I think you are all dealing with the wrong "addict".

If the government's addiction to taxes on tobacco (and alcohol) was solved, then we would not have to deal with their Dr.Jeckyl/Mr.Hyde attitude to it.

For instance, as an example, if the government (regardless of party) stops playing world self promotion, we could afford to stop taxing tobacco.

Stop taxing tobacco, then we can implement some policies to help the remaining addicts.

You could then make it illegal (a bit extreme) or bring other social tools to bear.

But, number one, get the government off it!

Ridiculous idea.

What a way to create an instant black market and increase crime.

You're basically selling licences to become drug-dealers.

you have taken...my idea for BOOZErs
and twisted it to suit further oppressing smokers

i put forward..that drinkers should be licenced
that druinking over the licebnced ammount of booze..invalidates other licences..such as licence to drive...[ie you can only use one licence at a time]

apply this to all the other addictions..that affect..drivers

but to single out smokers
who dont go arround glassing people
who dont drink/drive...who dont beat-up those calling them stinkey

mate you guys dont just beat all..its not enough..docters refuise to treat us in hospital...that were taxed...that smoking..is ATTRIBUTABLE..but not the CAUSE..of the many diseases ADDED to FLUFF-up..the numbers

ie asbestosis...that causes death..is accredited to smoking
[because there are so many...insurance cant cover their suing
thus the lie of smoking causing cancer

little do people know how stink has been added
to make the smoke smell worse...

also little known is woodsmoke and diesal particulate..then asbestus..are the 3 biggest causes of lung cancer

and booze is prime cause of 4 out of the 5 highest causes of death
[as well as domestic violence...violence..assults..rapes..yet still the boozers get their medical aid

or the obese...getting diabetus..they dont get taxed on lolies...transfats

but we smokers
yes we get the shaft

govt has turned society against one third of its poulation
simply..to distract from the REAL PROBLEMS

raceism..lies..organised oppression..is fine against smokers..

bah its you lot..[faux-racists..that need hate]
that really stink..[worse than those reeking of carcinogenic deoderant/fake per-fumes..or diesal particulate..or rancid transfats]

In principle, a good idea, and better than nothing.

Quote: "they become a burden on our society’s health services".

I suggest that non-smokers are a greater burden on society's largesse - they live longer on average thereby receiving age-pensions and other age-benefits for much longer and it matters not a lot whether one dies of lung cancer or another cancer in terms of heath costs.

As to "it usually provides little pleasure to smokers other than the absence of the nausea brought on by failing to smoke", smoking has not prevailed for so long without having obvious theraputic benefits, and I attribute in good part the increase in public alcohol-fuelled violence to the ban on smoking - smoking has a calming effect that offsets to a certain degree the agression alcohol fuels in so many people. Many people used to smoke only when drinking for just that reason.

I agree totally with Amicus. If governments were really serious about the alleged health disbenefits of tobacco, they could simply ban it, the same as they have done for other drugs such as heroin and marijuana (both of which have obvious therapeutic properties for certain illnesses). If I ever go to hospital which has staff which refuse treatment for a disease claimed to be smoking-related, I'll point out that the extra tax I've paid over the years has helped pay for the staffing and construction of said hospital!

There is an ad being flogged ad nauseum on TV at the moment where an young, overweight female actor struggles up stairs and tells us that all smokers end up with emphesema. This may well be true, but I'm nearly sixty, smoke near a pack a day, and can run up stairs two at a time while, admittedly, being a bit breathless by the end, I'm not near death like the actress portrays. A few kilos lost from her large behind would help her "stairway progession".

Governments cannot simply ban smoking since it would be too electorally unpopular. The basis of this idea is not to stop people from smoking but to stop the next generation from starting to smoke.

Also, there is no need for a black market in tobacco to arise since current smokers will have access to legal tobacco purchases.

You are right, the goal is to stop new smokers from starting. But trying to restrict it this way only makes it 'cooler' and more alluring to young people. And people with licences and low ethics will take advantage of that.

Young people aren't allowed to drink. It doesn't stop them.

Banning smoking, even in this format, won't work, just like it doesn't work for any other drug.

Removing the idea in youth culture that smoking is 'cool' is the best way to stop its uptake. Obviously easier said than done. But some clever (anti)marketing could achieve this.

After all, quitting smoking is much harder than starting.

