Republicans end Capitol Hill smoking ban

Your reference proves that your accusation speaks of Yourself, only. First though, what "facts" could you possibly be relying on, to determine that I do not care about science or facts? There are no "facts" involved, with your making that statement. Secondly, your source is NOT the scientists of the EPA, but some group, called the "Fraser Institute." And in that source, it admits that the EPA-- which is staffed by scientists-- has determined the exact opposite of your claim: that second hand smoke does have negative health consequences. Therefore, genius, you are demonstrating that it is you, who "don't care about Science or the facts." You only prefer the interpretation of those facts, which questions the EPA's findings.

If you were someone, like me, who came to reasoned, evidence-based conclusions, one would think you could actually explain your own rationale, which supposedly is drawn from this text, you link. More likely, you are a smoker, who simply prefers their conclusion, and it is irrelevant to you, how sound is the science, behind it.

 

Apparently not, because pot smoking is not allowed. Of course if Republicans were into pot, they would have legalized it already

 

Oh so you're saying "if it only affected them".

Just like abortion.

Nancy Pelosi keeps alcohol in her office. Is that something they're supposed to do.

 

Why not? I'm sure that many others do, as well. At times, they practically live in those offices. There are no "second hand" health concerns, with someone drinking alcohol, indoors, and no health-based restrictions against doing so, in shared or public, indoor spaces.

Abortion is a false analogy. You cannot show that someone's abortion does you, personally, any harm, whatsoever. That entire argument presupposes the fetus, as a person, which is a debatable contention, and certainly not a settled fact. However, there is little credible, scientific dispute, over the fact that other people's cigarette, cigar, and pipe smoke, within a closed environment, can most definitely, negatively impact the health of those around it.



P.S.-- You didn't respond to my, more accurate, analogy, of a representive's smoking of pot-filled Blunts, all day, in his Capitol office. You would be in favor of this "freedom?"

 

Takes two people to make a child, and you can call it whatever you want, but killing a developing human is still killing a human.

Congress can make blunts federally legal anytime they want to. They make the laws. Call them about it.

 

Is anyone really so stupid as to still be smoking in 2023?
Might as well stick a road flare up your butt and light it.

 

You are then saying, you would applaud a pot smoke filled Capitol, as indicative of "freedom" the same as with the tobacco smoke-- or were you purposely avoiding, answering my question? Because here's the good news: the District of Columbia has decriminalized the possession of up to two ounces of marijuana, for persons who are at least 21 years of age. So no act of Congress is required. There should be nothing preventing a Congressman, from toking away, to his heart's content, in our Capitol Building-- unless some narc, were to call in the DEA, to raid Congress. But no freedom loving Republican, would do such a thing, would they?

If one of those 'Pubs smokes a particularly nasty brand of cigar, I would wish that any nearby Democrat, subjected to it, would counter that odor with some fragrant herb, like skunk weed. But I know that won't happen, since Dems are too considerate, to subject everyone else to a smell, that all would probably not find pleasant.


As for the other issue, you compare to 2nd hand smoke: your failure to recognize that your equating of a fetus, at any stage, with anyone else, is only your opinion, & not the fact which you pretend it to be, I will not waste time arguing because the more to the point answer is: no one is having, or would have, abortions in the Capitol (making your analog, ridiculously moot). And a father has no legal rights, to prevent a pregnant woman from choosing to abort her pregnancy. That is the law, but-- why don't you call your Congressman about it?

 

Congress in general could use few big hits of the Bong .. and certainly worth a try .. we can't make things any worse. What does all this have to do with being a liberal though .. you on some Puritainism kick or something .. did Paster Paul tell you that dancing is a sin and you feel forcing your religious beliefs on others through physical violence is all good in the hood .. is that it ?

 

Lots of folks are "so stupid" .. including myself. Is anyone so stupid as to thinking of voting blue in 2023 .. or better yet .. is anyone so stupid to think that one person's poison may be another person's pleasure .. in 2023 .. I know for a fact that a whole lot are "So Stupid" that they get sucked into the Utilitarian fallacy .. and I realize you don't know what that is cause your so smart ... what could possibly be bad about supporting law thats good of the collective.

Lets get to see who gets to wear the "Stupid Pants" ... Shall we Daniel "Light" .. lets see who is a bit light Daniel my brother .. who is not likely older than me .. but perhaps still feels the pain

Sup Dan !

 

As a former business owner, it is my observation that stoners give you about 75% of you labor dollar. Too much BS chit chat leading to errors, misinterpreting what I once thought were idiot proof shop drawings. Drunks just call in sick.
Hashish was routinely used in Jesus’s time, but they were generally not in such a technical construction environment.
BTW, wonder what they “juice” Biden on when he really, really, really needs to be coherent?

 

That's excellent news. With any luck they will have all gotten lung cancer by Christmas.

