Today I'm happy about......

[Montreal Wanderer]

There is a difference as well in that you can drive without a seatbelt everyday and do absolutely no harm to yourself whatsoever.
However smoke a cigarette just once a day and you are actually doing yourself harm without question.

I'm quite prepared to treat that as the absolute gobbledegookeric paranoiaic twaddle that it is. I spent eight weeks in a wheelchair and on a walking stick from going for a paddle in a boat. How I wish I'd lay on the beach and smoked cigarettes instead.

shush!! you'll set monty off again!! was it a sea-boat??

No you won't set me off again. Actually it was amusing the first time you went fishing with the sea kayak allusion, ho hum the second but now by the third shot it has had its day I think. Perhaps you don't and will carry on. i don't really care - anyway I thought Tango had destroyed himself surfing.

[Prufrock]

There is a difference as well in that you can drive without a seatbelt everyday and do absolutely no harm to yourself whatsoever.
However smoke a cigarette just once a day and you are actually doing yourself harm without question.

I'm quite prepared to treat that as the absolute gobbledegookeric paranoiaic twaddle that it is. I spent eight weeks in a wheelchair and on a walking stick from going for a paddle in a boat. How I wish I'd lay on the beach and smoked cigarettes instead.

Argue with the vast body of research. Smoking is bad for you. For many it gives them a terminal disease. In others it contributes to indirectly to the quickening and/or worsening of other conditions. In other lucky people it merely reduces their life expectancy some over what it would be if they didn't smoke and has a small negative effect on their day to day health.

What is not arguable anymore is that it is indeed bad for people's health.

Not only is that bullshit, it sounds like a quote from Brasseye, Mr Blackwood.

They're changes in relative risk. It's undeniable that smoking is, statistically very bad for you. It's also undeniable that some people smoke without suffering any health problems on account of it. It's undeniable that some people don't wear a seatbelt and are fine, and some people don't and aren't. Some people even do and aren't fine. The numbers aren't the same for each, but that's bullshit you've written there.

Either way, what business is it of anybody else's providing it causes them no harm?

And Bish, not that's it's any use, but I'm fine with you not wearing a seatbelt as long as you don't hurt anybody else.

[thebish]

There is a difference as well in that you can drive without a seatbelt everyday and do absolutely no harm to yourself whatsoever.
However smoke a cigarette just once a day and you are actually doing yourself harm without question.

I'm quite prepared to treat that as the absolute gobbledegookeric paranoiaic twaddle that it is. I spent eight weeks in a wheelchair and on a walking stick from going for a paddle in a boat. How I wish I'd lay on the beach and smoked cigarettes instead.

shush!! you'll set monty off again!! was it a sea-boat??

No you won't set me off again. Actually it was amusing the first time you went fishing with the sea kayak allusion, ho hum the second but now by the third shot it has had its day I think. Perhaps you don't and will carry on. i don't really care -

obviously not!

[BWFC_Insane]

There is a difference as well in that you can drive without a seatbelt everyday and do absolutely no harm to yourself whatsoever.
However smoke a cigarette just once a day and you are actually doing yourself harm without question.

I'm quite prepared to treat that as the absolute gobbledegookeric paranoiaic twaddle that it is. I spent eight weeks in a wheelchair and on a walking stick from going for a paddle in a boat. How I wish I'd lay on the beach and smoked cigarettes instead.

Argue with the vast body of research. Smoking is bad for you. For many it gives them a terminal disease. In others it contributes to indirectly to the quickening and/or worsening of other conditions. In other lucky people it merely reduces their life expectancy some over what it would be if they didn't smoke and has a small negative effect on their day to day health.

What is not arguable anymore is that it is indeed bad for people's health.

Not only is that bullshit, it sounds like a quote from Brasseye, Mr Blackwood.

They're changes in relative risk. It's undeniable that smoking is, statistically very bad for you. It's also undeniable that some people smoke without suffering any health problems on account of it. It's undeniable that some people don't wear a seatbelt and are fine, and some people don't and aren't. Some people even do and aren't fine. The numbers aren't the same for each, but that's bullshit you've written there.

Either way, what business is it of anybody else's providing it causes them no harm?

And Bish, not that's it's any use, but I'm fine with you not wearing a seatbelt as long as you don't hurt anybody else.

Everyone who smokes will be less healthy than if they didn't. Everyone who smokes has build up of tar and chemicals in the lungs and tissues. It's unavoidable.

Some people will of course never notice. It won't have a huge effect on them. It may well shorten their life of course but that data is harder to measure.

Some people can for example eat high cholesterol diets without raising their cholesterol levels significantly or getting high blood pressure or any of the other direct symptoms of an unhealthy fat rich diet. However, they would undoubtedly still be healthier if they were not consuming those food stuffs in that amount.

[thebish]

And Bish, not that's it's any use, but I'm fine with you not wearing a seatbelt as long as you don't hurt anybody else.

many thanks, Pru! 99% of the time I wear a seat belt - it's the sensible thing to do... occasionally I forget to put it on - and notice after a while - and decide not to put it on whilst driving as I haven't got far to go - and it feels good!

that's all!