Yes, Michale got it entirely wrong as LB said, I guess he's a drinker, not a smoker.

Mate, I've never heard of anyone kicking someone to death, or near death, in the street, outside a night club, because they had had too many cigarettes.

However it's a very quiet week where this does not happen in south east Queensland at least once thanks to alcohol. I think a change in the subject of your proposed licence would make a bit more sense.

Not much more, but still more.

A valiant effort Michael Lardelli:

your thoughts contribute a lateral thinking logic to the debate on the evils of smoking.

Over the years I have noticed a steady decline in the absence of smoking in public areas; advancement wrested by stealth and gently pressure of many Government reforms which have produced positive results for the comfort of non-smokers.

Your idea meritoriously pushes reforms in the direction focusing on elimination of future addicts: I believe that now is the time to extend reforms in the direction of prevention.

The most obvious preventative measure against smoking which Government can assist is a continual increase in the tax on cigarettes; tax reform has proved a very successful tool, and apart from the political cost, is easy to implement and has the added advantage of improving government revenue. Taxing cigarettes directly impacts on smokers as a discouragement to continued smoking.

If the government were really serious about wanting smokers to quit they would put nicotine patches etc on the PBS. Instead they keep punishing them with tax increases. Its just simple greed. Any assertion that they care about peoples health is just rubbish.

Thank you for your thoughts on decreasing smoking in the Australian population. I do have problems with the licencing idea. I tend to think that this will cause a black market of people buying packets for people without licences at a higher rate. This effectively criminalises people for smoking without a licence.

I don't think Australia is doing too badly on this scale. We seem to have some of the strictest smoking environments in the world. All you have to do is travel and feel the difference. Throughout Asia and the UK I have found it difficult getting used to sitting in dining halls or pubs and having peoples smoke drift over the table. The malls in Australia are getting Designated Outside Smoking Areas, sporting evets have DOSAs and entertainment areas have DOSAs. You see people outside hospitals crowded together smoking outside. It has become anti social here. It will change slowly.

I do like the idea that you are trying to support a transitional change, but attitudes are changing.

Alcohol is another matter. Alcohol can cause cancer to nearly every organ in your body. Many alcohol related deaths are not recorded as such, such as many motor accidents. I do think there needs to be free will to a degree in society. We have laws about smoking in cars with children and where you can light up. This is positive change. Enforcing more control is not always the answer.

TillyJ and Mikk:

Patches fail where will power succeeds. The argument over patches follows similar lines to the usefulness of the methadone programme, where one substance replaces another. Obviously Government is not convinced of their usefulness.

TillyJ, where the war on nicotine leads the way, there surely can be an argument for preferential anti-alcohol campaigns. To collar the much worn phrase “Collateral Damage” would highlight enough the obvious need to more urgently control the social mess initiated by the mass abuse of alcohol in our communities.

I think this is a terrible idea. I cannot understand why people think that more government control over our private lives is a good thing. If the "evil" in question is one that only affects the person engaging in it then it should be no business of the government to interfere. Of course the author claims that smokers cost the country more than non-smokers in health care. This is simply not true as all of us will die of something and the extra life expectancy (during the least productive years of life) make non-smokers more expensive.
If we try to ban things simply because they are bad for the health of the individual concerned then where do we stop. Should we ban high fat foods? What about motorcycles? Should we have compulsory health checks and penalties for those considered not to be taking sufficient care of their health? i.e. the overweight or those who don't do the prescribed amount of exercise every week. This seems to me a horrible scenario.
What about the value of personal freedom? Does no-one out there consider the freedom to make ones own decisions more valuable than the questionable benefit to society of banning an activity that harms no-one but the individual who chooses to engage in it?

Do we not live in a Democratic Society? Do we not have freedom of choice? Everyone has a right to Freedom and Choice in a democratic society. Approximately 50 years ago I chose to smoke and still smoke.
I am now 61, smoke up to 50 cigarettes a day and am very fit. I do not agree to the government or anyone imposing on or attempting to remove my god given freedoms or choices when I am harming no one. There are many other chemicals that do more harm which every living man, woman and child uses every day, fluiride in the water, which impacts on the masses, wheras my cigarette smoke only impacts on a few if any. For the privaledge of smoking I pay extra taxes which benefit all. Case rested

Gypsy <" I am now 61, smoke up to 50 cigarettes a day and am very fit. I do not agree to the government or anyone imposing on or attempting to remove my god given freedoms or choices when I am harming no one."

