smokers revenge

On Wed, 26 May 2004 19:53:57 -0400, Howie
wrote:

I am smart enough not to compartmentalzie my whole world
into black and white, yes and no, healthy and unhealthy, etc. I am a
cognitively complex guy. I enjoy my smoking addiction. Life is short
when you're having fun, and I hell bent on having all the fun I can
grab, buddy.

Howie

Translation:

I bow at my image whenever I see myself in a mirror, everyone else can
get ****ed and as "smart" as I am, I have very little useful
knowledge.

ZombyWoof wrote:

Oh don't you love those drama queens who make it a five-star
production complete with facial expressions, hand gestures, and the
gaging & dry heaving noises? Makes me want to walk right up to them
and blow a nice billowing cloud of cigar smoke into their faces. And
I don't even smoke cigars. Here hack on this.

I often wonder where all these folks were in the early 60's when I
developed my nasty smoking habit. Although I am certain that a small
percentage of people were seriously bothered by or allergic to ambient
smoke, the numbers now seem staggering.

Perhaps a little, regular exposure helps to build resistence.
Interestingly, the actual data (one study never released to the public)
on childhood exposure to 2nd hand smoke, suggests (though not
significant in the statistical sense) that it provides an ameliorative
effect on later disease. Of course the two studies on adult exposure
that reveal a very small negative effect also had data that were not
statistically significant.

Howie

chip3130 wrote in message 6...
(Asya Kamsky) wrote in
:

In article ,
chip3130 wrote:
Now don't get me wrong, I will never go on a non-smoking cruise again.
The Paradise (which is going smoking), was the most boring ship I have
ever seen. Every bar closed at 9pm, no one to be found after 10pm.
Never saw anyone in any of the nightclubs.

We sailed the Paradise January 2003 and had the opposite of your
experience. We danced till 1 or 2am every night, we ran into a
group of young guys who claimed they had spent $75 on booze on
the first day alone (and watching them drink, I don't doubt it
for a minute!), our problem (as always on Carnival ships) was
trying to decide what to do late at night as we couldn't do
everything.

--
Asya Kamsky


I talked with at least 50 bartenders and assorted help- everyone of them
said that it was normal to see not one person in any of the nightclub/bar
areas after 10pm on every cruise. Anything other than this was a shock for
them. The Paradise was costing Carnival millions in lost revenue (the only
ship to do so)- thus the change over.

Having been on numerous ships, I am used to seeing hundreds of people in
the bars and nightclubs until 4am- not one or two people (if that) like on
the Paradise. Ask around, I have seen posts from at least 20 different
people stating over the life of the non-smoking ship, they saw the exact
same. Yet I have never seen one post like this from any other ship.

There is absolutely no doubt that there is a correlation here.

I went on the Paradise...I have to say, it was a pretty quiet ship,
but I tend to pick quieter ones - not big into the disco scene,
myself. But, the no-smoking aspect of the ship was glorious. First
time I could sit at any casino table and know I wouldn't have to move
because the person next to me lit up. I'm not allergic, but it does
trigger migraines in me, and it makes my clothes stink. The stinky
clothes come back to the cabin with me, and before I know it, my cabin
stinks of cigarette smoke, and I'm not a smoker! Yuck!

Lee

ZombyWoof wrote:


However, since they receive there has to be a signal traveling through
the air. This signal is not a naturally occurring phenomena so it
could be harmful. They haven't been around long enough, nor study
enough to know for sure. On top of that the satellites that they
receive their signals from aren't a part of nature either. As well
as the rockets that they use to launch them into space pollute as
well.

Where my helmut?

Eileen

(Lee) wrote in
om:

I went on the Paradise...I have to say, it was a pretty quiet ship,
but I tend to pick quieter ones - not big into the disco scene,
myself. But, the no-smoking aspect of the ship was glorious. First
time I could sit at any casino table and know I wouldn't have to move
because the person next to me lit up. I'm not allergic, but it does
trigger migraines in me, and it makes my clothes stink. The stinky
clothes come back to the cabin with me, and before I know it, my cabin
stinks of cigarette smoke, and I'm not a smoker! Yuck!

Lee


Yes, I agree, smoke free environments are nice. But, there are two facts
that remain: 1) Carnival has lost millions on one boat, and one boat only.
That being the Paradise, and this is why they are forced to go back to a
smoking allowed ship. Where are the millions going? Lack of sales in
alcohol being the primary one. 2) The staff (who sees thousands of people
each week) all say that the ship is the deadest in the fleet.

I don't care if someone was on board one week and they thought it was busy,
the staff is jumping ship as they are the ones confirming that there is
nothing going on at night to keep them in business.

Again, I wish that this wasn't the case as I like the smoke free ships, but
it sucks to be sitting on vacation with not a thing going on after 10pm.

And to the many people to think that second hand smoke doesn't hurt you-
tell you what, attend an autopsy with me some day where you see the lungs
of a person who never smoked, but lived around second hand smoke. I
guarentee it will change your minds. Or, you can ask any medial doctor, and
I am sure that 99.9% will agree that second hand smoke if very bad for your
health. Come on people, it is 2004, I think we know the effects of
cigarette smoke by now....

Cruising Chrissy wrote in message . ..
On 25 May 2004 20:11:45 -0700, (Reef
Fish) wrote:

The BO/race association remark was a mere personal observation, without
any racist implication nor intent. Never been accused of being a
racist in any context anywhere -- until this implicated accusation here.
My thousands of posts retrievable via groups.google would attest to
the non-racist fact!

You don't understand. The mere mention of certain words labels you a
anti-fill in or a bigot or a racist.

