One reason a smoking ban in clubs is bad

[William]

How many **** holes does it take to derail a thread entirely? ...... a goodly number, it would appear! Start another thread if you wanna go over all that **** again!


Back on track: if the people who used the clubs washed and used deodourant etc things would be better. Why on earth should the management take responsibility for a clientele who stink?

I think most people have a shower before they go out for the night....

 

[singist]

There's something wrong if you come out niffing ......

Fresh sweat is one thing .... stale sweat is something else!

 

[malfunkshun]

i dont care how clean you think you are, or how much deodorant/anti-perspirant etc you use. I doubt very many people could sweat there backsides off for 4 or 5 hours or so in a club without smelling, even just a little bit, iirc alcohol makes you sweat more too? Multiply by the number of people in the enclosed space. So unless everyone is dancing a bit then stopping before they sweat then repeating (yeah right, come on) its not unrealistic that an unpleasant atmosphere will ensue.

 

[j00ni]

Quite true. But the governments of the world don't want people to stop smoking entirely - think of all the tax £s, $s and whatever elses that they'd miss out on! They'd have to raise the duty on alcohol and fuel to compensate, and no-one wants that. Alright, they'll make it very difficult and expensive to smoke, but they've gone with that plan regarding driving and are still able to make money out of the British public for that.

Ahh something we can completely agree on. I am aware of the reasons (or what I assume to be the reasons) behind the govt not making a real effort to prevent people taking up smoking/help them quit. The NHS takes out far more than it puts in as far as ciggy tax is concerned - but I would rather the govt got rid of smoking altogether and found the excess from somewhere (I'm looking at you military budget).

Not going to argue with your other points either, because I largely agree with you. I don't like cigarette smoke, I think people who smoke are frankly stupid for doing so (with the possible exception of the over 50s who didn't know any better when they started). But I will defend to the hills those people's right to smoke in a public place, provided that there is an alternative option for non-smokers - preferably with neither being inconvenienced to any considerable degree

 

[j00ni]

Well I always maintain it can't be that bad for you:

Take two twins:

Put one in a room with 50 smokers with cigars.

Put one in a room with a car's exhaust being piped in.

Place yer bets!

...

Most people dont park their cars inside clubs/pubs, and keep the engine running to the best of my knowledge

How many **** holes does it take to derail a thread entirely? ...... a goodly number, it would appear! Start another thread if you wanna go over all that **** again!

If the topic of conversation didn't extend beyond the OP, this thread would only have variations of 2 posts:

"I prefer the smell of BO to cigarette smoke, I regularly scour this nations gyms in search of my next fix"
"eurgh BO! I'd start smoking myself before I see that day"

and perhaps someone who doesn't have a preference

 

[JRS]

But I will defend to the hills those people's right to smoke in a public place, provided that there is an alternative option for non-smokers - preferably with neither being inconvenienced to any considerable degree

That's the thing though - a pub isn't a public place, you're being invited onto the landlord's property Thats just semantics though, so I'll leave that there.

Oh, and singist:

How many **** holes does it take to derail a thread entirely?

I see.....so I'm a "**** hole". Not sure what **** is signifying here so I'll have to use my imagination, I can't see it being too complimentary though.

I could have a quick rant at you here.....but it just isn't worth the bandwith. RTMing your post though.

 

[j00ni]

I coulda sworn there's no proven link between passive smoking and cancer. Definitely remember reading an editorial in the Independent where the guy talked about the largest study ever conducted into passive smoking - and it couldn't find any link...

[quote="Lung Cancer" 45 Suppl. 2 (2004) S3–S9]Secondhand tobacco smoke has several deleterious effects on people who inhale it. The evaluation of its carcinogenicity was based on more than 50 studies of lung cancer in never-smokers, conducted in many countries. Lifelong non-smoking spouses of smokers who smoke at home had a significant and consistent 20–30% increase in lung cancer risk. Similarly, never-smokers exposed to secondhand tobacco smoke at the workplace have a 16–19% increase in risk to develop lung cancer. In accordance with the observations made with active smoking, risk increased with increasing exposure. The increased risk of never-smokers exposed to secondhand tobacco smoke cannot be ascribed to bias, confounding or other inadequacies in the research and are compatible with extrapolation of risk from active smokers in terms of intensity and duration of exposure.

