotting, maggot-infested animal carcass.
Posts: 308 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Seriously erosomniac, I don't follow your line of reasoning about second-hand smoke. Anyone who has been anywhere near a smoker can figure out that Second Hand Smoke is unhealthy.
Anyone who has been anywhere near a smoker can decide that second hand smoke is undesirable, but I think it's silly to automatically conclude it's unhealthy. By your logic, anyone who has been subjected to crappy tasting medicine should invariably conclude that it's bad for you.
Of the surgeon general's warnings quoted, only one (possibly two) are related to second hand smoke, and the surgeon general has yet to furnish sufficient conclusive proof to convince me that second hand smoke is directly responsible for causing any medical condition.
The surgeon general's website (hhs.gov) links to MedlinePlus (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/) as a compiled resource for information on the effects of second hand smoke. A quick perusal of these articles (including an excellent fact sheet by the National Cancer Institute found at http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/ETS) shows that while second hand smoke contains carcinogens and has been shown to aggravate many existing medical conditions, there is no conclusive evidence [edit to add]that it is the primary cause of diseases, including cancer[/edit]. Almost every study conducted on second hand smoke has been observational in nature which, as the lead researcher in a recent study of links between second hand smoke and diabetes states, means the study is non-conclusive: it is "the first step toward a conclusion, not the final answer."
posted
Ehh, I think the print ads that say "kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray" were more succinct and effective than the video ads. Are those ads unfairly discriminatory? Well, I don't know. It does make sense to point out that one of the downsides of smoking is that you get terrible bad breath.
quote:Don't you just love America? Where else would a company be required to actively campaign against a product that they are legally allowed to sell.
It seems to be less active campaigning against smoking in adults (I have seen Phillip Morris commercials telling kids not to smoke) and more informed consent. Just like the drug commercials which tell you about serious side effects. They don't tell you *not* to buy the drug, or cigarettes--they tell you all the bad things that could happen to you if you use them.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:And as for health issues such as allergies...there's a reason that most public places don't allow pets. And pet dander probably won't affect people as much outdoors like smoking would.
The difference is that public places opt to not allow pets, the same way that until more anti-smoking legislation got passed, establishments could opt not to allow smokers. In both cases, however, I suspect the reasons behind not allowing either are more cosmetic than health related.
quote:I personally think that it ought to be easier for people to take sick leave, because sick people are also a health hazard. In fact, I'd prefer a few Asian social customs such as bowing instead of shaking hands and wearing a surgical mask when one is sick and has to be out in public to be adopted here in the U.S.
Agreed.
quote:Well, if they can use the cool factor and beautiful people to promote smoking by suggesting that smoking makes you cool (it does not) then I see nothing wrong with anti-smoking campaigns portraying smoking as "gross" and undesirable (it is).
The limits on this were capped after the indictment of Phillip Morris. My argument is that the same limits should apply to anti-smoking organizations.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:It seems to be less active campaigning against smoking in adults (I have seen Phillip Morris commercials telling kids not to smoke) and more informed consent. Just like the drug commercials which tell you about serious side effects. They don't tell you *not* to buy the drug, or cigarettes--they tell you all the bad things that could happen to you if you use them.
I think this is more a reference to the fact that Phillip Morris, as part of the settlement, is actually heavily funding several anti-smoking campaigns which, unlike drug/alcohol commercials that come with warnings & caveats, are not paired with product advertising.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
ABEL, E.L. Smoking during pregnancy: A review of effects on growth and development of offspring. Human Biology 52(4):593-625, December 1980. ADLKOFER, F., SCHERER, G., Von HEES, U. Passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 312(11):719-720, March 14, 1985. AKIBA, S., KATO, H., BLOT, W.J. Passive smoking and lung cancer among Japanese women. Cancer Research 46(9):4804-4807, September 1986. ARONOW, W.S. Effect of passive smoking on angina pectoris New England Journal of Medicine 299(1):21-24, July 6, 1978a. ARONOW, W.S. Effects of passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 299(16):897, October 19, 1978b. BACKHOUSE, C.I. Peak expiratory flow in youths with varying cigarette smoking habits. British Medical Journal 1(5954):366-362, February 15, 1975. BARRON, B.A. The effects of misclassification on the estimation of relative risk. Biometrics 33(2):414-418, June 1977. BECK, G.J., DOYLE, C.A., SCHACHTER, E.N. Smoking and lung function. American Review of Respiratory Disease 123(2):149-155 February 1981. BERKEY, C.S., WARE, J.H., DOCKERY, D.W., FERRIS, B.G., Jr., SPEIZER, F.E. Indoor air pollution and pulmonary function growth in preadolescent children. American Journal of Epidemiology 123(2):250-260, February 1986. BEWLEY, B.R., HALIL T., SNAITH, A.H. Smoking by primary schoolchildren: Prevalence and associated respiratory symptoms. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 27(3):150-153, August 1973. BLACK, N. The aetiology of glue ear: A case-control study. