Smoking

Tanzeylee said:
Go on then point out the part where I said passive smoking doesn't kill.
Although Walking into a smoke filled room for 2 minutes every couple of weeks will NOT give you lung cancer, and no matter how many times you say it, it will not make it true, your scaremongering is what's pathetic
Click to expand...
Sorry mate you are so immature, this subject is beyond you
 
mosssideblue said:
smoker by any chance?
As for picking holes in what I say, you haven't. Your trying to but making yourself look even more immature in your efforts
Click to expand...


No not a smoker.
Your trying to make out everyone is going to die cos they walked into a smokey room which is utter bollocks, and at 46 I might be a lot of things but immature I'm not.
 
The one point I have not seen mentioned (please correct me if I'm wrong) these rules are laid down by the owners of the stadium and surrounding lands Manchester City Council.
Perhaps the club could try and arrange a compromise with them. Is the deliberate ignoring of the rules because they can't do without a cig, or because the rule says they can't.
 
Tanzeylee said:
You can smoke at the bars outside, they provide big ashtrays there.
Click to expand...
Yes I know I poison everyone around me in Buzzer's bar with my filthy antisocial behaviour, but read the Customer Charter.The day they implement it will be the day I'll give up my Season Ticket.
 
Tanzeylee said:
No not a smoker.
Your trying to make out everyone is going to die cos they walked into a smokey room which is utter bollocks, and at 46 I might be a lot of things but immature I'm not.
Click to expand...

What is it Tescos say, every little helps? Well, every little hurts too, when it comes to inhaling smoke and the associated chemicals. I assume you're a medically qualified professional are you? Some people can smoke 40 a day for 50 years and never develop cancer, others can be struck down with it by simply spending time in the company of others who do smoke. There is no cut off line by which above it is dangerous whereas below it is safe. What exactly causes cells in the lungs to mutate and become cancerous? Exposure to chemicals found in cigarette smoke is certainly one of the triggers. How much exposure? You'd be highly, highly unlikely, and extremely unlucky to create the correct set of circumstances to trigger the cancer from a few cigarettes, or from a very small amount of passive smoking, much more likely to be caused by prolonged exposure. Doesn't mean it's safe for people to spend any time in an environment where they are inhaling toxic substances though. The chemicals are proven to be dangerous. "Oh, but it's only a little bit dangerous" isn't an acceptable defence.
 
Matty said:
What is it Tescos say, every little helps? Well, every little hurts too, when it comes to inhaling smoke and the associated chemicals. I assume you're a medically qualified professional are you? Some people can smoke 40 a day for 50 years and never develop cancer, others can be struck down with it by simply spending time in the company of others who do smoke. There is no cut off line by which above it is dangerous whereas below it is safe. What exactly causes cells in the lungs to mutate and become cancerous? Exposure to chemicals found in cigarette smoke is certainly one of the triggers. How much exposure? You'd be highly, highly unlikely, and extremely unlucky to create the correct set of circumstances to trigger the cancer from a few cigarettes, or from a very small amount of passive smoking, much more likely to be caused by prolonged exposure. Doesn't mean it's safe for people to spend any time in an environment where they are inhaling toxic substances though. The chemicals are proven to be dangerous. "Oh, but it's only a little bit dangerous" isn't an acceptable defence.
Click to expand...


Thanks I think you just confirmed everything I've been saying.
 
Tanzeylee said:
Go on then point out the part where I said passive smoking doesn't kill.
Although Walking into a smoke filled room for 2 minutes every couple of weeks will NOT give you lung cancer, and no matter how many times you say it, it will not make it true, your scaremongering is what's pathetic
Click to expand...

Tanzeylee said:
Thanks I think you just confirmed everything I've been saying.
Click to expand...

Actually, I didn't. What I said was that neither you nor I know enough about how cancer is triggered in every single person to accurately say that spending 2 minutes every couple of weeks will NOT give someone lung cancer. Will it give everyone lung cancer? Of course not, that would be a ludicrous thing to say. Is it possible that a relatively small amount of exposure could trigger cancer in someone who is genetically predisposed to contracting cancer? Yes, as every single individual will have their own tolerances and thresholds. People who chose, through entirely selfish methods, to expose others to harmful chemicals, when they know those chemicals can contribute towards people contracting life threatening diseases, should be cut no slack whatsoever.
 
Matty said:
How much exposure? You'd be highly, highly unlikely, and extremely unlucky to create the correct set of circumstances to trigger the cancer from a few cigarettes, or from a very small amount of passive smoking, much more likely to be caused by prolonged exposure. Doesn't mean it's safe for people to spend any time.
Click to expand...


My point was more aimed at this part.
 
Matty said:
How much exposure? You'd be highly, highly unlikely, and extremely unlucky to create the correct set of circumstances to trigger the cancer from a few cigarettes, or from a very small amount of passive smoking, much more likely to be caused by prolonged exposure. Doesn't mean it's safe for people to spend any time.
Click to expand...

Tanzeylee said:
My point was more aimed at this part.
Click to expand...

Which leads me to the points below, which I made earlier.

Matty said:
"Oh, but it's only a little bit dangerous" isn't an acceptable defence.
Click to expand...
 
Matty said:
Which leads me to the points below, which I made earlier.
Click to expand...


I've never said it was acceptable, your not supposed to smoke in there, therefore you shouldn't, but the scaremongering on this thread is quite amusing, there's more chance of me knocking the back doors in of Kylie Minogue than getting cancer from City's bogs.
 
So I was the person that informed the stewards at the WHU game that smoking was taking place in the toilets behind the Family Stand. If these people were banned I wouldn't lose any sleep. As the majority have stated on here, all supporters know the score - it's made very clear at each game. This thread shouldn't be about the rights and wrongs of passive smoking, it's about the supporters not adhering to the rules of the stadium.
 
I agree that smokers shouldn't use confined spaces to smoke (those which are accessed by non-smokers), or create a shitty atmosphere for anyone else, but I'm not going to suggest that a 30-60 second toilet stop on such an irregular basis is a serious health risk for individuals. At least not whilst I'm driving around spewing noxious toxins from the back of my car. Surely I'm equally at risk of bring called selfish?

I think the issue is far more related to the unpleasant environment it creates for non-smokers (and probably many regular smokers) in the toilets, rather than any serious threat to one's health. It's not enjoyable standing in thick clouds of smoke and having your clothes smell like you're a heavy smoker, especially when it's not out of choice.
 
I smoke but do not believe on imposing my habbit on others so never do stuff like that.
I enjoy pubs shoving us into our own little cancer corner so we can cough and splutter giggles at you norms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top