Hospital cigarette ban has gone up in smoke

Andrew Whitehead

A picture of a smoker outside the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford taken by Andrew Whitehead

First published in News Witney Gazette: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter. Please call me on (01865) 425411

HEALTH officials have admitted a ban on smoking at Oxfordshire’s hospitals has failed to stub out the problem.

They are reviewing the situation as a “matter of urgency” after receiving complaints about staff and other people lighting up, despite the habit being outlawed at all four of their sites.

Carterton resident Andrew Whitehead took a picture of what appears to be a member of staff smoking in grounds of the John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford when he went in for a check-up recently. He said: “If they say it is a no- smoking site, then they have to enforce it.

“Parking is prohibited in any part of the hospital, except the designated areas, and the hospital ensures this is adhered to.

“There are areas where the public are prohibited and the hospital ensures the public stay out. Why would the hospital not ensure another of its rules is adhered to?”

In March the Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust (OUHT) relaunched its no smoking policy on National No Smoking Day.

The aim was to stop smoking at the JR, the Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre an the Churchill Hospital in Oxford, and at The Horton Hospital in Banbury.

A health bus visited the sites to promote the policy and offer support and advice to patients, visitors and staff.

Related links

The trust said it there had been problems enforcing a total ban.

Director of workforce Sue Donaldson said: “Smoking is currently prohibited on our four hospital sites and there are no designated areas for staff, patients and visitors.

“However, it has not been possible to enforce the current policy in all areas and we are now reviewing it to consider what other measures can be put in place.

“We would hope that everyone would respect our efforts to deter smoking on our sites.”

It is not known how long the review will take.

Mr Whitehead, 62, wrote to the chief executive of the OUHT, Sir Jonathan Michael, about the problem.

Sir Jonathan wrote back to say the trust realised it had to do more and that the policy needed proper enforcement.

Smoking was banned outright at the hospitals on January 1, 2007.

The trust said there had been four formal complaints between April last year and March this year over smoking at its hospitals.

Recently, larger ‘No Smoking’ signs have been placed at the main entrances of all four hospitals. A spokesman for anti-smoking campaign Ash said: “Many hospitals have found it difficult to eradicate smoking from their grounds, despite bans. It is disappointing, as clearly smoking and tobacco have no place near a hospital.

“Mr Whitehead’s interjection is timely, given the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) is consulting on this particular issue and advising on what action hospitals must take to create smoke-free environments.”

Nice is an independent body but answers to the Department of Health.

It says there should be better management of hospital sites and better attitudes to confronting smokers about their habit, whether they are staff, patients or visitors.

Comments (43)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:49pm Wed 8 May 13

chas says...

NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced.
NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced. chas
  • Score: 6

1:16pm Wed 8 May 13

Severian says...

The staff and visitors at the JR in Oxford regularly smoke outside the building. In the entrance to the new children's block there is an indoor area by the car park with big signs saying "No Smoking" but these are ignored by everyone.

It seems that even the NHS staff (including nurses) don't care about their own health or that of others.
The staff and visitors at the JR in Oxford regularly smoke outside the building. In the entrance to the new children's block there is an indoor area by the car park with big signs saying "No Smoking" but these are ignored by everyone. It seems that even the NHS staff (including nurses) don't care about their own health or that of others. Severian
  • Score: 1

1:18pm Wed 8 May 13

Severian says...

chas wrote:
NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced.
Wrong I'm afraid. Hospitals are NOT public places, they are just places open to the public.

Just because the NHS is run for the people doesn't give anyone the right to do what they want on their premises. There is no difference between the JR and any school, library, museum, art, police station etc.

If people want to smoke in public they should go and stand outside the hospital gates.
[quote][p][bold]chas[/bold] wrote: NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced.[/p][/quote]Wrong I'm afraid. Hospitals are NOT public places, they are just places open to the public. Just because the NHS is run for the people doesn't give anyone the right to do what they want on their premises. There is no difference between the JR and any school, library, museum, art, police station etc. If people want to smoke in public they should go and stand outside the hospital gates. Severian
  • Score: -3

1:59pm Wed 8 May 13

H.J.Harris says...

I am an ex-smoker and have a great dislike for being around cigarette smoke but have sympathy for those who are still addicted.
It is a pity an area cannot be set aside to smokers although I have no doubt there are those who would say this would be the NHS condoning the habit. Going off the premises to indulge would be difficult with the distance involved between the main JR building and the main entranced.
I am an ex-smoker and have a great dislike for being around cigarette smoke but have sympathy for those who are still addicted. It is a pity an area cannot be set aside to smokers although I have no doubt there are those who would say this would be the NHS condoning the habit. Going off the premises to indulge would be difficult with the distance involved between the main JR building and the main entranced. H.J.Harris
  • Score: 3

2:21pm Wed 8 May 13

Diddy OX says...

Wow! A few people are smoking a legal product where they shouldn't be? This is terrible it must be at the top of the list of things to sort out far more important than treating people for life threatening conditions way above keeping the wards clean, it's an absolute outrage these people must be found and humiliated in public with a good flogging!
Wow! A few people are smoking a legal product where they shouldn't be? This is terrible it must be at the top of the list of things to sort out far more important than treating people for life threatening conditions way above keeping the wards clean, it's an absolute outrage these people must be found and humiliated in public with a good flogging! Diddy OX
  • Score: 8

2:28pm Wed 8 May 13

moonlight shadow says...

so if I am visiting the hospital and as I leave light up on my way to my car who is going to stop me? And how do they propose to actually enforce this?
Just another example of the p/c brigade imposing their will on others.
I do not think it is legally enforceable so why waste money on harassing smokers?
so if I am visiting the hospital and as I leave light up on my way to my car who is going to stop me? And how do they propose to actually enforce this? Just another example of the p/c brigade imposing their will on others. I do not think it is legally enforceable so why waste money on harassing smokers? moonlight shadow
  • Score: 10

3:03pm Wed 8 May 13

iamlauren345 says...

