True confessions:<BR><BR>I used to smoke about a pack a day for a number of years. Quit for 8 or 9 years, ran 10k's in right at 48 minutes, stayed in shape etc. <BR><BR>Son became a teenager, drove me crazy and I started smoking again. Now, I have quit again for two years, run three miles daily and comfined my habit to quality cigars about one or two a month. <BR><BR>Now I'm not even allowed that vice as I had a heart flutter, rate of 154 for 12 hours and finally the $750 medicine converted heart back to normal rhythm and regular pulse of 62. Dr. said it was too much caffinated coffee, cigars, rich chocolate candy and too many bottles of Chateauneuf du Pape on trip to Provence that sent me over the edge.<BR><BR>However, even when I smoked, I was bothered by second hand smoke. It just does not smell the same as the smoke you get when you smoke the darn things yourself. However, even when I smoked, I refrained from any smoking indoors unless it was at a bar where the smoke was so thick you could cut it with a knife. I was always observant of non smokers and would immediately put out a smoke if osmeone was offended.<BR><BR>I believe that it is good public policy to regulate smoking. I would much rather have dinner in a smoke free environment, but if not I can survive and btw, I too am allergic to smoke.<BR><BR>The issue is consideration. I wouldn't want to be offensive to others, nor do I want some anti smoking Nazi in my face.<BR><BR>Concessions and common sense tend to work!<BR><BR>US

I agree that Americans shouldn't complain about smoke in Europe. When you go to another land you have to abide by their rules. Europe smokes, thats's the way it is,if you don't like it don't go there.<BR>However, here in the US, the non-smokers rule, and I'm a non-smoker. If you blow smoke in my face I'll hassle you. The mob rules. That's just the way it is.<BR>

Such passion for such a common problem. <BR><BR>Sure, there are obnoxious American complaining about smoking and everything else under the sun, and it's annoying. <BR><BR>But to paraphrase George Carlin, I don't mind you smoking in front of me if you don't mind me waving sticks laced with arsenic in your face.<BR><BR>Smoking affects everyone in the room, much more so than the guy drinking martinis (yes, I know that some drink and drive). Love-my-Marlboros, you are quite incorrect, they are linked...<BR><BR>Oh, and Babs and Lillian, you are too strange for words. Truly sorry you are such unhappy people.

Congratulations, Babs. That was a bit of an improvement but I still think you could do much better. You actually might not be Insult College material, though. Perhaps you'd be better off by taking some classes at an Insult Community College first and then progress from there. Good luck! <BR><BR>D.B. what do you mean by saying that, logically, corporations would be FOR the legalization of drugs if they thought they could "get away with it"? Get away with what? Lobbying (which they excel at) for legalization? Or something else? <BR><BR>You also say that "MJ is probably physically addictive" basing this guess, apparently, on some kind of interesting scientific study: "the number of idiots that say they can stop anytime they want, they just don't want to." You should try to have that published in the New England Journal of Medicine. <BR><BR>Uncle Sam, very true, unfortunately, that alcohol is responsible for the deaths of a lot of *other* people, both on the road and off. In fact, that was one of the reasons for Prohibition. Problem was, as we found out, people want to drink and when the demand is great, prohibiting something creates more problems than it solves. This is a lesson we are learning all over again with our "War on Drugs." <BR><BR>Thanks, Fair. <BR><BR>GASP, well said. In my opinion, while there may be *some* non-smokers who object to people smoking out of some sense of moral superiority, I think the claim, or implication, that all or most non-smokers feel that way is disingenous, and is a way of diverting attention from the real issue, which is second-hand smoke. I mean, did airlines and offices ban smoking because the people that made these decisions felt morally superior to smokers? Or could it just possibly be there were some real health issues involved? I suspect the vast majorty of non-smokers are like you and I, not caring at all about people who choose to smoke in their own personal space, or outdoors. In fact, I'd never support a ban on tobacco, just like I don't support the current ban on marijuana, since I think adults should be free to make these kinds of decisons for themselves. <BR><BR><BR>By the way, here's an interesting website which talks about the a World Health Organization-sanctioned global treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). It also talks about how Big Tobacco's future lies, in large part, in the developing world and mentions how researchers working with the WHO have developed a four-stage model to explain how smoking tends to spread, and that the model demonstrates why new markets are the battleground. <BR><BR>http://www.fctc.org/news187.shtml

Capo<BR><BR>Do you ever leave your house or take a break for more than 5 minutes from your computer? You, my man, do not have a life.

