On 30/08/2011 4:02 a.m., Elmo wrote:

I don't scream (do you?)



I don't, but my mother-in-law does whenever she is having an orgasm,
which is quite often since my father-in-law discovered Viagra. My wife
is no longer so keen to have them visit. Thank God for Viagra.

LOL

On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:35:34 +0100, "'Mike'"
wrote:

snip


Was this the result of an autopsy - or just your guess.
Did it say on the death certificate : Lung Cancer caused by passive
smoking?

- or are you just guessing or suggesting that Lung Cancer is *only* caused
by
inhaling cigarette smoke?

Oh dear :-((

Another smoker trying to justify their addiction to the obnoxious weed.

Why can't they just admit that they are wrong, pack up their vile habit and
stop polluting the air WE breath and the pavements with their dog ends?

.


Oh dear :-((

Another person with an inability to answer simple questions, but the ability to
jump to wrong conclusions. AKA a ****wit.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:18:38 +0100, "Kathy" wrote:

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...
On 28/08/2011 19:35, 'Mike' wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:37:43 +0100,
wrote:





"The Medway wrote in message
...
On 27/08/2011 16:18, Interloper wrote:
"The Medway Handyman" mocked:

Why don't you try getting a life?

Most likely Dave has already got a life and he is trying to hang on
to
it
and his health by avoiding passive smoking.

Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere in
the
world will do.

Margaret Horsborough
25 Colchester Road
Leicester

My next door neighbour when I lived in Leicester in the 60's and 70's

A non smoker, died of Lung Cancer due to secondary/passive smoking
whilst
in
an office environment.


Was this the result of an autopsy - or just your guess.
Did it say on the death certificate : Lung Cancer caused by passive
smoking?

- or are you just guessing or suggesting that Lung Cancer is *only*
caused
by
inhaling cigarette smoke?

Oh dear :-((

Oh dear, oh dear.

Another smoker trying to justify their addiction to the obnoxious weed.

Another non smoker unable to support his biased opinion.

Why can't they just admit that they are wrong, pack up their vile habit
and
stop polluting the air WE breath and the pavements with their dog ends?

Why can't you appreciate that anally retentive, small minded people like
you will believe anything that supports your cause?

Many of your habits might well be vile to me.



On Monday March 7th, 2011, my eldest brother died, quite nastily, from lung
cancer caused by smoking. Smoking can cause lung cancer and lung cancer can
kill. Fact.


Here is a clue: it was your brother who died - not you.

(Another clue : primary smoking is not secondary smoking)

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:00:27 +0100, TGH wrote:

snip

And Roy Castle, a famous case if I am not mistaken.

TGH


Yawn.

You are.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:36:20 +0100, "'Mike'"
wrote:



"Judith" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:40:02 +0100, wrote:

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 17:20:27 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 27/08/2011 16:18, Interloper wrote:
"The Medway Handyman" mocked:

Why don't you try getting a life?

Most likely Dave has already got a life and he is trying to hang on to
it
and his health by avoiding passive smoking.

Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere in
the world will do.

Roy Castle.


Indeed - according to that well known Cancer expert : his wife.

If you could actually point to the autopsy result which confirms what you
say -
it would be much appreciated.

Oh dear :-((

Another smoker trying to justify their addiction to the obnoxious weed.


Oh dear : another ****wit jumps to a wrong conclusion.

On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 19:37:20 +0100, "'Mike'"
wrote:



"Judith" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 21:47:18 +0100, David Rance
wrote:

On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Why don't you try getting a life?

Most likely Dave has already got a life and he is trying to hang on
to it
and his health by avoiding passive smoking.

Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere in
the world will do.

Roy Castle, the entertainer.

Nope.

It is well documented that Roy Castle did die of passive smoking


Please point out the many scientific articles which support you claim.


(Letters from his wife to the Daily Mail do not count as such)



Oh dear :-((

Another smoker trying to justify their addiction to the obnoxious weed.

Another ****wit jumping to wrong conclusions.

