MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
The dangers of secondhand smoke have been used to justify banning smoking in public places. This article reviews the evidence and finds the dangers wildly overstated. Using faulty science to stigmatize smokers has pushed them out of society and ignored their rights.
Early arguments for smoking bans at least paid lip service to the idea that restrictions were necessary to protect unwilling bystanders’ health. But as bans have grown ever more intrusive even as the case for expanding them has withered, that justification has been revealed as a polite fiction by which nonsmokers shunted smokers to the fringes of society. It was never just about saving lives.
Comments
Scre 'em - anything to stop smoking is good. It's suicide, and while 2nd hand numbers *may be* off, the aesthetic and health efffects aren't benign. Meanwhule, from the CDC:
by PeraclesPlease on Wed, 02/15/2017 - 9:28pm
Nobody, including the author of the article, disputes that smoking is bad for you. But is smoking bad for other people (so-called "secondhand smoke")? That's the main justification for banning it in public places, and he says it's bad science.
Lots of things are known (or suspected) to be bad for you, including eating meat, cheese, cakes and pastries, fried food, sugar, salt, riding motorcycles, hang gliding, skiing, disparaging Putin... Shall we ban them all, or only the ones you don't partake in?
by Lurker on Sat, 02/18/2017 - 11:20am
As a non-smoker Ive been in the smoking section of a plane flying 13 hours across the Pacific and hung out nightly in a poolhall for teens with largely unbearable smoke. How much it causes cancer fortunately can't tell you, but how much it exacerbates lung problems and impacts normal breathing, yeah. Say bye.
by PeraclesPlease on Sat, 02/18/2017 - 11:32am
Passive smoking also increases asthma and upper respiratory effects. Why should a non-smoker be exposed to these risks?
by rmrd0000 on Sat, 02/18/2017 - 11:38am
I always take my medical information from freelance writers who were former bartenders like the author of the article. I'll wait for future studies from scientific sources. I do note that the increased incidence of lung cancer and asthma associated with secondhand smoke is not addressed. Again I'll wait for controlled scientific studies. The benefit of science is that it is always looking at data and taking the time required to assess if there are risk factors that are better markers for disease. Freelance writers make rapid conclusions not based on systemic reviews of the literature. A scientific analysis looks at statistically valid studies that come to different conclusions and come to a preliminary analysis of what the trends tend to be, a meta-analysis. The article presents only one side of the data. Medical science is hard. This type of freelance writing is not as rigorous from a medical standpoint. We need better scientific education in classrooms so that citizens have means to analyze articles like this one.
by rmrd0000 on Wed, 02/15/2017 - 10:33pm