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology 9(2):121-133, July 1985. BLAND, M., BEWLEY, B.R., POLLARD, V., BANKS, M.H. Effect of children’s and parents’ smoking on respiratory symptoms. Archives of Disease in Childhood 53(2):100-105, February 1978. BLOT, W.J., MCLAUGHLIN, J.K. Practical issues in the design and conduct of case control studies: Use of next-of-kin interviews. In: Blot, W.J., Hirayama, T., Huel, O.G. (eds). Statistical Issues in Cancer Epidemiology. Hiroshima, Sanei Publishers, 1985, pp. 46-62. BRINTON, L.A., BLOT, W.J., BECKER, J.A., WINN, D.M., BROWDER, J.P., FARMER, J.C., Jr., FRAUMENI, J.F., Jr. A case-control study of cancers of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinus. American Journal of Epidemiology 119(6):896- 906, June 1984. BRUNEKREEF, B., FISCHER, P., REMIJN, B., VAN DER LENDE, R., SCHOUTEN, J., QUANJER, P. Indoor air pollution and its effect on pulmonary funtion of adult nonsmoking women: 3. Passive smoking and pulmonary function. International Journal of Epidemiology 14(2):227-230, June 1985. BRUNNEMANN, K.D., ADAMS, J.D., HO, D.P.S., HOFFMANN, D. The influence of tobacco smoke on indoor atmospheres: 2. Volatile and tobacco-specific nitrosamines in main- and sidestream smoke and their contribution to indoor pollution. Proceedings of the Fourth Joint Conference on Sensing of Environmental Pollutants, New Orleans, 1977. American Chemical Society, 1978, pp. 876-886. BUDIANSKY, S. Food and drug data fudged. Nature 302(5909):560, April 14, 1983. BURCH, P.R.J. Passive smoking and lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 282(6273):1393, April 25, 1981. BURCH, P.R.J. Lifetime passive smoking and cancer risk. (letter). Lancet 1(8433):866, April 13, 1985. BURCH, P.R.J. Passive smoking in adulthood and cancer risk. (letter). American Journal of Epidemiology 123(2):368-369, February 1986. 109 BURCHFIEL, C.M., HIGGINS, M.W., KELLER, J.B., HOWATT, W.F., BUTLER, W.J., HIGGINS, I.T.T. Passive smoking in childhood: Respiratory conditions and pulmonary function in Tecumseh, Michigan. American Review of Respiratory Disease 133(6):966-973, June 1986. BURROWS, B., KNUDSON, R.J., CLINE, M.G., LEBOWITZ, M.D. Quantitative relationships between cigarette smoking and ventilatory function. American Review of Respiratory Disease 115(2):195-205, February 1977. BURROWS, B., KNUDSON, R.J., LEBOWITZ, M.D. The relationship of childhood respiratory illness to adult obstructive airway disease. American Review of Respiratory Disease 115(5):751-769, May 1977. CAMERON, P., KOSTIN, J.S., ZAKS, J.M., WOLFE, J.H., TIGHE, G., OSELETT, B., STOCKER, R., WINTON, J. The health of smokers’ and nonsmokers’ children. Journal of Allergy 43(6):336-341, June 1969. CHAN, W.C., COLBOURNE, M.J., FUNG, S.C., HO, H.C. Bronchial cancer in Hong Kong 1976-1977. British Journal of Cancer 39(2):182-192, February 1979. CHAN, W.C., FUNG, S.C. Lung cancer in nonsmokers in Hong Kong. In: Grundmann, E., Clemmesen, J., Muir, C.S. (eds). Geographical Pathology in Cancer Epidemiology. Cancer Campaign, Vol. 6. New York, Gustav Fischer Verlag, 1982, pp. 199-202. CHARLTON, A. Children’s coughs related to parental smoking. British Medical Journal 288(6431):1647-1649, June 2, 1984. CHEN, Y., LI, W.-X. The effect of passive smoking on children’s pulmonary function in Shanghai. American Journal of Public Health 76(5)515-518, May 1986. COLLEY, J.R.T. Respiratory disease in childhood. British Medical Bulletin 27(1):9-14, January 1971. COLLEY, J.R.T. Respiratory symptoms in children and parental smoking and phlegm production. British Medical Journal 2(5912):201-204, April 27, 1974. COLLEY, J.R.T., HOLLAND, W.W., CORKHILL, R.T. Influence of passive smoking and parental phlegm on pneumonia and bronchitis in early childhood. Lancet 2(7888):1031-1034, November 2, 1974. COLLINS, M.H., MOESSINGER, A.C., KLEINERMAN, J., BASSI, J., ROSSO, P., COLLINS, A.M., JAMES, L.S., BLANC, W.A. Fetal lung hypoplasia associated with maternal smoking: A morphometric analysis. Pediatric Research 19(4):408- 412, April 1985. COMSTOCK, G.W., MEYER, M.B., HELSING, K.J., TOCCKMAN, M.S. Respiratory effects of household exposures to tobacco smoke and gas cooking. American Review of Respiratory Disease 124(2):143-148, August 1981. COODLEY, A. Effects of passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 299(16):897, October 19, 1978. COPELAND, K.T., CHECKOWAY, H., McMICHAEL, A.J., HOLBROOK, R.H. Bias due to misclassification in the estimation of relative risk. American Journal of Epidemiology 105(5):488-495, May 1977. CORREA, P., PICKLE, L.W., FONTHAM, E., LIN, Y., HAENSZEL, W. Passive smoking and lung cancer. Lancet 2(8350):595-597, September 10, 1983. CRIQUI, M.H. Response bias and risk ratios in epidemiologic studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 109(4):394-399, April 1979. DAHMS, T.E., BOLIN, J.F., SLAVIN, R.G. Passive smoking: Effects on bronchial asthma. Chest 80(5)530-534, November 1981. DODGE, R. The effects of indoor pollution on Arizona children. Archives of Environmental Health 37(3):151-155, May-June 1982. DOLL, R., PETO, R. Cigarette smoking and bronchial carcinoma: Dose and time relationships among regular smokers and lifelong non-smokers. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 32(4):303-313, December 1978. 110 DUTAU, G., CORBERAND, J., LEOPHONTE, P., ROCHICCIOLI, P. Manifestations respiratoires liees a l’inhalation passive de fumme de tabac chez l’infant d’age prescolaire [Respiratory signs associated with passive inhalation of tobacco smoke in infants]. Le Poumon et le Coeur 35(2):63-69, 1979. EKWO, E.E., WEINBERGER, M.M., LACHENBRUCH, P.A., HUNTLEY, W.H. Relationship of parental smoking and gas cooking to respiratory disease in children. Chest 84(6):662-668, December 1983. FERGUSSON, D.M., HORWOOD, L.J. Parental smoking and respiratory illness during early childhood: A six year longitudinal study. Pediatric Pulmonology 1(2):99-106, March-April 1985. FERGUSSON, D.M., HORWOOD, L.J., SHANNON, F.T., TAYLOR, B. Parental smoking and lower respiratory illness in the first three years of life. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 35(3):180-184, September 1981. FEYERABEND, C., HIGENBOTTAM, T., RUSSELL, M.A.H. Nicotine concentrations in urine and saliva of smokers and nonsmokers. British Medical Journal 284(6321):1002-1004, April 3, 1982. FOLIART, D., BENOWITZ, N.L., BECKER, C.E. Passive absorption of nicotine in airline flight attendants. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 308(18):1105, May 5, 1983. FRIEDMAN, G.D. Passive smoking in adulthood and cancer risk. (letter). American Journal of Epidemiology 123(2):367, February 1986. FRIEDMAN, G.D., PETTITI, D.B., BAWOL, R.D. Prevalence and correlates of passive smoking. American Journal of Public Health 73(4):401-405, April 1983. GARFINKEL, L. Time trends in lung cancer mortality among nonsmokers and a note on passive smoking. