Does smoking cigarettes really cause heart attacks? Should it matter?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by Randwolf, Oct 29, 2012.

  1. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    FR yes the right to grow up healthy is irrelivent to Americans who are one of only 3 countries (other 2 being southen Sudan which has only just become a country and Somalia where there is almost no goverment and both these counties have said they will ratify the convention soon) who still view children as property
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    You're exaggerating as usual. That's not my position. But I most firmly believe that children are not adults and cannot logically be granted the rights of adults.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,225
    Well, not "not" from me bro.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You will please note that I did slip a complaint about stinky diesel smoke in there. I wish all auto transport was electric (like it will eventually be) and that no - one was allowed to pollute the air, water, space etc anywhere. (yeah, like that is ever gonna happen

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    I was ecstatic when they banned lead in gasoline and asbestos in brakes, would be tickled fookin pink if they cleaned up all of the rest of the pollution being spewed pretty much everywhere. That includes loud smell phone conversations in public ques and in traffic, loud music blasting from loud cars, 'jake braking' by semi trucks, Harley Davidsons with straight pipes (that means there is no muffler, baffles or other noise reduction of the exhaust), chumps tossing burning cigarette butts from out of car windows, junkies tossing used syringes on my lawn etc etc etc.....

    ...and no, I do not care one little bit for the lazy, wasteful habits that are driving global warming or for terrorist idiots either.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    /rant
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    Stoniphi off the bat- I'm not hating on you here.

    But that's a hell of a lot of control you're shoving down everyone's throat. You grant that it may improve the environment- some of it. But loud music?

    The "Jake" - Jacobs brake saves lives. It kills four cylinders to give braking power to a tractor/trailer to conserve the mechanical brakes which can fail.
    Oh, but you find the noise annoying and wouldn't mind jeopardizing lives to spare yourself the deep guttural sound of the jake. It saves the brakes, prevents out of control Semi's. I find city ordinances against them absurd and you know what? The drivers know better. They break that law and they use the jake- I hear them going down the highway near here all the time. Occasionally see one on the side of the road - flashing red and blue behind them. /Salute.


    /rant
     
  8. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Better yet, how about mandating more telecommuting? One-fourth of America's petroleum is used directly for commuting. And I'm sure that would become one-third if we add in the second-order effects such as energy-intensive fast food for people who can't get home in time for dinner, tradesmen driving to the homes of people who don't have time to replace a faucet washer, and nannies scurrying around to take care of children whose parents never get to see them awake.

    I know that the dinosaur-generation of managers (hey wait, that's my generation!) don't believe it's possible for people to work together if they can't see each other, but we've got webcams and pass-the-mouse meeting software now. Besides, my grandfather refused to let the telephone company install a free phone in his pharmacy because "people will never be comfortable transacting business with someone they can't see." And as I noted earlier, I'm sure a lot of cavemen insisted that people would never be happy living in houses, growing wheat and raising goats in their back yard, instead of hunting their own dinner, sleeping under the stars, and starving to death during a dry year.

    A lot of our energy problems would be greatly mitigated, if perhaps not completely solved, if we would just make the transition from the Industrial Era to the Information Age a little faster. There's no reason not to build a civilization in which people never have to travel except for recreation and socialization, with a few obvious exceptions such as diplomats and psychiatrists who probably need face-to-face meetings, and a tiny percentage of the population performing physical labor that can't (yet) be automated.

    Obviously there's a large business community with too much invested in the defunct paradigms of the Industrial Era for us to expect them to go away quietly. I remember when Backward Baby Bush was inaugurated--the Scion Of The Energy Industry. Many government agencies received very terse notices urging them to discontinue their telecommuting programs.

    As someone else explained, this is a safety requirement. You'd have to double the size of the brakes on all eighteen wheels (at least double--I'm not an automotive engineer) in order to achieve the same stopping power as you get from engine braking on downhills and in emergencies, and that would be cost-prohibitive. Perhaps you should be comforted by the little-known fact that despite being a nation of driving enthusiasts, the USA actually ships a much larger percentage of its freight by train than by truck. The Europeans are way ahead of us on passenger traffic (only because they've taxed passenger cars and their fuel beyond affordability), but we've got it all over them when it comes to freight.

    You're too young to remember the two-stroke engines on many of the early Japanese bikes. Even with stock mufflers a little (by today's standards) 250cc Yamaha could wake up an entire neighborhood.