Capo:<BR><BR>For someone who claims to be a nonsmoker, you blow more smoke out of your ears than anyone I have ever read!

Good comments, Jon. You're absolutely right in that the owner of a pub (or restaurant, etc.) who permits smoking in their establishment would reasonably expect any customers to accept that. <BR><BR>Where we differ is that I'm of two minds regarding government making laws prohibiting business owners from allowing smoking in their facilities, such as was done in California. One one hand, I don't like government making laws telling business owners, or individuals, what to do. And yet, government does that all the time, does it not? Government tells people of the same sex they can't get married; government tells people who like to smoke marijuana that they can't do that; govenment tells people they have to wear seat belts, etc. and how many people who are opposed to government telling business owners what do to, turn around and support government telling individuals what to do? <BR><BR>Also, whether one agrees with it or not, government tells business owners, via acts like OSHA, that they can't permit what it considers to be hazardous working conditions for their employees. The latter was the reason being California's smoking ban in bars and restaurants. The ban was not for the benefit of the customers; the ban was for the benefit of the employees.

Great post! Enjoy the intelligent opinions......cringe at the mean, self-rightous idiots. <BR>I, too, am a reformed smoker who enjoys daily 2 mile runs at lunch but would NEVER EVER go to a foreign country (or domestic for that matter)and harass people. Make a choice but don't make others be part of your choice.<BR><BR>

*LOL* even Babs was better than you guys with her attempts at insults. C'mon guys, try harder; I KNOW you can do it!

I just did a 5 minute survey of Capo notes and here is what I found. He has 10 messages between 6/12 at 11:40 AM until 6/13 11:37 AM and that doesn't include all the stuff he has written on this thread. ( He has 4 or 5 just on this one thread ) One thing I'll give you Capo-chino, you are an industrious sort. Do you ever go out or is this your entire sad life?<BR>

"Sad life" is a decent attempt an at an insult but, really John, I'm very disappointed that you couldn't come with something nastier than that. Your nasty juices must not be flowing today, eh?

Capo.<BR><BR>Tell these folks to take a long walk on a short pier.<BR><BR>If you want to stay on here 24 hours a day, what's it to them!<BR><BR>US

Thanks, Uncle Sam. I appreciate it, but no need to. Not when a third-grader could come up with better insults they they do. That's why I keep suggesting Insult College, or perhaps Insult Community College. There, they could take some classes on derision, do some research projects on hurling abuse, and generally hone their insult skills.

Interesting thread....<BR>I am also an expat who lived 7 years in several Europe countries. I've given up trying to stay healthy....just too many things to avoid. Although I'm a non-smoker, many of my fondest memories have been in European pubs, taverns, even US taverns. I just bite the bullet, and enjoy myself. <BR>When my time is up, it's up whether it's due to spending my time with friends in smokey pubs, eating bacon, being consumed by environmental fumes, getting hit by a bus, or whatever. <BR>I WILL SAY THOUGH...I REALLY MISS EUROPEANS "LIVE AND LET LIVE" ATTITUDE, now that I'm back in the U.S. for good. I believe we would all be much happier with their attitude.

Capo,<BR>For a moment I thought you & I were going agree on an issue...<BR>Just because our government is overly powerful does not mean we have to agree with it's mandates. You previously argued against bans on weed, and are now saying that because such laws are in place we should accept others that follow suit. I don't support a government that attempts to "big brother" industry or individuals. <BR>As a capitalist, I support letting the market dictate how private industry operates. If there is a market for smoke-free bars, they will open in mass. If a bartender feels that his health is at risk due to smoke, he is free to pursue another job. If an employer is unable to maintain a workforce due to unsafe conditions, he will enforce safety policies or go out of business. <BR>Once OSHA was given power (as is the case with most US Govt agencies; State and Federal) it went way beyond what is reasonable. A good example is Cali's smoking ban. <BR>A capitalist culture will evolve naturally to supply the demand. Passing law in attempt to protect every citizen from every evil in the country is ludicrous.<BR>Over to you.<BR>j.