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 66(6):1061-1066, June 1981. GARFINKEL, L., AUERBACH, O., JOUBERT, L. Involuntary smoking and lung cancer: A case-control study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 75(3):463- 469, September 1985. GARLAND, C., BARRETT-CONNOR, E., SUAREZ, L., CRIQUI, M.H., WINGARD, D.L. Effects of passive smoking on ischemic heart disease mortality of nonsmokers: A prospective study. American Journal of Epidemiology 121(5):645-650, May 1985. GILLIS, C.R., HOLE, D.J., HAWTHORNE, V.M., BOYLE, P. The effect of environmental tobacco smoke in two urban communities in the west of Scotland. European Journal of Respiratory Diseases 65(Suppl. 133):121-126, 1984. GOLD, E., GORDIS, L., TONASCIA, J., SZKLO, M. Risk factors for brain tumors in children. American Journal of Epidemiology 109(3):309-319, March 1979. GORDIS, L. Should dead cases be matched to dead controls? American Journal of Epidemiology 115(1):1-5, January 1982. GORTMAKER, S.L., WALKER, D.K., JACOBS, F.H., RUCH-ROSS, H. Parental smoking and the risk of childhood asthma. American Journal of Public Health 72(6):574-579, June 1982. GREENBERG, R.A., HALEY, N.J., ETZEL, R.A., LODA, F.A. Measuring the exposure of infants to tobacco smoke: Nicotine and cotinine in urine and saliva. New England Journal of Medicine 310(17):1075-1078, April 26, 1984. GREENLAND, S. The effect of misclassification in the presence of covariates. American Journal of Epidemiology 112(4)564-569, October 1980. GRUFFERMAN, S., WANG, H.H., DeLONG, E.R., KIMM, S.Y.S., DELZELL, E.S., FALLETA, J.M. Environmental factors in the etiology of rhabdomyosarcoma in childhood. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 68(1):107-113, January 1982. GRUNDMANN, E., MULLER, K.-M., WINTER, K.D., STERLING, T.D. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (Letter). British Medical Journal 282(6270):1156, April 4, 1981. 111 HALEY, N.J., HOFFMANN, D. Analysis for nicotine and cotinine in hair to determine cigarette smoker status. Clinical Chemistry 31(10):1598-1600, October 1985. HAMMOND. E.C., SELIKOFF, I.J. Passive smoking and lung cancer with comments on two new papers. Environmental Research 24(2):444-452, April 1981. HARLAP, S., DAVIES, A.M. Infant admissions to hospital and maternal smoking. Lancet 1(7857):529-532, March 30, 1974. HARRIS, J.E., DuMOUCHEL, W.H. Nonsmoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6296):915, October 3, 1981. HASSELBLAD, V., HUMBLE, C.G., GRAHAM, M.G., ANDERSON, H.S. Indoor environmental determinants of lung function in children. American Review of Respiratory Disease 123(5):479-485. May 1981. HENDERSON, B.E., BENTON, B., JING, J., YU, MC., PIKE, M.C. Risk factors for cancer of the testis in young men. International Journal of Cancer 23(5):598-602. May 1979. HIGGINS, I. Lifetime passive smoking and cancer risk. (letter). Lancet 1(8433):866- 867, April 13, 1985. HIGGINS, M.W., KJELSBERG, M., METZNER, H. Characteristics of smokers and nonsmokers in Tecumseh Michigan. 1: The distribution of smoking habits in persons and families and their relationship to social characteristics. American Journal of Epidemiology 86(1):45-59, July 1967. HILLER, F.C. Deposition of sidestream cigarette smoke in the human respiratory tract. Preventive Medicine 13(6):602-607, November 1984 HIRAYAMA, T. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer: A study from Japan. British Medical Journal 282(6259):183-185, January 17, 1981a. HIRAYAMA, T. Passive smoking and lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 282(6273):1393-1394, April 25, 1981b. HIRAYAMA. T. Nonsmoking wives of smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6296):916-917, October 3, 1981c. HIRAYAMA, T. Nonsmoking wives of smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6304):1465-1466, November 28, 1981d. HIRAYAMA, T. Passive smoking and lung cancer: Consistency of association. (letter). Lancet 2(8364):1425-1426, December 17, 1983. HIRAYAMA, T. Cancer mortality in nonsmoking women with smoking husbands based on a large-scale cohort study in Japan. Preventive Medicine 13(6):680-690. November 1984a. HIRAYAMA, T. Lung cancer in Japan: Effects of nutrition and passive smoking. In: Mizell, M., Correa, P. (eds). Lung Cancer: Causes and Prevention. Deerfield Beach, Florida, VCH, 1984b, pp. 175-195. HIRAYAMA, T. Passive smoking: A new target of epidemiology. Journal of Experimental Clinical Medicine 10(4):287-293, 1985. HOEGG. U.R. Cigarette smoke in closed spaces. Environmental Health Perspectives (2):177-128, October 1972. HOFFMANN, D., HALEY, N.J., ADAMS, J.D.. BRUNNEMANN, K.D. Tobacco sidestream smoke: Uptake by nonsmokers. Preventive Medicine 13(6):608-617, November 1984. HORWOOD, L.J., FERGUSSON, D.M.. SHANNON, F.T. Social and familial factors in the development of early childhood asthma. Pediatrics 75(5):859-868, May 1985. HUGOD, C., HAWKINS, L.H., ASTRUP, P. Exposure of passive smokers to tobacco smoke constituents. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 42(1):21-29, 1978. 112 INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER. Tobacco Smoking. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of the Carcinogenic Risk of Chemicals to Humans, Vol. 38. Lyon, IARC, 1986, pp. 163-314. IVERSON, M., BIRCH, L., LUNDQVIST, G.R., ELBROND, O. Middle ear effusion in children and the indoor environment: An epidemiological study. Archives of Environmental Health 40(2):74-79, March-April 1985. JARVIS, M.J., TUNSTALLPEDOE, H., FEYERABEND, C., VESEY, C., SALOOJEE, Y. Biochemical markers of smoke absorption and self-reported exposure to passive smoking. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 38(4):335-339, December 1984. JONES, J.R., HIGGINS, I.T.T., HIGGINS, M.W., KELLER, J.B. Effects of cooking fuels on lung function in nonsmoking women. Archives of Environmental Health 38(4):219-222, July-August 1983. KABAT, G.C., WYNDER, E.L. Lung cancer in nonsmokers. Cancer 53(5):1214-1221, March 1, 1984. KANNEL, W.B. Update on the role of cigarette smoking in coronary artery disease. American Heart Journal 101(3):319-328, March 1981. KASUGA, H., HASEBE, A., OSAKA, F., MATSUKI, H. Respiratory symptom in school children and the role of passive smoking. Tokai Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine 4(2):101-114, April 1979. KAUFFMANN, F., DOCKERY, D.W., SPEIZER, F.E., FERRIS, B.G., Jr. Respiratory symptoms and lung function in women with passive and active smoking. (abstract). American Review of Respiratory Disease 133(4, part 2):A157, April 1986. KAUFFMANN, F., TESSIER, J.-F., ORIOL, P. Adult passive smoking in the home environment: A risk factor for chronic airflow limitation. American Journal of Epidemiology 117(3):269-280, March 1983. KENTNER, M., TRIEBIG, G., WELTLE, D. The influence of passive smoking on pulmonary function: A study of 1351 office workers. Preventive Medicine 13(6)656- 669, November 1984. KNOTH, A., BOHN, H., SCHMIDT, F. Passiv rauchen als Lungenkrebs-Ursache bei Nichtraucherinnen [Passive smoking as a causal factor of bronchial carcinoma in female nonsmokers]. Medizinische Klinik 78(2):66-69, February 4, 1983. KOO, L.C., HO, J.H.