Liverpool FC Forum

by **dawson99** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:38 pm

but how can they decide? the pubs are not owned by the government? they are owned by indivduals who pay the governemtn to run!

it should be up to the pub owner, unless the government owns pubs, then they can do what they like!

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:38 pm

Mercury you can get in much higher levels by eating seafood - lets ban all seafood. Lead you can get in much higher levels drinking tap water - lets ban water. Chrome which is KNOWN to cause AD is knowingly put in your water just so it looks clearer , etc etc

Because aluminum is so pervasive in the environment, to the point of being unavoidable, researchers have long been studying its effects on humans. This research has revealed a link between aluminum intake and neurological dementia in kidney dialysis patients (dialysis encephalopathy). In recent years, the public and the media have become concerned about other possible adverse effects of aluminum on human health, including its role in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease). In addition, questions have been raised about the potential risks to infants who drink baby formula containing aluminum.

ban all aluminium pans as well

by **shanks72** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:40 pm

dawson99 wrote:ok, one of the locals in my pub. hes gotta be 90. he was in world war 2. he actually stormed normandy (or so he says) hes now in a wheelchair. virtually no pension. but he loves his bitter and a few ciggies.

now someones gotta wheel him out onto the street so he can smoke? something hes been doing for 75 years?

F*ck off.

Ok he is an old war hero who's served his country...fine..

and so he now has the right to kill innocent members of the public by 'allowing' them to passively breathe his smoke.

It sounds harsh but it's true...

If I smoked, I wouldn't do it around other people if I knew it would put their health at risk.

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:41 pm

s@int wrote:Mercury you can get in much higher levels by eating seafood - lets ban all seafood. Lead you can get in much higher levels drinking tap water - lets ban water. Chrome which is KNOWN to cause AD is knowingly put in your water just so it looks clearer , etc etc

You appear to be in denial that those chemicals mentioned are good for you.

Cigarette smoke contains 69 carcinogenic substances, drinking water does not.

It is no coincidence that smokers die younger ON AVERAGE than non-smokers.

by **dawson99** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:43 pm

non smokers dont live longer, it just seems longer :;):

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:44 pm

dawson99 wrote:but how can they decide? the pubs are not owned by the government? they are owned by indivduals who pay the governemtn to run!

it should be up to the pub owner, unless the government owns pubs, then they can do what they like!

Because the individual has the right to work in a healthy work environment - it is about respecting the health of others. If every pub/restaurant in the UK was smoking only, where does someone who aspires to be a top bartender go - they are forced to work in a smoking environment?

Where are their rights?

Do they also not have a right?

Where are their aspirations left?

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:44 pm

Taking in fluoride definitely has deleterious consequences for the brain. Pathological conditions of the brain have been studied by Russians, Chinese, the United States Public Health Service (USPHS), and others since 1978. For instance, in their 1978 book Fluoridation, the Great Dilemma, three medical authors describe the findings of practicing Soviet physicians. The Russian physicians observed that 79% of patients with occupational fluorosis show a series of chalky‑white, irregularly distributed patches on the surface of the enamel which become infiltrated by yellow or brown staining or other discolorations on teeth from fluoride ingestion. With these patches, say the Russians, the patients "demonstrate dysfunction of subcortical axial nonspecific structures of the brain."9

Moreover, the 1991 review, Fluoride Benefits and Risks, published by the USPHS, states that there is "relative impermability of the blood‑brain barrier to fluoride." This mineral does penetrate the brain's first line of defense against toxins and potentially may be responsible for various brain syndromes such as senile dementia, schizophrenia, and Alzheimer's disease.10

Recent studies from China on the relationship between drinking fluoridated water by residents in endemic Chinese dental fluorosis areas and the population's intelligence quotient, contain significant references and discussions. They indicate that diminishing IQ for people living in dental fluorosis areas has been known since 1989. Chinese studies indicate that the influence of a high fluoride environment on the intelligence of children may occur early in development such as during the stages of embryonic life or infancy when differentiation and growth are more rapid. Ultramicroscopi study of embryonic brain tissue obtained from termination of pregnancy operations in endemic fluorosis regions showed "differentiation of brain nerve cells were poor, and brain development was delayed. ‑11,12

The incidence of thigh bone fractures at the femoral neck in those people 65 years of age and older was compared in three communities in the State of Utah. Among the Utah towns, one of them had its water artificially fluoridated to one part per million. The other two did not. Measured over a seven year period, the relative risk of hip fracture for women drinking fluoridated water increased by 1.27, and for men the risk rose to 1.41. As a conclusion to their study, the four medical researchers state, "We found a significant increase in the risk of hip fracture in both men and women exposed to artificial fluoridation at one ppm, suggesting that low levels of fluoride increase the risk of hip fracture in the elderly"

ENJOY YOUR WATER

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:45 pm

s@int wrote:Mercury you can get in much higher levels by eating seafood - lets ban all seafood. Lead you can get in much higher levels drinking tap water - lets ban water. Chrome which is KNOWN to cause AD is knowingly put in your water just so it looks clearer , etc etc

Because aluminum is so pervasive in the environment, to the point of being unavoidable, researchers have long been studying its effects on humans. This research has revealed a link between aluminum intake and neurological dementia in kidney dialysis patients (dialysis encephalopathy). In recent years, the public and the media have become concerned about other possible adverse effects of aluminum on human health, including its role in Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease). In addition, questions have been raised about the potential risks to infants who drink baby formula containing aluminum.

ban all aluminium pans as well

Does an aluminum pan contain 69 carcinogenic substances proven time and time and again to cause cancer?