Look out, the MMC* is starting it's nightly meeting right here on this board. Charter members are Capo and Uncle Sam though this dude Jon looks like he will be a contender for president next year.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>*MMC = Mental Masturbation Club

First of all, all smoke is an IRRITANT, whether ii comes from a cigg or a bonfire. It is not an ALLERGEN like dustmites, cat dander, ragweed, etc. When breathed in it swells the mucous membranes and irritates the throat like an allergic reaction but is not the same. You cannot get "desensitized" to smoke or perfumes by taking allergy shots. I know my allergy stuff, huh?<BR><BR>Next, hey Capo, lets get together and smoke a fatty. !)

Addendum<BR><BR>Add RANDI to the MMC list. He'll be elected director of Altered States of Awareness by a landslide.

Hey Lucas,<BR><BR>Thanks for the reply. I am happy to be director of Alt.States. But tell me, whats MMC? <BR><BR>Thanks bud.

Thanks, Jon. I did say I was of two minds on California's smoking ban; in otherwords, I see it from both perspectives, from the perspective of regulating working conditions, but also from a libertarian perspective. The devil, as always, is in the details. I'm sure many people would agree, in principle, with the need for *some* regulation of workplace conditions (ever heard of the infamous Triangle Building fire in New York City?). The question, of course, is how much regulation, to what degree? <BR><BR>You say that once OSHA was given power it went way beyond what is reasonable. That may be true and I'm hardly familiar with all of OSHA's regulations. But what is "reasonable" is going to vary from person to person, isn't it? <BR><BR>Anyway, although I can see both sides of California's ban, if I was voting on it, I would've voted against it. <BR> <BR>I do agree with you that just because our government is very powerful -- and has tons of laws about what people and businesses can and cannot do -- that certainly does not mean we have to agree with the laws. I disagree with many of the laws against so-called "vices", for example. The point I was trying to make -- and maybe my attempt was poor -- was how many people who are opposed to California's smoking ban as a government intrusion would turn around and support *other* government intrusions into people's lives? As I asked before, specifically, how many smokers who complain about not being able to smoke in certain places turn around and support laws against smoking marijuana in ALL places? <BR><BR>Back to smoking and the pub... I agree that a person doesn't have to go into a pub or restaurant that permits smoking; there are other options. And I think that non-smoking establishments, especially in the U.S., are growing as business owners see the demand for them. My main issue with smoking has always been music clubs because, if a national act is playing in town, and it's a smoking show, the only other option I have is to stay home. Fortunately, one of my favorite music clubs in Seattle has gone to a lot of non-smoking shows so I don't always have to make the choice of music & smoke vs. no music & no smoke. <BR><BR>Anyway, thanks for your comments.

A cigarette is a pinch of tobacco, wrapped in paper, fire at one end, fool at the other.

Love,<BR><BR>Roy Castle a well known British entertainer/celebrity/Christian died of cancer from passive smoking (second hand smoke. Persistent passive smoking is still very unhealthy. Why do you think parents are advised not to smoke around young children? It is not safe, For asthmatics it can bring on an asthma attack, smoke is one of the triggers.

And we're certain this gentleman died of passive 2nd hand smoke.....how?<BR><BR>US

Lillian how insensitive can you be. Sure would not want to be one of your friends, but then again, you probably don't have any.

I’ve got to wonder about those out there set to change the world. Here’s what dismays me: It is reasonably common knowledge that grilled and smoked meats cooked over coals or wood are loaded with umpteen known carcinogens. <BR><BR>If you ban smoking everywhere are you planning to ban my barbie? If I decide to grill a burger or a steak some Sunday afternoon can I expect to see one of you Morality Nazi’s bound over my fence with a fire extinguisher? Will you be taking me to court because the smoke from my grill is giving you second hand high cholesterol?<BR><BR>Just curious.<BR><BR>The whole idea of the government (or you) telling me, on a personal level, what I can and cannot do scares the bejesus out of me. <BR>