Whilst visiting my premature baby son in the Special Care Baby Unit for 6 weeks, I was nearly always greeted by new mums and dads standing outside the entrance, with their newborn baby still in the plastic cot provided by the maternity unit, smoking away. It's absolutely disgusting, and also distressing to see what should be a newborn baby's first breath of fresh air, instead they're having to breathe in their selfish parents second-hand smoke. I know other mums who had experienced the same thing felt the same way as I do. If they need to enforce their No Smoking policy anywhere, surely it should be outside the Women's Centre?
Whilst visiting my premature baby son in the Special Care Baby Unit for 6 weeks, I was nearly always greeted by new mums and dads standing outside the entrance, with their newborn baby still in the plastic cot provided by the maternity unit, smoking away. It's absolutely disgusting, and also distressing to see what should be a newborn baby's first breath of fresh air, instead they're having to breathe in their selfish parents second-hand smoke. I know other mums who had experienced the same thing felt the same way as I do. If they need to enforce their No Smoking policy anywhere, surely it should be outside the Women's Centre? iamlauren345
  • Score: 1

3:03pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

Feds Spend $402,721 on Underwear That Senses Cigarette Smoke.

http://cnsnews.com/n
ews/article/feds-spe
nd-402721-underwear-
senses-cigarette-smo
ke

Stink Bomb: Underwear Bomber Wore Explosive Undies for Weeks, FBI Says.

http://abcnews.go.co
m/blogs/headlines/20
12/09/stink-bomb-und
erwear-bomber-wore-e
xplosive-undies-for-
weeks-fbi-says/

SUICIDE BOMBS AND SUICIDE BOMBERS - World Topics | Facts and Details.
factsanddetails.com

Poster Glorifying Suicide.
Bomber in Jenin The explosives and detonator on suicide bombs are often placed on a belt or vest that is rapped around the torso. A wire connects the detonator and bomb with a cigarette-lighter-si
ze arming device and trigger that is used to detonate the bomb and is hidden the bombers pocket of hand. Sometimes suicide bombers are discovered because of their bulky clothing or heavy coats in hot weather or because their triggering devises are visible of they have their hands suspiciously in their pockets, http://factsanddetai
ls.com/world.php?ite
mid=2392&subcatid=38
4.

Looks like the smokefree advocates have a friend in al quieda!

Fred Thompson Explains Al Qaeda, Baffles Media.
Posted by Paul.

Published: September 9, 2007 – 10:53 PM Fred Thompson was giving a speech yesterday and he mentioned that one of the reasons the locals threw Al Qaelda out of Anbar was the prohibition on smoking. This apparently baffled one reporter by the name of Richard Sisk from the NY Daily News who thought it was a nonsensical answer.

Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.
BY RICHARD SISK (who doesn’t read enough).
SIOUX CITY, Iowa – Freshly minted GOP White House hopeful Fred Thompson puzzled Iowans yesterday by insisting an Al Qaeda smoking ban was one reason freedom-loving Iraqis bolted to the U.S. side.

“They said, ‘You gotta quit smoking,’” Thompson explained to a questioner asking about progress in Iraq during a town hall-style meeting.

Thompson said the smoking ban and terror tactics Al Qaeda used to oppress women and intimidate local leaders pushed tribes in western Anbar Province to support U.S. troops.
Feds Spend $402,721 on Underwear That Senses Cigarette Smoke. http://cnsnews.com/n ews/article/feds-spe nd-402721-underwear- senses-cigarette-smo ke Stink Bomb: Underwear Bomber Wore Explosive Undies for Weeks, FBI Says. http://abcnews.go.co m/blogs/headlines/20 12/09/stink-bomb-und erwear-bomber-wore-e xplosive-undies-for- weeks-fbi-says/ SUICIDE BOMBS AND SUICIDE BOMBERS - World Topics | Facts and Details. factsanddetails.com Poster Glorifying Suicide. Bomber in Jenin The explosives and detonator on suicide bombs are often placed on a belt or vest that is rapped around the torso. A wire connects the detonator and bomb with a cigarette-lighter-si ze arming device and trigger that is used to detonate the bomb and is hidden the bombers pocket of hand. Sometimes suicide bombers are discovered because of their bulky clothing or heavy coats in hot weather or because their triggering devises are visible of they have their hands suspiciously in their pockets, http://factsanddetai ls.com/world.php?ite mid=2392&subcatid=38 4. Looks like the smokefree advocates have a friend in al quieda! Fred Thompson Explains Al Qaeda, Baffles Media. Posted by Paul. Published: September 9, 2007 – 10:53 PM Fred Thompson was giving a speech yesterday and he mentioned that one of the reasons the locals threw Al Qaelda out of Anbar was the prohibition on smoking. This apparently baffled one reporter by the name of Richard Sisk from the NY Daily News who thought it was a nonsensical answer. Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S. BY RICHARD SISK (who doesn’t read enough). SIOUX CITY, Iowa – Freshly minted GOP White House hopeful Fred Thompson puzzled Iowans yesterday by insisting an Al Qaeda smoking ban was one reason freedom-loving Iraqis bolted to the U.S. side. “They said, ‘You gotta quit smoking,’” Thompson explained to a questioner asking about progress in Iraq during a town hall-style meeting. Thompson said the smoking ban and terror tactics Al Qaeda used to oppress women and intimidate local leaders pushed tribes in western Anbar Province to support U.S. troops. harleyrider1777
  • Score: -5

3:05pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

Last but not least Hitler and his smoking bans! One must ask is smokefree advocacy ASH working for the enemy!