-C., LEE, N. An analysis of some risk factors for lung cancer in Hong Kong. International Journal of Cancer 35(2):149-155, February 15, 1985. KOO, L.C., HO, J.H.-G., SAW, D. Active and passive smoking among female lung cancer patients and controls in Hong Kong. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Cancer Research 4(2):367-375, October-December 1983. KOO, L.C., HO, J.H.G., SAW, D. Is passive smoking an added risk factor for lung cancer in Chinese women? Journal of Experimental and Clinical Cancer Research 3(3):277-283, July-September 1984. KORNEGAY, K.R., KASTENBAUM, M.A. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6296):914, October 3, 1981. KRAEMER, M.J., RICHARDSON, M.A., WEISS, N.S., FURUKAWA, C.T., SHAPIRO, G.G., PIERSON, W.E., BIERMAN, C.W. Risk factors for persistent middle-ear effusions: Otitis media, catarrh, cigarette smoke exposure, and atopy. Journal of the American Medical Association 249(8):1022-1025, February 25, 1983. LEBOWITZ, M.D. Environmental tobacco smoke: 3.3. The effects of environmental tobacco smoke exposure and gas stoves on daily peak flow rates in asthmatic and non-asthmatic families. European Journal of Respiratory Diseases 65(Suppl. 133):90-97, 1984. LEBOWITZ, M.D., ARMET, D.B., KNUDSON, R. The effect of passive smoking on pulmonary function in children. Environment International 8(1-6):371-373, 1982. LEBOWITZ, M.D., BURROWS, B. Respiratory symptoms related to smoking habits of family adults. Chest 69(1):48-50, January 1976. 113 LEE, P.N. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6304):1465-1466, November 28, 1981. LEE, P.N. Passive smoking. (letter). Lancet 1(8275):791, April 3, 1982a. LEE, P.N. Passive smoking. Food and Cosmetics Toxicology 20(2):223-229, April 1982b. LEE, P.N. Lifetime passive smoking and cancer risk. (letter). Lancet 1(8443):1444, June 22, 1985. LEE, P.N., CHAMBERLAIN, J., ALDERSON, M.R. Relationship of passive smoking to risk of lung cancer and other smoking-associated diseases. British Journal of Cancer 54(1):97-105, July 1986. LEEDER, S.R., CORKHILL, R.T., IRWIG, L.M., HOLLAND, W.W. Influence of family factors on asthma and wheezing during the first five years of life. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 30(4):213-218, December 1976a. LEEDER, S.R., CORKHILL, R.T., IRWIG, L.M., HOLLAND, W.W. Influence of family factors on the incidence of lower respiratory illness during the first year of life. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine 30(4):203-212, December 1976b. LEHNERT, G. Roundtable discussion. Preventive Medicine 13(6):730-746, November 1984. LERCHEN, M.L., SAMET, J.M. An assessment of the validity of questionnaire responses provided by a surviving spouse. American Journal of Epidemiology 123(3):481-489, March 1986. LIM, T.P.K. Airway obstruction among high school students. American Review of Respiratory Disease 108(4):985-988, October 1973. MacDONALD, E.J. Nonsmoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6296):917, October 3, 1981a. MacDONALD, E.J. Nonsmoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6304):1465, November 28, 1981b. MANNING, M.D., CARROLL, B.E.. Some epidemiological aspects of leukemia in children. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 19(6):1087-1094, December 1957. MANTEL, N. Nonsmoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6296):914-915, October 3, 1981. MANTEL, N. Passive smoking in adulthood and cancer risk. (letter). American Journal of Epidemiology 123(2):367-368, February 1986. MARTINEZ, F., ANTOGNONI, G., MACRI, F., LEBOWITZ, M., RONCHETTI, R. Distribution of bronchial responsiveness to a constrictive drug in a random pediatric population sample. (abstract). American Review of Respiratory Disease 131(4, part 2):A242, April 1985. MATSUKURA, S., HAMADA, H., SEINO, Y., MURANAKA, H., HIGASHI, E. Passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 312(11):720-721, March 14, 1985. MATSUKURA, S., TAMINATO, T., KITANO, N., SEINO, Y., HAMADA, H., UCHIHASHI, M., NAKAJIMA, H., HIRATA, Y. Effects of environmental tobacco smoke on urinary cotinine excretion in nonsmokers: Evidence for passive smoking. New England Journal of Medicine 311(13):828-832, September 27, 1984. McCONNOCHIE, K.M., ROGHMANN, K.J. Bronchiolitis as a possible cause of wheezing in childhood: New evidence. Pediatrics 74(1):1-10, July 1984. McCONNOCHIE, K.M., ROGHMANN, K.J. Predicting clinically significant lower respiratory tract illness in childhood following mild bronchiolitis. American Journal of Diseases of Children 139(6):625-631, June 1985. MURRAY, A.B., MORRISON, B.J. The effect of cigarette smoke from the mother on bronchial responsiveness and severity of symptoms in children with asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 77(4):575-581, April 1986. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the Process Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1983. 114 NEUTEL, C.I., BUCK, C. Effect of smoking during pregnancy on the risk of cancer in children. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 47(1):59-63, July 1971. O’CONNOR, G., WEISS, S.T., TAGER, I., SPEIZER, F.E. The effect of passive smoking on nonspecific bronchial responsiveness in a population sample of children and young adults. (abstract). Clinical Research 34(2):581A, April 1986. PATHAK, D.R., SAMET, J.M., HUMBLE, C.G., SKIPPER, B.J. Determinants of lung cancer risk in cigarette smokers in New Mexico. