I can only speak for myself, but I'll try to stay out of other people's way if smoking in a public place. But some people take it too far - there was a proposed law to ban smokers from being within 25 feet of non-smokers at public places such as parks. I forgot which state it was, and don't know if it was ever passed. But it's ridiculous. People should learn to talk with one another and reach compromises instead of having the state come up with this stuff.
I've heard of third-hand smoke (residue that remains in the enclosed space where smoking took place and can cause carcinogens when expose to nitrous acid that can be found in the air). I find it hard to believe because I find it hard to believe in second hand smoke. There's also this, from Wikipedia:
"High but reasonable"? Four to twelve times the normal amount? To prove that it's there, sure it's reasonable. To prove that it can and will happen in normal circumstances? I'm not a scientist, but I have my doubts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wikipedia
I can't find the bookmark anymore, because it was on another computer, but I recall reading a website that talked about second hand smoke and the studies done about 50 years ago which are still being touted to this day. It basically tried to discredit most of those things, by saying that second hand smoke can't be as dangerous as it's said to be since regular burning is a different chemical reaction to taking a drag from the stick, among other things. How pipe smokers in the study lived longest, except for the ones who quit smoking and ended up dying younger, and that the sample was skewed for several reasons: Second-hand data from neighbors or family members, a smoker was anyone that had smoked at any time, and lung cancer related deaths were any deaths in lung cancer patients. And the study was commissioned with the intention to find negative side effects to smoking, so the whole thing was biased to begin with.
I do admit, however, that I'm biased towards all of this being true, and can't assure anyone that it is or isn't. I have to find that page again and reread it more thoroughly.