Smoking bans in public places - how are they doing?

or trains, SWT run many commuter trains that are completely non smoking.

The disadvantage of this is that you get some smoker just putting out their fag before getting on then sitting next to you stinking of fresh tobacco smoke. At least when there are smoking compartments the smokers stick together.

Brian,

The physical addiction to smoking is minor but the psychological addiction (aka "the cravings") is *huge*. This is why the most successful stop smoking measure (and the one I used successfully) is a drug called Ryban which reduces the acute psychological urge to smoke during nicotine withdrawal. The phsyical syumptoms are relatively minor to the point of insignificance.

The reason I say smokers talk this up is becuase painting a picture of nicotine witdrawal = physical agony rather like Gene Hackman strapped to a bed in French Connection II makes fairlure to give up sound slightly more heroic (for want of a better word) than simply not being able to cope with the urge to smoke.

The other aspect of the psychological addiction is that you can be smoke-free for months or even years and suddenly, like a light going on, you will be overwhelmed with the urge to smoke again. Years ago I once gave up for 18 months and then jut started again on a holiday (a mistake that in retrospect probaby cost me about £30k and fair amount of unleasant coughing).

BTW The quit-smoking-wonder-drug Ryban has, I think, rather ironically been banned on account of being too dangerous for smokers. It's from a class of anti-depressants called SSRI's (its much like Prozac) and there was a rash of non-depressed people taking it to quit smoking and committing suicide. An anti-depressent that causes suicide that is also deemed too dangerous for smokers to take takes some beating.

Matthew

quote:

---

Originally posted by domfjbrown:
So IMHO drivers in the main are every bit as irresponsible, smelly and selfish as us smokers...

---

ha! so you now admit that smokers are irresponsible and selfish?
great, you've been worth the effort!
smelly is debatable depending on an individual's level of personal hygiene and grooming.
although most smokers I know are likely to spend more on Silk Cut than silk boxers.

dom.
you're an entertaining read and often struggle to achieve a balance between realism and the ridiculous.
this makes you an extra special basket-case.
please take that as a compliment.
I'm certain that the bizarre fantasy world in which you occupy has the most tenuous of links with reality and the fits of hysterics you enjoy just before hitting the 'send' button propel your brain into achieving even greater levels of absurdity.
so don't let me spoil your fun!

TN

Cool as a mountain stream innit.

Fritz Von BorrowedfromcurrentP-E,thankslordgnome.

hey, what was the 1000th post?

TN

Matthew

Thanks for the explanation, as a 45 year old who has never even had one drag on a tab, I really do have no idea. Please bear in mind though that I never said it was easy to stop smoking, I said it was an easy decision to make to stop smoking.

quote:

---

hey, what was the 1000th post?

---

Probably a photo of some ugly auld git, like.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matthew Robinson:
Trevor -- I understand why you find it so unpleasant (becuase it very obviously is) and I agree that in an ideal world you wouldn't have to be exposed to it and certainly that smokers should be a lot more considerate. My point is that given the current de facto situation where it is allowed and the fact that the freedom of choice works both ways so you need a good reason (health rather than personal distaste) to justifiy a ban.

---

which is why I used Roy Castle as an example.
you may not be convinced the lung cancer he died of was due to passive smoking, but I am.
have you ever removed a picture from a wall in a room once painted white that's populated exclusively by smokers?
if you have, see that yellow, sticky deposit that's replaced the white colour?
it's called tar, and it's the result of nicotine build up and cigarette smoke.
so where else apart from on the walls might that tar go when cigarette smoke is inhaled, passively, by someone in a bar or restaurant?
there may not be a negative effect now, but in 5,10, or 20 years time, who knows what effect inhaling cigarette smoke, passively, on a regular basis will have had?
my lungs are rather important to me.
that's why I object so strongly to people smoking in public.
is that reason enough to ban it?
better less risk than more risk.
I'll leave you with that thought.

TN

[This message was edited by Trevor Newall on FRIDAY 27 February 2004 at 15:58.]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steven Toy:
Just because an individual does not have direct access himself to private transport (through no fault of his own) is not a reason to want to deny that access to everyone else.

