Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree13Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 12th, 2017, 08:43 PM   #11
Have you seen my Iguana
 
Sabcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 22,486
This is one of the major reasons I am opposed to forced state medical.

You want to compare smoking to fatties?


Next thing you know all of our screens will simultaneously come on for our required calisthenics.

Furthermore what does society gain by prolonging the lives of the elderly once they can no longer contribute to society, when the cost outweighs the return on a new hip/heart exc.?


Now, I believe that the tobacco companies have created a super strong nicotine that they are adding to cigarettes that some compare to crack. I do think that if our great and powerful FDA gave a flying turd about us they would require them to label that, but no.

This has nothing to do w/ public safety. It is about control. Plain and simple. They have popularized the synthesized consumption of nicotine "vaping". This is something that there is no real research behind this, yet it has been pushed as a "healthy" alternative to smoking
Sabcat is offline  
Old August 12th, 2017, 08:58 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 10,704
Quote:
Originally Posted by titan View Post
The FDA's Dr. Scott Gotlieb observes that tobacco remains the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.

So Gotlieb has FDA plan to reduce nicotine in cigarettes sold here, reports Professor Kristy Andersen from Syracuse University.

She claims such nicotine reduction would make cigarettes much less addictive. We could still buy cigarettes. But she says they'd be easier to quit.

One of my questions:

What about those already addicted to regular cigarettes, and the nicotine they contain? Will they have to give up nicotine cold turkey when they switch to the new, doctored type of cigarette replacements?

And what's next? Scotch with most of the ethanol removed? Salt pork without the salt?
The FDA is nanny government gone hog wild. This will put real tobacco underground and make me a criminal. The FDA should take caffeine out of coffee and tea because I don't drink them.

Your Scotch is protected by the 21st Amendment.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 04:56 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabcat View Post
This is one of the major reasons I am opposed to forced state medical.

You want to compare smoking to fatties?


Next thing you know all of our screens will simultaneously come on for our required calisthenics.

Furthermore what does society gain by prolonging the lives of the elderly once they can no longer contribute to society, when the cost outweighs the return on a new hip/heart exc.?


Now, I believe that the tobacco companies have created a super strong nicotine that they are adding to cigarettes that some compare to crack. I do think that if our great and powerful FDA gave a flying turd about us they would require them to label that, but no.

This has nothing to do w/ public safety. It is about control. Plain and simple. They have popularized the synthesized consumption of nicotine "vaping". This is something that there is no real research behind this, yet it has been pushed as a "healthy" alternative to smoking


You'll be surprised to know that I agree with some of your post. If people want to kill themselves, it's fine with me. The restrictions have become ridiculous. AND there's no end in sight. It started with the labeling of cigarette packages in the 60s. By the 70s the surgeon general was warning about second-hand smoke. Restrictions on smoking in public places, government buildings, and airplanes were implemented in the 1970s, most of which limited but did not ban smoking. Then we had smoke free areas in public places.
In the 1990s hospitals petitioned for a policy prohibiting smoking by patients, visitors, employees, volunteers, and medical staff. EPA released its report classifying secondhand smoke as a group A carcinogen (known to be harmful to humans), placing secondhand smoke in the same category as asbestos, benzene, and radon. AND now? The ban includes no smoking policies within so many feet of a public building. We saw the decline of smoking in films and movies.
At the same time all this was happening, alcohol consumption, hard-core drug use and marijuana use are at an all time high. The opioid epidemic?
Obesity is UP. Sugar consumption is up.

I think these restrictions get out of control....and they are hypocritical. It's fine to drink yourself into a coma--anywhere, anytime--but God forbid you should smoke and die?? Really??
Clara007 is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 06:10 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 55,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
You'll be surprised to know that I agree with some of your post. If people want to kill themselves, it's fine with me. The restrictions have become ridiculous. AND there's no end in sight. It started with the labeling of cigarette packages in the 60s. By the 70s the surgeon general was warning about second-hand smoke. Restrictions on smoking in public places, government buildings, and airplanes were implemented in the 1970s, most of which limited but did not ban smoking. Then we had smoke free areas in public places.
In the 1990s hospitals petitioned for a policy prohibiting smoking by patients, visitors, employees, volunteers, and medical staff. EPA released its report classifying secondhand smoke as a group A carcinogen (known to be harmful to humans), placing secondhand smoke in the same category as asbestos, benzene, and radon. AND now? The ban includes no smoking policies within so many feet of a public building. We saw the decline of smoking in films and movies.
At the same time all this was happening, alcohol consumption, hard-core drug use and marijuana use are at an all time high. The opioid epidemic?
Obesity is UP. Sugar consumption is up.