[mrkint]

HAPPY THREAD.

[TANGODANCER]

No you won't set me off again. Actually it was amusing the first time you went fishing with the sea kayak allusion, ho hum the second but now by the third shot it has had its day I think. Perhaps you don't and will carry on. i don't really care - anyway I thought Tango had destroyed himself surfing.

Not quite Monty. If I remember, my first post, after it happened, said I'd taken on the California surf...in a boat. That in itself at my age was lunacy enough. I'd never have tried a Pointbreak, California Girls or no...

[thebish]

i think i may have seen this or something similar a while ago - but have rediscovered it - and it is making me laugh!

http://www.deanliou.com/winrg/winrg2.htm

[mrkint]

He beat a girl with tremendous legs ....

He beat a girl, with his legs ?? B'stard.


Well done Kinty, full of admiration.

Mummy .... photo of those legs please. .... I KNOW you took some.

Your lucky day bobo - couple of photos have emerged on facebook from the night. Though probably doesn't do her justice. yer perv

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 3700_n.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 0013_n.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Yeah... much better in person.

[mrkint]

Lol

http://usvsth3m.com/post/54590722640/er ... y-shame-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and also, this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaIq9o1H1yo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

o_O

[bobo the clown]

Lol

http://usvsth3m.com/post/54590722640/er ... y-shame-it" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and also, this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaIq9o1H1yo
o_O

I'm getting the word ............... smug.

[Wandering Willy]

Blah blah blah about the effects of secondary smoking.

You are more likely to get cancer from eating a pork chop once a week than you are from breathing in someone else's smoke.

Do carry on with the propaganda though.

[BWFC_Insane]

Blah blah blah about the effects of secondary smoking.

You are more likely to get cancer from eating a pork chop once a week than you are from breathing in someone else's smoke.

Do carry on with the propaganda though.

600,000 people every year die from diseases caused by second hand smoke. So it's not completely irrelevant.

And the pork chop analogy is poor. I can if I wish choose to eat or not eat a pork chop, having weighed up the risks and benefits if I so want, or not if I choose not to.

However, prior to the change in law, I could not always choose if I wanted to inhale second hand smoke or not.

[Worthy4England]

Blah blah blah about the effects of secondary smoking.

You are more likely to get cancer from eating a pork chop once a week than you are from breathing in someone else's smoke.

Do carry on with the propaganda though.

I'm going to stop smoking pork chops as a result of this. No doubt about that.

[thebish]

Blah blah blah about the effects of secondary smoking.

You are more likely to get cancer from eating a pork chop once a week than you are from breathing in someone else's smoke.

Do carry on with the propaganda though.

I'm going to stop smoking pork chops as a result of this. No doubt about that.

you should also stop inhaling other people's pork chops...

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

600,000 people every year die from diseases caused by second hand smoke. So it's not completely irrelevant.

I'm interested to know how this is determined as incontrovertible fact?

[BWFC_Insane]

600,000 people every year die from diseases caused by second hand smoke. So it's not completely irrelevant.

I'm interested to know how this is determined as incontrovertible fact?

I read it on the interweb so it must be true.......

[thebish]

600,000 people every year die from diseases caused by second hand smoke. So it's not completely irrelevant.

I'm interested to know how this is determined as incontrovertible fact?

the widely quoted figure comes from a 2010 study published in the Lancet in early 2011 - "Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries"

(Mattias Öberg PhD, Prof Maritta S Jaakkola PhD, Prof Alistair Woodward PhD, Armando Peruga DrPH, Dr Annette Prüss-Ustün PhD)

the conclusions were as follows:

Worldwide, 40% of children, 33% of male non-smokers, and 35% of female non-smokers were exposed to second-hand smoke in 2004. This exposure was estimated to have caused 379 000 deaths from ischaemic heart disease, 165 000 from lower respiratory infections, 36 900 from asthma, and 21 400 from lung cancer. 603 000 deaths were attributable to second-hand smoke in 2004, which was about 1·0% of worldwide mortality. 47% of deaths from second-hand smoke occurred in women, 28% in children, and 26% in men. DALYs lost because of exposure to second-hand smoke amounted to 10·9 million, which was about 0·7% of total worldwide burden of diseases in DALYs in 2004. 61% of DALYs were in children. The largest disease burdens were from lower respiratory infections in children younger than 5 years (5 939 000), ischaemic heart disease in adults (2 836 000), and asthma in adults (1 246 000) and children (651 000).

NB: The disability-adjusted life year (DALY) is a measure of overall disease burden, expressed as the number of years lost due to ill-health, disability or early death.

whether you count that as incontrovertible fact or not is a matter of personal judgement - not MANY things are incontrovertible facts, are they? but that's where BWFCi's figure (rounded down!) comes from...

[Bruce Rioja]

I'm going to stop smoking pork chops as a result of this. No doubt about that.

Whenever I try cooking pork chops one has to inhale them prior to extinguishing them.