“The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.”
(Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler; 1943)



The Führer thanks you from the grave:


Hitler was a Leftist
Hitler's Anti-Tobacco Campaign

One particularly vile individual, Karl Astel -- upstanding president of Jena University, poisonous anti-Semite, euthanasia fanatic, SS officer, war criminal and tobacco-free Germany enthusiast -- liked to walk up to smokers and tear cigarettes from their unsuspecting mouths. (He committed suicide when the war ended, more through disappointment than fear of hanging.) It comes as little surprise to discover that the phrase "passive smoking" (Passivrauchen) was coined not by contemporary American admen, but by Fritz Lickint, the author of the magisterial 1100-page Tabak und Organismus ("Tobacco and the Organism"), which was produced in collaboration with the German AntiTobacco League.

http://constitutiona
listnc.tripod.com/hi
tler-leftist/id1.htm
l

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Nazi_propag
anda
Last but not least Hitler and his smoking bans! One must ask is smokefree advocacy ASH working for the enemy! “The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation.” (Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler; 1943) The Führer thanks you from the grave: Hitler was a Leftist Hitler's Anti-Tobacco Campaign One particularly vile individual, Karl Astel -- upstanding president of Jena University, poisonous anti-Semite, euthanasia fanatic, SS officer, war criminal and tobacco-free Germany enthusiast -- liked to walk up to smokers and tear cigarettes from their unsuspecting mouths. (He committed suicide when the war ended, more through disappointment than fear of hanging.) It comes as little surprise to discover that the phrase "passive smoking" (Passivrauchen) was coined not by contemporary American admen, but by Fritz Lickint, the author of the magisterial 1100-page Tabak und Organismus ("Tobacco and the Organism"), which was produced in collaboration with the German AntiTobacco League. http://constitutiona listnc.tripod.com/hi tler-leftist/id1.htm l http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Nazi_propag anda harleyrider1777
  • Score: -1

3:06pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

http://vitals.nbcnew
s.com/_news/2013/01/
28/16741714-lungs-fr
om-pack-a-day-smoker
s-safe-for-transplan
t-study-finds?lite

Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...............
............

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!
This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke: http://vitals.nbcnew s.com/_news/2013/01/ 28/16741714-lungs-fr om-pack-a-day-smoker s-safe-for-transplan t-study-finds?lite Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds. By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News. Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe. What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none. “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study............... ............ Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it! The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered: Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year. 146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY. A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose. Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh! harleyrider1777
  • Score: 2

3:09pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

iamlauren345 wrote:
Whilst visiting my premature baby son in the Special Care Baby Unit for 6 weeks, I was nearly always greeted by new mums and dads standing outside the entrance, with their newborn baby still in the plastic cot provided by the maternity unit, smoking away. It's absolutely disgusting, and also distressing to see what should be a newborn baby's first breath of fresh air, instead they're having to breathe in their selfish parents second-hand smoke. I know other mums who had experienced the same thing felt the same way as I do. If they need to enforce their No Smoking policy anywhere, surely it should be outside the Women's Centre?
In more rational times, before the anti-tobacco hysteria began in earnest, women who smoked continued to smoke and enjoy other normal pleasures of life without guilt during their pregnancies. Many even smoked during labor to help them relax and take the edge off their pain. If their doctors mentioned smoking at all, it would be to advise them to perhaps cut down if they were heavy smokers, something which most did intuitively because they didn’t “feel” like smoking as much.
But pity the poor Bolton smoker today who becomes pregnant, because she will be told that if she continues to smoke at all (or have any alcohol or caffeine) during her pregnancy, she is putting her developing fetus at high risk of death or disability.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Though there is considerable evidence showing that on average the babies of women who smoke during pregnancy weigh on average a few ounces less than babies of women who do not smoke and that the rate of low birthweight babies is somewhat higher for smokers, there is no credible evidence for the hyperbolic claims that the babies of smokers have a higher mobidity and mortality rate. Quite the contrary, the babies of women who smoke during pregnancy have a better survival rate ounce for ounce, a somewhat lower rate of congenital defects, a lower rate of Down’s syndrome, a lower rate of infant respiratory distress syndrome and a somewhat lower rate of childhood cancer than do the babies of non-smokers.

Dr. Richard L. Naeye, a leading obstetrical researcher who studied more than 58,000 pregnancies, states unequivocally:

“We recently found no significant association between maternal smoking and either stillbirths or neonatal deaths when information about the underlying disorders, obtained from placental examinations, was incorporated into the analyses. Similar analyses found no correlation between maternal smoking and preterm birth. The most frequent initiating causes of preterm birth, stillbirth, and neonatal death are acute chorioamnionitis, disorders that produce chronic low blood flow from the uterus to the placenta, and major congenital malformations. There is no credible evidence that cigarette smoking has a role in the genesis of any of these disorders.”
[quote][p][bold]iamlauren345[/bold] wrote: Whilst visiting my premature baby son in the Special Care Baby Unit for 6 weeks, I was nearly always greeted by new mums and dads standing outside the entrance, with their newborn baby still in the plastic cot provided by the maternity unit, smoking away. It's absolutely disgusting, and also distressing to see what should be a newborn baby's first breath of fresh air, instead they're having to breathe in their selfish parents second-hand smoke. I know other mums who had experienced the same thing felt the same way as I do. If they need to enforce their No Smoking policy anywhere, surely it should be outside the Women's Centre?[/p][/quote]In more rational times, before the anti-tobacco hysteria began in earnest, women who smoked continued to smoke and enjoy other normal pleasures of life without guilt during their pregnancies. Many even smoked during labor to help them relax and take the edge off their pain. If their doctors mentioned smoking at all, it would be to advise them to perhaps cut down if they were heavy smokers, something which most did intuitively because they didn’t “feel” like smoking as much. But pity the poor Bolton smoker today who becomes pregnant, because she will be told that if she continues to smoke at all (or have any alcohol or caffeine) during her pregnancy, she is putting her developing fetus at high risk of death or disability. Nothing could be further from the truth. Though there is considerable evidence showing that on average the babies of women who smoke during pregnancy weigh on average a few ounces less than babies of women who do not smoke and that the rate of low birthweight babies is somewhat higher for smokers, there is no credible evidence for the hyperbolic claims that the babies of smokers have a higher mobidity and mortality rate. Quite the contrary, the babies of women who smoke during pregnancy have a better survival rate ounce for ounce, a somewhat lower rate of congenital defects, a lower rate of Down’s syndrome, a lower rate of infant respiratory distress syndrome and a somewhat lower rate of childhood cancer than do the babies of non-smokers. Dr. Richard L. Naeye, a leading obstetrical researcher who studied more than 58,000 pregnancies, states unequivocally: “We recently found no significant association between maternal smoking and either stillbirths or neonatal deaths when information about the underlying disorders, obtained from placental examinations, was incorporated into the analyses. Similar analyses found no correlation between maternal smoking and preterm birth. The most frequent initiating causes of preterm birth, stillbirth, and neonatal death are acute chorioamnionitis, disorders that produce chronic low blood flow from the uterus to the placenta, and major congenital malformations. There is no credible evidence that cigarette smoking has a role in the genesis of any of these disorders.” harleyrider1777
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