You are surely kidding yourself Gypsy! If you are smoking 50 cigarettes a day at age 61, you are most definitely NOT fit!
If you are basing this observation on how you look, then you need to have some chest xrays and tests on your arteries and see how fit you really are on the inside.

Unless you are living alone and never go out in areas where other people are near you while smoking, then you are harming other people with your exhaled smoke.

I believe the Government should go even further than banning smoking in public places, and start hitting tobacco companies for the medical expenses of all smoking related diseases amongst their customers.

It is a filthy habit that has caused much heartache in my family.

ok susie...smoking has caused much heartache..in YOUR family
booze has brought a lot of problems to mine

for many others its drugs..or drink driving..or violence..or ignorance

but we cant hear from them
so lets sort out your problems

you claim the right to judge me
well explain the facts...and we shall see smoking isnt the true cause

just like in the adverts
its ATTRIBUTABLE...is a conveniant blame
not nessearilly the cause...

smoking has its CAUSES..just as much as drinking
smoking has killed no one..!

the act of smoking...is an act...[dead people cant act]
people dont die in the act of smoking

it can be said people get lung sickness..or heart diseaase..from* smoking..but just like they cant call getting cancer from mobile phones...dying from phonecalling..you cant blame an act for the result..without proof

so lets hear your proof
have those who presumably died..ever inhaled wood-smoke

or diesal particulate..
or smoked in the presence of perfume..[carcinogene]

realise dear susie...casting blame..on smokers
is contradicted by the other facts...were they drinkers..or did they take asprin..
or was one a heavey user of chemicals/chlorene
..was their workplace asbestus free..ventilated or airconditioned

its not as simple..as you would like to believe

we could stop smoking today..yet non smokers die everyday
[and blaming smokers wont cut.it]

how come deaths have steadilly increased
even as smokers has steadily decreased

you can cast blame
but lets hear your proof..!

3 out of 4 people simply..*CANT GET CANCER
at least tax ONLY..those who can...im sick of paying YOUR TAX

tax..*something YOU USE..[not only those you love to ab-use]

As others have pointed out such a proposal would seem to pretty much instantly create a black market.
Regardless of existing laws around the sale and supply of cigarette's to under age people they seem to get access to them.
I suspect that there would also be somewhat of a rush on licenses by those with a mind to the future, ex-smokers not wanting to never be able to get them again, non-smokers who can see the market opportunities etc.
At the same time others who would probably cope the least with having their supply of cigarette's cut off might not do so well with getting a license (mentally ill etc)
I've got a general adversion to governments trying to have too strong a role in regulating peoples lives. Every new type of license or permit seem's to provide an excuse for a bunch more regulation, fee's and bureaucracy.

R0bert

most of my families whining..about my smoking..was cured by me leaving
but of course now they whine about dad being gone..[ya just cant please some people]

i suspect most of the heart break in susies case was by bothering a parent..[or brother]..for being there...and stinking up..the house

seems many..dont like us being there
they much prefer the absent father/brother/spouse

their drinking wasnt the problem
only my smoking...

[they of course spayed carcionogenic fumes into their own lungs..with the airfresheners and other chemicals they adore...

[little realising..that at low tempratures..dioxin and other known cancer causing mutagenes are created...[wood-smoke]

as well benzine*..[that anti knocking lead_replacement..put into standard fuel]..that is pumped into the air..*we all breath..must not escape notice...but no..*blame the smokers..we are the scum of the earth

but lets not take a ciggie to keep calm
lets take a chemical..or booze..or comfort food

i need wonder..how many people are persicuted..*by their loved ones
because their loved ones..drank the coolaid..propaganda..of govt spin..[just to get a new tax..on smokers]

govt has much to account for..in making this lie..believable

but lets forget our concerns
lets hear the heartbreak of susie

who died
what was their job
what was the cause of death
how long were they in hospital
how long did they not work..before passing away

[most smokers go from moderatly sick..to dead..[in hospital..in a few days]...

and as they are under a docter supervision..
no autopsy is called for...nor done..

thus any*..statistics..arnt EVEN..based on fact

[i suspect anti-smoker radicals..are putting the styinky dogs..[like-me]..down..to get the beds ready for the NEXT obese diabetic...or the recovering boozer..

