Any smokers in the forum?

Peter wrote: Tried it as a young teen, got really sick, never did it since.

Probably the number one way us non smokers get started not smoking.

Which makes me curious how many smokers had a bad first encounter but still took up smoking anyway...

kibble_alex wrote: Depends on whether you live in any of these places or not http://www.livescience.com/environment/061018_polluted_places.html. In which case you will die twice as fast

"Air can hurt you too
Air can hurt you too
Some people say not to worry about the air
Some people never had experience with..."  Talking Heads



Edited by Slartibartfast - November 10 2008 at 08:34

My wife's successfully given it up twice since I've known her.  Unfortunately got started again in February.

Had to vote non-smoker, as I've been on nicotine replacement therapy for a few months.  I can recommend the nicotine lozenges. 

Edited by Floydoid - November 12 2008 at 12:10

Peter wrote: Disgusting, silly, pointless, poisonous, expensive, smelly and polluting habit

But sooo satisfying, Peter

Peter wrote: Why do almost all smokers feel they are free to litter everywhere, with their discarded toxic butts?

I'm glad you qualified that with "almost"; I too cannot stand it when people throw their cigarette ends anywhere they please; you'll hopefully remember that when V&I visited that place we always carried a sealed box for our dog-ends & left nary a one to be seen < smug grin

^lol

There is a debate going around the campus here of whether it should ban smoking, which I think is a misdirected and selfish idea. I can understand bans on smoking by doorways and wanting to keep streets clean of butts. However, the campus is big, and to want people to cross a long distance just to smoke is unfair. It seems to me that a lot of non-smokers seem to think it is a right to not encounter unpleasant or infringing odors every once in awhile. By such a logic, couldn't the strong use of cologne be banned as well? Of course, smoking causes cancer, but a momentary sniff of a trace of tobacco smoke is not going to make any noticeable difference in the length of your life. Making the campus smoke-free would be discriminatory unless smoking areas were established at reasonable places of access around campus.

Yes,pot smokers too!

Bring back Opium dens - at least they were dry and warm, unlike designated smoking area's which are anything but. I honestly couldn't give a crap where I smoke as long as I'm left to do it in peace, I've been ostracised for being a selfish and antisocial pollutant and a walking health-risk to millions and I can accept that, I unreservedly apologise for anyone who has inadvertently inhaled any of my unwanted smoke over the years, it was never my intention to share, just an unfortunate side-effect of a world that didn't know any better from an age that was none the wiser. I'd just like some comfort in return for making the working, shopping and eating environments cleaner and more pleasant - just some warmth, protection from the elements and perhaps somewhere to sit down, if that's not asking too much - after all, Southern Britain doesn't quite have the same climate as Southern California, so al fresco anything is not as accommodating as it should be (we even wear thermals on the beach in high summer most years) - and due to my advancing years, somewhere I can walk to without the need for a base-camp and Sherpas would be nice.

I can buy into that. Containment sounds like a better alternative for everybody anyway.  I am all for letting bars have smoking, as long as they are not eateries.  But smoking dens would be right on.

On the subject of Britain, I was there just before the ban took effect. I was amused by the smoking areas in Heathrow.  The whole airport smelled like smoke even with no-smoking signs everywhere. Then we would round a corner and see a smoking corral. The billowing smoke from the area rivaled a steel mill.

Tapfret wrote: Selfish? To make a more pleasant environment for those who don't smoke? Do you know how little smoke it takes to set off an asthma attack?  Its fair and unselfish to expect those people to have to make detours to avoid smokers and smoking areas?

It's much fairer to expect non-smokers to make a detour of a few feet that to expect smokers to make a detour of half a mile to smoke. Remember, this is a college campus, not a neighborhood with private residences.

Again, this could be offset with smoking areas close to dorms. But then there are people who are not satisfied with having 99.99999% of the entire outside world smoke-free, they seem to want, even demand the right to that last tiny refuge for smokers.

It's not even a matter of rights, it's a matter of decency and fairness. Some people who've written to the school paper's opinion section, vigilant non-smokers they are, seem to think that the unhealthiness of smoking justifies their lack of fairness toward people who do it.