    My own personal "favorite" on trash night is the used condoms.

    As I implied above, you can lay a lot of that blame on the U.S. business sector, for staying on a profitable path with no thought for the future. And on the U.S. government for not doing what the People's Republic of Europe has done and simply taxed them into submission. Gasoline was $6.00 a gallon over there ten years ago, IIRC.

    You can blame GM for the fact that diesel-engine automobiles (which are much more energy-efficient than their gasoline counterparts and also, because their engines have to be much more sturdily built, cheaper to keep running for 20 years) are out of vogue in the U.S. When we first began buying diesel Peugeots and Mercedes after the first "Gas Crisis" in the 1970s, GM came out with a line of diesel engines that were nothing more than gasoline engines with diesel heads. Predictably, with 24:1 compression they banged themselves into destruction in less than 100K miles, teaching all of America that "diesels suck." We still have the first car we bought new when we got married, a 1978 diesel Mercedes. It still runs like new with 200K miles.

    I'm not quite sure how the terrorists figure into your argument, except obliquely. Backward Baby Bush had to convince Americans that 9/11 was NOT planned, financed and carried out primarily by Saudis, his family's buddies in the energy industry. So he wove a tale of Saddam (leader of the only major secular pro-Western government in the entire Middle East) having WMDs, and got us to destroy Iraq. This was okay because once Iraq became a U.S. territory like Puerto Rico, all of its petroleum would be ours. He didn't bother to mention that when you destroy a country that includes its infrastructure, in this case its petroleum industry. (Yes, I've exaggerated a little bit, but us old guys just call that "making a good story better."

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
     
  9. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,547
    Prediction: psychiatry will be automated before plumbing, farming, carpentry and painting, housework, childcare, masonry, lawn and garden work, snow shoveling, retail grocery and clothing sales, machine and appliance repair (including computers), household goods sale and delivery, veterinary and medical services, insurance sales and adjustment, mechanical invention and design, any engineering job except drafting, the support staff for any of those jobs, journalism, police work, and so forth.

    "Phoning it in" has slipshod implications for a reason.

    You don't need a jake brake for any ordinary intown, freeway, or suburban road driving. They are for emergencies and very steep hills only - those drivers are just being assholes, because they like the noise. Same as a straight pipe Harley - it's no different, in motive or execution, from walking down the street slapping people for entertainment.

    And the stress, the involuntary cortisol boost from the racket, does abet blood pressure spikes and eventual heart attacks, strokes, etc - in both the riders and the afflicted public.

    Diesel pollution is nasty stuff - lots of fine particulates, considerably worse than second hand tobacco smoke. And diesels are much more expensive to repair, keep running in cold weather, etc, for a private individual (you need a fleet mechanic crew in house, to handle diesels economically in Minnesota). I've put 300k on two consecutive four cylinder spark engines, 270 and counting on the third, 30 mpg over the road in a a pickup truck, no engine repairs except gaskets and belts (which are a hell of a lot more expensive for a diesel). Body rust got them, not engine wear. Replacement with a decent electric - great. Diesel? I can't afford it, don't want to breathe it or listen to it.
    And diesel effluvia is linked to heart attacks, btw - dose for dose more dangerous than cigarettes, in its particulate structure and chemical composition. As your mother said, do not kneel down and inhale bus fumes, unless you want to get sick.
     
  10. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    This statement is an untrue assumption on your part.
    You clearly have no idea what you're talking about- exemplified by how you claimed the drivers are "assholes that like the noise" as if you had any idea of whether that is true or not.

    The Jacobs brake is not for emergencies only- clearly this statement is absurd as the Jake brake will not stop a truck.
    It will slow the truck down, preserving the mechanical brakes from heat damage so that the mechanical brakes can perform when needed.

    It is used to prevent emergencies.

    To claim such an absurdity as the Jake is for emergencies only demonstrates your bias and ignorance and how willing you are to dismiss mechanical physics as an excuse used by assholes that like noise.
     
  11. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    You can smoke all you want, just keep your smoke off my clothes and out of my lungs.
     
  12. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    That's just not true. The number of smokers in society has nosedived, decade on decade, from a majority in the 50's, to a fifth of the population now. As the vast majority are now non-smokers, we've simply decided we don't want to stink, and you can keep your vile stench to yourself. You do know smokers stink, right?
     