Severian wrote:
chas wrote:
NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced.
Wrong I'm afraid. Hospitals are NOT public places, they are just places open to the public.

Just because the NHS is run for the people doesn't give anyone the right to do what they want on their premises. There is no difference between the JR and any school, library, museum, art, police station etc.

If people want to smoke in public they should go and stand outside the hospital gates.
Blocking traffic and getting run over! Increasing hospital NHS business costs!

Whilst adding to the The Smokers' Graveyard

In Memory of all the smokers driven to their deaths by smoking bans

http://thesmokersgra
veyard.wordpress.com
/

So you would like to add to this listing with even more needless proven deaths via anti-smoking laws! Why not just line them all up and shoot and bayonet them as hitler did to those who defied him!
[quote][p][bold]Severian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chas[/bold] wrote: NHS Trust hospitals are public property and smoking is not illegal in open public places so any ban cannot be enforced.[/p][/quote]Wrong I'm afraid. Hospitals are NOT public places, they are just places open to the public. Just because the NHS is run for the people doesn't give anyone the right to do what they want on their premises. There is no difference between the JR and any school, library, museum, art, police station etc. If people want to smoke in public they should go and stand outside the hospital gates.[/p][/quote]Blocking traffic and getting run over! Increasing hospital NHS business costs! Whilst adding to the The Smokers' Graveyard In Memory of all the smokers driven to their deaths by smoking bans http://thesmokersgra veyard.wordpress.com / So you would like to add to this listing with even more needless proven deaths via anti-smoking laws! Why not just line them all up and shoot and bayonet them as hitler did to those who defied him! harleyrider1777
  • Score: 0

3:38pm Wed 8 May 13

Quentin Walker says...

harleyrider1777 says:

Dr. Richard L. Naeye, a leading obstetrical researcher who studied more than 58,000 pregnancies, states unequivocally:

“We recently found no significant association between maternal smoking and either stillbirths or neonatal deaths when information about the underlying disorders, obtained from placental examinations, was incorporated into the analyses. Similar analyses found no correlation between maternal smoking and preterm birth. The most frequent initiating causes of preterm birth, stillbirth, and neonatal death are acute chorioamnionitis, disorders that produce chronic low blood flow from the uterus to the placenta, and major congenital malformations. There is no credible evidence that cigarette smoking has a role in the genesis of any of these disorders.”

I don't know the date of the paper you quote, however, Dr Naeye must have changed his view, one way or another, for in an article published on
27 September 1982, he states:

"...Black women who smoke cigarettes during pregnancy increase the risk of their offspring dying of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome by 50 percent...smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..."
harleyrider1777 says: Dr. Richard L. Naeye, a leading obstetrical researcher who studied more than 58,000 pregnancies, states unequivocally: “We recently found no significant association between maternal smoking and either stillbirths or neonatal deaths when information about the underlying disorders, obtained from placental examinations, was incorporated into the analyses. Similar analyses found no correlation between maternal smoking and preterm birth. The most frequent initiating causes of preterm birth, stillbirth, and neonatal death are acute chorioamnionitis, disorders that produce chronic low blood flow from the uterus to the placenta, and major congenital malformations. There is no credible evidence that cigarette smoking has a role in the genesis of any of these disorders.” I don't know the date of the paper you quote, however, Dr Naeye must have changed his view, one way or another, for in an article published on 27 September 1982, he states: "...Black women who smoke cigarettes during pregnancy increase the risk of their offspring dying of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome by 50 percent...smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..." Quentin Walker
  • Score: 2

3:42pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

I don't know the date of the paper you quote, however, Dr Naeye must have changed his view, one way or another, for in an article published on
27 September 1982, he states:

"...Black women who smoke cigarettes during pregnancy increase the risk of their offspring dying of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome by 50 percent...smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..."


Study: Babies’ low serotonin levels cause SIDS – USATODAY.comwww.usat
oday.com/news/health
/2010-02-03-sids03_s
t_N.htmCached – Similar
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
Feb 2, 2010 – Sudden infant death syndrome researchers say low serotonin may be what prevents infants from waking up when they inhale too much carbon …

http://www.usatoday.
com/news/health/2010
-02-03-sids03_st_N.h
tm

Researchers may have solved the mystery of what makes some babies vulnerable to sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, which kills more than 2,300 babies a year.
Infants who died of SIDS had low levels of serotonin, a brain chemical that helps the brainstem regulate breathing, temperature, sleeping, waking and other automatic functions, according to an autopsy study in today’s Journal of the American Medical Association.