OR OLD FOLK..WHO GOT NO HOME..where they can simply rest in peace
one persons heartbreak..is anothers nagger

only facts can correct the many lies
and heartbreaks...many of us..put upon others

lets simply have facts

Dearest OUG, you can go on living in dream world if you like.
Do you think cancer is all that smokers suffer from?
Take a long hard look at emphysema, chronic obstructive airways disease,and a myriad of heart problems.

In 30 years of nursing I never met a patient with emphysema (slowly suffocating to death over a period of years) who had not smoked or who had not been living with a smoker.

Go spend some time on any respiratory ward in the country and have a few words with the people gasping in the beds. They all wish they had never smoked.

I also visit literally hundreds of people who exist at home on oxygen bottles. Sure, they are all old, but most of their non-smoking friends get to go out and live life to the fullest, even at an advanced age.

I know which group I would rather be in.
You are in denial OUG.
Give it up.

Stroke would be another of the terrible outcomes of smoking.

However I am wondering what ever became of the research started many years ago to find an ultra low tar or nil tar alternative to the high tar tobaccos. It wouldn't matter so much where the person could not give up the nicotine if the toxins in the 'tar' were ultra low or hopefully non-existent. Probably that early research was before the very successful genetic manipulation of plants too, which could also offer a way of engineering better alternatives.

I am aware that low tar tobacco cigarettes have been available for some time and such practices as smoking more or drawing smoke more deeply can defeat the purpose of low tar cigarettes.

Anyone who has visited China might think that an ultra low tar or nil tar alternative with the shot of nicotine could reduce what is destined to be a major health problem in that country alone.

My comments should not be taken as support for tobacco which clearly they are not.

susie/quote..<<..It is a filthy habit..that has caused much heartache..*in my family.>>

are you saying your nursing familiy
or your home/life family

your reply fails to reveal anything on the personal level

you make a case re emphasema..[will you also be aware that many occupations list emphasema...as a hazard..CAUSED in their work...[by their jobs]

i was a spray[painter...we got warned ..the SOLVENTS...cause emphasema

i recall the resqeue workers[at 911]..list emphasema as a main symptom

i also recall the tank cleaners..of f111's..report many cases of emphasema

you mention getting xrays...[that are known to cause cancer]
you make much of a case re emphasema...but yet WHERE THIS FAMILY TRAUMA[heart=BREAK]..of the family?

your a nurse..you must know of adverse reaction..[you know the cause of 1 in 10 hospital admitions?]...ie adverse reation to PERSCRIBED medications..[perscribed by docters..adminesterd by nurses]

how many of your dead patients...have had autopsy?

have any?
how many thjis week

who writes ''CAUSE OF DEATH:SMOKING'..on the death certification..

is emphasema...the cause of death?
this all has a funny smell..to the whole issue

we get too used to...far too many..pat answers
but when the true facts..are accertained..
we realise the simplistic..has been achieved via tained bias..

or claiming personal distress...[in the family]..
where no evidence..for such a claim..has been given

how many died in hospital?
how many deaths got..autopsies?

i shall wager..not very many at all..!

the statistics are based on docters writing..their opinion
their opinioon of the...'cause*..of death''

cause of death..must be something..other than..formerly smoking
how many died from the cure..?

a smoker..working with asbestos...dies from asbestosis..
[or radiologists..from radiation]..not the act of smoking

whats the average survival time ..
for a smoker getting into hospital

my experience is under a week

All you poor saps:) still cant break your little habit? Well have a look at just some of the things that this useless product is doing to you and the people around you.

http://tinyurl.com/2a5v3xg

The day will come where this filthy discussing vile smelling poison will eradicated from the good people that Government tries to show its compassion.... by helping its citizens live a long and full life.LOL yep! but maybe its better to kill off the population this way, than to keep the dummies alive.

I guess at the rate that smoking kills, we can avert war since it takes the same amount of casualties.

Now! At the currant price $15.00 give or take......times that by 7 days a week......times that by 52 weeks in a year............mmmmmmmmm one could buy a good small car for that I thinks.

Anyway.......puff away:)

The government tax office needs your help.

Buy a pack today, and support the winning team.

And just like globe-warming.........its affects wont be felt.lol.

Have a nice day.

