University of Louisiana prepares smoke- and tobacco-free policy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turbine

I don't believe lungs were designed for smoking but I seriously doubt the study about "increased incidences."

I'm not bashing your quote, I read it elsewhere and from an authority on the subject. It didn't make sense then or now.

The culture used to be smoke any time any where.

This new culture of mostly segregated smoking by a shrinking portion of the population, simply doesn't allow for "increased incidences"

jmo

---

i respect your opinion. But there is on going research into "third hand smoke." And current research is showing that the pollutents from smoking do linger around on clothes, furniture, etc...this research material is new and im not advocating that its "set in stone to be true" but it does seem to have some growing merit. IMO
im not gonna post links to research articles. but anyone who realllllly wants to look further into just to prove a point, feel free to go to Dupre Library or any library with research articles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hammer58

And once you get your way and smoking is outlawed, what will be your excuse then for people dying of lung cancer? Maybe it will be "residual smoke". Or maybe just the memory of smoke.

And while we are using anecdotal evidence I know a number of lifelong smokers who lived to a ripe old age before arriving at the same destination as every non-smoker. How do you explain that?

---

u mad bro?

simplessimism? That's not a word. Enjoy your life but don't force you habits on others. How hard is that to understand? When I was a smoker, I never smoked inside. Most cigar smokers don't inhale but they enjoy lighting one up and puffing away. Outside I say enjoy! Inside I say don't light the stogie. If you get hooked on cigars by standing next to someone enjoying one then it's your fault.

since this thread has taken a small turn...

honestly, i see no harmful effects of ruling a campus to be "smoke-free"

Just like i believe every hospital should be "smoke-free" as well.

it only does good...does not harm. (except ____ off the smokers)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hammer58

And once you get your way and smoking is outlawed, what will be your excuse then for people dying of lung cancer? Maybe it will be "residual smoke". Or maybe just the memory of smoke.

And while we are using anecdotal evidence I know a number of lifelong smokers who lived to a ripe old age before arriving at the same destination as every non-smoker. How do you explain that?

---

You mean you haven't found a cure for death Hammer? You really need to find one before you light up again! = - )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

i respect your opinion. But there is on going research into "third hand smoke." And current research is showing that the pollutents from smoking do linger around on clothes, furniture, etc...this research material is new and im not advocating that its "set in stone to be true" but it does seem to have some growing merit. IMO
im not gonna post links to research articles. but anyone who realllllly wants to look further into just to prove a point, feel free to go to Dupre Library or any library with research articles.

---

I certainly agree with the 3rd hand smoke research, as WE in the medical field know that the skin is our largest organ and also the bodies largest portal into the body. Everyone has an acid base barrier that the epidermis uses to aid in trying to prevent viruses and bacteria from entering our bodies, along with other pathogens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

since this thread has taken a small turn...

honestly, i see no harmful effects of ruling a campus to be "smoke-free"

Just like i believe every hospital should be "smoke-free" as well.

it only does good...does not harm. (except ____ off the smokers)

---

So you believe the smokers are better off leaving the campus, grabbing their little child from the sitter, and lighting up in the confines of their car? I know you don't agree with that, but it is an unintended consequence. Our office complex in BR instituted a "No smoking anywhere around our multiple building complex". It was intended to force the remaining smokers that did not succeed (or refused to participate) in the smoking cessation classes we offered. As a result, those remaining smokers would hide behind buildings near our complex, or even walk across busy streets to find a place to smoke. We finally decided to designate a safe outside area for them to smoke. It was safer (and less liable) than having them get run over or raped behind some building on their break.

I don't like poorly thought out plans that produce unintended consequences. X percent of 18,000 students are going to go to great lengths to find a place to smoke, even if it produces dangers, rather than giving up smoking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

i respect your opinion. But there is on going research into "third hand smoke." And current research is showing that the pollutents from smoking do linger around on clothes, furniture, etc...this research material is new and im not advocating that its "set in stone to be true" but it does seem to have some growing merit. IMO
im not gonna post links to research articles. but anyone who realllllly wants to look further into just to prove a point, feel free to go to Dupre Library or any library with research articles.

---

I'm not doubting the danger, I am doubting "increased incidences.

Years ago 3rd hand smoke was inescapable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just1More

So you believe the smokers are better off leaving the campus, grabbing their little child from the sitter, and lighting up in the confines of their car? I know you don't agree with that, but it is an unintended consequence. Our office complex in BR instituted a "No smoking anywhere around our multiple building complex". It was intended to force the remaining smokers that did not succeed (or refused to participate) in the smoking cessation classes we offered. As a result, those remaining smokers would hide behind buildings near our complex, or even walk across busy streets to find a place to smoke. We finally decided to designate a safe outside area for them to smoke. It was safer (and less liable) than having them get run over or raped behind some building on their break.