Serotonin normally helps babies respond to high carbon-dioxide levels during sleep by helping them wake up and shift their head position to get fresh air, says senior author Hannah Kinney of Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital Boston.
I don't know the date of the paper you quote, however, Dr Naeye must have changed his view, one way or another, for in an article published on 27 September 1982, he states: "...Black women who smoke cigarettes during pregnancy increase the risk of their offspring dying of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome by 50 percent...smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..." Study: Babies’ low serotonin levels cause SIDS – USATODAY.comwww.usat oday.com/news/health /2010-02-03-sids03_s t_N.htmCached – Similar You +1'd this publicly. Undo Feb 2, 2010 – Sudden infant death syndrome researchers say low serotonin may be what prevents infants from waking up when they inhale too much carbon … http://www.usatoday. com/news/health/2010 -02-03-sids03_st_N.h tm Researchers may have solved the mystery of what makes some babies vulnerable to sudden infant death syndrome, or SIDS, which kills more than 2,300 babies a year. Infants who died of SIDS had low levels of serotonin, a brain chemical that helps the brainstem regulate breathing, temperature, sleeping, waking and other automatic functions, according to an autopsy study in today’s Journal of the American Medical Association. Serotonin normally helps babies respond to high carbon-dioxide levels during sleep by helping them wake up and shift their head position to get fresh air, says senior author Hannah Kinney of Harvard Medical School and Children’s Hospital Boston. harleyrider1777
  • Score: -3

3:45pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..."

This is not proven,baby umbilical cord causes blue baby births...........But then we have had 600 plus years of smoking and child birth and we are at what 6 billion humans worldwide...........
with more smoking now than ever before!
smoking reduces oxygen to the fetus (sic) it reduces blood flow from the uterus to the placenta..." This is not proven,baby umbilical cord causes blue baby births...........But then we have had 600 plus years of smoking and child birth and we are at what 6 billion humans worldwide........... with more smoking now than ever before! harleyrider1777
  • Score: 0

3:46pm Wed 8 May 13

chas says...

Severian. NHS hospitals were built with public funds. They are public property. Although smoking is illegal inside NHS hospitals it is not illegal to smoke outside in the grounds.
Severian. NHS hospitals were built with public funds. They are public property. Although smoking is illegal inside NHS hospitals it is not illegal to smoke outside in the grounds. chas
  • Score: 4

3:46pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

World Atlas: More People Smoking Cigarettes than Ever


There are more people smoking now than ever before, despite health warnings and the rising price of cigarettes. In 1980, 4,453 billion cigarettes went up in smoke, which increased to 6,319 billion in 2010. By 2020, you can expect to find nearly seven billion cigarette ends littering the world.

Top of the charts in terms of nicotine addiction are Asia and Australia, which is where 57 percent of cigarettes are smoked today.

These alarming statistics are among many of the intriguing facts laid bare in the ninth edition of Dan Smith's The State of the World Atlas.

Elsewhere, the book reports that 19 percent of Americans say they could not feed their families in 2011, despite living in one of the world's richest countries. Meanwhile, 20 percent of India's population remains undernourished, despite its Gross National Income rising by 450 percent since 1990.

An even more shocking revelation is that 2.5 billion people live on less than £1.25 a day, which represents one in three of the global population.


http://www.ibtimes.c
o.uk/articles/421066
/20130106/population
-statistics-state-wo
rld-atlas-dan-smith.
htm
World Atlas: More People Smoking Cigarettes than Ever There are more people smoking now than ever before, despite health warnings and the rising price of cigarettes. In 1980, 4,453 billion cigarettes went up in smoke, which increased to 6,319 billion in 2010. By 2020, you can expect to find nearly seven billion cigarette ends littering the world. Top of the charts in terms of nicotine addiction are Asia and Australia, which is where 57 percent of cigarettes are smoked today. These alarming statistics are among many of the intriguing facts laid bare in the ninth edition of Dan Smith's The State of the World Atlas. Elsewhere, the book reports that 19 percent of Americans say they could not feed their families in 2011, despite living in one of the world's richest countries. Meanwhile, 20 percent of India's population remains undernourished, despite its Gross National Income rising by 450 percent since 1990. An even more shocking revelation is that 2.5 billion people live on less than £1.25 a day, which represents one in three of the global population. http://www.ibtimes.c o.uk/articles/421066 /20130106/population -statistics-state-wo rld-atlas-dan-smith. htm harleyrider1777
  • Score: -2

3:49pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

chas wrote:
Severian. NHS hospitals were built with public funds. They are public property. Although smoking is illegal inside NHS hospitals it is not illegal to smoke outside in the grounds.
Exactly,but ASH tries to emplore to the hospitals that they are a private property institution and as such have the right to regulate on their property. They are public and there is no outdoor smoking ban law in effect for hospitals!
[quote][p][bold]chas[/bold] wrote: Severian. NHS hospitals were built with public funds. They are public property. Although smoking is illegal inside NHS hospitals it is not illegal to smoke outside in the grounds.[/p][/quote]Exactly,but ASH tries to emplore to the hospitals that they are a private property institution and as such have the right to regulate on their property. They are public and there is no outdoor smoking ban law in effect for hospitals! harleyrider1777
  • Score: 1

4:28pm Wed 8 May 13

Lord Palmerstone says...

It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed")
It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed") Lord Palmerstone
  • Score: 2

5:20pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

Lord Palmerstone wrote:
It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed")
Freedom has no age its is a living part of all life through out mankinds existense!

Its why we fight back young or old,we have to,its our only right worth fighting for.
[quote][p][bold]Lord Palmerstone[/bold] wrote: It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed")[/p][/quote]Freedom has no age its is a living part of all life through out mankinds existense! Its why we fight back young or old,we have to,its our only right worth fighting for. harleyrider1777
  • Score: -1

6:36pm Wed 8 May 13

moonlight shadow says...

