fishermanbmr wrote:
Quote:
Okay, if smoking is a big deal, perhaps they should ban huge SUV's with the 8, 10, 12 cylinder gas engines in heavily polluted cities for dumping more cancerous chemicals in one day than a smoker will his whole life. That is a REAL public health issue.
you make a good point, now give me validation that people are dropping dead from car exhaust and I'll support your issue.
Hehe. More to the point. Give me validation that people are dropping dead from second hand smoke.
The problem with the issue is that it's prone to hijacking based on political goals.
Fact: Some 50,000 people every year die from various heart/lung disease, but do not smoke.
Fact: Second hand smoke does contain some carcinogens that could result in those heart/lung conditions.
Conclusion sold to public: 50,000 people every year die from second hand smoke.
Problem: There are dozens of other sources of carcinogens that we breath every day that could just as easily be causing that 50,000 to die. Car exhaust contains most of the same exact harmful chemicals that second hand smoke does, and the average person is exposed to it far more often then second hand smoke. Same deal with anyone working around any of a number of chemicals. Construction work, mining, agriculture work... all cause exposure to harmful chemicals, which may not be off the chart at any given time (just as second hand smoke isnt), but over years may result in harm.
Heck. You live in an area with power plant (as most of us do). There are some substanes put into the air as a result. What about manufacturing plants? Paper mills? We can clearly understand the idea of car exhaust being bad for us, but car exhaust accounts for something like 10% of the total air pollution in the country. The bulk of it is produced by industry. How much of that can cause some people to develop heart/lung problems?
But we focus on second hand smoke? Why? Because there's money in it. If you can convince the public that it's the primary cause of those 50,000 dead a year, it makes it easier to sue tobacco companies for damages, and the people pushing the anti-smoking issue in the first place make lots and lots of money via donations to their cause, and lawsuit settlements. We attack smoking, not because it can actually be shown to cause even a significant number of those deaths, but because it's the easiest one to attack.