 

Banning vapes is backfiring, they should have been happy people were not smoking, but they could never be happy, now all the bans were reversed

 

longest people to ever lived were smokers, but yes, excessive smoking comes with risks as well

 

yet, people that smoked moderately were less likely to be hospitalized or die from Covid

per studies. moderate smokers also appear to have lower blood pressure, high blood pressure is a killer too

just like the sun can cause cancer in excess, it can also be healthy in moderation

 

personally, I think people should be able to smoke outside, unrestricted.... inside I am ok with banning

but it's good to see some push back on the anti-smoking nonsense as they are going too far, people get $50 fines here in some places for smoking in their own car in a parking lot - businesses should be allowed to be smoking or non-smoking - it should be the business owners choice and consumers should choose to go there or not

 

Members of the party of love and tolerance dance on graves again.

 

many male politicians used to keep whiskey in their offices, not sure if Pelosi or others do or not anymore

 

unless the smoke is a fog so thick you can cut it with a knife, I do not see any danger in it, especially if outside and you just "smell" it

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/01.hyp.37.2.194

"Some epidemiological studies have reported lower blood pressure (BP) in smokers than in nonsmokers. This finding is regarded as a paradox, because nicotine has potent sympathomimetic effects, which affects BP levels and heart rate. Furthermore, ex-smokers tend to have BPs similar to those of people who never smoked."

why do moderate smokers have lower blood pressure then ex-smokers and non-smokers that have never smoked?

I think this lower blood pressure is why smokers own the title of longest living people - that said, smoking is addictive and many can not smoke in moderation, thus the dangers and risks of smoking - the dose makes the poison

 

A fine example of anecdote .. albeit a flawed guess likely inspired by "refer madness" "Too much BS chit chat" ? .. is moronic when done by any group of office folks .... Have you ever worked in an office .. where you were not "The Boss" so doesn't count .. as your not around when the real BS starts to fly .. the fact that one of them wore red shoes and drank hot Chocolate .. has about as much relevance as the fellow who happened to be a pot smoker .. we call this "Non Sequitur fallacy" in educated circles..

What does Hash in Jesus time have to do with your claims about moronic faulty logic ? .. and do morons not mess up idiot proof shop drawings ? not everyone is skilled at such things .. intelligence comes in many different forms .. some lack logic skills for example .

Is it not true that most pot smokers are smarter than you on a bad day .. and so can be afforded a small error amongst the cacophony of which they are surrounded ?

 

Your citation does not come from any study of second hand smoke, so I guess the source of your only relevant quote, the one beginning your reply, is yourself.

The rest of your reply, is a different issue: is smoking bad for the smoker's life. Your final paragraph also seems to be your own words, not those of any medical researcher, and I would challenge your assertion, that smokers are the "longest living people." The study is on one thing: blood pressure. It is true that lower blood pressure, is a positive indicator of health, and longevity. But, firstly, so will regular exercise, lower one's blood pressure, as well as will meditation, and secondly, those methods don't add the other health risks, that come along with smoking, including emphysema, and cancers of, at least, the lungs & throat.

I do agree, that someone who only smoked the equivalent of a few cigarettes a day, would not be adding any significant health risk; but this seems a moot argument, for practical purposes, because almost no smoker, so limits themself. As you noted, the addictive component of smoking, is a powerful one, and too much of anything, is a bad thing. What constitutes "too much" tobacco, is usually exceeded, by the user.




P.S.-- Are you a pipe smoker? They are the only tobacco users I have ever heard were longer lived. Regardless, more than sparing use of a tobacco pipe, will lead to reduced lung capacity.

 

I don’t smoke but don’t begrudge anyone stupid enough to smoke. Smoke all you want. I just don’t want to be around it as I shouldn’t have to smell like a dirty ashtray just because of someone else’s disgusting vile habit.

 

""That ban's removal in 2023 did not change any policy regarding smoking in a House member's own office, as some press reports implied. There has never been a ban on smoking in a Representative's own office.""

 

Not at all.

 

Pot gets you high and has medical properties.

 

if moderate smoking can make people have lower blood pressure and live longer... then walking by someone outside and smelling it, is not gonna kill ya

and I qualified that statement with "unless the smoke is a fog so thick you can cut it with a knife"

I did not say all smokers are the longest living people, I said they hold that title, if a non-smoker held that title we would hear about it constantly

"I think this lower blood pressure is why smokers own the title of longest living people - that said, smoking is addictive and many can not smoke in moderation, thus the dangers and risks of smoking - the dose makes the poison"

you said "will lead to reduced lung capacity. "

may lead to reduced lung capacity.

some studies even show marijuana smokers have increased lung capacity

"I do agree, that someone who only smoked the equivalent of a few cigarettes a day, would not be adding any significant health risk; but this seems a moot argument, for practical purposes, because almost no smoker, so limits themself. As you noted, the addictive component of smoking, is a powerful one, and too much of anything, is a bad thing. What constitutes "too much" tobacco, is usually exceeded, by the user. "

if it has health benefits, like lower blood pressure and stress relief, then is not a moot point - and yes, the addictiveness to many is the downside

but yes, a big difference between a pack or two a week and a pack or two a day, mild stress benefits the body, excessive stress destroys it