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 76(4):597-604, April 1986. PEDREIRA, F.A., GUANDOLO, V.L., FEROLI, E.J., MELLA, G.W., WEISS, I.P. Involuntary smoking and incidence of respiratory illness during the first year of life. Pediatrics 75(3):594-597, March 1985. PERSHAGEN, G., ZDENEK, H., SVENSSON, C. Passive smoking and lung cancer in Swedish women. American Journal of Epidemiology, in press. PETERS, J.M., FERRIS, B.G., Jr. Smoking, pulmonary function, and respiratory symptoms in a college-age group. American Review of Respiratory Disease 95(5):774-782, May 1967. PICKLE, L.W., BROWN, L.M., BLOT, W.J. Information available from surrogate respondents in case-control interview studies. American Journal of Epidemiology 118(1):99-108, July 1983. PIMM, P.E., SILVERMAN, F., SHEPHARD, R.J. Physiological effects of acute passive exposure to cigarette smoke. Archives of Environmental Health 33(4):201-213, July-August 1978. PITTENGER, D.J. Passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 312(11):720, March 14, 1985. PRESTON-MARTIN, S., YU, M.C., BENTON, B., HENDERSON, B.E. N-nitroso compounds and childhood brain tumors: A case-control study. Cancer Research 42(12):5240-5245, December 1982. PULLAN, C.R., HEY, E.N. Wheezing, asthma, and pulmonary dysfunction 10 years after infection with respiratory syncytial virus in infancy. British Medical Journal 284(6330):1665-1669, June 5, 1982. PUKANDER, J., LUOTGNEN, J., TIMONEN, M., KARMA, P. Risk factors affecting the occurrence of acute otitis media among 2-3-year-old urban children. Acta Otolaryngolica 100(34):26&265, September-October 1985. RANTAKALLIO, P. Relationship of maternal smoking to morbidity and mortality of the child up to the age of five. Acta Paediatrica Scandinavica 67(5):621-631, September 1978. RAWBONE, R.G., KEELING, C.A., JENKINS, A., GUZ, A. Cigarette smoking among secondary school children in 1975: Prevalence of respiratory symptoms, knowledge of health hazards, and attitudes to smoking and health. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 32(1):53-58, March 1978. REPACE, J.L., LOWREY, A.H. A quantitative estimate of nonsmokers’ lung cancer risk from passive smoking. Environment International 11(1):3-22, 1985. ROBINSON, B.F. Effects of passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 299(16):896, October 19, 1978. RUSH, D. Respiratory symptoms in a group of American secondary school students: The overwhelming association with cigarette smoking. International Journal of Epidemiology 3(2):153-165, June 1974. RUSSELL, M.A.H., FEYERABEND C. Blood and urinary nicotine in nonsmokers. Lancet 7900(1):179-181, January 25, 1975. RUSSELL, M.A.H., JARVIS, M.J., WEST, R.J. Use of urinary nicotine concentrations to estimate exposure and mortality from passive smoking in non-smokers. British Journal of Addiction 81:275-281, 1986. RUTSCH, M. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 282(6268):985, March 21, 1981. 115 SACKETT, D.L. Bias in analytic research. Journal of Chronic Diseases 32(1-2):5163, 1979. SAID, G., ZALOKAR, J., LELLOUCH, J., PATOIS, E. Parental smoking related to adenoidectomy and tonsillectomy in children. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 32(2):97-101, June 1978. SALOOJEE, Y., VESEY, C.J., COLE, P.V., RUSSELL, M.A.H. Carboxyhemoglobin and plasma thiocyanate: Complementary indicators of smoking behaviour? Thorax 37(7):521-525, July 1982. SAMET, J.M., TAGER I.B., SPEIZER, F.E. The relationship between respiratory illness in childhood and chronic air-flow obetruction in adulthood. American Review of Respiratory Disease 127(4):508-523, April 1983. SANDLER, D.P., EVERSON, R.B., WILCOX, A.J. Passive smoking in adulthood and cancer risk. American Journal of Epidemiology 121(1):37-48, January 1985. SANDLER, D.P., EVERSON, R.B., WILCOX, A.J. Passive smoking in adulthood and cancer risk. (letter). American Journal of Epidemiology 123(2):369-370, February 1986. SANDLER, D.P., EVERSON, R.B., WILCOX, A.J., BROWDER, J.P. Cancer risk in adulthood from early life exposure to parents’ smoking. American Journal of Public Health 75(5):487-492, May 1985. SANDLER, D.P., WILCOX, A.J., EVERSON, R.B. Cumulative effects of lifetime passive smoking on cancer risk. Lancet 1(8424):312-314, February 9, 1985a. SANDLER, D.P., WILCOX, A.J., EVERSON, R.B. Lifetime passive smoking and cancer risk. (letter). Lancet 1(8433):867, April 13, 1985b. SCHENKER, M.B., SAMET, J.M., SPEIZER, F.E. Effect of cigarette tar content and smoking habits on respiratory symptoms in women. American Review of Respiratory Disease 125(6)684-690, June 1982. SCHENKER, M.B., SAMET, J.M., SPEIZER, F.E. Risk factors for childhood respiratory disease: The effect of host factors and home environmental exposures. American Review of Respiratory Disease 128(6):1038-1043, December 1983. SCHILLING, R.S.F., LETAI, A.D., HUI, S.L., BECK, G.J., SCHOENBERG, J.B., BOUHUYS, A.H. Lung function, respiratory disease, and smoking in families. American Journal of Epidemiology 106(4):274-283, October 1977. SCHLESSELMAN, J.J. Case-Control Studies: Design, Conduct, Analysis. Monographs in Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Vol. 2. New York, Oxford University Press, 1982. SCHMELTZ, I., HOFFMANN, D., WYNDER, E.L. The influence of tobacco smoke on indoor atmospheres: I. An overview. Preventive Medicine 4(1):66-82, March 1975. SEELY, J.E., ZUSKIN, E., BOUHUYS, A. Cigarette smoking: Objective evidence for lung damage in teen-agers. Science 172(3984):741-743, May 14, 1971. SHEPHARD, R.J., COLLINS, R., SILVERMAN, F. “Passive” exposure of asthmatic subjects to cigarette smoke. Environmental Research 20(2):392-402, December 1979. SIMS, D.G., DOWNHAM, M.A.P.S., GARDNER, P.S., WEBB, J.K.G., WEIGHTMAN, D. Study of 8-year-old children with a history of respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolities in infancy. British Medical Journal 1(6104):11-14, January 7, 1978. SPRIZER, F.E., FERRIS, B., Jr., BISHOP, Y.M.M., SPENGLER, J. Respiratory disease rates and pulmonary function in children associated with NO2 exposure. American Review of Respiratory Disease 121(1):3-10, January 1980. SPEIZER, F.E., TAGER, I.B. Epidemiology of chronic mucus hypersecretion and obstructive airways disease. Epidemiologic Reviews 1:124-142, 1979. SPINACI, S., AROSSA, W., BURGIANI, M., NORTALE, P., BUCCA, C., DeCONDUSSION, E. The effects of air pollution on the respiratory health of children: A crosssectional study. Pediatric Pulmonology 1(5):262-266, 1985. STERLING, T.D. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 282(6270):1156, April 4, 1981. 116 STEWART, A., WEBB, J., HEWITT, D. A survey of childhood malignancies. British Medica1 Journal 50(86):1495-1508, June 18, 1958. STJERNFELDT, M., BERGLUND, K., LINDSTEN, J., LUDVIGSSON, J. Maternal smoking during pregnancy and risk of childhood cancer. Lancet 1(8494):1350-1352, June 14, 1986. STOBER, W. Lung dynamics and uptake of smoke constituents by nonsmokers: A survey. Preventive Medicine 13(6):589-601, November 1984. SUTTON, G.C. Passive smoking and lung cancer. (letter). British Medicial Journal 282(6265):733, February 28, 1981. SVENDSEN, K.H., KULLER, L.H., NEATON, J.D. Effects of passive smoking in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT). Circulation, Part II, No. 4, October 1985. TAGER, I.B. Passive smoking and respiratory health in children: Sophistry or cause for concern? American Review of Respiratory Disease 133(6):959-961, June 1986. TAGER, LB., MUNOZ, A., ROSNER, B., WEISS, S.T., CAREY, V., SPEIZER, F.E. Effect of cigarette smoking on the pulmonary function of children and adolescents. American