I repeat my previous question no one has answered so far.
How would they enforce the ban and what would be the sanction against the person smoking?
I repeat my previous question no one has answered so far. How would they enforce the ban and what would be the sanction against the person smoking? moonlight shadow
  • Score: 2

6:43pm Wed 8 May 13

harleyrider1777 says...

moonlight shadow wrote:
I repeat my previous question no one has answered so far.
How would they enforce the ban and what would be the sanction against the person smoking?
Its really quite simple,the anti-smoking movement died last week after plain packaging died. It signaled the government is now out of the prohibiitonal movement as is whats now sweeoping the world. Enforcement and proposed bans are no longer the standard they are now to become the subject of repeal!

Along with the lowering of tobacco taxes to put an end to Global tobacco smuggling the world over not just the UK,RELAND and Scotland. The FCTC world anti-tobacco treaty has been an utter failure just as the EU.

In essence the entire social world experiment is DEAD! They know it and so do the comming elections worldwide!
[quote][p][bold]moonlight shadow[/bold] wrote: I repeat my previous question no one has answered so far. How would they enforce the ban and what would be the sanction against the person smoking?[/p][/quote]Its really quite simple,the anti-smoking movement died last week after plain packaging died. It signaled the government is now out of the prohibiitonal movement as is whats now sweeoping the world. Enforcement and proposed bans are no longer the standard they are now to become the subject of repeal! Along with the lowering of tobacco taxes to put an end to Global tobacco smuggling the world over not just the UK,RELAND and Scotland. The FCTC world anti-tobacco treaty has been an utter failure just as the EU. In essence the entire social world experiment is DEAD! They know it and so do the comming elections worldwide! harleyrider1777
  • Score: -2

8:08pm Wed 8 May 13

oafie says...

Perhaps staff should be given adequate breaks so they can leave the site, and not end up with a 2 min fag outside the back door as a break in a ten hour shift.
Perhaps staff should be given adequate breaks so they can leave the site, and not end up with a 2 min fag outside the back door as a break in a ten hour shift. oafie
  • Score: 9

9:16pm Wed 8 May 13

Ismene says...

I don't see why we can't all deal with this issue both pragmatically and sensitively. I'm sure anyone can understand that walking past people smoking by the hospital doors could be very distressing if you are being treated for cancer, or have just lost a loved one to lung cancer etc, and also difficult if you've managed to give up.

But we need to be clear about the reasons behind this policy - what is anyone trying to achieve by banning people from smoking in the open air while they are near hospitals? Realistically, nobody can really imagine that these people will therefore not light up when they get home?

I presume then that the reason for the ban is so that non-smokers don't have to see smokers smoking. Fair enough, but in that this policy clearly was never realistic and isn't working -- people are smoking, and right by the very visible entrance.

By not providing smokers with anywhere discreet where they can smoke in the open air, it is inevitable that they will smoke openly. Hospitals are often places we face great personal tragedies - life and death and diagnosis. Is that really the time to suddenly forbid this perfectly legal addiction? And can it really help the atmosphere in hospital to have irritable nicotine addicts around?!

So surely at the moment disservice is being done both to non-smokers and smokers? Personally I do not understand why some sort of L shaped wall or fence can't be landscaped 50 yards or so from the hospital, creating a sight barrier. Smokers would surely prefer to be discreet, when near a hospital, and would naturally gravitate to it, if the NHS feels the need to be uncompromising then it wouldn't even have to be officially condoned! (This is the arrangement I saw at a German hospital, and it seemed to work very well.) That way smokers would be happy, as would non-smokers - at the moment neither are!
I don't see why we can't all deal with this issue both pragmatically and sensitively. I'm sure anyone can understand that walking past people smoking by the hospital doors could be very distressing if you are being treated for cancer, or have just lost a loved one to lung cancer etc, and also difficult if you've managed to give up. But we need to be clear about the reasons behind this policy - what is anyone trying to achieve by banning people from smoking in the open air while they are near hospitals? Realistically, nobody can really imagine that these people will therefore not light up when they get home? I presume then that the reason for the ban is so that non-smokers don't have to see smokers smoking. Fair enough, but in that this policy clearly was never realistic and isn't working -- people are smoking, and right by the very visible entrance. By not providing smokers with anywhere discreet where they can smoke in the open air, it is inevitable that they will smoke openly. Hospitals are often places we face great personal tragedies - life and death and diagnosis. Is that really the time to suddenly forbid this perfectly legal addiction? And can it really help the atmosphere in hospital to have irritable nicotine addicts around?! So surely at the moment disservice is being done both to non-smokers and smokers? Personally I do not understand why some sort of L shaped wall or fence can't be landscaped 50 yards or so from the hospital, creating a sight barrier. Smokers would surely prefer to be discreet, when near a hospital, and would naturally gravitate to it, if the NHS feels the need to be uncompromising then it wouldn't even have to be officially condoned! (This is the arrangement I saw at a German hospital, and it seemed to work very well.) That way smokers would be happy, as would non-smokers - at the moment neither are! Ismene
  • Score: 7

11:05pm Wed 8 May 13

Arnold.Brewer says...

its a ban - enforce it - fullstop
its a ban - enforce it - fullstop Arnold.Brewer
  • Score: -3

11:11pm Wed 8 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

Clearly it would be inappropriate for public health funds to be used to accommodate smokers on a hospital site.

Perhaps a charity would be willing to sponsor a discrete "dirty-zone" for smokers in the allotment area at the JR or Warneford Meadow for the Churchill or Warneford Hospitals as well as smoking volunteer porters to wheel patients back and forth.

It might also be helpful to display the legislation that permits enforcement of the No Smoking outdoors or in cars policy whilst on a hospital site in England.

