SPAM random annoying things

[Scouse]

So which one are you two arguing over, prolonged exposure, or random twat blowing smoke in your face once every two moons?

Prolonged exposure. Smoke-filled rooms. Clubs, pubs, bars etc.

You get random twats doing that outside all the time. Just one of those things. But it doesn't matter - the evidence is clear, when not cherry picked by a crackpot english lit conspiracy theorist with a self-confessed non-understanding of science.

 

[Gwadien]

I have to agree, I like the idea of people with E-Cigarettes smoking outside, I know loads of people that don't smoke, but randomly started using e-cigs and blowing it into faces.

 

[Edmond]

New I phone 5 died on holiday. Total. Daughter says the matrix had crashed. What the hell is a matrix? I thought that was a film!!!!!

 

[Moriath]

Yet you choose to ignore the very well presented and readily available evidence in the article I chose that shows the link was statistically insignificant at best, and instead decided to attack the author instead.

And you still haven't shown how the smoking ban has reduced deaths from passive smoking. Mainly as it was zero before and remains zero.

Dear oh dear. Must try harder.

Really too soon to see deaths reduced from passive smoking. Give another five to ten years i would say. But i smoked and agree i dislike the vaping stuff. Am happy not to see it.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Prolonged exposure. Smoke-filled rooms. Clubs, pubs, bars etc.

Doesn't even really need proof in my opinion. Living in smoke every day is a given healthrisk, even working in a smokebar is, even if ventilation works and it's not every day.

That being said, how much it affects cancer statistics in bar situations is a bit up for debate(i'm sure home situations will decrease). Not that i'm interested in that, or care, since well, smoking outside is a winwin situation.

By the by, how do they differentiate the cause in cancer? If anyone knows. As in, this guy got it from smoking, this from passive and not from other sources etc.

 

[leggy]

If breathing in smoke first hand is bad, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that breathing that same shit coming out of someone else's lungs is also bad.

Either way keep your stinking shit outside so I can wear the same clothes the next day.

 

[Scouse]

Really too soon to see deaths reduced from passive smoking. Give another five to ten years i would say. But i smoked and agree i dislike the vaping stuff. Am happy not to see it.

Maybe not deaths but Smoking ban in England cuts child hospital admissions

The study, in the European Respiratory Journal, looked at 1.6 million hospital admissions of under-14s from 2001-12.

The law against smoking in indoor public places saw 11,000 fewer children being admitted to hospital with lung infections every year....hospital admissions for children with respiratory infections fell by 3.5% immediately after the ban was introduced.While the biggest effect was seen in the number of children suffering chest infections - which dropped by almost 14% - the number of admissions attributable to nose, throat and sinus infections also went down

But meh. I don't mind if people smoke - from a personal point of view I'm glad they banned it mainly because smokers are inherently selfish (their nicotine addiction makes them so) and the law now requires them to go and have their addiction away from me. But the ban isn't just benefitting people who spend a lot of time in pubs and bars (workers and visitors) - it's clearly also benefitting children.

It's not just about death rates.

I'm gonna go out on a limb

You don't have to go out on a limb. The direct causal evidence has been there for a long time. The deniers will die out in a few generations. And faster in general than non-smokers too

 

[caLLous]

Roy Castle. A non-smoking trumpet player who put his lung cancer entirely down to performing in smoke filled clubs and rooms.

 

[Scouse]

Roy Castle

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-gJV_kM33M

 

[Moriath]

I agree. Just the deaths and stuff will take a few years to cycle through.

With vaping we dont know what that does as its so new so best to err on the side of caution than otherwise.

Its humans learning from their mistakes

But still upholding the right of those to do what they like to themselves if its legal and doesnt affect others

 

[Bodhi]

Roy Castle. A non-smoking trumpet player who put his lung cancer entirely down to performing in smoke filled clubs and rooms.

Ah Roy Castle. Widely known to enjoy the odd cigar, used all sorts of carcinogenic chemicals to clean out his trumpet and freely admitted to eating Fuller's Dust during filming Carry On Up the Khyber. Died at a time when it wasn't widely understood that non-smokers get Lung Cancer too (albeit a different kind), and no autopsy was ever performed to identify what sort of Lung Cancer he had. As many scientists far more intelligent than any of us have since found there is no real link between passive smoking and lung cancer, I'd be tempted to suggest that it was nothing to do with the smoky clubs - and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that his death was jumped on by the anti-smoking activists, when it was far from proven that that was the cause.