I don't like poorly thought out plans that produce unintended consequences. X percent of 18,000 students are going to go to great lengths to find a place to smoke, even if it produces dangers, rather than giving up smoking.

---

i understand your gripe...and to my knowledge, or from what ive been told by certain people, there will be a small designated area for smokers. but the intent of this new rule is to remove the smokers from more public areas of campus (side walks, building entrances, benches, etc...) But like i also said previously, i dont have sympathy for smokers. its something they chose to get addicted to...so if rules are to be set that limit them from doing so, i say "oh well."

I have no sympathy for anyone who smokes, but I do worry about this big brother attitude we all have accepted. First the smoker, and before you know it there will be sin taxes on sugar, butter, meat. We already have it for alcohol, and other vices. You simply are missing the big picture.

Soon and currently the EPA is and will be taxing your carbon use. You will be big brother-ed into poverty. Don't fret that is OK because Big Brother will subsidize your vegetables, and solar cells from all the evil doers, and finally they will subsidize your bicycle from Chevron, Exon/Mobile, and British Petroleum.

China is loving our abandonment of heavy industry, China cares little for pollution, balancing hiring practices, or class action law suits. No doubt you will probably love poverty in your Utopian world, at least you will only be dying from poverty related issues. And since you value studies so much there are numerous studies that show conclusively that poverty reduces health, and your life length by more than any other vice by a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

i understand your gripe...and to my knowledge, or from what ive been told by certain people, there will be a small designated area for smokers. but the intent of this new rule is to remove the smokers from more public areas of campus (side walks, building entrances, benches, etc...) But like i also said previously, i dont have sympathy for smokers. its something they chose to get addicted to...so if rules are to be set that limit them from doing so, i say "oh well."

---

It isn't my "gripe". I don't smoke (except cigars in wide open spaces). I'm glad to hear they've got designated areas. To ignore the unintended consequences of any "rule" is becoming habitual in this country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunEXPRESS

I have no sympathy for anyone who smokes, but I do worry about this big brother attitude we all have accepted. First the smoker, and before you know it there will be sin taxes on sugar, butter, meat. We already have it for alcohol, and other vices. You simply are missing the big picture.

Soon and currently the EPA is and will be taxing your carbon use. You will be big brother-ed into poverty. Don't fret that is OK because Big Brother will subsidize your vegetables, and solar cells from all the evil doers, and finally they will subsidize your bicycle from Chevron, Exon/Mobile, and British Petroleum.

China is loving our abandonment of heavy industry, China cares little for pollution, balancing hiring practices, or class action law suits. No doubt you will probably love poverty in your Utopian world, at least you will only be dying from poverty related issues. And since you value studies so much there are numerous studies that show conclusively that poverty reduces health, and your life length by more than any other vice by a lot.

---

I have a lot of sympathy for anyone with a terminal disease. Often it is deserved like smoking like a chimney will kill you. I have an Aunt that smoked two packs a day for 60 years. She will celebrate her 85 birthday soon. She is the exception to the rule about smoking. My wife has an uncle that was a big time alcoholic until his 88th birthday. He swore off the booze and died four years later. Lifestyle choices are big predictors of longevity. No doubt about it. If you smoke you will probably die before you should. However, it's not etched in stone. Also consider the uncle of my wife missed in life. He missed babbling to a nurse and messing in his pants.

So let me decide how I want to live my life. If smoking gives me joy and I don't impose on anyone else, let me be. Some people enjoy Jet ski, sky diving or driving motorcycles etc.... I think it's stupid and many die doing these things but it has no effect on me. Let them be and enjoy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

u mad bro?

---

Yep, tired of Nannies like you trying to dictate my life, Dr. Bloomberg. BTW, is it Ok if I have a Big Gulp?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaddyCajun

I certainly agree with the 3rd hand smoke research, as WE in the medical field know that the skin is our largest organ and also the bodies largest portal into the body. Everyone has an acid base barrier that the epidermis uses to aid in trying to prevent viruses and bacteria from entering our bodies, along with other pathogens.

---

Then why haven't we succumbed to all the pesticides in the air that our skin is exposed to? Hey, whatever happened to all that "research" that said breast implants would turn women into cripples, cause lupus, death, etc.? Weren't they recently quietly debunked? Hollywood sure seems to be thriving? And what about the studies about artificial sweeteners that basically put one of them out of business? I believe that study was discredited as well.

Hey, I bet if I rub 400 times your body weight of just about any substance on your skin it's going to cause problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCAJUN90

I have a lot of sympathy for anyone with a terminal disease. Often it is deserved like smoking like a chimney will kill you. I have an Aunt that smoked two packs a day for 60 years. She will celebrate her 85 birthday soon. She is the exception to the rule about smoking. My wife has an uncle that was a big time alcoholic until his 88th birthday. He swore off the booze and died four years later. Lifestyle choices are big predictors of longevity. No doubt about it. If you smoke you will probably die before you should. However, it's not etched in stone. Also consider the uncle of my wife missed in life. He missed babbling to a nurse and messing in his pants.