---

Yeah - I know that - but most people really don't NEED a car - they just get conditioned to thinking they need one, rather like me smoking in the pub. And round full circle

I'll give up on the driver bashing now - since we'll all die of pollution together there's no point...

Oh - re the "passive shagging"/condoms in pubs comment - well, that would entice me into the pub way more often, thus leading to chronic alcoholism, so it IS bad for your health Would add a nice bit 'o spice to a Friday night though hey?

__________________________
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

This thread is quite astonishingly badly timed. This week the long-expected complete smoking ban was brought in at work. The only exception is for clients smoking in meeting rooms.

The previous rule (which as a 20 a day smoker I found easy to live with) was that I could smoke in meetings if clients and the other participants consented and, after hours, in my own office with the door closed. At other times I found a brisk circumnavigation of the office building (fag in mouth) very helpful to order my thoughts and sort out what best to do next.

I will of course accommodate myself to the new regime although I suspect there would be no real sanction if I continued smoking in the evening. However the prospect of the evening hours at my desk with no cigarette to hand is not enticing.

One thing is sure, my first instinct is not to be seen to give up because of the ban. Matthew R put it well (and the new policy has not been implemented in a particularly “sanctimonious”, “preachy” way):

“-- Sanctimonious non-smokers should be more aware of how they encourage and reinforce smokers intransigence and anti-social behaivour by their constant preaching. Smoking is an essentially an unpleasant and humiliating pastime based on addiction and the natural reaction to this is for smokers to pretend they like it and adopt a "it's my right to choose" attitude which leads them to blow smoke in people's faces and the like. Getting all preachy makes this effect much worse.”

Timo

Hi,
Where I work If you smoke you have to go outside and off the employers premises in order to do so. This morning I felt for some staff as they stood shivering in the cold.

However I remember seeing my father and grandfather and the effects of smoking... and any thoughts of compassion went away.
My relatives were very strong willed people, saying 'something will get you if it isn't smoking...' and similar comments.

I can see their point, but at 38 and 57 respectively, with post mortems directly attributing their deaths to smoking related deseases it was a strong stance to take.

As part of my job I have to go to pubs and peoples houses. In the houses there are children who are under fed, not properly clothed, but the parents are happy (they are dependant after all due to the habit) to spend their money on cigarettes (and worse drugs).

The smell is vile, I can smell it on my clothes for days afterwards, and my own breath tastes vile due to passive smoking.

I like a glass of wine, or a pint of beer. I don't make others drink either when they are in my company. Both are in effect mild drugs (dependant upon consumption).

My point is don't ram your smoke and smoking habits down my throat, and I won't ram my habits down yours...

My Grandad was a lucky geezer, never smoked a fag in his entire life, and like
many others survived the joys of an 1st Army Infantryman in N. Africa putting up
with Monty's ego (his words not mine). Well rewarded upon his return by a return
to the pit, though they did give him a few years before retirement at British
Steel in Leeds, so he could see a bit of daylight now and again, he did prefer
nightshift though (more dosh).
Few bob on the mantlepice of his Horbury Council
house for the wake to enjoy the Co-op funeral (true Labour man all his life) and
then nuffink aged 66. Many others died younger I'm sure, he'd be proud to see how
successive Governments have wisely invested the country's future pensions in the
stock exchange, and stupid greedy (Illegal ?) quick buck schemes to help short
term dickheads fall off of their yachts, he'd be proud to see the present dream
of a leadership changing all that at last, innit.

Fritz Von Bloodyliberalswunnit

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tim Oldridge:
This thread is quite astonishingly badly timed. This week the long-expected complete smoking ban was brought in at work. The only exception is for clients smoking in meeting rooms.

The previous rule (which as a 20 a day smoker I found easy to live with) was that I could smoke in meetings if clients and the other participants consented and, after hours, in my own office with the door closed. At other times I found a brisk circumnavigation of the office building (fag in mouth) very helpful to order my thoughts and sort out what best to do next.