I think these restrictions get out of control....and they are hypocritical. It's fine to drink yourself into a coma--anywhere, anytime--but God forbid you should smoke and die?? Really??
I agree with most of your post. Obesity is UP. Sugar consumption is up. It's slowly dawning on health care "professionals" that a low-fat diet leads to high carb intake which leads to obesity.

But you overlooked this, which has become a Sabcat meme:

Furthermore what does society gain by prolonging the lives of the elderly once they can no longer contribute to society, when the cost outweighs the return on a new hip/heart exc.?


The "no control" guy believes some panel or person shall decide when a person "no longer contributes to society." If the decision is yes, you no longer contribute to society, then piss on you, you old fuck. Kiss your knee replacement bye-bye bucko. You're going to live out your life in pain, and let's hope your life ends soon.

And, never mind that a knee replacement costs 4-6 times as much in the US. No, let's not address that....

Sabcat the anarchist's position on medical care based on "contributing" to society is pure evil, and a statist position to boot. WTF is the working definition of contributing to society? If we're to clamp down on something, let's clamp down on the medical "professionals" who keep a cancer patient alive just enough to keep him or her a cash cow for ridiculous procedures that prolong life at the expense of quality of life.
Thanks from Clara007

Last edited by imaginethat; August 13th, 2017 at 06:14 AM.
imaginethat is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 06:32 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
I agree with most of your post. But you overlooked this, which has become a Sabcat meme"

Furthermore what does society gain by prolonging the lives of the elderly once they can no longer contribute to society, when the cost outweighs the return on a new hip/heart exc.?


The "no control" guy believes some panel or person shall decide when a person "no longer contributes to society." If the decision is yes, you no longer contribute to society, then piss on you, you old fuck. Kiss your knee replacement bye-bye bucko. You're going to live out your life in pain, and let's hope your life ends soon.

And, never mind that a knee replacement costs 4-6 times as much in the US. No, let's not address that....

Sabcat the anarchist's position on medical care based on "contributing" to society is pure evil, and a statist position to boot. WTF is the working definition of contributing to society? If we're to clamp down on something, let's clamp down on the medical "professionals" who keep a cancer patient alive just enough to keep him or her a cash cow for ridiculous procedures that prolong life at the expense of quality of life.


Yes, I understand what you are saying and agree. Let's talk about contributing to society. Living in a senior community is like taking a class on aging. We see the effects of the aging process in everything from Alzheimers to broken hips to Macular Degeneration to cancer of every kind. We see seniors lose their homes, their children, their grandchildren--their freedom. We see the estate sales and every growing senior housing. It's devastating but inevitable.

So when, exactly do they stop contributing? When they are at death's door--in a fetal position? Nope. Even then, the seniors are paying taxes, creating jobs, supporting charities and churches. Their estates are transferred to the children who then invest in the stock market, real estate, and businesses. It's a cycle that continues.
Every senior I know has already created their trust, their POA, their end of life decisions, which do not include resuscitation. Mr. Clara and I have done the same. Even THOSE decisions contribute to society.
My mother was diagnosed with ovarian cancer at the age of 88--had surgery and lived another two years. She volunteered at her church, played golf, hosted luncheons, visited her sick friends and helped her neighbors until two days before she died....and good for her!!
There is no end to our contributions.
Thanks from imaginethat
Clara007 is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 07:44 AM   #16
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
You'll be surprised to know that I agree with some of your post. If people want to kill themselves, it's fine with me. The restrictions have become ridiculous. AND there's no end in sight. It started with the labeling of cigarette packages in the 60s. By the 70s the surgeon general was warning about second-hand smoke. Restrictions on smoking in public places, government buildings, and airplanes were implemented in the 1970s, most of which limited but did not ban smoking. Then we had smoke free areas in public places.
In the 1990s hospitals petitioned for a policy prohibiting smoking by patients, visitors, employees, volunteers, and medical staff. EPA released its report classifying secondhand smoke as a group A carcinogen (known to be harmful to humans), placing secondhand smoke in the same category as asbestos, benzene, and radon. AND now? The ban includes no smoking policies within so many feet of a public building. We saw the decline of smoking in films and movies.
At the same time all this was happening, alcohol consumption, hard-core drug use and marijuana use are at an all time high. The opioid epidemic?
Obesity is UP. Sugar consumption is up.

I think these restrictions get out of control....and they are hypocritical. It's fine to drink yourself into a coma--anywhere, anytime--but God forbid you should smoke and die?? Really??
The argument here is that smoking anywhere anytime will harm those in the area. The effects of second hand smoke have been established pretty well.
RNG is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 08:04 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Clara007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Arizona
Posts: 7,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
The argument here is that smoking anywhere anytime will harm those in the area. The effects of second hand smoke have been established pretty well.