So let me decide how I want to live my life. If smoking gives me joy and I don't impose on anyone else, let me be. Some people enjoy Jet ski, sky diving or driving motorcycles etc.... I think it's stupid and many die doing these things but it has no effect on me. Let them be and enjoy.

---

Oh ____!!!! I was a paratrooper too!!! Why the ____ am I not dead?!!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunsHat

But like i also said previously, i dont have sympathy for smokers. its something they chose to get addicted to...so if rules are to be set that limit them from doing so, i say "oh well."

---

Welcome to America, where we stand up and fight for the freedoms of all mankind.*




*Unless they annoy us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just1More

So you believe the smokers are better off leaving the campus, grabbing their little child from the sitter, and lighting up in the confines of their car? I know you don't agree with that, but it is an unintended consequence. Our office complex in BR instituted a "No smoking anywhere around our multiple building complex". It was intended to force the remaining smokers that did not succeed (or refused to participate) in the smoking cessation classes we offered. As a result, those remaining smokers would hide behind buildings near our complex, or even walk across busy streets to find a place to smoke. We finally decided to designate a safe outside area for them to smoke. It was safer (and less liable) than having them get run over or raped behind some building on their break.

I don't like poorly thought out plans that produce unintended consequences. X percent of 18,000 students are going to go to great lengths to find a place to smoke, even if it produces dangers, rather than giving up smoking.

---

It amazes me that as a country we haven't figured out that an addict isn't going to stop using because someone passed a law or rule against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunRebel

Welcome to America, where we stand up and fight for the freedoms of all mankind.*

*Unless they annoy us.

---

Pussification of America....

+1 (for the post)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hammer58

Then why haven't we succumbed to all the pesticides in the air that our skin is exposed to? Hey, whatever happened to all that "research" that said breast implants would turn women into cripples, cause lupus, death, etc.? Weren't they recently quietly debunked? Hollywood sure seems to be thriving? And what about the studies about artificial sweeteners that basically put one of them out of business? I believe that study was discredited as well.
Hey, I bet if I rub 400 times your body weight of just about any substance on your skin it's going to cause problems.

---

Hey they have NEW Silicone Breast Implants! If the protective covering they are incased in ruptures they no longer run all over in the patients body. The sales reps liken them to "Gummy Bears" in viscosity and feel!!! They just go in pull out the Gummy Bear Implant and put in another one!

Hammer, I don't want anything 400 times my weight on me, big dawg! Hey the rep did not say how they taste! Further research needed!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCAJUN90

I have a lot of sympathy for anyone with a terminal disease. Often it is deserved like smoking like a chimney will kill you. I have an Aunt that smoked two packs a day for 60 years. She will celebrate her 85 birthday soon. She is the exception to the rule about smoking. My wife has an uncle that was a big time alcoholic until his 88th birthday. He swore off the booze and died four years later. Lifestyle choices are big predictors of longevity. No doubt about it. If you smoke you will probably die before you should. However, it's not etched in stone. Also consider the uncle of my wife missed in life. He missed babbling to a nurse and messing in his pants.

So let me decide how I want to live my life. If smoking gives me joy and I don't impose on anyone else, let me be. Some people enjoy Jet ski, sky diving or driving motorcycles etc.... I think it's stupid and many die doing these things but it has no effect on me. Let them be and enjoy.

---

Sorry bad wording, I do have empathy for those people with smoking related diseases not sympathy for their social exile.

I am not so sure it is as hard to quit as we are told. My dad had a small growth on his tonsil and quit after forty years. Never picked up another, never got grumpy, never got nervous. Not only did he quit smoking he quit his daily six pack of Schlitz beer, and coffee in the morning all on the same day. He simply made up his mind. I think he was was made of better stuff than most.

I have seen a whole generation quit. Some with more difficulty than others but quit they did. I do not buy the I cannot quit excuse. They like the tobacco.

Ragin Pagin...where else can you find 100+ health related posts on a sports fan web site...nice.

Most of our rivals can't get 100 in a month this time of year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunEXPRESS

Sorry bad wording, I do have empathy for those people with smoking related diseases not sympathy for their social exile.

I am not so sure it is as hard to quit as we are told. My dad had a small growth on his tonsil and quit after forty years. Never picked up another, never got grumpy, never got nervous. Not only did he quit smoking he quit his daily six pack of Schlitz beer, and coffee in the morning all on the same day. He simply made up his mind. I think he was was made of better stuff than most.

I have seen a whole generation quit. Some with more difficulty than others but quit they did. I do not buy the I cannot quit excuse. They like the tobacco.