---

I can't believe I'm about to say this, but I really do think that smoking in an office is fairly rank. I know that makes a mockery of my "they know the risks" blah blah rubbish in my previous posts re barstaff/passive smoking, but what can I say? I don't think that smoking in an office environment is right and therefore to be fair (and un-Gemini-like) I retract all my comments about smoking in pubs and will endevour (sp) to give up once I use up the last of my baccy.

__________________________
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

Oh, and 'cos I've just had a really nice pint in the "Welcome Inn" in Exeter (look it up - it has real gaslamps and everything) I also retract my comments WRT car drivers.

I KNOW I'd drive if I could - so in the words of David Brent - "hands up - I admit it" - I guess I'm a (tipsy as hell!) hypocrite. That half bottle of whiskey didn't help!

__________________________
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

Tim -- You are of course welcome to smoke your head off around my place any time you like.

Matthew

I started reading this thread but skipped to the end after reading about 40 posts – I actually got sick and tired of reading the usual rants from the usual suspects. The noxious attitudes displayed by Mick Parry, Count D and all those other smug, sanctimonious bores will mean that a hardcore of smokers will continue to hang onto their habit - even if it's to blow metaphorical smoke into their faces. I always find the vehemence of a certain kind of anti-smoker perplexing. In a world beset with pain and trouble, is this all they can find to get worked up about? Have you listened to yourselves recently guys?

This is a subject quite close to my heart. I used to smoke 40 Lucky Strikes a day and last August gave up. I was fine until I went on holiday. Then, sitting round a campfire in Tanzania, I was overcome by an urge to smoke. It wasn't physical, it was an overwhelming psychological dsire, to which I responded, so now I'm a smoker again – although I'm down to about 10 a day.

Anyway, I think a ban on smoking in public places will happen, but it won't be an overnight thing. It'll creep up slowly, so that no-one notices (there are 13 million smokers in this country, and no government would dare piss them off – hence the buck will be passed to llocal authorities, business owners and the like).

On balance, it'll probably be a good thing. (Hopefully I'll have given up by then, so it won't matter to me peersonally).

It will be a cultural change - don't forget, as recently as 20 years ago it was perfectly acceptable to smoke on the Tube; indeed, there were smoking carriages. I suspect that nobody in the country thinks that this [ie a ban on smoking on the Tube] is a bad thing. In another 20 years people may wonder why smoking in restaurants was ever allowed. (By the way, what about a ban on people eating stinky burgers on the Tube too – I'll vote for that one).

A ban on smoking in public places will come, but it will be a gradual process. A complete, overnight ban will fail miserably - partly, I suspect because we [British]as a nation do not take kindly to being bossed around, be it by Thatch, Blair, that tosser Blunkett, our GPs or even Mick Parry. The last bastion of smoking will be the pub, and the last smoking pubs to fall will be those near football grounds. I suspect it will be at least 30 years before it disappears completely in those places.

In conclusion, then. Smoking in public will disappear. Slowly. I wonder then if the anti-smokers will turn on people with BO or halitosis.

Love

Kevin

PS I've just decided - I'm going to give up. Right now.

Kevin

You raised an interesting point re. the time scale, but if the current trends amongst the young (especially girls) was to continue then perhaps in 30 years time smokers will no longer be a minority. What iv'e been seeing and reading on TV and in the press, it seems that the Anti Smoking Campaign just isn't working in preventing youngsters starting.

And has been stated before, National Governments off any political persuasion also need the revenue from baccy. The amount is just too great and a wholesale ban or indeed, the sudden unlikely occurrence of all smokers giving up within the next few weeks, would certainly lead too large increases in Income Tax, National insurance or a load of new taxes on such things as Computers games and software, DVD players and discs, internet connections or, god forbid, HI FI components (pauses to let the shuddering pass). They will certainly get the revenue somehow. And of course the decrease in demand on the health service would'nt work it's way through for many years. I'll carry on puffing away secure in the knowledgee that my sacrafice is for the benefit of Music lovers everywhere.

