Is smoking around children abusive?
No just plain stupid ,smoking at all.
You can claim that all you want, but I survived a childhood hell of secondhand smoke. Both parents smoked until I was away at college. My first six winters I had pneumonia. I never made it through a school year without missing at least three weeks
Absolutely, it's wrong and unfair.
Shazam - you're right - they didn't ask me. (Laughing slightly).
I do feel that, through the ignorance of society and their own addictive denial, they raised me abusively, though they meant no harm. They just ignored their son's obvious suffering.
The case against second hand smoke is truthfully smoke & mirrors. Here's a synopsis of why the data is crap, but google and you'll find hundreds more: www.cato.org/publications/commentary/secondhand-smoke-charade
and often more. Fortunately I was the smartest kid in class. After the pneumonia, it was asthmatic bronchitis, caused and prolonged by continued exposure to the toxic smoke. My Mom smoked for 40 years, quit for 40, then COPD killed her. My Dad's
Disrespectful and unhealthy, yes. Abusive, no.
The stuff is in the air; it gets into other people's lungs; it causes mutations in DNA; mutations can & many times do result in cancer. I'm not even talking about other adverse effects. I've used a compound found in 2nd-hand smoke myself, & I
susan - thanks so much. I knew this wasn't your specialty, but you're my most reliable source who's even in that neighborhood. I shall sweeten with less worries now! :-)
Not what I'm claiming. This is just a Q of good science. The studies used for the demonization of 2nd hand smoke did not use good research methodology.
Extremely bad idea yes
Yes, second hand smoke is terrible in general.
If the child has asthma or other respiratory issues, then yes. I am 56 years old, EVERYONE smoked around us, I never smoked, I'm fine.........
Let's heap on more and more behavioral crimes.
know what it can do when it reaches cells, however it gets there.
Yes my mother in law was not allowed in our house and I never took my children to her house cause she refused to stop smoking around my sons, both had bronchitis they would have to have breathing treatments before I told her to stop coming over
Susan, the issue I have is when laws are erected around junk science. It's happened more than once. SHS is as far as I know an example of that. I'm not advocating smoking, and if the SHS data is there , I'll change my tune. So far, I haven't seen it.
susan, can you tell me anything about the relative safety of Splenda and Truvia(Stevia) as compared to Aspartame? Everybody cautions me about Aspartame, but I really like these other two sweeteners and hope they're not sautéeing my liver, etc. :-)
You're quite welcome, as always. I just wish I had something less flabby to tell you. I really should do a survey of the current literature & see if I can come to some more solid conclusions.
And I haven't read Shazam's SHS article yet either...
I do not smoke. I am sick unto death of Smoke Nazis!
I'm having a VERY lazy Sunday, not actually getting anywhere with anything... I have stacks of other stuff I need to do too (like 3 weeks of accumulated mail, & bills).
lungs healed up fine and he diedwith only three weeks' warning of gall bladder cancer. I'm still on asthma meds and a nebulizer.
No, but I bet it soon will be
Susan - thoughts?
Good luck with that! I'm playing catch-up too.
No, but it shouldn't be done.
Reformed smokers are the worst.
Shazam, I haven't read that article yet, but I have worked with people who did 2nd-hand smoke research (my field in grad school was genetic toxicology; looking at mutagenesis/carcinogenesis caused by environmental chemicals), & I don't believe
Shazam - Oh, thanks for the nudge. Forgot. Still have to read...
tlaney - I haven't kept up with the research on these. I was never convinced that aspartame was that bad (there was a lot of *incorrect* negative info on the internet years ago).
their work was "smoke & mirrors" or bad science at all. Maybe some work was, but there's been a LOT of it, & I just don't believe it's all bad.
..I can't remember if I found anything particularly bad about Splenda. I was suspicious of stevia before it went mainstream - I *never* believe that something is OK just because it is "natural" or has been used by some tribe for centuries... but
..when it went mainstream I looked around a little.. again, I can't remember exactly what I found, but nothing that really concerned me. At any rate, I use both Splenda (or generic) & stevia, although I'm trying to cut my use to nothing, but
not for reasons of concern about the chemicals themselves.
None of these fit into the category of what I have any specific training to understand, unless they're shown to be mutagens, which I don't believe they have been.
Susan, the link I posted was for a op-Ed. I try not post links to peer-rev materials as many fins them hard to digest. You obviously will not. The link below was for a 39 yr cohort in CA of 118K participants. It was pub in BMJ in 03. Give it a read?
It's just a question. :)