You can try and justify that smoking a cigarette is somehow healthy for you but I am fairly certain you are in a minority.

It contains 400 chemicals, 69 deadly.

It is a PROVEN killer, why do you think the anti-smoking lobby is so big?

Because they have had relatives die of smoking induced illnesses, because it is a KILLER.

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:48 pm

It depends what you are cooking in it.

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:48 pm

The radioactive compounds found in highest concentration in cigarette smoke are polonium-210 and potassium-40. Other radioactive compounds present include radium-226, radium-228 and thorium-228. Radioactive compounds are well established as carcinogens.

I'm not going to argue over the health effects of smoking, it is so bloody obvious it's unhealthy, the stats are there, it kills.

by **dawson99** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:49 pm

LFC2007 wrote:
dawson99 wrote:but how can they decide? the pubs are not owned by the government? they are owned by indivduals who pay the governemtn to run!

it should be up to the pub owner, unless the government owns pubs, then they can do what they like!

Because the individual has the right to work in a healthy work environment - it is about respecting the health of others. If every pub/restaurant in the UK was smoking only, where does someone who aspires to be a top bartender go - they are forced to work in a smoking environment?

Where are their rights?

Do they also not have a right?

Where are their aspirations left?

waiters and barstaff dont have aspirations!!! if they did they wouldnt be waiters or bar staff!!!!

the owner of the pub should have the right to decide whther the premises that own should be smoking or non smoking.

the staff have the right to decide to work in a smoke atmosphere or not.

the non smoker has the right to f*ck off if they dont like it.

now the non smoker has no rights? a man buys a pub. he buys it himself, with me?

now he cant smoke on land he owns because the government says so? the government doesnt own the land, how can they have the right?

it has to be about choice and democracy and the freedom to decide for yourself!

the government is taking that away and you like it?

commie
:pirate

by **shanks72** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:50 pm

dawson99 wrote:so shanks, would u ever go out with a smoker?

I went out for a couple of months with a guy who smoked...

although he went outside to smoke (without being asked

)

He only smoked roll-ups, don't know if they are better or worse.

I had to dump him though as he was a compulsive liar...

The smoking I could tolerate, funnilly enough, and it was my choice.

When it boils down to it it's all about choice...which I've said before...
All the while there are smokers around non-smokers don't usually have one.

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:51 pm

And here's the arsenic answer btw:

"Epidemiological evidence has indicated that arsenic and cigarette smoking exposure act synergistically to increase the incidence of lung cancer. Since oxidative damage of DNA has been linked to cancer, our hypothesis is that aerosolized arsenic and cigarette smoke work synergistically to increase oxidative stress and increase DNA oxidation in the lung. To test this hypothesis male Syrian golden hamsters were exposed to room air (control), aerosolized arsenic compounds (3.2 mg/m 3 for 30 minutes), cigarette smoke (5 mg/m 3 for 30 minutes), or both smoke and arsenic. Exposures were for 5 days/week for 5 or 28-days. Animals were sacrificed one day after the last exposure. In the 28-day group, glutathione levels and DNA oxidation (8-oxo-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-oxo-dG)) were determined. Our results show that in the 28-day arsenic/smoke group there was a significant decrease in both the reduced and total glutathione levels compared with arsenic or smoke alone. This correlated with a 5-fold increase in DNA oxidation as shown by HPLC. Immunohistochemical localization of 8-oxo-dG showed increase staining in nuclei of airway epithelium and subadjacent interstitial cells. These results show that dual exposure of arsenic and cigarette smoke at environmentally relevant levels can act synergistically to cause DNA damage. "

by **LFC2007** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:53 pm

dawson99 wrote:now he cant smoke on land he owns because the government says so? the government doesnt own the land, how can they have the right?

Wrong. he can smoke on that land if he has a private residence above.

Is it that hard to go up those stairs and light up, with me?

by **account deleted by request** » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:54 pm

If I didn't want to fight I wouldn't join the Army. If I didn't want to deal with criminals I wouldn't join the police, if I didn't want to breath in smoke and smell of alcohol I wouldnt work behind a bar.

Liverpool FC Forum

July 1st - Comin up....

Who is online