Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
This one statement leaves me concerned that you didn't actually read my previous post(s), the thrust of which I thought was extremely clear:
and elsewhere:
To paraprase Claire (I think), if I sit next to a smoker, my heath *will* be compromised. If I sit next to a drinker, if I am very unlucky, my health *might* be compromised. It's a matter of degrees, and if tobacco is boiling point, alcohol is somewhere below freezing.
As for your other comments, yes, we wll have to agree to differ. I say it's indefensible because I rate the knowledge of tha harm it does above the freedom of choice aspect. You obviously take the contraty view. We're not about to change our minds on that point.  |
Agreed but my alcohol comment was two lines. You fail to address the other points I make re obesity rates, lifestyles etc. and the fact that some people do smoke all their lives without ill effects.
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by clarie
The negative side-effects of smoking are not just limited to terminal illnesses though. It is true that some people do live to old age happily having smoked all of their lives but that isn't a strong argument against the dangers of smoking because whilst we know that smoking kills, there is no way of knowing if you are going to be one of those lucky people who lives to old age as a smoker. Furthermore the fitness levels, general health, and appearance of someone who has smoked all of their lives are often significantly lower than non-smokers. Furthermore that old person may well have escaped the dangers of smoking himself, but who knows what damage he could have done to others by smoking in front of them all his life.
|
Agreed but the debate appeared to be steering towards individuals right to smoke per se, regardless of whether this was in front of others, hence my comments.