|
|
Topic Originator: Tad Allagash
Date: Thu 2 Jan 09:52
‘In Turin, it is forbidden to smoke in front of children or pregnant women while outside.’
So you’re supposed to ask random women if they’re pregnant before lighting up? Awkward 😆.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 2 Jan 10:15
According to the article it`s mostly symbolic as the authorities concede it would be near impossible to enforce and there is no expectation on private individuals or businesses to do so.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Thu 2 Jan 12:28
Quote:
Tad Allagash, Thu 2 Jan 09:52
‘In Turin, it is forbidden to smoke in front of children or pregnant women while outside.’
So you’re supposed to ask random women if they’re pregnant before lighting up? Awkward 😆.
Hopefully it`ll move the onus on smokers to go and find a very quiet place. I was sitting outside Sainsbury`s a wee while ago and someone came over and started smoking. It`s rank and the sooner it`s banished from society the better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Thu 2 Jan 15:55
Quote:
ipswichpar, Thu 2 Jan 12:28
Quote:
Tad Allagash, Thu 2 Jan 09:52
‘In Turin, it is forbidden to smoke in front of children or pregnant women while outside.’
So you’re supposed to ask random women if they’re pregnant before lighting up? Awkward 😆.
Hopefully it`ll move the onus on smokers to go and find a very quiet place. I was sitting outside Sainsbury`s a wee while ago and someone came over and started smoking. It`s rank and the sooner it`s banished from society the better.
As much as I can sympathise with thinking its rank etc I honestly think saying something like that should be banished because you don’t like it is crazy.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 2 Jan 16:29
It’s a bit more than that though. Apart from the passive smoking health risks, people’s clothes stink after standing next to a smoker…
If you want to do self harm then fine, but not where it negatively impacts those standing next to you
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Thu 2 Jan 16:57
Quote:
DBP, Thu 2 Jan 16:29
It’s a bit more than that though. Apart from the passive smoking health risks, people’s clothes stink after standing next to a smoker…
If you want to do self harm then fine, but not where it negatively impacts those standing next to you
Aw jeezo! At least come up with new honest arguments against it or be honest and say “I don’t like it so nobody can do it”
I don’t think my clothes have ever smelt of cigarettes since the smoking ban came in.
Why do people keep wanting to ban things other people do? Will you want to ban something you want to do soon?
We should also ban cycling. I mean it’s dangerous to fall off and every so often a pedestrian gets hit. It’s all fine and well saying “nobody is dead” but what would you say if it was you that got struck by a cyclist and had a broken leg? I won’t even mention the youth who always take it to far and do just outright dangerous stuff. I mean whoever sides with a 10yr old drunk on dragonsoop that enjoys these kind of things are just brain dead.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Thu 2 Jan 17:50
The poster above implied it was only because people didn’t like it and I was pointing out that it does impact those around who choose not to partake.
There used to be a guy that smoked at the bus stop I used going to work and I did stink when I arrived - to the point people assumed I was a smoker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Thu 2 Jan 18:15
Quote:
DBP, Thu 2 Jan 17:50
The poster above implied it was only because people didn’t like it and I was pointing out that it does impact those around who choose not to partake.
There used to be a guy that smoked at the bus stop I used going to work and I did stink when I arrived - to the point people assumed I was a smoker.
I’m not implying it, I’m saying it.
Why did you stand next to the guy smoking if it bothered you?
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 2 Jan 20:47
When wanting to catch a bus, a bus stop/shelter is usually the best place to stand at.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Fri 3 Jan 07:09
Quote:
DBP, Thu 2 Jan 16:29
It’s a bit more than that though. Apart from the passive smoking health risks, people’s clothes stink after standing next to a smoker…
If you want to do self harm then fine, but not where it negatively impacts those standing next to you
Spot on. I`ve got no problem folk doing what they want if it has no impact on others.
Passive smoking has been proved to have an impact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Sat 4 Jan 17:07
Quote:
ipswichpar, Fri 3 Jan 07:09
Quote:
DBP, Thu 2 Jan 16:29
It’s a bit more than that though. Apart from the passive smoking health risks, people’s clothes stink after standing next to a smoker…
If you want to do self harm then fine, but not where it negatively impacts those standing next to you
Spot on. I`ve got no problem folk doing what they want if it has no impact on others.
Passive smoking has been proved to have an impact.
Best ban vehicles on the roads as well then.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sat 4 Jan 19:20
Legislation is in place to start to significantly reduce vehicle emissions.
As it is for smoking, but it`s taking way too long to enact. There`s now reason why it should just to let a bunch of ignorant selfish people impact the health of others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Sat 4 Jan 20:15
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sat 4 Jan 19:20
Legislation is in place to start to significantly reduce vehicle emissions.
As it is for smoking, but it`s taking way too long to enact. There`s now reason why it should just to let a bunch of ignorant selfish people impact the health of others.