Blue

ohhh blue...you whine about the price
its not you that are paying it
it is us...

you can fantisize..about what 15 dollars can buy

one meal in a resterant
or a cheap bottle of whine
or 3 capochinoes
or a pack of nappies
or a cheap watch
or a pair of rechargable tripple c batteries
public transport to work for the day
or a short taxi ride

its pathetic...i dont want any of that stuff
i just want to smoke my smoke
and be left alone
if i die...who give a flick

comprehend..im living my life

i know govt DELIBERATLY made the tobacco industry ADD stink to my tobacco..just so you whiner can winge about the stink

many of you born again high priests of self control used to smoke
but being weak...gave up under presure from nobodies..and do nothings..having nothing better to do that tell YOU what to do

there is going to be a hardcore of smokers
get used to it

you can tax us to our early grave...
you can revile and ridicule us all you like
and blow smoke up our butts about how its killing you
but wqe will go away from you...and go smoke elsewhere..because we love our smoke

just as much as you lot love to feel superiour
holier than thou...and oh so clever

but your just being
what govt wants you to be..[a busy body]

mind ya own business...or go buy your own life enjoyments
but dont be letcuring me about the cost

you lot are decievers
[[heartbreak..it costs your families']...lol

thats about typical
of you zealots of guilt...
laying it on with a trowel..and by the bucket load

Oh dear. So OUG, all those millions spent on advertising to save you and educate people like yourselves, is just a waste of times according to you?.........excellent! then one can stop wasting time with the likes of you and invest the surplus on the unemployed people, with the work-for-the dole programs by doubling the payments....WOW OUG you have a heart of gold.

OUG..said..

you can fantisize..about what 15 dollars can buy

one meal in a resterant
or a cheap bottle of whine
or 3 capochinoes
or a pack of nappies
or a cheap watch
or a pair of rechargable tripple c batteries
public transport to work for the day
or a short taxi ride

its pathetic...i dont want any of that stuff
i just want to smoke my smoke
and be left alone
if i die...who give a flick.

Again! excellent!

Ummm OUG...what about all those small business people that relies on all those products that you mentioned above that keeps a greater volume of first-time job hunters employed? or do you just support the big top-end companies that makes billions, and that just laughs at you for being a DRUG-DEALERS pet?

I never took you for a capitalist supporter OUG.

And its Sir HIGH priest mate:)

Look OUG....If want to stick a FAG in your mouth, your right... Its none of my business:)

BLUE

Continue dreaming OUG. You carry on about solvents and alcohol and prescription medications causing deaths- but this thread is about smoking isn't it?
If you want to discuss the other issues- start a new thread.

Check these stats out OUG :

"Each year more than 18,000 Australians die prematurely because of smoking - that's 50 a day.

Smoking kills more people in Australia than the total number killed by drink, drugs, murder, suicide, road crashes, rail crashes, air crashes, poisoning, drowning, fires, falls, lightning, electrocution, snakes, spiders and sharks.

Of 1,000 young Australian males who smoke, 1 will be murdered, 15 will be killed on the road and 250 will be killed before their time by tobacco."

http://www.nsma.org.au/facts/figures.htm

Amazingly, medical science can now tell the difference between a healthy lung, heart, brain or blood vessels, and those affected by nicotine. It's not that hard.

Go and have some tests yourself OUG.

I think we are speeding down the wrong trail when blaming the smoker for the evils of smoking. What is important is the welfare of the smoker, not an ostracizing campaign aimed at them.

Believe it or not there are people who actually enjoy smoking. They may be overheard referring to the cigarette as their “friend”, an endearment incomprehensible to me personally but I accept their deep attachment to the habit none-the-less.

I think smokers are accepting of the fact their habit boarders on the anti-social and reluctantly but good naturedly accept the changing social norms imposed on them by the remainder of us the non-smokers. It is true to say though, we do a lot of winging to force changes to the rules of smoking rightly or wrongly.

gypsy, second-hand smoke can be harmful to the people around you: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/ETS (from the US, but the information is relevant).

There is also the thinking that second-hand smoke is even more harmful as a non-smoker breathes normally while a smoker (while smoking) only puffs. I am not a smoker so cannot really verify this...