In message , Interloper
writes
Having analysed the various passive smoking arguments, "Keith" made the
following contribution to the discussion:

I believe that you are a ****wit. Is that good enough for you?

Rather like 'TMH', if the best you can come up with is a personal insult,
then you have lost the argument.


So some say, but why ?

There is no hard evidence to support it and few have died from it

--
geoff

In message , ARWadsworth
writes
Fuschia wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011 22:06:16 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

David Rance wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Why don't you try getting a life?

Most likely Dave has already got a life and he is trying to hang
on to it
and his health by avoiding passive smoking.

Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere
in the world will do.

Roy Castle, the entertainer.

Nope.

It is well documented that Roy Castle did die of passive smoking,
but if you are simply going to contradict anyone who doesn't agree
with you then I shall not waste my time with you.

He died of lung cancer. Passive smoking was a suggested cause of
that lung cancer. That does not make it a well well documented proof.

He believed it himself. That's good enough for me.

And if he believed that fairies lived at the bottom of the garden?


You mean ...



they don't ?

--
geoff

On Sun, 28 Aug 2011 08:33:52 +0100, (Peter James)
wrote:

snip


For further information see the following URL's.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d.../2/newsid_2493
000/2493567.stm

Mr Castle had never smoked, but said he contracted his illness after years of
playing in smoky jazz clubs



http://www.stopsmokingtoday.com/dync...e_Smoking.html

One US study observed that passive smoking increased the incidence of feline
lymphoma in cats and the likelihood of them developing health complications
increased the longer they were exposed to passive smoking.



Yep - that's proof if ever there was any

In message , "dennis@home"
writes


"Jon" wrote in message
...

Very true - there are a lot of myths about smoking, perpetuated by
those with an agenda and propagated by those who slavishly believe
whatever they're told.

Mostly by the addicts.


For a more balanced view on the subject, the singer Joe Jackson
decided to look into REAL facts regarding smoking and wrote "Smoke
Lies, and the Nanny State"

Addicts and their suppliers always like to look at studies and ignore
those that don't agree with their findings.
remember how many decades the smoking lobby told everyone that smoking
didn't harm the addicts?
remember how many decades the smoking lobby claimed smoking was not
addictive.
Now they claim passive smoking does no harm.

You just can't trust the smoking industry or the addicts, they lie,
they lie lots.

There is no way an addict will admit that he has helped to kill someone
and they will cling on to any sliver of evidence to say they didn't,
such is life and death.

Its pointless arguing with addicts until they are cured.

Well, report back when you've been cured of your addiction to stupidity

What drugs have you tried dennis ?

Alcohol
caffeine
ketamine

?

What has addled those grey cells in your cranium?


--
geoff

In message , The Medway Handyman
writes
On 28/08/2011 18:57, dennis@home wrote:


"Jon" wrote in message
...

Very true - there are a lot of myths about smoking, perpetuated by
those with an agenda and propagated by those who slavishly believe
whatever they're told.

Mostly by the addicts.


For a more balanced view on the subject, the singer Joe Jackson
decided to look into REAL facts regarding smoking and wrote "Smoke
Lies, and the Nanny State"


Hello Dennipoos.

You are well known around here for being a thick ****. This does
nothing to avoid that opinion.

Addicts and their suppliers always like to look at studies and ignore
those that don't agree with their findings.

The anti smoking fascists do exactly that. Any study refuting the
passive smoking myth are suppressed and never published - and they are
legion & many fold.

remember how many decades the smoking lobby told everyone that smoking
didn't harm the addicts?

Remember how the ASF spent years trying to denigrate smokers?

remember how many decades the smoking lobby claimed smoking was not
addictive.

You are going to have to provide some evidence for that.

Now they claim passive smoking does no harm.

You just can't trust the smoking industry or the addicts, they lie, they
lie lots.

Nothing like the anti smoking lobby. When it comes to lies, false
information & fudged reports they are in a league of their own.

Perhaps you would like to check out the well known anti smoking charity
Action on Smoking & Health?