---

You can quit but it is far from easy. Your dad was made of some tough stuff. They say it's harder to quit smoking than heroin. I stopped drinking coffee about three years ago. No doctor told me to stop I just lost my taste for the stuff. That was really easy to quit. I can smell someone smoking a block away. It's not an unpleasant smell to me and I start to get the urge.

This is kind of off topic but I never liked the seat belt laws. If I decide not to wear one I'm hurting nobody but myself. It's just another example of the erosion of our personal freedom and privacy.

I strongly dislike motorcyclists. Not personally but their hobby. Mainly because they can die so easily. I don't get the allure but hey if they enjoy it, more power to them. I try to drive past them or stay far back. There are also the suicidal riders weaving in and out of traffic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CajunEXPRESS

Sorry bad wording, I do have empathy for those people with smoking related diseases not sympathy for their social exile.

I am not so sure it is as hard to quit as we are told. My dad had a small growth on his tonsil and quit after forty years. Never picked up another, never got grumpy, never got nervous. Not only did he quit smoking he quit his daily six pack of Schlitz beer, and coffee in the morning all on the same day. He simply made up his mind. I think he was was made of better stuff than most.

I have seen a whole generation quit. Some with more difficulty than others but quit they did. I do not buy the I cannot quit excuse. They like the tobacco.

---

There's a difference between social exile and forced exile.

If say a bar wants to practice social exile and ban smoking you'll never hear a peep out of me. In fact I pretty much exclusively go to non smoking bars these days because I've grown to hate smelling like nasty cigarettes even though I don't smoke.

And addiction is way more complicated than simply working on willpower. For every person like your dad there are dozens who could never manage to cut the habit. Lower smoking rates today are more a result of a younger generation never starting than an older generation quitting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCAJUN90

You can quit but it is far from easy. Your dad was made of some tough stuff. They say it's harder to quit smoking than heroin. I stopped drinking coffee about three years ago. No doctor told me to stop I just lost my taste for the stuff. That was really easy to quit. I can smell someone smoking a block away. It's not an unpleasant smell to me and I start to get the urge.

This is kind of off topic but I never liked the seat belt laws. If I decide not to wear one I'm hurting nobody but myself. It's just another example of the erosion of our personal freedom and privacy.

I strongly dislike motorcyclists. Not personally but their hobby. Mainly because they can die so easily. I don't get the allure but hey if they enjoy it, more power to them. I try to drive past them or stay far back. There are also the suicidal riders weaving in and out of traffic.

---

Here is the deal IMO about such laws as helmet laws, seat belt laws for YOU or ME. It is my choice, but since we have a social contract to spend whatever it takes to take care of people making stupid high risk choices they should at least bare the cost of such behavior. A special fee/tax, or proof of insurance seems appropriate as a letter of permission to not take care of YOU or ME would never be accepted.

How far should the high risk fees go? That is pretty easy we can get actuarial stats, http://www.pstat.ucsb.edu/actuary.htm

on the activity and society would decide what level is an acceptable non fee/tax risk and which are not. It then becomes a simple matter of insuring or taxing such behavior and the costs associated with it. Smoke til your lips fall off but do not expect your neighbors to support you, blast your brains out on a Harley sans helmet do not ask me to pay for your 24/7 life support.

I totally support peoples right to live and die doing stupid things, I just do not want to be on the financial hook for their choices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Just1More

"Oil and Gas Companies" have diversified holdings, first of all. And they are all "energy companies". When product x is either depleted or forced limited, they will be the first to fund the new energy investment. That's about like saying that once the Apple computer sales are depleted, Apple will be out of business. The iPod, iPad, iPhone are products that are succeeding that depleting product.

Solyndra doesn't own the sun. Shell may end up as the great new technology breakthrough investor behind solar energy utilization. You're mixing up companies, resources, products, markets, and technology in improper combinations. The only fact right now relevant to Solyndra and our government is... the two should never have met. I'm an electrical engineer, so any lesson you can give on "depreciation versus depletion", I can school you in the reality of solar conversion of light to electrical energy.

Oh, and the tortoise and the hare don't give a ____ about who in your example wins. Stupid lazy people aren't going to win any races. Use that as your new motto and then read my book, "The Other Prize".

---

Sure they diversify...but most make the mistake of diversifying in their own industry. I highly doubt when oil runs out that any of the big energy companies will exist. I didn't see any Exxon stations in The Road Warrior. They are all too busy chasing the hot plays. Once oil goes...they will crumble...as will the world at large. We tend to make the same mistakes we have always made over and over again.

I didn't even come up with those three companies. Direct your rant at Zee.

The tortoise won because he took his time instead of sprinting...rarely in the oil industry do you see anything but companies, especially the big conglomerates, sprinting like their hair is on fire. They could use a little tortoise in them...as could most of America.