Review of Respiratory Disease 131(5):752-759, May 1985. TAGER, I.B., WEISS, S.T., MUNOZ, A., ROSNER, B., SPEIZER, F.E. Longitudinal study of the effects of maternal smoking on pulmonary function in children. New England Journal of Medicine 309(12):699-703, September 22, 1983. TAGER. I.B., WEISS, S.T., ROSNER, B., SPEIZER, F.E. Effect of parental cigarette smoking on the pulmonary function of children. American Journal of Epidemiology 110(1):15-26, July 1979. TASHKIN, D., CLARK, V.A., SIMMONS, M., REEMS, C., COULSON, A.H., BOURQUE, L.B., SAYRE, J.W., DETELS, R., ROKAW, S. The UCLA population studies of chronic obstructive respiratory disease: 7. Relationship between parental smoking and children’s lung function. American Review of Respiratory Disease 129(6):891-897, June 1984. TRICHOPOULOS, D. Passive smoking and lung cancer. (letter). Lancet 1(8378):684, March 24, 1984. TRICHOPOULGS, D., KALANDIDI, A., SPARROS, L. Lung cancer and passive smoking: Conclusion of Greek study. (letter). Lancet 2(8351):677-678, September 17, 1983. TRICHOPOULGS, D., KALANDIDI, A., SPARROS, L., MacMAHON, B. Lung cancer and passive smoking. International Journal of Cancer 27(1):1-4, January 15, 1981. TSOKOS, C.P. Non-smoking wives of heavy smokers have a higher risk of lung cancer. (letter). British Medical Journal 283(6394):1464-1465, November 28, 1981. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE. Smoking and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. DHEW Pub. No. (PHS)79-50066. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office on Smoking and Health, 1979. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. The Health Consequences of Smoking for Women: A Report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office on Smoking and Health, 1986. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. The Health Consequences of Smoking: Cancer. A Report of the Surgeon General. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS)82-59179. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office on Smoking and Health, 1982. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. The Health Consequences of Smoking: Cardiovascular Disease. A Report of the Surgeon General. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS)84-50294. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office on Smoking and Health, 1983. 117 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. The Health Consequences of Smoking: Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. A Report of the Surgeon General. DHHS Pub. No. (PHS)84-50205. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office on Smoking and Health, 1984. U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Smoking and Health. Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. PHS Pub. No. 1103. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 1964. VAN STEENSEL-MOLL, H.A., VALKENBURG, H.A., VANDENBROUCKE, J.P. Are maternal fertility problems related to childhood leukaemia? International Journal of Epidemiology 14(4):555-559, December 1985. VEDAL, S., SCHENKER, M.B., SAMET, J.M., SPEIZER, F.E. Risk factors for childhood respiratory disease: Analysis of pulmonary function. American Review of Respiratory Disease 130(2):187-192, August 1984. VUTUC, C. Quantitative aspects of passive smoking and lung cancer. Preventive Medicine 13(6):698-704, November 1984. WAITE, C.L. Effects of passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 299(16):897, October 19, 1978. WAKEHAN, H. Effects of passive smoking. (letter). New England Journal of Medicine 299(16):896, October 19, 1978. WALD, N.J., BOREHAM, J., BAILEY, A., RITCHIE, C., HADDOW, J.E., KNIGHT, G. Urinary cotinine as marker of breathing other people’s tobacco smoke. (letter). Lancet 1(8370):230-231, January 28, 1984. WALD, N.J., IDLE, M., BOREHAM, J., BAILEY, A. Carbon monoxide in breath in relation to smoking and carboxyhaemoglobin levels. Thorax 36(5):366-369, May 1981. WALD, N.J., RITCHIE, C. Validation of studies on lung cancer in nonsmokers married to smokers. (letters). Lancet 1(8385):1067, May 12, 1984. WALTER, S., NANCY, N.R., COLLIER, C.R. Changes in forced expiratory spirogram in young male smokers. American Review of Respiratory Disease 119(5):717-724, 1974. WARE, J.H., DOCKERY, D.W., SPIRO, A. III, SPEIZER, F.E., FERRIS, B.G., Jr. Passive smoking, gas cooking, and respiratory health of children living in six cities. American Review of Respiratory Disease 129(3):366-374, March 1984. WEINBERGER, S.E., WEISS, S.T. Pulmonary diseases. In: Burrow, G.N., Ferris, T.F. (eds). Medical Complications During Pregnancy. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1981, pp. 405-434. WEISS, S.T., TAGER, I.B., MUNOZ, A., SPEIZER, F.E. The relationship of respiratory infections in early childhood to the occurrence of increased levels of bronchial responsiveness and atopy. American Review of Respiratory Disease 131(4):573-578, April 1985. WEISS, ST., TAGER, I.B., SPEIZER, F.E., ROSNER, B. Persistent wheeze: Its relation to respiratory illness, cigarette smoking, and level of pulmonary function in a population sample of children. American Review of Respiratory Disease 122(5):697- 707, November 1980. WHITE, J.R., FROEB, H.F. Small-airways dysfunction in nonsmokers chronically exposed to tobacco smoke. New England Journal of Medicine 302(13):720-723, March 27, 1986. WHITTEMORE, A., ALTSHULER, B. Lung cancer incidence in cigarette smokers: Further analysis of Doll and Hill’s data for British physicians. Biometrics 32(4):805-816, December 1976. WIEDEMANN, H.P., MAHLER, D.A., LOKE J., VIRGULTO, J.A., SNYDER, P., MATTHAY, R.A. Acute effects of passive smoking on lung function and airway reactivity in asthmatic subjects. Chest 89(2):180-185, February 1986. 118 WOOLCOCK, A.J., PEAT, J.K., LEEDER, S.R., BLACKBURN, C.R.B. (eds.). The development of lung function in Sydney children: Effects of respiratory illness and smoking. A ten year study. European Journal of Respiratory Diseases 65(Suppl. 132):1-137, 1964. WU, A.H., HENDERSON, B.E., PIKE, M.C., YU, M.C. Smoking and other risk factors for lung cancer in women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 74(4):747-751, April 1965. WYNDER, E.L., HOFFMANN, D. Tobacco and Tobacco Smoke: Studies in Experimental Carcinogenesis. New York, Academic Press, 1967. WYNDER, E.L. STELLMAN, S.D. Comparative epidemiology of tobacco-related cancers. Cancer Research 37(12):4608-4622, December 1977. YARNELL, J.W.G., ST. LEGER, A.S. Respiratory illness, maternal smoking habit and lung function in children. British Journal of Diseases of the Chest 73(3):230-236, July 1979.