Let me know when you do, we can talk about funding & lying.


There is no way an addict will admit that he has helped to kill someone
and they will cling on to any sliver of evidence to say they didn't,
such is life and death.

There is no way a small minded idiot like you would ever develop the
intellectual capacity to think for himself.

I think you have it slightly wrong there

If Deennis were to call any part of his imagined word into question, his
whole wall would come crumbling down

Take drugs dennis, take lots of them



--
geoff

In message
, mike
writes
On Aug 28, 12:40*am, Jon wrote:

For a more balanced view on the subject, the singer Joe Jackson decided
to look into REAL facts regarding smoking and wrote "Smoke Lies, and the
Nanny State"

It can be downloaded here as a doc or PDF file:

Jon

In what way are Joe Jackson's views on smoking any more "balanced"
than Gary Glitter's views on the age of consent?

Not read it but ...

I think that the general thrust is that he has gone out to find real
facts rather than the oft peddled assumptions

Paul Gadd's sexual preferences are out of tune with the current commonly
accepted norms. I'm not sure what the relevance is

--
geoff

In message , The Medway Handyman
writes
On 27/08/2011 23:05, Huge wrote:
On 2011-08-27, David wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2011, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Why don't you try getting a life?

Most likely Dave has already got a life and he is trying to hang on
to it
and his health by avoiding passive smoking.

Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere in
the world will do.

Roy Castle, the entertainer.

Nope.

It is well documented that Roy Castle did die of passive smoking, but if
you are simply going to contradict anyone who doesn't agree with you

Which he will. There's no point in arguing with junkies.


No point in arguing with anyone if you don't know the facts.

Well, the facts are, if you smoke (not talking about secondary smoking)

you are clogging up your lungs with tars and other carcinogenic
substances, impairing their ability to function properly

the carbon monoxide you inhale preferentially attaches to the
haemoglobin, further reducing the body's ability to get oxygen to the
cells which need it to produce the energy required to function correctly

There are no real benefits from smoking ( slight improvement in memory
aside) - no high, no tripping, no benefit to the body

They are now seriously expensive - what, £7/packet

So it begs the question - other than the nagging little voice of
addiction - why would any rational human want to smoke?

--
geoff

In message , The Medway Handyman
writes
On 28/08/2011 10:20, Peter James wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

In article1k6pbn0.zrjw1i1dikjd4N%pfjames2000@googlem ail.com,
Peter wrote:
Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere in
the world will do.

How about Roy Castle a man who died from lung cancer and who never
smoked. Said he picked up the disease from the night clubs he worked in
and where smoking was rampant.
For further information see the following URL's.

One swallow - even with a famous name - does not a summer make. And even
if it did, there's a very big difference between working all your life in
smoky rooms and having neighbours who smoke outdoors.

Indeed. But did you read the attached URL's?

I suppose you are a strong believer in the tobacco companies assertion
that there is no proven link between tobacco and lung disease?

There is conclusive evidence to link active smoking with lung cancer.


So, why do you smoke?



.



--
geoff

In message , The Medway Handyman
writes
On 28/08/2011 21:07, dennis@home wrote:


"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , dennis@home
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Peter
James wrote:
Could you name someone who as died from passive smoking? Anywhere
in the world will do.

How about Roy Castle a man who died from lung cancer and who never
smoked. Said he picked up the disease from the night clubs he worked
in and where smoking was rampant. For further information see the
following URL's.

One swallow - even with a famous name - does not a summer make. And
even if it did, there's a very big difference between working all your
life in smoky rooms and having neighbours who smoke outdoors.

that's true.. you can choose not to go into smoke filled rooms.

not if your job depends on it.

That's why we have a smoking ban, you can't go into smoke filled rooms
because of your job anymore.

No, we have a smoking ban because a fanatical group of anti smokers,
backed up by the lobbying of multi national drug companies,

Which ones ?

forced it through.

Its undemocratic & basd on false evidence.

Good, though, isn't it



--
geoff