  13. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    That's just not true. I can smell a cigarette from about a hundred yards, and if it's a windless day tell you which way along a path a smoker walked when they are long gone, and I've never been a smoker. I don't think I've even got a particularly good sense of smell, given it was my other half who sniffed out there was a dead pigeon up our chimney last year. It's just that cigarettes stink, and if you stop tuning the stink out, it's very apparent.
     
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,547
    I've been working around trucks and truck drivers my entire working life - more than thirty years. You don't need a jake brake for ordinary braking. The guys who use jake brakes in ordinary situations in residential areas are assholes who like the noise. I come to that assessment, right or wrong, after working with dozens - hundreds - of them, for years.

    [quote="neverfly'] It is used to prevent emergencies. [/quote] Exactly - emergencies (or emergency situations, if you prefer) and steep hills, situations like that. If you're overloaded. If you are coming up on something suddenly, surprised. Not ordinary braking. Unless the driver simply prefers the noise.

    Banning Jake braking on the ordinary roads in small towns, suburbs, etc, is perfectly reasonable. Some guys will jake brake to a red light outside of a hospital at 3 in the morning, if permitted, just for the macho thrill - same reason they run straight pipes on their Harleys, with some bs about "loud pipes save lives".

    And yes, sudden or loud noise does raise blood pressure, affect cortisol levels and sugar metabolism and adrenalilne release, the whole shebang. As with second hand smoke, swing shift work, and the like, it abets heart attacks and strokes. This is especially so if the noise, smoke, etc, is not under the afflicted person's control, if it is an imposition or abuse they cannot mitigate.
     
  15. R1D2 many leagues under the sea. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,321
    I will agree with the scientists that say smoking does increase health risks.
    There is even a third hand smoke people can get I heard that can be harmful. The third hand smoke is when someone smokes and you are close to them and you can smell it. The degree can be increased based on the amount they smoke. And I went to a casino one time in Louisiana. If all casinos allow smoking I don't wish to go to one.
    I don't smoke. I have had older family smoke most of there lives. And those that have. Have some have health issues. Some have COPD, heart issues, and blood pressure problems. I love them but it is hard sometimes to be around them. I also know that most parents not all that smoke tend to have kids more likely to smoke. There are some European places that smoke anywhere and everywhere. Maybe we should not just study Americans for smoking. Maybe they don't I don't really know.
     
  16. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    You have changed your tune.
    And I'm not buying it.
    You went from saying "emergencies only" to "Ok well, not ordinary braking."
    That's quite a leap. No. The Jake Will Not Stop A truck. Saying now that it's only for the purpose of "Suddenly, surprised" isn't going to change anything.

    I repeat: It's purpose is to save the mechanical brakes from overheating and failure. And claiming to have been around trucks and truckers does not make you qualified when you say things like, "It's for emergencies only." I've driven one. I don't anymore and I no longer have my CDL, but I had one and I've driven them.

    Yes, so make sure you don't suddenly sneeze in a quiet room where you might startle someone.

    In the meantime, legislation to ban the use of the Jake Brake was passed in towns in the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California because of the same ignorant B.S. that you spouted in this thread. Steep hills, indeed.
     
  17. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    How is it a slippery slope? Where is the slippery slope aspect of my argument?
     
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,547
    Please do not present your wording as a quote from me.
    And since there is no realistic danger of brake overheating and failure in ordinary situations, there is no need to jake brake. Exactly.
    Well, I think I am. Ridden, driven, worked off of, done minor mechanical repairs, and been widely experienced with not only trucks, but more importantly and relevantly their drivers, in a variety of perspectives including training them.
    Your habit of changing my quotes, and then assailing the implications of stuff I did not say, is damn irritating.
    So? I've known lots of truck drivers. They talk like you, often. Why would that affect my well informed assessment of the situation?
    How would banning jake braking on steep hills accord with my posts? I specifically included steep hills in the limited circumstances in which jake braking was reasonable.
    Typical. Yep, my assessment stands. Read your posts, and you'll see where it comes from - thirty years of guys talking just like that.

    That's why we get these mickey mouse, awkward, ill-considered, blanket-judgment, overkill laws - because guys like that cannot buy a clue, and people have given up on trying to persuade them to be reasonable. It's too bad, but what do you do?
     