Smoking is, of course, a filthy habit that has no place in a civilised society.
Clearly it would be inappropriate for public health funds to be used to accommodate smokers on a hospital site. Perhaps a charity would be willing to sponsor a discrete "dirty-zone" for smokers in the allotment area at the JR or Warneford Meadow for the Churchill or Warneford Hospitals as well as smoking volunteer porters to wheel patients back and forth. It might also be helpful to display the legislation that permits enforcement of the No Smoking outdoors or in cars policy whilst on a hospital site in England. Smoking is, of course, a filthy habit that has no place in a civilised society. Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: 1

10:51am Thu 9 May 13

chas says...

Andrew:Oxford. When are you going to give up all your filthy habits?
Andrew:Oxford. When are you going to give up all your filthy habits? chas
  • Score: 1

11:30am Thu 9 May 13

Diddy OX says...

Arnold.Brewer wrote:
its a ban - enforce it - fullstop
At the expense of which other services at the JR? Why don't you volunteer your services if you feel so strongly about it? Not too sure what reaction you might get!
[quote][p][bold]Arnold.Brewer[/bold] wrote: its a ban - enforce it - fullstop[/p][/quote]At the expense of which other services at the JR? Why don't you volunteer your services if you feel so strongly about it? Not too sure what reaction you might get! Diddy OX
  • Score: 2

11:59am Thu 9 May 13

moonlight shadow says...

Diddy OX wrote:
Arnold.Brewer wrote:
its a ban - enforce it - fullstop
At the expense of which other services at the JR? Why don't you volunteer your services if you feel so strongly about it? Not too sure what reaction you might get!
exactly.
But I still want to know how and what penalty the smoker would face.
No point in having a policy that no one knows how to enforce.
Better the hospital consentrates it's limited resources on patient care
[quote][p][bold]Diddy OX[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Arnold.Brewer[/bold] wrote: its a ban - enforce it - fullstop[/p][/quote]At the expense of which other services at the JR? Why don't you volunteer your services if you feel so strongly about it? Not too sure what reaction you might get![/p][/quote]exactly. But I still want to know how and what penalty the smoker would face. No point in having a policy that no one knows how to enforce. Better the hospital consentrates it's limited resources on patient care moonlight shadow
  • Score: 1

12:31pm Thu 9 May 13

Jimmer says...

“Parking is prohibited in any part of the hospital, except the designated areas, and the hospital ensures this is adhered to."

Parking isn;t prohibited...but they make it hard to park thats for sure!!
“Parking is prohibited in any part of the hospital, except the designated areas, and the hospital ensures this is adhered to." Parking isn;t prohibited...but they make it hard to park thats for sure!! Jimmer
  • Score: 3

12:44pm Thu 9 May 13

Andrew:Oxford says...

chas wrote:
Andrew:Oxford. When are you going to give up all your filthy habits?
If I had any to give up...
[quote][p][bold]chas[/bold] wrote: Andrew:Oxford. When are you going to give up all your filthy habits?[/p][/quote]If I had any to give up... Andrew:Oxford
  • Score: -1

1:30pm Thu 9 May 13

Doctor69 says...

All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors.
All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors. Doctor69
  • Score: 4

2:28pm Thu 9 May 13

Lord Palmerstone says...

Doctor69 wrote:
All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors.
"All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans"
Haven't they worked out which of you is pregnant then? There must be too much smoke round the CT screen.
[quote][p][bold]Doctor69[/bold] wrote: All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors.[/p][/quote]"All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans" Haven't they worked out which of you is pregnant then? There must be too much smoke round the CT screen. Lord Palmerstone
  • Score: 0

2:33pm Thu 9 May 13

Lord Palmerstone says...

harleyrider1777 wrote:
Lord Palmerstone wrote: It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed")
Freedom has no age its is a living part of all life through out mankinds existense! Its why we fight back young or old,we have to,its our only right worth fighting for.
Well I'm not sure what you're on about Hailey, but I'd certainly prefer to smoke a good cigar than be Doctor69 and suddenly give birth while my missus laughed her...nearly said the rude word...head off.
[quote][p][bold]harleyrider1777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lord Palmerstone[/bold] wrote: It's probably just because I'm very old, but I tend to agree with Rudyard Kipling ("the Betrothed")[/p][/quote]Freedom has no age its is a living part of all life through out mankinds existense! Its why we fight back young or old,we have to,its our only right worth fighting for.[/p][/quote]Well I'm not sure what you're on about Hailey, but I'd certainly prefer to smoke a good cigar than be Doctor69 and suddenly give birth while my missus laughed her...nearly said the rude word...head off. Lord Palmerstone
  • Score: 0

2:51pm Thu 9 May 13

bogwoppit24 says...

For goodness sake - this is a hospital where sick people go to get better. Smoke makes people ill. How unfair of staff, patients and visitors to smoke outside a hospital entrance where the smoke can infiltrate the air of the wards etc. For someone to say that keeping wards clean is more important than smoking is utter madness. Don't get me wrong, ward and hospital cleanliness is vital, but if people didn't smoke they wouldn't get ill! Most of the life threatening conditions - ie cancer, heart disease, stroke, copd, sudden infant death, bronchiolitis, are caused by smoking. Why on earth should smoking be allowed on the site of a place that is trying to heal the sick?
For goodness sake - this is a hospital where sick people go to get better. Smoke makes people ill. How unfair of staff, patients and visitors to smoke outside a hospital entrance where the smoke can infiltrate the air of the wards etc. For someone to say that keeping wards clean is more important than smoking is utter madness. Don't get me wrong, ward and hospital cleanliness is vital, but if people didn't smoke they wouldn't get ill! Most of the life threatening conditions - ie cancer, heart disease, stroke, copd, sudden infant death, bronchiolitis, are caused by smoking. Why on earth should smoking be allowed on the site of a place that is trying to heal the sick? bogwoppit24
  • Score: -3

3:29pm Thu 9 May 13

chas says...