Bodies such as the National Cancer Institute have struggled to find a link http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/12/05/jnci.djt365.extract

With a lovely quote within

We've gotten smoking out of bars and restaurants on the basis of the fact that you and I and other nonsmokers don't want to die. The reality is, we probably won't.

And the bloke who did the initial research for the WHO isn't exactly shocked http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffre...test-for-the-ability-to-think-scientifically/

Considering other research has shown that working in a smoky bar can lead to inhaling an amount of smoke similar to smoking 6 cigarettes per year it really is starting to become clear that the smoking ban had bugger all to do with public health, and more to do with stigmatising around 20% of the population. All this so others could pickle their livers in a smoke free environment. Alanis would be proud. Also amusing that someone has tried to correlate under 14's admissions to hospital around the time of the smoking ban, when in reality, at the time the only place you could really smoke indoors was the smoking area of a pub, which weren't exactly chock full of 14 year olds at the time (apart from possibly in Stoke. And Paisley.). The smokiest areas they will have spent time in were homes and cars, both of which it remained legal to smoke in. Seems another case of correlation not equaling causation

Whilst I have no issue with the less hygenic amongst us who would like to go out to the pub and wear the same clothes the next day (as long as you don't stand near me you fetid tramps), what I do have an issue with is the removal of choice. Non-smoking pubs? Great idea. Ban smoking in restaurants? Go for it, smoke and food don't tend to mix too well. But to remove the right of someone to open a smoker's bar, or to offer an indoor, well ventilated smoking area (much like you see in the Netherlands)? That's too far imo, and seems to be insinuating that choice is too dangerous for us little people. Strangely our continental cousins - especially the Germans, don't seem to be of this opinion. If you want to smoke and have a pint in Germany you go to a Smoking bar, where no one moans and everyone accepts the risks of being in there - mainly as they pale into insignificance next to the risks of drinking whilst they are there, or crossing the street to get there.

I won't even go there on the attitude to it in Thailand, as they really didn't seem to give a shit - despite the massive pictures of doom covering a packet of Marlboro (that cost me £1.80 a packet to buy. Bliss).

So in most places I have been recently in what used to be Great Britain, one is left with a fairly miserable choice if one wants to go to the pub. Either go to some godawful restaurant with a bar that parents seem to enjoy as a Wacky Warehouse saves them doing any actual parenting for the afternoon (or their godawful posh equivalents - the Gastropub *cringe*), or go to one of the few remaining proper pubs and bathe in the wonderful smells of farts, BO, stale beer and peanuts and Leggy's clothes.

And now the puritanical busibodies are going after the vapers, who I presume they see as both possessing the cake and consuming it. All the joys of smoking with massively reducing harmful effects? This sounds like people having fun, it must be stopped at once. You should be thankful we smokers are so stubborn, as if we caved and quit they'd move onto Booze next (some have already started). Enjoy yourself whilst you can folks........

 

[Billargh]

I'm not a smoker, can't stand the stink of the stuff. But I think banning e-cigs in places just pointless pandering, most the ones I've been near have smelt pretty good anyway

 

[Moriath]

Ah Roy Castle. Widely known to enjoy the odd cigar, used all sorts of carcinogenic chemicals to clean out his trumpet and freely admitted to eating Fuller's Dust during filming Carry On Up the Khyber. Died at a time when it wasn't widely understood that non-smokers get Lung Cancer too (albeit a different kind), and no autopsy was ever performed to identify what sort of Lung Cancer he had. As many scientists far more intelligent than any of us have since found there is no real link between passive smoking and lung cancer, I'd be tempted to suggest that it was nothing to do with the smoky clubs - and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that his death was jumped on by the anti-smoking activists, when it was far from proven that that was the cause.