Anyway, the thinking goes that as a non-smoker breathes normally the smoke goes deep into the lungs where damage occurs more easily. There were studies to show that lung cancer in smokers tends to be in the upper areas of the lung while non-smokers who developed lung cancer presented with tumours deep in the lungs.

I can't find the link for the above but this is related: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071126104424.htm

Personally I have no problem with people smoking, but more government bureaucracy doesn't seem like the answer. Plus a blackmarket would be a real possibility especially as cigarettes would still be available overseas. Customs would have yet one more item to search for in all our luggage. We should have hermetically-sealed smoking bars or something akin to that. In Australia you can't just walk down the street drinking a beer, yet you can with a cigarette.

As for alcohol-fuelled violence being a result of smoking restrictions...if that is the argument, then perhaps we should ban alcohol too. Our society is becoming more violent-prone even during sober hours.

http://currentglobalperceptions.blogspot.com/

Wake up Australia. Regardless whether you do or do not smoke the real issue is Freedom of choice. Every year more of our inalienable freedoms are being taken from us by drakonion legislation.
To hide what they are doing so people do not focus turn people against each other as is the case of the smoking debate. Anti Smokers against Pro. Smokers. After reading the comments posted, some appearing very nasty attacks from both sides makes one realise its not the real issue. The real issue is freedom of choice and both sides attempting to impose their beliefs on each other. I am a smoker and I choose to smoke and if I die from smoke related illness that is my choice.
I can remember when trains had smoking and non smoking carriages.

as i suspected..susie...no personalised heartbreak..
so this reveals your loose with your spin

also your facts are somewhat ambigious

This page was last updated on 21st April, 2006,

i suppose suing this mob
The Non-Smokers' Movement of Australia Inc,
for lying..would be a waste of time..

[they likely are some shelf copmpany..
or drongoes..that need to get some of that great tax money..for their hate group

but lets look at their numbers

Each year more than because of smoking - that's 50 a day.

In Australia in 1986,
the following body organs were removed from humans
because of cancer caused by smoking:

521 lungs

148 gullets

71 tongues

221 voice boxes

82 stomachs

40 pancreases

68 wombs

85 bladders 115 kidneys and 161 miscellaneous body parts.

*THATS FAR FROM*ADDING UP TO*
''18,000 Australians"

and the number of disproportuinate wombs
indicates a matter of concern*...
[for strippers blowing smoke bubbles]

BUT in your hate..
you fail to see the blooming obvious
THE NUMBERS DONT ADD UP..!

i note the complete absence of the obese persons
[or cows}.. artery filled with butter

or removal of those blackend toes
[ie from frostbite]

or them distorted teeth..from ya adverts

THESE numbers ALONE prove the spin
or SEVERE negligence...
or lies..re the true cost of medical aid

BUT in your bigoted..blindness..
you only see what you seek to remain.. so morally supiour to these
factionalised..despised smokers...oh how clever..your lies..and theirs

so your non reply of autospsies..speaks volumes
and those who are quoted..in the numbers abouve
HOW MANY OF THEM DIED..?

oh and what is the average life expectancy of a smoker
once they hit ya hospital...indeed are you really even a nurse

you seem to be loose with the truth
or extreemly gullable

you certainly dont reply questions

ps go read a ciggie packet...there on it..they have to remain in legal bounds
thus THEY use attributable...to...not the more liablous caused by...

because THEY GOT NO AUTOPSY...proof...of hjust how many or how few
taking the docters words...and guess what docters lie

OUG, <"*THATS FAR FROM*ADDING UP TO*
''18,000 Australians""
OUG, you have no idea what you are talking about!
The diseased organs above were removed from LIVE patients, to try and save their lives!
They may or may not have been part of the eventual 18,000 that are said to have died as a result of smoking.

But hey, these statistics could all just be part of a conspiracy to make smokers give up...just to annoy them.

As for my families medical problems, well I didn't think you really cared about them so much OUG. So here it is- although I wish it wasn't so:
My grandmother developed nicotine poisoning at age 65. Her legs swelled and were discoloured yellow. She then developed liver failure due to the poisons in her body, and died.

But you never know, maybe she got the nicotine some other way.

My grandfather spent the last five smoking years of his life gasping to death from emphysema, sucking on oxygen tubing that didn't ease his pain or fear of suffocating to death at all.

He died a disgusting death that you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy, and we cared for him at home until the day he died- with a terrible look of fear in his eyes.
All the doctors said it was caused by smoking- no other reason.

