That's true, but in all the studies I've read it was a controlled variable. For instance, in a study in my state, it found (using the most conservative model) that 59 non-smoking bar workers die a year of lung cancer.Originally Posted by YellerDog
I know a lot of bartenders who first-hand smoke.
That's true, but in all the studies I've read it was a controlled variable. For instance, in a study in my state, it found (using the most conservative model) that 59 non-smoking bar workers die a year of lung cancer.Originally Posted by YellerDog
Last edited by AstroBlue; 20 Nov 2004 at 04:50 AM.
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
No, Darwinism at it's best is that I get to have kids and he doesn't (gays don't have the "civil right" to magically make babies with each other yet). Speaking of flaming commie queers, where is your "evidence" that bartenders get lung cancer more than everyone else? Also, lots of bartenders smoke dumbass.Originally Posted by AstroBlue
You do realize that lung cancer isn't a magical disease caused exclusively by tobacco smoke, right? I bet a few non-bartenders a year die of it too. "Astro-Blue, AusTRALLL-ian-for-communist!"Originally Posted by AstroBlue
They however have pagan science and turkey basters to do it without magic.Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Repace JL (2004) Estimated mortality from secondhand smoke among club, pub, tavern and bar workers in New South Wales, Australia. The Cancer Council New South WalesOriginally Posted by SpoDaddy
Junker MH, Danuser B, Monn C, Koller T (2001) Acute sensory response of nonsmokers at very low environmental tobacco smoke concentrations in controlled laboratory settings. Environmental Health Perspectives 109: 1045-1052
Cains T, Cannata S, Poulos R, Ferson MJ, Stewart BW (2004) Designated ‘‘no smoking'' areas provide from partial to no protection from environmental tobacco smoke. Tobacco Control 13:17–22
Neuberger JS and Field RW (2003) Occupation and lung cancer in nonsmokersl Reviews on Environmental Health. 18(4):251-67
Nurminen MM and Jaakkola MS (2004) On the estimation of lung cancer mortality caused by occupational exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in Finland. Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 46(2):93-5
Sasco AJ (2003) Epidemiology of lung carcinoma, Revue du Praticien. 53(7):721-6
Sasco AJ, Merrill RM, Dari I. Benhaim-Luzon V, Carriot F, Cann CI, Bartal M (2002) A case-control study of lung cancer in Casablanca, Morocco, Cancer Causes & Control. 13(7):609-16, 2002 Sep.
Hu J, Mao Y, Dryer D and White K (2002) Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemiology Research Group. Risk factors for lung cancer among Canadian women who have never smoked., Cancer Detection & Prevention. 26(2):129-38
Carrion Valero F, Hernandez Hernandez JR (2002) Passive smoking in adults, Archivos de Bronconeumologia. 38(3):137-46
Johnson KC, Hu J, Mao Y (2002) Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemiology Research Group. Lifetime residential and workplace exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and lung cancer in never-smoking women, Canada 1994-97., International Journal of Cancer. 93(6):902-6
Nurminen MM. Jaakkola MS. Mortality from occupational exposure to environmental tobacco smoke in Finland, Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine. 43(8):687-93, 2001 Aug.
Williams MD and Sandler AB (2001) The epidemiology of lung cancer, Cancer Treatment & Research. 105:31-52
That's what I could find on the first page of a Medline search, do you need more?
Ever used SPSS?Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Indeed. Coal Tar, Nickel, Chromium, Arsenic, Radon, and radiation can also cause it. But are you aware of the incidence of Lung Cancer before the popularisation of cigarette smoking, pre-Great War?Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
All of these studies are put through Statistical Packages for covariates and controls.
Yes, I am such a big communist; I wear red all day long and burn churches. Now, here's some juice and a cookie, run along.Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Last edited by AstroBlue; 20 Nov 2004 at 05:42 AM.
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
That's why I support establishments deciding for themselves whether or not smoking would be allowed within their doors. I don't like the city deciding it for them. If a bartender feared lung cancer from secondhand smoke, however large or small the chance, then they shouldn't work somewhere where people smoke. That's their call. Find a place where they don't if that worries them.Originally Posted by AstroBlue
I guess it's not an issue here and in many other cities anymore either, though.
NYC too, except for a few specific places. It's actually cut down business, but it's nice being about to go out and not reek of cigarettes by the end of the night.Originally Posted by Grave
I haven't smoked in years, so I don't really care. It's actually nice not having to breathe other people's shit. People want to smoke, awesome. Smoke 20 packs a day, I don't care. You're entitled to your rights as a smoker just as I'm entitled to my rights as a non-smoker. I don't see the problem with having to step outside for a smoke, or perhaps having a smokers-only bar or a seperate non-smoking section. I shouldn't have to breathe second-hand smoke but banning smoking from all bars altogether is a bit too much. I certainly remember how good a cigarette went with a Jack and Coke.Granted, I quit a little over a month ago, but the fact remains that I think smoking is a pleasurable activity and there's no reason people shouldn't be able to do it if they want without being treated like lepers and having everyone in the world tell them how horrible it is for them.
Dolemite, the Bad-Ass King of all Pimps and Hustlers
Gymkata: I mean look at da lil playah woblin his way into our hearts in the sig awwwwwww
Yes, sometimes it is a huge pain in the ass to have to go outside to smoke, like when it's 2 degrees or raining outside. If the establishment was non-smoking by choice it'd be completely different, but having it forced by the government is an outrage. The government doesn't mind taxing the hell out of cigarettes or keeping them legal, yet they restrict the rights of people who use the product? That's bullshit. It hurts business and it's not right.
Nobody has yet proven that second hand smoke is anything more than annoying.
How about I use your lungs as an ashtray?Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Hahaha... only if you ignore about 40 scientific studies.Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
I guess I would care if I lived in a Communist country. But here in America we can choose what we do for a living. If bartenders are worried about it they can get another job. And from everything I've heard from places where smoking in bars is illegal, bar workers tend to be quite pissed about it because sales (and therefore tips) are down.Originally Posted by AstroBlue
If this is from the JL Repace study you listed, he included ex-smokers with non-smokers, which is total bullshit. I stopped reading the study there.Originally Posted by AstroBlue
What's the average age that lung cancer is diagnosed at? And what was the average life expectancy prior to 1914?Originally Posted by AstroBlue
Last edited by Saint of Killers; 20 Nov 2004 at 09:02 PM.
Bookmarks