Secondhand Smoke

Secondhand smoke is cigarette, cigar, or pipe smoke that is inhaled unintentionally by nonsmokers. The amount of such smoke inhaled by a nonsmoker is relatively small when compared to the amount inhaled by a tobacco user; however, so-called passive smoking can aggravate respiratory illnesses and contribute to serious diseases, including cancer. This danger has led many countries to adopt smoking bans in indoor spaces. How has the tobacco industry responded to the issue of secondhand smoke? More...

I agree with you. It seems like employers who allow smoking breaks are only acting as enablers. Personally, I think everyone should be allowed to make his or her own decisions with regard to their own body, but it does seem patently unfair to essentially reward smokers with breaks that are not available to non-smokers.

I hope they dont discover that second-hand books are also dangerous.

---

I think therefore I think I am

Maggie, whether or not second hand smoke has carcinogenic effects or not, it still exacerbates people who are predisposed to lung problems. My entire family has lung problems. My twin brother has had bronchitis and pnuemonia several times, same with my mom. We tend to get lung infections from being around smokers, if not asthmatic attacks. My health was at its worst when my mom was dating a smoker. Even though he smoked outside, the stuff that stuck to his clothes made me cough frequently and I found myself getting lung infections several times a year. I haven't had a lung infection in about 3 years, and I haven't been around smokers for that long.

So yes, second hand smoke can be harmful to bystanders.

If I could have amended my reply I would have done so because I don't want to appear 'catty'. My response simply points out that there are a number of things that - individually - to which we do not wish to be exposed - for a variety of reasons. I was also responding to a post above that said businesses are enabling smokers by providing them with a designated smoking area. Again, we should be careful what we want. If we take away smoking areas (you as an individual don't have to frequent these if you have an allergy), then why not take away the drink and candy machines? Are we not 'enabling' those who have a health problem caused by too much refined sugar?

---

"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program." - Ronald Reagan

I think I may have sent the wrong message in my first post. I wasn't advocating that people shouldn't be able to smoke at all. I don't mind the smoking areas and think that these are a GOOD thing. I think that people have the right to smoke, and as long as they are able to keep their smoke away from the people that dislike/are harmed from it, I have absolutely no problem. It's once the smokers' actions have detrimental effects on others that I have a problem.

I'm sure a smoker wouldn't want to have to pay for my antibiotics and the time I have to take off from work when I get a lung infection. I don't want to have to pay for that stuff either, let alone suffer through the actual lung infection. I'm not saying that smokers are inconsiderate, because I know quite a few that are considerate. However, I have also had a few professors who were blindly stubborn on the matter and refused to hear any argument from the other side because they were convinced that people just didn't want them to be able to enjoy their cigarettes or pipes. I am a little bitter towards the latter group.

i know it is hard to quit from it(because i see it also happens to my Uncle)but still,most of us know that smoking is like a ripper!!! It can rips your life...

Hey!!! for those smokers, i don't want to annoy you.... .^_^.

Guys and gals, G