University of Louisiana prepares smoke- and tobacco-free policy

[Just1More]

and ive also taken care of patients and watched them die because they were told smoking wasnt bad for you back then...makes sense right? (and they would never admit that smoking was the cause...even up until their last breath)
i encourage you to watch someone die who smoked all their life...its a dreadful way to watch someone die.
good luck with your logic though, hope it works out for you.

I hate smoking (cigarettes)... but one of the unintended consequences of disallowing a smoker from smoking in public, is that they will make up for it in closed confines (vehicles, dorms, apartments, etc) where small children will get the brunt of it. I simply do not believe smoking in the great outdoors is where others obtain the effects of second hand smoke. I'd love to figure out ways to eliminate all cigarette smoking. But, when you impose actions to eliminate what I consider to be an annoyance to others, more than a health hazard, you have to consider the unintended consequences. The answer should be adequate designated smoking areas within the campus.

[Turbine]

yes there is 3rd hand smoke. these things arent just "invented". studies have shown that there are increased incidences of children developing lung disorders from parents smoking (even when not smoking in their home) common factor being the clothes they wear comes in contact with the children.
god forbid non-smokers are health conscience...

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

[CajunsHat]

And how many have you watched die from "second hand smoke" or your new bogeyman "third hand smoke"?

And, yes, I've seen it. I've watched them die of other things too. Just as painful. Just as permanent.

my point was not that the passive interactions of smoke kill people...it was that just because you dont believe in something doesnt make it "un true" or "B-S". So, just because u dont recognize what the latest research is sayin...doesnt make it "invented" or "BS".

But to answer your question, i have actually witnessed a patient die from "second hand smoke". she never smoked a day in her life but her husband did. and she passed away just like a typical "smoker" would...

[Hammer58]

my point was not that the passive interactions of smoke kill people...it was that just because you dont believe in something doesnt make it "un true" or "B-S". So, just because u dont recognize what the latest research is sayin...doesnt make it "invented" or "BS".

But to answer your question, i have actually witnessed a patient die from "second hand smoke". she never smoked a day in her life but her husband did. and she passed away just like a typical "smoker" would...

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?

[CajunsHat]

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.

[CajunsHat]

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?

[RCAJUN90]

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.

[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)

[RCAJUN90]

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! = - )

[DaddyCajun]

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.

[Just1More]

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.

[Turbine]

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.