Feel free to look them up. Not everything is available online. I've got tons more, just gimme awhile to find them and post them.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've actually read about a fifth (okay, more like a tenth) of what you've quoted there, Lyrhawn, e.g.
U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE. Smoking and Health. Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service. PHS Pub. No. 1103. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 1964.
TAGER, I.B. Passive smoking and respiratory health in children: Sophistry or cause for concern? American Review of Respiratory Disease 133(6):959-961, June 1986.
GREENBERG, R.A., HALEY, N.J., ETZEL, R.A., LODA, F.A. Measuring the exposure of infants to tobacco smoke: Nicotine and cotinine in urine and saliva. New England Journal of Medicine 310(17):1075-1078, April 26, 1984.
and they were inconclusive. None of them offered more than an observational study and a steaming pile of correlations.
Edit to add: I will, however, eventually get around to reading them all, so thanks for the list.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
shigosei, one thing about asian cultures that you are omitting is that (at least in Japan) unless you are on your death bed you are expected to show up for work. The facemasks are actually really helpful in terms of not only spreading the disease, but also getting better... the humidity that you rebreath is supposed to help with resperatory illness. After living in Tokyo for a year, I now find living in NYC very gross, and always feel like i am surrounded by germs... especally on the subway.
Posts: 104 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
eros: Some research is not ethical to do. You'd never get a review board to approve an experiment (not correlational) in which the researchers expose subjects to known carcingens from the open, burning end of a cigarette just to see if it causes them cancer or other health problems like closing their mouth over that burning cigarette would.
I think mounds of correlational data make a strong enough case. I, for one, am not willing to give people cancer just to prove to you that second-hand smoke causes cancer.
Edit: If second hand smoke is not the causal variable that would explain the correlational data, what would you propose as the possible variable that could account for the corrrelational data?
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about current medical testing, though?
"Oh, we're pretty sure this drug will lower your chances of a heart attack by 70%. So we're going to give it to these people and not give it to these other people, both of whom currently have the same factors for heart attacks."
Well...you've still kinda caused the people in the control group to have heart attacks.
posted
pH: I guess your comment was for me. The difference is in the pharmaceutical study, one does not know whether the experimental drug will help or not. That is what is currently under investigation. If they already knew then they would have no need to do the study.
In the second hand smoking case, we already know ingredients in cigarettes have been shown to cause cancer. Why would we expect putting one's mouth over the cigarette is that much more dangerous than holding our faces two feet from the smoke and breathing it in.
Posts: 264 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by enochville: pH: I guess your comment was for me. The difference is in the pharmaceutical study, one does not know whether the experimental drug will help or not. That is what is currently under investigation. If they already knew then they would have no need to do the study.
In the second hand smoking case, we already know ingredients in cigarettes have been shown to cause cancer. Why would we expect putting one's mouth over the cigarette is that much more dangerous than holding our faces two feet from the smoke and breathing it in.
Because there is no evidence that there aren't tons and tons of other factors involved in the development of cancer that are NOT second-hand smoke exposure.
I believe studies were done concerning whether or not sealants increase the likelihood of breast cancer.
(Random thought) Did they ever actually do a study on antidepressants causing suicidal tendencies in children and teens, or did they just say, "Oh, it happened to this one kid, so it can happen to your kid, too?"
posted
You kind of set up an impossible standard pH.
You're saying that if you prove that Poison 1 has Effect A, you also have to prove that Poisons 2-10,000,000 don't have Effect A.
I don't understand the logic. Inhaling carcinogens causes cancer, second hand smoke contains levels of carcinogens (and other bad things) that lead to cancer and other diseases. What more do you need to know that hasn't already been covered by the hundreds upon hundreds of studies already done on the subject?
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dab, I'm somewhat aware of the workaholic attitude in Japan. I'm not saying I wanted to adopt all of Asian culture. Just the bowing and masks
pH, I think the suicidal tendencies in teens may have been discovered during studies of the efficacy of the drug in treating depression.
A quick of pubmed central with the words "SSRI" and suicide turned up a few articles and commentary on the issue (It might be quicker to find a good commentary and then look at the bottom for the peer-reviewed papers.) Anyhow, this study seems to indicate that the data were based on self-reporting of suicidal thoughts by people on a particular drug.
My hypothesis, based pretty much on no medical knowledge or expertise whatsoever, is that SSRIs have all sorts of weird side effects when you first start taking them. The antidepressant effect doesn't kick in until later. So you're depressed *and* you feel like crap.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Because there is no evidence that there aren't tons and tons of other factors involved in the development of cancer that are NOT second-hand smoke exposure.
In order to be able to draw conclusions from data where there are numerous possible causes for various effects, you have to control for those other effects in your statistical analysis of the data. Once you have done so, if there is still a strong correlative relationship between the cause and effect of interest, you can start to think about suggesting that there may be a causative relationship there.
In this case, with the number studies showing a correlative relationship -- and this isn't a no-brainer, here, since the suggestion is that long-term exposure to known carcinogens increases risk of cancer -- the likelihood of a causative relationship is high.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm by no means saying that cigarettes are not deadly to their users. I am, however, saying that the deadliness of second hand smoke has not been demonstrated to me in a convincing fashion.
Tough. My firing a rifle in the general direction of a group of people may not be responsible for their gunshot wound, but that doesn't make it alright for me to go around shooting. It's selfish rationalization for me to say, "I like to shoot near people, and I won't stop until someone conclusively proves that my bullets did the damage". Of course, because of ballistics that's a lot easier to prove than the effects of second hand smoke. But the point is that you don't continue to do something that you know is harmful to those around you just because, in your mind, there's an ever so slight chance that it's not that harmful.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to say, this is a pretty absurd argument.
I think that eros is looking for a way to justify continuing to smoke. If smoking is bad for my health, it is my problem. If smoking is bad for everyone else's health as well, I might feel obligated to stop. If I say it is NOT bad for anyone else (even though there is a huge amount of evidence to the contrary), I can continue to smoke without feeling bad about it. And truthfully it doesn't matter if eros or any other smoker believes it really; I believe it and I don't want to be exposed to your poison. Kill yourself in your own house, thank you very much, but leave my lungs out of it. I applaud the government for passing some legislature that actually protects people for a change.