In addition, never-smokers exposed to secondhand smoke suffer from several other smokingrelated diseases observed among smokers: in adults, increased morbidity and mortality linked to acute and chronic coronary heart diseases, and eye and nose irritation; in children, acute lower respiratory tract infections, chronic respiratory symptoms such as exacerbation of asthma, and middle ear infections. Exposure in utero and possibly secondhand smoke can affect fetuses of smoking or smoke-exposed mothers, and is responsible for low birth weight and a higher frequency of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.[/quote]

 

[malfunkshun]

hmm, smoke, die young, cost the NHS a lot in the short term.
Dont smoke, live longer and cost the NHS a lot over the long term.

 

[j00ni]

hmm, smoke, die young, cost the NHS a lot in the short term.
Dont smoke, live longer and cost the NHS a lot over the long term.

You do realise most smokers don't die particularly young, right?

 

[malfunkshun]

they die, statistically, younger than non-smokers, iirc

 

[trojan698]

I think the bar staff know the risks involved with passive smoking as do we all, but pubs aren't health clubs. There are also other issues that have arisen following the introduction of the smoking ban, namely fighting and even just drunk people loitering outside pubs. Not particularly nice, but I'm sure its for the best

 

[^TANK^]

Oh get over yourself. You can't seriously believe that passive smoke from going to a club once or twice a week will give you cancer?

The smell of sweat or cancer decisions decisions .

 

[j00ni]

they die, statistically, younger than non-smokers, iirc

Yeah, but it's not like the die young, just younger, i.e. mostly in their 60s/70s

The smell of sweat or cancer decisions decisions .

Surely you can understand that the likelihood of contracting cancer from passive smoking as a punter at a club/pub is miniscule - so it's not like you are making a choice between the smell of sweat, and cancer (unless you work in a pub/club)

 

[Oliver]

Fine, but iirc there's no such thing as passive orange juice drinking.

lol

It beggars belief how smoking in confined spaces is still allowed when it clearly damages other people's health yet drugs are still illegal *shrugs*
I reckon they shouldn't ban it in public places, it should be left up to the owners of the venue, but only if they legalise all the other ways to "kill" ourselves like illegal drugs I don't smoke by the way.

 

[^TANK^]

Yeah, but it's not like the die young, just younger, i.e. mostly in their 60s/70s


Surely you can understand that the likelihood of contracting cancer from passive smoking as a punter at a club/pub is miniscule - so it's not like you are making a choice between the smell of sweat, and cancer (unless you work in a pub/club)

I am asthmatic and hate being around smokers, and i no passive smoking has a much lower chance of causing cancer. But not being in a smoking Envirament is much healthier and safer.

 

[Slam62]

I just hate the smell of smoke and smokers and thus as the minority who smoke stink out the pubs i dont go.

Smoking is adictive, expensive and very bad for you, therefore it should either be illegal or restricted to private property

The only reason its taken so long to ban is the economic implications.

good ridence to evil smoking

 

[secretspy]

id rather smell sweat then disgusting cigarette smoke

with cigarettes its a persons choice but then you have to leave the club stinking of the stuff

you would only smell the sweat when leaving, if it was yours.

and as for the smell from toilets - i used to be a cleaner and the reason there is a smell is that "most" men dont know how to pee and they seem to like doing it on the floor.
(not a nice thing to have to clear up)

 

[locutus12]

Solution:

excellent idea, 10 out of 10, im off to suggest it to mr BLiar/Blair.

 

[cheets64]

id rather smell sweat then disgusting cigarette smoke

with cigarettes its a persons choice but then you have to leave the club stinking of the stuff

you would only smell the sweat when leaving, if it was yours.

and as for the smell from toilets - i used to be a cleaner and the reason there is a smell is that "most" men dont know how to pee and they seem to like doing it on the floor.
(not a nice thing to have to clear up)

I agree, I dont know why but my throat is getting a lot worse after a Saturday night around Wigan, My throat is hazy and my flem is yellow and some times even red

I cant stand clubs because they are the worst offenders poor A/C and 100s of people smoking in one big room.

 

[pyro]

Right there with ya, where are we going?

Not upto the nbc protection standards, unlike me!



(I didn't manage to get an sa80 just yet, the bbgun will do for now!)