I am afraid I do understand how silly and extreme some folks go,
to be "politically correct" that almost EVERYTHING we encounter
today is speech is a form of euphemism.

No one is humor-impaired anymore. Humor challenged.


Say "Jew."

Now you're an anti-Semite.

I can almost understand. :-)

See how it works?

Did you know that recently the kind of black grouper (my posting
name is Large Nassau Grouper, so I am expert on groupers G)
called Jewfish (whose etymology does not go back to Jew to the
best of my knowledge; no more than Jewel derived from Jew) was
renamed by the politically correct nincompoops I don't know the
PC word for it BG to ... honestly, I don't remember the new
name because the whole idea was so SILLY!

But when I am talking to anyone I suspect may be a nincompoop,
I would be careful to call it a LARGE BLACK GROUPER, because
it is a grouper; a black grouper is the name of a kind of bass;
and of course BLACK is politically very correct.

So there!

Thanks, Chrissy for the hint. :-)

-- Bob.

Howie wrote in message ...

Tom,

Believe it or not, beling intelligent and smoking are not mutually
exclusive.

I am not Tom, but I can relate and subscribe to that remark.

I smoked heavily for 30 years till 1992. I was a certified member
of MENSA (minimum IQ 132) in 1968; certified member of Triple
Nine Society (minimum IQ 150) in 1969. I was STILL members of
those societies prior to quitting smoking in 1992. :-)


I am smart enough not to compartmentalzie my whole world
into black and white, yes and no, healthy and unhealthy, etc.

I would have been able to relate to your statement as one that
appies to you, had you not compartmentalized everyone into racist
and non-racist.


I enjoy my smoking addiction. Life is short
when you're having fun, and I hell bent on having all the fun I can
grab, buddy.

Howie

I have no problem with any of your choices above, although smoking
was not an "addiction" for me. I quit smoking cold-turkey in 1992.
Never missed it one day thereafter. Never smoked another cigarette
since 1992.

I posted that earlier. You were quick to say "that's my man" or
something like that; and then moments later, compartmentalized
me into your "racist" bin for reasons completely unknown to me,
because some pal of yours said I used some no-no word, "race", I
think.

Howie, have sexual intercourse with yourself in the ear! :-)

I said that so as not to rouse up all the other nincompoops. :-))

-- Bob.

Howie wrote in message ...
starwars wrote:

Go **** yourself, moron.



Howie


Brian wrote:


So stop whining please. No one cares.


Wow, how erudite!! You sure your a college professor? You sound more
like a high school kid with 'roid rage.

I am sure that I will not sit back and accept insults from you or any
other ****wit about the choices that I make for myself. As you
associate public smoking with public urination, and I am a public smoker
who has absolutely no guilt or shame about my behavior, you will
understand me very well when I say that I **** on you.

Howie

You have no guilt because you're a filthy pig, which not all smokers
are Im sure. Animals are unashamed of what they do publically, so Im
not surprised to hear this from you. Have you ever been walking down
the sidewalk and some slug in front of you turns and spits on the
sidewalk? You think he's a pig, right? Im sure he doesnt feel guilty
about it. Hes too stupid to know what hes doing.

A lot of people dont feel guilty or responsible when they fling their
car door open and damage your car. Its because they have no concept of
right and wrong, and no understanding of their place in society. If
you dont want people thinking your a filthy pig, then dont act like
one. Otherwise deal with the abuse.

...The question to ask is: How did the person die that was autopsied.
...Probably from old age. A little discolourization of the lungs won't
kill you. ...It's the unseen things like radon gas that are probably
the big killers. ...My Dad smoked steady since the age of 5. ...He died
at 87 from causes totally unrelated to smoking. ..My Brotherinlaw's Dad
developed lung cancer. ...Never smoked; lived in a smoke-free house.
...But worked for years in a basement. ...Jon

chip3130 wrote:


I am sure that 99.9% will agree that second hand smoke if very bad for your
health. Come on people, it is 2004, I think we know the effects of
cigarette smoke by now....

Tell us about the very bad effects of second hand smoke, Chip. I would
like to have the full details of the studies. Your anecdotal
experiences with autopsies are meaningless. I want to see the hard data.

Some studies have shown that living with a smoker (not sitting next to
one occasionally in a bar or casino), increases one's risk of lung
cancer by 14%. The very next question a sophisticated consumer of this
information should ask is "what is the base rate for lung cancer among
non-smokers." Let's say it is 2%, meaning that 2% of the non-smoking
population can expect to contract the disease during their lifetime.
Putting the above "facts" together tells you that a non-smoker who lives
with a smoker has a 2.3% chance of contracting lung cancer in his/her
lifetime. Thus, among 1000 non-smokers who do not live with a smoker,
20 can be expected to contract lung cancer; while among 1000 non-smokers
living with a smoker, 23 can expect to conract lung cancer. So,
assuming statistical significance, which is not the case in most
studies, we can expect very heavy exposure to 2nd hand smoke (e.g.,
living with a smoker) to increase the chance of lung cancer by 3 in 1000
cases. So what do you suppose the data would look like for folks who
spend three weeks per year cruising on a ship?

Now we could do the same kind of research on the increased risk of lung
cancer that is involved when one moves from a rural to an urban area.
Or the increased risk for lung cancer among those who live in
California, as compared to the rest of the Nation. I bet the statistics
would be a lot more frightening than those for heavy exposure to 2nd
hand smoke (i.e., living with a smoker). So I guess all those folks who
choose to raise their kids in CA, or worse move their kids to CA, are
engaged in serious child abuse.

Howie