Yours in Music

Syd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Kevin-W:

In conclusion, then. Smoking in public will disappear. Slowly. I wonder then if the anti-smokers will turn on people with BO or halitosis.

Love

Kevin

PS I've just decided - I'm going to give up. Right now.

---

Jeez you just don't get it do you. Your senses of smell and taste have obviously been so frazzled by smoking that you don't appreciate that some of us still have noses and taste buds that work as nature intended.

In the Brave New World of smoking being banned from all public places I want to open up a private club reserved for smokers and their non-smoking friends.

I wouldn't get a licence.

So, the majority will therefore ride roughshod over the minority of smokers in a place where anti-smokers will be a minority.

Is that real democracy?



Regards,

Steve.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse....

Oral sex linked to mouth cancer

Some cases of mouth cancer could be caused by a virus contracted during oral sex, scientists have warned. Writing in New Scientist magazine, US researchers said the human papilloma virus, which causes most cervical cancers, may also cause oral tumours.

Experts say heavy smoking or drinking causes most mouth cancers, but the HPV link could help explain why some young adults develop the rare disease.

Kevin W

You stated that the pub will be the last bastion of smokers....how wrong you are.

The pub trade is very concerned that bar staff may have the legal right to sue under duty of care. This is the same principal that your employer must ensure that you work in a safe environment.

It appears that ventilation is a non starter due to cost and obstrusiveness.

The pubs themselves conceed that they expect laws to be introduced where the Landlord will be made to pay a hefty fine if a customer is caught smoking in his pub. Therefore it will be the Landlord who will be forced to act as a policeman.

Your days are numbered.

Regards

Mick

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jez Quigley:
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse....

_Oral sex linked to mouth cancer_

Some cases of mouth cancer could be caused by a virus contracted during oral sex, scientists have warned. Writing in New Scientist magazine, US researchers said the human papilloma virus, which causes most cervical cancers, may also cause oral tumours.

Experts say heavy smoking or drinking causes most mouth cancers, but the HPV link could help explain why some young adults develop the rare disease.

---

Breast Cancer Linked to Underarm Shaving and Deoderants

Saw reports of this last week on the box. Just as those anti smokers think they're getting rid of smelly smokers in public places, a new and horrible menace is in the wings to replace it. THE BIG FAT WOMAN WITH PLEATED OXTER* HAIR AND A STENCH OF NAVVY. You have been warned.

*Gaelic for armpit

Yours in Music

Syd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mick Parry:
Kevin W

You stated that the pub will be the last bastion of smokers....how wrong you are.

The pub trade is very concerned that bar staff may have the legal right to sue under duty of care. This is the same principal that your employer must ensure that you work in a safe environment.

It appears that ventilation is a non starter due to cost and obstrusiveness.

The pubs themselves conceed that they expect laws to be introduced where the Landlord will be made to pay a hefty fine if a customer is caught smoking in his pub. Therefore it will be the Landlord who will be forced to act as a policeman.

Your days are numbered.

Regards

Mick

---

As we all are well aware after hours drinking in pubs the length and breadth of
the UK has been going on since time imimorial, lately though more a case of
serious survival for the smaller boozers, though still bereaking the laws of the
land. Publicans as far as I'm aware have also always acted as their own policemen
in their establishments, so that is nothing new whatsover, and has worked very
well so far, thank you very much Squire. What pray will induce them to ban
smoking, under closed doors in the future, loss of license ? I don't think so,
do you ?

Fritz Von Rockininthefreeworld

Piss² I can't recal any case where Barstaff have won, or even attempted a legal
stance against their employer, Mick me old China, maybe you're referring to
another planet somewhere, that enjoys a perfect World, innit ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steven Toy:
In the Brave New World of smoking being banned from all public places I want to open up a private club reserved for smokers and their non-smoking friends.

I wouldn't get a licence.


Steve.

---

Ask them all round to your smoke-filled stinky, yellow wallpaper, phlegm-strewn house then.



Stephen

Cancer killed my Father and he never smoked.

There are no guarantees.