I have never seen these particular ads on TV but I don't have a problem with them. I think they are a little creepy but kinda funny actually. They are no less subversive than ads for other things that can kill you like alcohol or drugs. It is ridiculous to suggest a comparison between racial and religious groups and the "persecution" of smokers.
Posts: 1319 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't actually watch those ads until now.
I tend to agree that I don't see anything morally objectionable about them. It's amounts to social peer pressure. Anyone who has kissed a smoker already knows that though, so I'd say it's aimed at the smoker, to let him/her know that what they are doing is incredibly unattractive and that it'll cost them. I don't see the problem with it.
However, the ad is creepy as all hell. It's slightly amusing, ever so slightly, but mostly is just friggin creepy and weird. While I don't disagree with the message, the method of getting that message across certainly could have been better. Whatever happened to those commercials in the early 90's with the teenagers kissing each other and then sticking their tongues out to the camera only to find out they had the contents of an ashtray in there? Icky, but not creepy.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I firmly believe that there is almost nothing more rude than to smoke around non-smokers.
When I am walking down on a sidewalk, and there are people smoking in front of me, I will hold my breath until I am far clear of them. Niki does the same.
Its nasty, its vile, and I think less of you as a person for doing it. I make no aplogies for that.
If you were to put a bunch of chemicals proven to cause cancer and which are generally harmful to people's health, put it in an aerosol can along with something designed to smell terrible and to stick to clothing for days, and then get in packs and spray it around an area outside a business or on a sidewalk, I would feel about the same about you as I do about smokers in public.
It also makes you look incredibly stupid, but you have the right to be as stupid as you want to be, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Honestly, I will be really pissed if these Lousiaina Clean Air people accomplish their goals. And I don't smoke. I just don't see a problem with people smoking in bars.
Its real quite simple pH.
1) Second hand smoke has been proven to be detrimental to people's health in a serious and life threatening way.
2) Bartenders, watresses, bouncers, and other bar staff spend 8+ hours inhaling massive amounts of second hand smoke during their shift. After a couple of years of working, even if they don't smoke themselves, they are at serious risk of developing health problems due to cigarette smoke inhalation.
3) Workplaces have a legal responsibility to provide a safe work environment for their employees.
I don't see any way allowing smoking in bars could ever be legal given 1, 2, and 3. Its simply a workplace safety issue. Its like an employer having exposed decaying asbestos in there workplace. That's not legal either.
Posts: 5656 | Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Honestly, I will be really pissed if these Lousiaina Clean Air people accomplish their goals. And I don't smoke. I just don't see a problem with people smoking in bars.
Its real quite simple pH.
1) Second hand smoke has been proven to be detrimental to people's health in a serious and life threatening way.
2) Bartenders, watresses, bouncers, and other bar staff spend 8+ hours inhaling massive amounts of second hand smoke during their shift. After a couple of years of working, even if they don't smoke themselves, they are at serious risk of developing health problems due to cigarette smoke inhalation.
3) Workplaces have a legal responsibility to provide a safe work environment for their employees.
I don't see any way allowing smoking in bars could ever be legal given 1, 2, and 3. Its simply a workplace safety issue. Its like an employer having exposed decaying asbestos in there workplace. That's not legal either.
1. No, it hasn't. It has been proven to contain chemicals that can cause health problems. But do we know how much smoke one would have to breathe in order to develop said health problems? Like the dental thread...amalgam fillings and sealants expose patients to harmful chemicals....but we don't think SO FAR that the exposure is enough to cause significant harm.
And I had responses as to how a decent study of second hand smoke is not impossible...but I must go to class. Suffice to say, there ARE ways to go about it.
quote:In this case, with the number studies showing a correlative relationship -- and this isn't a no-brainer, here, since the suggestion is that long-term exposure to known carcinogens increases risk of cancer -- the likelihood of a causative relationship is high.
I'm certainly not trying to argue that the carcinogens present in second hand smoke are magically not harmful when in second hand smoke; what I have not seen is evidence that the small amounts of these carcinogens present in second hand smoke will have any measurable influence in causing new (not aggravating existing) medical conditions in a person, especially in an open atmosphere.
quote:But the point is that you don't continue to do something that you know is harmful to those around you just because, in your mind, there's an ever so slight chance that it's not that harmful.
My whole point is that I don't "know" anything about it. The chances that it's not harmful are not any more slight than the chances that it is.
quote:I think that eros is looking for a way to justify continuing to smoke. If smoking is bad for my health, it is my problem. If smoking is bad for everyone else's health as well, I might feel obligated to stop. If I say it is NOT bad for anyone else (even though there is a huge amount of evidence to the contrary), I can continue to smoke without feeling bad about it.
You're wrong about every assumption you've made there.
The purpose of this thread was to see what other reactions were like regarding a series of ads that attack people for using a product rather than the product, the companies who produce it or the act of using it.
quote:And truthfully it doesn't matter if eros or any other smoker believes it really; I believe it and I don't want to be exposed to your poison. Kill yourself in your own house, thank you very much, but leave my lungs out of it. I applaud the government for passing some legislature that actually protects people for a change.
I'm going to go ahead and point out again that car exhaust is significantly worse for you and far more abundant in almost any public setting than cigarette smoke is - especially now that more and more states are legislating against smoking in any public or private non-residential enclosure.
quote:They are no less subversive than ads for other things that can kill you like alcohol or drugs.
Where exactly do you live that there are subversive ads for drugs? I'm assuming you mean pharmaceuticals and that you don't live in an area where drugs like marijuana are legal.
quote:It is ridiculous to suggest a comparison between racial and religious groups and the "persecution" of smokers.
Easy to say, when you're in the persecuting group. I'm about as conscientious a smoker as they come. How do you imagine the average muslim or Arab American feels getting treated like a terrorist when they've done nothing out of the ordinary wrong?
The ad campaigns I'm objecting to in the first place do not even discuss smoking as a health issue; they jump directly into the cosmetic, superficial issues involved, ignoring health completely. I think it is, therefore, a valid comparison to say that a billboard of that nature is as offensive to me as one that said "Kissing a Jap is just gross."
quote:Its nasty, its vile, and I think less of you as a person for doing it. I make no aplogies for that.
You don't have to. I find your views narrowminded, shortsighted and generalized, and I make no apologies for that, either.
quote:If you were to put a bunch of chemicals proven to cause cancer and which are generally harmful to people's health, put it in an aerosol can along with something designed to smell terrible and to stick to clothing for days, and then get in packs and spray it around an area outside a business or on a sidewalk, I would feel about the same about you as I do about smokers in public.
I'm waiting for you or anyone to answer my question regarding car exhaust, which is much, much more noxious, much more abundant in the open atmosphere and (in my opinion) smells much worse.
(Edited to add the word "when")
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