From a sociological point of view, this is a fascinating topic. However, it is very hard to discuss with people whose main source of information has been CNN.<BR><BR>Let me tell you a couple of FACTS (that is, something that can't be disputed).<BR><BR>The US, for example, has 1% of the world's smokers. For some bizarre reason, US health authorities claim 10% of the smoking related deaths in the world. Shouldn't that figure be 1%?<BR><BR>Take Japanese men. They are among the world's heaviest smokers (in terms of cigarettes, not weight). 50% of Japanese men smoke, as opposed to 25% of Americans. For some bizarre reason, the Japanese have the longest life expectancy in the world. Why is that?<BR><BR>It has been proven (by the World Health Organization) that second hand smoke related deaths are a myth. It was also proven that children living in households where 1 or both parents smoke were LESS prone to lung cancer...<BR><BR>Weird, isn't it?<BR><BR>I would like to see a poll, on how many of the people being so vocal against smoking on this thread are American. I would suspect that most of them are.

Message to smokers :<BR><BR>We don't hate you. On the other hand, we don't care if you are killing yourself with cigs. either. We aren't much concerned about getting cancer from sitting next to you 45 min in a restaurant.<BR><BR>The problem is... it stinks! it interferes with my tasting enjoyment of my food or beverage. It makes me cough. Because I'm ALLERGIC to other things, it makes my nose IRRITATED and makes me sneeze. The only way you can compare your smoking to my boozing is if I spit some Shiraz on you.<BR><BR>Maybe things are different in CA, but I don't think anti-smoking feelings are normally a health-nazi kind of thing.<BR><BR>Message to Non-Smokers:<BR><BR>Back in the day before everything was non-smoking I , on rare occaisions, would politely ask a smoker to put it out for a while. No one ever told me to drop dead. Courtesy will get you what you want 95% of the time.

Due to my lifelong work dealing with the lunatic fringe I should know better than to wade back in here, what with the Carrie Nation’s of the world who would much rather take an axe to something that they don’t like rather than to reason through, but here goes.<BR><BR>Rather than outright banning smoking in a place like a bar or even a restaurant, why not give the owner options? <BR><BR>A. Ban all smoking on the premises. That’s one option. If the owner/operator thinks that’s where the best interest of his business lies, so be it. This is a capitalist economy, for those of you who have forgotten, profit is NOT a dirty word, and no one should be allowed to determine a business’ operating policy except for the owner(s).<BR>B. Should he/she decide instead to give their clients a choice of smoking here’s another option. The business that decides to allow smoking will be directed, by law or statute, to buy an air exchange unit/ionizer that is capable of turning over and purifying the air in an area TWICE the size of the establishment in question at least every hour. The owner would agree in writing with the municipality/county to undergo a monthly inspection to ascertain the mechanism is doing its job. Failing to do this could result in a fine or suspension of the operator’s license. Should the owner decide to go to the expense of buying and maintaining the purifier in order to have smoking in his establishment, then so be it.<BR><BR>Of course that’s far too logical. It is more fun for the self-righteous to dictate to everyone else what’s best for “all of us.” However, bear in mind that some of the electric “smoke-eaters” on the market are so effective that even the smell of tobacco smoke is eliminated. But then what would there be to whine about? Like a previous poster said, the do-gooders would probably move next to ban grilled meats in public places.<BR>

I just want to inject a little bit of science on this highly charged subject. I am an otolaryngologist that specialises in allergy medicine. Also, I did a stint at a university medical center on addiction. Having said that, here goes:<BR>There truly is no such thing as an allergy to cigarette smoke. That is a very common myth (that may or may not have anything to do with the proliferation of vehement anti-smokers--I won't take sides here). However, cigarettes contain a number of toxic chemicals and irritants that can aggravate _other_ allergies and/or trigger asthma. So, the irritation is indeed real, but it is not an allergy to smoke, per se. Posters who claim a smoke allergy (Lisa, Uncle Sam), I urge you to see your doctor to get your allergy/breathing condition properly diagnosed. If smoke irritates you more than the typical person (i.e., you don't just hate the smell and its pervasiveness), you may have an underlying, valid allergy that is going untreated.<BR>The poster who pointed out that marijuana is generally not physically addictive was accurate. Those who are predisposed to addiction (alcoholics and their progeny) are more likely to develop dependence upon marijuana. I suspect that those who say they can quit but just choose not to fall into that group of genetically predisposed addicts.