  19. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    Let's look...
    Fine. But this is different from "Emergencies only. See your direct quote above.
    So, you worked around them, etc. but didn't listen to what they said. Got it.
    I pointed out that the people making the claims you have did not take that into consideration. But steep hills is not the only time a jake is a lifesaver. Constant use of the mechanical brakes is when it's a brake saver. And consider what conditions would make that necessary?
    Mechanical brakes are pads on metal. You've worked on these things? So have I. I've seen those mechanical brakes go out. I've seen truck after truck wreckage where the trucker had to veer off the road in order to prevent plowing into cars- He put himself in harms way, rather than others when those others forbade the use of the Jake Brake.
    I've been out on calls for trucks where the brakes were so hot, they were running a hose on them constantly from a tanker for ten minutes and still making only vapor. "For emergencies only," you said. Quoted above.
    Yes, because your excuse was lame. Clearly the operators of these massive vehicles are clueless crap-talkers that are assholes wanting to make loud noises at people. Never mind they could just use the horn...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,402
    I live near a highway and do occasionally hear those trucks breaking--not sure if they are Jake breaks. Though distracting, I don't get bent out of shape because of it. maybe if I were closer to the highway I might take exception.
     
  21. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,547
    My direct quote included steep hills, an example of a non-emergency situation in which jake braking is appropriate. I never said anything about "stopping" the truck with a jake brake, I did not say "emergencies only" without qualification, and so forth.

    Your presumptions here are symptomatic. Like this:
    More insults from complete and obvious ignorance. Running true to form, I must say - one more confirming experience, for my initial assessment (which was based on hundreds of them).
    You have made no reference to anyone else making the claims I made here. Obviously anyone who did not take into account what I take into account, who did things I recommend against, who did not say what I said, would not be making the same claims - right?

    Your only reference was to people banning jake braking when it should be allowed - my only contribution to that was to point out (in response) one reason why such laws, which I agree are unfortunate and ill-considered, get passed: people get frustrated, and act unwisely, when dealing with assholes who are abusing them. You appear to be arguing from some kind of fantasy about what I've been posting - maybe reread? Here:
    Are you claiming that truck drivers - at least some of them (and they are getting younger, have you noticed?) do not occasionally - and in some arenas frequently, such as important truck routes through small, flat prairie towns at night - simply enjoy the racket, same as the racket from their glass pack dual exhausts and unmuffled motorcycles and so forth? I've been in the cab, watching them, listening to them talk about it - they do.

    The relevance to the thread is tenuous, but real - some of the same reflexive hostility and defense of abuse is obvious in the crowd that doesn't want to change the way they smoke, and doesn't want to hold truck with any kind of justification for curbing smoking at all. As is the frustrated over-reaction from people fed up with living among clouds of smoke amid a debris carpet of discarded filters, and met with the above kind of reactionary scorn upon any attempt at all to defend their lives: (banning smoking outdoors inside the city limits, say). Reactionaries react, in an almost Newtonian sense. It's an aspect of human nature, with implications for everything from the grounds of religion to the conduct of this latest campaign season.
     
  22. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    What you said was "for emergencies and steep hills only." Check your wording and stop giving me a hard time for what you said.

    This one is my poor wording, sorry.
    I was referring to the residents of Jackson California, Volcano, California and numerous other small towns in the Sierra Nevada mountains that foolishly passed ordinances against jake brakes due to noise when those towns are in the mountains. Steep hills- indeed.
    Again, I wasn't very clear in how I put that.
    I've never seen you take this position except for now, in this post.
    I've got over a decade experience and you have at least 20 years experience more- however, I've never seen nor heard tales of people abusing the Jake because they like the noise- and you say that you have. It's a stalemate at that point. I don't find it impossible to think that a few might do that. But it's not worth banning the use of the jake over, is it?
    Have I noticed... LOL I remember more than one truck stop clerk complaining about how I was the youngest driver they had ever seen. I got carded constantly. Truth is, much as it galls me, I don't look as old as I am. Believe me when I say that's not a good thing.
    I have never seen that. I've been in the mountains of California and the flats and all over Texas- very flat. I've never seen it done, not once. But that doesn't mean it never happens.
    You say you have seen it many times. I will take your word for it that truckers have done that. In which case, you're right- that's improper and may even cause undue wear and tear on their mechanical components. I have seen the jake used in heavy braking conditions even on the flats. It was not improper for them to do so.
    I see the relevance to the thread as the principle is very similar.
     

Share This Page