We should also be restricting everyone’s calorific intake everyday. It’s ignorant and selfish to think you can walk around overweight eating anything you want. If we cut out over eating not only will it save the environment, the NHS will also be under less pressure
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Sun 5 Jan 11:56
Quote:
NMCmassive, Sat 4 Jan 20:15
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sat 4 Jan 19:20
Legislation is in place to start to significantly reduce vehicle emissions.
As it is for smoking, but it`s taking way too long to enact. There`s now reason why it should just to let a bunch of ignorant selfish people impact the health of others.
We should also be restricting everyone’s calorific intake everyday. It’s ignorant and selfish to think you can walk around overweight eating anything you want. If we cut out over eating not only will it save the environment, the NHS will also be under less pressure
Won`t someone think of the nicotine addicts!?!?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Sun 5 Jan 12:45
Quote:
NMCmassive, Sat 4 Jan 20:15
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sat 4 Jan 19:20
Legislation is in place to start to significantly reduce vehicle emissions.
As it is for smoking, but it`s taking way too long to enact. There`s now reason why it should just to let a bunch of ignorant selfish people impact the health of others.
We should also be restricting everyone’s calorific intake everyday. It’s ignorant and selfish to think you can walk around overweight eating anything you want. If we cut out over eating not only will it save the environment, the NHS will also be under less pressure
I`d take your point if I was force feeding someone excess carbs and sugar in a public space like that guy on Se7en. But I think your comparing Apples and Cakes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Sun 5 Jan 13:27
Anyone thinking it’s ok to smoke in areas with non smokers, because its their “right”, is an idiotic moron. Along with those who think its fine to smoke around children, babies or when pregnant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Sun 5 Jan 14:51
Just have a bit of common sense. Smoke outside if you want but don`t smoke where other people have no choice but to stand (for example, at a bus stop or at benches in a playpark).
I`d be much more concerned about idiots who vape. Far more antisocial in my opinion and the waste from a discarded vape is far worse than a fag end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Mon 6 Jan 04:37
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sun 5 Jan 12:45
Quote:
NMCmassive, Sat 4 Jan 20:15
Quote:
ipswichpar, Sat 4 Jan 19:20
Legislation is in place to start to significantly reduce vehicle emissions.
As it is for smoking, but it`s taking way too long to enact. There`s now reason why it should just to let a bunch of ignorant selfish people impact the health of others.
We should also be restricting everyone’s calorific intake everyday. It’s ignorant and selfish to think you can walk around overweight eating anything you want. If we cut out over eating not only will it save the environment, the NHS will also be under less pressure
I`d take your point if I was force feeding someone excess carbs and sugar in a public space like that guy on Se7en. But I think your comparing Apples and Cakes.
Obesity costs the NHS approximately £6 billion annually, a figure that is expected to rise to over £9.7 billion each year by 2050. According to a study involving nearly 2.5 million people, the cost per patient increases drastically with weight, as obese patients with a BMI over 40 cost the NHS an average of £1,375 per year, compared to £638 for those with a healthy weight. This financial strain highlights the need for interventions aimed at prevention and management of obesity.
Would you take my point if I said I could save you money in your pay packet if we restrict everyone’s calories?
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Mon 6 Jan 06:05
We should restrict everyone’s sugar intake.
Good news is that can be done by working in partnership with food manufacturers (regulation if needed), taxing products that continue to put ridiculous amounts of sugar in food, and maybe even teaching kids how to cook decent non processed food from basic/cheaper ingredients (plus trying to inform adults what crap they are actually eating most of the time)
Post Edited (Mon 06 Jan 06:06)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: ipswichpar
Date: Mon 6 Jan 06:15
I think that they are two separate issues NMC.
But I definitely agree that getting people to be more healthy is key, as is people making sure they`re doing as much as possible to be healthier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Mon 6 Jan 12:08
Quote:
DBP, Mon 6 Jan 06:05
We should restrict everyone’s sugar intake.
Good news is that can be done by working in partnership with food manufacturers (regulation if needed), taxing products that continue to put ridiculous amounts of sugar in food, and maybe even teaching kids how to cook decent non processed food from basic/cheaper ingredients (plus trying to inform adults what crap they are actually eating most of the time)
Notice I said calories and not sugar…
I know you’ve written about information/education which to me is a good way to go about it but a ban would be taking that option out of your hands.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: NMCmassive
Date: Mon 6 Jan 12:09
Quote:
ipswichpar, Mon 6 Jan 06:15
I think that they are two separate issues NMC.
But I definitely agree that getting people to be more healthy is key, as is people making sure they`re doing as much as possible to be healthier.
They’re not really. They’re both personal choices which in different directly and indirectly impacts on everyone else.
COYP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Mon 6 Jan 17:57
I think if we sorted sugar, which feels easier, that would solve a lot of the issues around health and obesity.
Sugar stimulates your brain, raises your glucose levels which means when they then crash (or your brain thinks they’re going to), it makes you want more - which in turn means you eat more…
So yes I did talk about sugar and not calories but there’s clear positive correlation between the two
|
|
|
|
|
|