Bodies such as the National Cancer Institute have struggled to find a link http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/12/05/jnci.djt365.extract

With a lovely quote within



And the bloke who did the initial research for the WHO isn't exactly shocked http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffre...test-for-the-ability-to-think-scientifically/

Considering other research has shown that working in a smoky bar can lead to inhaling an amount of smoke similar to smoking 6 cigarettes per year it really is starting to become clear that the smoking ban had bugger all to do with public health, and more to do with stigmatising around 20% of the population. All this so others could pickle their livers in a smoke free environment. Alanis would be proud. Also amusing that someone has tried to correlate under 14's admissions to hospital around the time of the smoking ban, when in reality, at the time the only place you could really smoke indoors was the smoking area of a pub, which weren't exactly chock full of 14 year olds at the time (apart from possibly in Stoke. And Paisley.). The smokiest areas they will have spent time in were homes and cars, both of which it remained legal to smoke in. Seems another case of correlation not equaling causation

Whilst I have no issue with the less hygenic amongst us who would like to go out to the pub and wear the same clothes the next day (as long as you don't stand near me you fetid tramps), what I do have an issue with is the removal of choice. Non-smoking pubs? Great idea. Ban smoking in restaurants? Go for it, smoke and food don't tend to mix too well. But to remove the right of someone to open a smoker's bar, or to offer an indoor, well ventilated smoking area (much like you see in the Netherlands)? That's too far imo, and seems to be insinuating that choice is too dangerous for us little people. Strangely our continental cousins - especially the Germans, don't seem to be of this opinion. If you want to smoke and have a pint in Germany you go to a Smoking bar, where no one moans and everyone accepts the risks of being in there - mainly as they pale into insignificance next to the risks of drinking whilst they are there, or crossing the street to get there.

I won't even go there on the attitude to it in Thailand, as they really didn't seem to give a shit - despite the massive pictures of doom covering a packet of Marlboro (that cost me £1.80 a packet to buy. Bliss).

So in most places I have been recently in what used to be Great Britain, one is left with a fairly miserable choice if one wants to go to the pub. Either go to some godawful restaurant with a bar that parents seem to enjoy as a Wacky Warehouse saves them doing any actual parenting for the afternoon (or their godawful posh equivalents - the Gastropub *cringe*), or go to one of the few remaining proper pubs and bathe in the wonderful smells of farts, BO, stale beer and peanuts and Leggy's clothes.

And now the puritanical busibodies are going after the vapers, who I presume they see as both possessing the cake and consuming it. All the joys of smoking with massively reducing harmful effects? This sounds like people having fun, it must be stopped at once. You should be thankful we smokers are so stubborn, as if we caved and quit they'd move onto Booze next (some have already started). Enjoy yourself whilst you can folks........

But booze isnt atomised and spread in the atmosphere. Like smoking is. Knee jerk i feel

 

[Bodhi]

But booze isnt atomised and spread in the atmosphere. Like smoking is. Knee jerk i feel

Yet smokers don't tend to abuse partners, or smash people's faces in outside kebab shops if they've had one too many Bensons.

 

[DaGaffer]

Roy Castle. A non-smoking trumpet player who put his lung cancer entirely down to performing in smoke filled clubs and rooms.

Yes but if go into smoky rooms and stick a device over your mouth designed to suck in huge volumes of air, you're probably a bit of an edge case.

 

[old.Tohtori]

mainly because smokers are inherently selfish (their nicotine addiction makes them so)

Sorry, and without affecting my opinion on smoking bans, winwin situation of outside smoking etc...

but i have to call bullsh*t on that one.

For a small example go ask any smoker for a cigarette and i dare say 9/10 would give you one.

This one requires some proof to hold any water.

 

[Raven]

Yeah those bastard non smokers never have a spare tab, the selfish pricks.

 

[Raven]

Anyway. Even as a smoker I prefer not smoking inside. When we have a lockin and the ashtrays come out its horrible.

 

[Scouse]

By inherently selfish I mean that the vast majority of smokers I know would very much like to smoke inside - forcing their habit onto others - and until the law changed they did just that. If the law changed back they'd be straight back in - despite knowing the well-established risks to others.

That, IMO, is a selfish choice. But it's not their fault as nicotine makes observeable physical changes to the brain - which is why I said it was their addiction that made them so...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Now you see you're mixing facts with your known associates

I can see the point that some smokers are selfish and want to smoke where they want, but those people are inherently selfish.

Only reason i liked smoking inside is because bars don't allow drinks outside and a smoke is really good with a pint, or especially with a nice scotch. But i think it's even better since it's a rarer to get to do that(summer terraces in pubs, house parties, etc).

 

[Bodhi]

By inherently selfish I mean that the vast majority of smokers I know would very much like to smoke inside - forcing their habit onto others - and until the law changed they did just that. If the law changed back they'd be straight back in - despite knowing the well-established risks to others.

That, IMO, is a selfish choice. But it's not their fault as nicotine makes observeable physical changes to the brain - which is why I said it was their addiction that made them so...