Should we ban motor vehicles from hospital sites, because of all the pollution? The fumes infiltrate hospital wards and are far more dangerous than cigarette smoke.
Should we ban motor vehicles from hospital sites, because of all the pollution? The fumes infiltrate hospital wards and are far more dangerous than cigarette smoke. chas
  • Score: 6

6:58pm Thu 9 May 13

Doctor69 says...

Lord Palmerstone wrote:
Doctor69 wrote:
All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors.
"All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans"
Haven't they worked out which of you is pregnant then? There must be too much smoke round the CT screen.
Funny bloke aren't you?!
Seriously, what's your problem? Jealous you can't go with your partner for a scan as she is old and barren and you can't get a rise these days?
[quote][p][bold]Lord Palmerstone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Doctor69[/bold] wrote: All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans etc, its not very pleasent as non smokers having to walk through clouds of smoke. If people are going to smoke, then dedicated smoking areas should be set up away from the main doors.[/p][/quote]"All i know is, when me and the missus go to the maternaty centre for scans" Haven't they worked out which of you is pregnant then? There must be too much smoke round the CT screen.[/p][/quote]Funny bloke aren't you?! Seriously, what's your problem? Jealous you can't go with your partner for a scan as she is old and barren and you can't get a rise these days? Doctor69
  • Score: 0

9:34pm Thu 9 May 13

Vernon Spools says...

If they can't enforce the taxi drivers and the woman that drives the oap bus from smoking which is illegal, how will they enforce this. Employ someone and waste more NHS funds!
If they can't enforce the taxi drivers and the woman that drives the oap bus from smoking which is illegal, how will they enforce this. Employ someone and waste more NHS funds! Vernon Spools
  • Score: 4

3:44pm Fri 10 May 13

Bob 1900 says...

Ironic really-the most popular place for smoking on the JR site is is by the mortuary entrance.
If that doesnt say something about smokers :)
Ironic really-the most popular place for smoking on the JR site is is by the mortuary entrance. If that doesnt say something about smokers :) Bob 1900
  • Score: -1

4:04pm Fri 10 May 13

H.J.Harris says...

Bob 1900 wrote:
Ironic really-the most popular place for smoking on the JR site is is by the mortuary entrance.
If that doesnt say something about smokers :)
where is that, is it in the dead centre of the site ?
[quote][p][bold]Bob 1900[/bold] wrote: Ironic really-the most popular place for smoking on the JR site is is by the mortuary entrance. If that doesnt say something about smokers :)[/p][/quote]where is that, is it in the dead centre of the site ? H.J.Harris
  • Score: -3

1:24pm Mon 13 May 13

Adrian1 says...

I have friends who smoke, and others that don't. I'm getting to an age now where some are begining to shuffle off this mortal coil or fall foul of serious health problems, a higher proportion of these are the smokers. I wish they'd heeded my odd requests for their ceasation of the habit, I miss my friends.
I have friends who smoke, and others that don't. I'm getting to an age now where some are begining to shuffle off this mortal coil or fall foul of serious health problems, a higher proportion of these are the smokers. I wish they'd heeded my odd requests for their ceasation of the habit, I miss my friends. Adrian1
  • Score: 2

2:38pm Tue 14 May 13

Lezzo1 says...

Smoking is just an excuse,
for all of the Health Problems we have to-day. It is easier to blame just one thing, such as Smoking, than it is to blame every-thing else.
Asbestos dust. Exhaust fumes. Etc:-
I'd hate to worry anyone but, just read some of the labels on your Cleaning Items that you use in your Kitchen or Bathroom, in fact your whole House or Workplace, even your Food and what's happened to it before it get's to you. I could go on but I'm sure you get the drift of what I'm saying. Why put the blame on a Million and One other things when it's Cheaper and Easier to blame just one. Smoking ? If everyone stopped Smoking The Health Problems we suffer would'ent just go away, so the powers that be would just blame it on something else.
I even read once in a News paper that Bacon and Eggs in the morning can give you Cancer. Lezzo.
Smoking is just an excuse, for all of the Health Problems we have to-day. It is easier to blame just one thing, such as Smoking, than it is to blame every-thing else. Asbestos dust. Exhaust fumes. Etc:- I'd hate to worry anyone but, just read some of the labels on your Cleaning Items that you use in your Kitchen or Bathroom, in fact your whole House or Workplace, even your Food and what's happened to it before it get's to you. I could go on but I'm sure you get the drift of what I'm saying. Why put the blame on a Million and One other things when it's Cheaper and Easier to blame just one. Smoking ? If everyone stopped Smoking The Health Problems we suffer would'ent just go away, so the powers that be would just blame it on something else. I even read once in a News paper that Bacon and Eggs in the morning can give you Cancer. Lezzo. Lezzo1
  • Score: 2

5:24pm Tue 14 May 13

LouiseOxford says...

Why does it need to even be enforced? What is it about smokers that makes them lack any common decency or consideration for others? How about just don't smoke near windows and entrances where sick or ill or pregnant (i.e. anywhere near a hospital) or anyone who does not smoke will be. I don't want to breathe it nor stink of it. Why is it so difficult? (Plus e-cigarettes nowadays are absolutely fantastic, they should be giving those out on the NHS, cheaper, as bad for you as coffee, etc etc).
Why does it need to even be enforced? What is it about smokers that makes them lack any common decency or consideration for others? How about just don't smoke near windows and entrances where sick or ill or pregnant (i.e. anywhere near a hospital) or anyone who does not smoke will be. I don't want to breathe it nor stink of it. Why is it so difficult? (Plus e-cigarettes nowadays are absolutely fantastic, they should be giving those out on the NHS, cheaper, as bad for you as coffee, etc etc). LouiseOxford
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree