Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SlackDad
That is twisting the point of what I was saying. I would and have suggested that we look for evidence to see how effective the ban is going to be before implementing it. And seeing as you insist, sadly it would appear that such research on animals is common place. http://www.pcrm.org/resch/anexp/beyond/smoke2_0411.html |
I've never doubted you on that - what I was trying to say was all day you've been asking for proof, research etc and at the same time you make a fairly assertive statement with 'probably' included.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SlackDad
And yes I do think we are talking degrees. We can eat small amounts of what is not good for us with minimal adverse effects. Do we know the effect of occasional exposure to second-hand smoke? If the answer is, as is very likely, there was no significant impact on health or no increased risk to serious illness would you still support the ban? That is my point.
|
And the point you were making to me was:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SlackDad
Logic perhaps, but what about research. And are you so confident that the difference will be HUGE?
|
Do you really need research (or anything other than common sense) to tell you that if you remove smoking from the equasion, a person will not suffer from passive smoking ie breathing in second-hand smoke?
btw my challenge to you to find a non-smoking pub in the Port Talbot/Swansea area hasn't been forgotten about just because you glossed over it
