[extropy-chat] whose ox is gored

[MB]

IMHO the argument about secondhand smoke is a bit overblown. If it
were as absolutely true as the doomsayers claim all of us would
already be dead of smoke related problems. The fact that we aren't and
that many are healthy indicates (to me) that more data needs to be
examined.

That said, I would not choose to smoke around an infant, nor would I
want to smoke where it is obnoxious to others. At a restaurant I do
not much care whether I sit in the smoking or non-smoking section, as
it will be a short stay anyway. And there are other things in my
lifestyle that will IMO have much more effect on my health. Bigger
bang for the buck, so to speak.

The hysterical nicotine-police types who fuss and cry and whine and
scream at every opportunity make life stressful and unpleasant.
Unfortunately, this kind of behaviour tends to spread to other areas.
It takes on an puritanical and evangelical tinge - and *that* stresses
me far more than limited tobacco smoke exposure.

Regards,
MB
a non-smoker


On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:

> I think we have to make a distinction between places where you *have*
> to go and places where you *choose* to go. So I agree with Mike's
> statement for a restaurant but not for an airport.
>
> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:58:54 -0800 (PST), Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > If parents are so abusive as to bring their kids into a smoke filled
> > restaurant, the crime is theirs, not the proprietors.