I don't think that is the case at all, I had no problem at all with not smoking around people who objected back in the day when we could smoke inside, and the bulk of smokers I knew were similar. Back then pubs (certainly round here) were typically broken down into two areas - the smoking part where you could enjoy one of life's pleasures - a pint and a smoke, and the non-smoking part where non-smokers could sit in peace and tut their disapproval at those in the other area. And in my view it worked quite well - everyone was happy and the pubs were busy and open.

Then the smoking stasi turned up and banned it everywhere. Even if the pub landlord wanted to have an area of the pub where smokers could go and non-smokers knew the risks of going but could go anyway if they so choose (I tend to find most non-smokers aren't quite so anal about secondhand smoke as yourself - hell I'm engaged to a non-smoker who doesn't really care), our beloved government at the time said no, you aren't allowed that choice. So pubs started closing as people stayed at home instead, an entire portion of society gets marginalised for enjoying an completely legal passtime, yet there was no observeable decline in the number of people who smoked. Great work guys!

Yet go across to the continent (apart from France but they're weird over there) and decide you want to smoke inside? Not a problem sir, we have areas where you can do that. No one is forcing non-smokers to go in there, and people who wish to smoke can do so in peace without idiots coughing at them whilst chugging their 6th pint of lager of the evening. Germany are especially good with this, but then they did produce the gentleman credited with starting the anti-smoking movement, and they aren't too proud of him - actually to be pedantic it was Austria, but for some reason they seemed to have disowned him as well.

In summary, Britain is getting more and more unpleasant by the day, and it's not the 1% or the out of touch government causing this imo - it's the "we know better than you and will force our will on everyone" lobbyists and health and safety brigade. I have no wish to be wrapped in cotton wool, and do not require the state to play Nanny to look after me. But then I get the concept of personal responsibility, which appears to be a dying principle these days.

 

[Scouse]

Back then pubs (certainly round here) were typically broken down into two areas - the smoking part where you could enjoy one of life's pleasures - a pint and a smoke, and the non-smoking part where non-smokers could sit in peace and tut their disapproval at those in the other area. And in my view it worked quite well - everyone was happy and the pubs were busy and open

It was a stupid half measure as smoke doesn't stay where it's emitted and you and the non-smoking staff ended up breathing it all the time anyway.

I'm also not a fan of the places I've been to in Germany where there's a designated sealed-off area because if you go with smokers you end up with a choice of sitting in there anyway or splitting your group.

In summary, Britain is getting more and more unpleasant by the day ... I have no wish to be wrapped in cotton wool, and do not require the state to play Nanny to look after me. But then I get the concept of personal responsibility...

I would never say "move" to someone who's complaining about Britain. It's where you're from and you've every right to your opinion. But the state played nanny because smoker's habits affect non-smokers without their consent. Smokers may understand the concept of personal responsibility - but they didn't give enough of a fuck about non-smokers to take their habit outside voluntarily.

If your definition of an unpleasant Britain is one where you have to go outside to smoke then fair enough.

Mine is that it's populated by people who need a law to make them do that in the first place.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Bit of a sore throat in th morning(too much cock i guess), didn't think much of it. Now a fever of 38C(100+ F) hits and everything starting to hurt.

Gonna be a long night

 

[TdC]

prolly the bad aids Toh. GWS!!

 

[CorNokZ]

My luck with computers.

Windows updates were a week or two overdue, so decided to do them hoping I'd get the windows 10 logo to reserve it etc.

Kk they're downloaded and installed(110mb but still took ages!). Need to restart to apply ofc so I do that. Now after the reboot windows won't launch and the boot repair is running now after I tried to reroll it

Fuck

 

[caLLous]

The one fucking time I tried to use the System Restore thing, it didn't work. I was not impressed.

 

[CorNokZ]

Got nothing on it that will be lost, but i don't have a copy of windows so can't really wipe it either

 

[CorNokZ]

It worked! It actually rerolled windows! So far back that I don't have the pw for the user anymore...!

Again, fuck!

 

[CorNokZ]

Don't have the cd so can't get into cmd prompt so that I can reset the pw.. I can just feel all of my hairs turning grey as I am typing this

 

[Moriath]

Don't have the cd so can't get into cmd prompt so that I can reset the pw.. I can just feel all of my hairs turning grey as I am typing this

Cant you download a cd on another pc and do it that way