Doc:<BR><BR>Maybe you can help me out with a related question. I am sure that you are aware with a "condition" called MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity).<BR><BR>Is that for real? Or is it NOT coincidental that most people who suffer from it are middle-aged, affluent and American?

Sorry, that should have read:<BR><BR>"aware OF a condition"... (I was thinking "familiar WITH" as I wrote it)<BR><BR>Thx

GudGawd, I think you're a Eurowannabe who's embarrassed by his own countrymen/women. SO WHAT if that lady did what she did. She has every right to be asked to be moved if the smoke was bothering her. Yes you have to respect other cultures and customs especially when you're visiting them, but what she did isn't disrespectful. I'm a Yank living in london. I have plenty of English friend also offended by cigarette smoke. They complain all the time about how smokey it is in places like Spain. I think the problem is yours not hers!

GudGawd, I think you're a Eurowannabe who's embarrassed by his own countrymen/women. SO WHAT if that lady did what she did. She has every right to be asked to be moved if the smoke was bothering her. Yes you have to respect other cultures and customs especially when you're visiting them, but what she did isn't disrespectful. I'm a Yank living in london. I have plenty of English friend also offended by cigarette smoke. They complain all the time about how smokey it is in places like Spain. I think the problem is yours not hers!

What irritates me more than the actual smoking is the attitude of smokers who drop their cig butts on the ground, grind it out and leave their trash on the ground - it's a total lack of consideration for public space and cleanliness. The smoker's attitude is: I don't care about the my surroundings, I only care about me. It takes 10 years for A cigarette butt to disintegrate. They say "it''s only a little cigarette butt, what does it matter?" They don't see the hundreds of other cigarette butts littering the sidewalk and making the area unsightly. It's no different than people who spit on the sidewalk. Thus if a smoker is going to be so selfish then I see no reason not to be selfish also. <BR><BR>PS - I recycle - separate and wash my can, bottles and plastic.

I am a non-smoker and I dislike smoking. Smoking will kill you, no doubt - believe me, I have the family gravestones to prove it. <BR><BR>I am happy that we have some restrictions on smoking in certain places here in the US, but I accept that some places are going to be smoky. I deal with it. It's OK. Exposing myself to a few hours of second-hand smoke every few months is probably less harmful than the daily lungfull of bus and taxi exhaust I get working in a big city.<BR><BR>Now, what kind of dimwit goes into an English pub (of all places) and complains about the smoke?! Has she never been to a bar before? If you dislike the smoke, leave. Otherwise, shut up and drink your Boddington's.

liam, i think you're right, but if all she did was ask to sit at another table what's the big deal. If she happens to be loud and have an "obnoxious" new jersey accent, well that's neither here nor there. The brits may have even gotten a kick out of it. I mean was she going around to each table asking people to not smoke?? That's something entirely different. Was she sitting there complaining about the smoke so loudly that everyone could hear her? That's rude and disrespectful.

"What irritates me more than the actual smoking is the attitude of smokers who drop their cig butts on the ground, grind it out and leave their trash on the ground - it's a total lack of consideration for public space and cleanliness. The smoker's attitude is: I don't care about the my surroundings, I only care about me. It takes 10 years for A cigarette butt to disintegrate." Anon.<BR><BR>Bravo, Anon. It kills me to see a smoker toss a cigarette butt out a car window onto the road. Doesn't your friggin' car have a friggin' ashtray?!?!<BR><BR>Our society has become incredibly self centered in the past few decades and smokers are no exception. When was the last time you heard someone ask, "Mind if I smoke?" (Actually, I do.)

"Now, what kind of dimwit goes into an English pub (of all places) and complains about the smoke?! "<BR><BR>People from New Jersey!

That's mild behavior for people from New Jersey. Most of them have a really bad attitude problem.<BR><BR>OTOH, I survived five long years in "Jersey" going for the brass ring...and If I'd had to stay there one day longer, I too would have developed the "Jersey" attitude, just putting up with the folks in "Jersey"!<BR><BR>US

Yo Uncle Sam, I'm from Jersey. Get bent!