AND my argument wasn't for or against smoking. My argument is the hypocrisy of our culture. We are all connected. What my neighbor does or does NOT do has an impact on me.
WE the people are allowed to have as many guns as we want. We can kill ourselves in so many awesome ways. We can become drug addicts and alcoholics. We can eat ourselves into 600 pound oblivion or starve ourselves until we go into cardiac arrest. All those things affect others--our families and friends.

But we can't smoke?? We can't drive without seat belts? Helmets?
This nation gets on a "kick" and just won't let go until there's nowhere ELSE TO go. AND yet, no one gives a crap about other death-defying habits?
Thanks from Sabcat
Clara007 is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 08:19 AM   #18
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 26,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clara007 View Post
AND my argument wasn't for or against smoking. My argument is the hypocrisy of our culture. We are all connected. What my neighbor does or does NOT do has an impact on me.
WE the people are allowed to have as many guns as we want. We can kill ourselves in so many awesome ways. We can become drug addicts and alcoholics. We can eat ourselves into 600 pound oblivion or starve ourselves until we go into cardiac arrest. All those things affect others--our families and friends.

But we can't smoke?? We can't drive without seat belts? Helmets?
This nation gets on a "kick" and just won't let go until there's nowhere ELSE TO go. AND yet, no one gives a crap about other death-defying habits?
I have long advocated that laws and regulations against actions that only harm oneself other than through secondary financial costs be removed BUT individuals electing to opt out of such laws and regs would have to sign a disclaimer saying that any consequence they suffer as a result of it will not result in a cent of public money to be expended. And obviously the laws would need to be changed to absolutely prevent family from suing.

So things like drunk driving would still be illegal as well as smoking in public. But if you want a crushed skull, go ahead and ride your bike without a helmet. Just accept the fact that if you go down you become road pizza.
Thanks from Clara007
RNG is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 09:07 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 55,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
I have long advocated that laws and regulations against actions that only harm oneself other than through secondary financial costs be removed BUT individuals electing to opt out of such laws and regs would have to sign a disclaimer saying that any consequence they suffer as a result of it will not result in a cent of public money to be expended. And obviously the laws would need to be changed to absolutely prevent family from suing.

So things like drunk driving would still be illegal as well as smoking in public. But if you want a crushed skull, go ahead and ride your bike without a helmet. Just accept the fact that if you go down you become road pizza.
Road pizza is one of the better outcomes. Becoming totally disabled at 29 and dependent upon constant hospital care is another outcome ... because the person wanted to enjoy the freedom of riding without a helmet.

But hell, obesity in most circumstances is a choice, too. The rise in diabetes directly is connected to obesity, and in most cases losing weight and improving one's diet proves effective. But no, Western medicine can keep ya alive in spite of poor decisions. That's "progress."
Thanks from RNG and Clara007
imaginethat is offline  
Old August 13th, 2017, 09:17 AM   #20
Have you seen my Iguana
 
Sabcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Earth
Posts: 22,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
I agree with most of your post. Obesity is UP. Sugar consumption is up. It's slowly dawning on health care "professionals" that a low-fat diet leads to high carb intake which leads to obesity.

But you overlooked this, which has become a Sabcat meme:

Furthermore what does society gain by prolonging the lives of the elderly once they can no longer contribute to society, when the cost outweighs the return on a new hip/heart exc.?


The "no control" guy believes some panel or person shall decide when a person "no longer contributes to society." If the decision is yes, you no longer contribute to society, then piss on you, you old fuck. Kiss your knee replacement bye-bye bucko. You're going to live out your life in pain, and let's hope your life ends soon.

And, never mind that a knee replacement costs 4-6 times as much in the US. No, let's not address that....

Sabcat the anarchist's position on medical care based on "contributing" to society is pure evil, and a statist position to boot. WTF is the working definition of contributing to society? If we're to clamp down on something, let's clamp down on the medical "professionals" who keep a cancer patient alive just enough to keep him or her a cash cow for ridiculous procedures that prolong life at the expense of quality of life.

You, like usual, either completely miss or just shoot it out to fit your meme. The point is if we bow to a socialist utopia where the collective outweighs the individual then we must apply values to humans. When we go down this route weak babies and the elderly will be the first to be eliminated as the consume far more resources than they can contribute to society.


Nice try


How is Cindy ?
Sabcat is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
cigarettes, fda, nicotine, removed, sold



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New York, Cigarettes, Tax Law, and Crime Sabcat Big Government 1 September 21st, 2016 04:35 AM
Why do we tax cigarettes? Sabcat Taxes 104 April 18th, 2016 04:17 PM
Turbans, AK-47s and Cigarettes, Oh My! The Bare Knuckled Pundit Politicians 0 July 16th, 2008 03:39 AM
One Joint Could Have Similar Impact to 5 Cigarettes... tadpole256 Drugs, Alcohol, Tobacco 49 October 19th, 2007 07:40 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.