They could all be wrong of course- but I didn't smoke because I didn't want to take that chance...

there is no use blaming smoking...alone

The list of known triggers..is long and varied. ...causes of emphysema are industrial pollutants,aerosol sprays,risk factors like cigarette smoking,air pollution,..asthma,...long-term exposure to other lung irritants, such as air pollution, chemical fumes, or dust.

Read more at http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/e/emphysema/causes.htm?ktrack=kcplink

as for your grandmother and nicoteen poisening
i have no comment

you are free to believe anything you chose
http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/e/emphysema/causes.htm
WrongDiagnosis.comCauses of Emphysema including triggers, hidden medical causes of ... This condition is known as alpha 1-antitrypsin (AAT) deficiency-related emphysema. ...
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=emphysema%2Cknown+causes&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

i chose to smoke
now stay out of my life

none of the males of my family make it much over 50
im the oldest male in my line

they loved booze

if you love booze
then please wake up..to the dangers of drinking

and leave us smokers..out of your guilt trips

i never made your grandma eat ciggie butts
nor gave your grandfather emphasema

i can only dream of getting as old as them
and a smoke relaxes me...[stops me from minding others business]

i payed my tax
now leave me be

the medical numbers indicate that none of the 18,000
[or very few..get any help from you lot]
so why tax us into our early graves..

because fear-monger's.. like you lot..guilt people into it

whining to me..about me
aint going to bring grandma ..nor grandad back

genetical facters are involved..re emphasema
so you should be carefull..with THE OTHER RISK FACTERS

you might not smoke
but do you breath dust...or other polutants
think about it..i refuse to think about it further

have a nice life

Regrets from choices are not something we should seek to save adults from or look down on them for later, although we refuse them the choice of how to die with doing good as a collective motto.

Objecting to a smell in this world is amusing and quickly becomes confused with compassion for others.

We’ve all had a fat unfit relative who while smoking a packet of tax loaded cigarettes got drunk and grabbed their gun before getting in their carbon emitting vehicle as they were trying to fill their meth pipe to speed towards a fast food outlet then had to swerve to avoid a jay walking doctor on his way to receive his bonus from a local drug manufacturer and hit a power poll which caused the gun in their pocket to go off that in turn gave them a fright and they promptly had a heart attack and died.

This clearly shows that smoking is indeed an evil in this world and needs to be stopped, although the path of good intentions appears to be rather crowded.

The smoking disease. Its funny you know....you just try to help some people and they bite your head off.

Now don't people get up-set when they cant quit. Some even go into theatricals and shocking shame blames and off to the leper colony's they go....with a little puff of steam or smoke in this case, rising from their heads.

Carbon Monoxide Levels


Responses to CO levels

0-8 ppm


Nonsmoker

20 ppm


Loss of oxygen to vital organs begins

35 ppm


Legal limit of 8-hour exposure in workplace

50 ppm


Urban "Air Pollution Emergency" alert

60 ppm


Headaches, nausea, mild central nervous system dysfunction and lots more facts.....which begs the question.........why do it?

http://tinyurl.com/28fx2f9

http://tinyurl.com/2a8g77y

I wonder if some would have the same opinion when cigs get to the price of $25.00 a packet?

BLUE

OUG, if you didn't want me to comment on your smoking habit, why on earth did you bring it up?

This is an online opinion website, and if you mention you smoke, on a thread discussing smoking, then you must surely expect people to comment on that?

I just get upset with caring for people with preventable diseases caused by smoking, that our governments allow to keep happening because of the money from the taxes.

I don't blame the smokers. They have an addiction.

It is honestly nothing personal OUG, although you did ask me about my personal life.

And yes, I truly do hope you have a nice life.

OUG just don't want to come clean with himself here and admit
that he's an addict who can't quit.

Fair enough, its pretty hard to fight with brain chemstry at times,
harder then non smokers will ever understand.

But that is the reality. OUG, just come clean, admit it.

<<If the government were really serious about wanting smokers to quit they would put nicotine patches etc on the PBS. Instead they keep punishing them with tax increases. Its just simple greed. Any assertion that they care about peoples health is just rubbish.>>

Well done to the government and about time. Maybe they do actually care. Just a bit. Extra points for limiting it to the most needy and those most likely to benefit.