Smoking and 3rd Hand Smoke, Child Abuse and etc.

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Drucquers Banner

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

jaytex1969

Lifer
Jun 6, 2017
9,520
50,597
Here
Ludicrous! It's the 4th hand smoke we need to be worried about, found in the flatulence of smokers...
jay-roger.jpg


 

eaglewriter1

Starting to Get Obsessed
Sep 22, 2018
171
8
By that logic every Adult that handles potentialy harmful/carcinogeneic susbtances (being one of them) is a hazard to children and should be legaly required to keep a twenty meter distance.

 

eggrollpiper

Can't Leave
Jul 27, 2018
378
38
Sad but true, it's called take home toxins. To deny it is to be truly ignorant. I do think 3rd hand cigarette smoke is way way worse than pipe tobacco and cigars.

It probly does a fraction of the damage living and breathing in a city however it is a reality.

And if your concerned, take a shower, put on clean clothes that don't get exposure to smoke, brush your teeth and most likely there's a negligible amount of toxic residue on you..

Sure it's a bummer and I wouldn't start a thread like this myself, were here for pleasure, not for whatever this is..

 

brian64

Lifer
Jan 31, 2011
9,629
14,732
Yeah sure...third hand smoke...total asinine BS. Childhood cancer used to be practically non-existent back in the days when everyone smoked. Now smoking rates are far lower than ever before and pediatric cancer has become common place.
Chronic illnesses of all kinds in children have increased dramatically in recent decades...diabetes, cancer, autism, etc...primarily due to toxins in food, water and air, as well as contaminated vaccines...and an epidemic of morbid obesity combined with nutritionally depleted food.
But we need to be concerned about 3rd hand smoke. What a crock of shit.

 

seldom

Lifer
Mar 11, 2018
1,035
940
Sure it's a bummer and I wouldn't start a thread like this myself, were here for pleasure, not for whatever this is..
Eggroll, I presume you have taken it upon yourself to write on behalf of everybody but I honestly don't know. "Were here for pleasure" I suppose means "we're" just like "your" probably means "you're" and "probly" may mean "probably". This thread is in the Tobacco Legislation section of the forum. Generally speaking tobacco legislation doesn't fall under the umbrella of pleasure. I believe this article is worthy of attention and discussion. If you don't like it then don't read it.

 

npod

Lifer
Jun 11, 2017
2,942
1,024
This topic is part of an even more concerning 800 pound gorilla. The NIH has funded a massive initiative on tobacco policy. These initial studies are just the beginning. Check out this new exploratory study on tobacco retail patterns. Yes, that’s correct, the government will collect any all details relating to tobacco point of sale in the U.S. This will involve internet purchases of pipe and cigar tobacco as well. Notice the very crucial word here ... “policies”. The goal is to change behavior.
Stanford team will participate in NIH-funded study of tobacco policies. Scientists at Stanford and two other universities have received a five-year, $11.6 million grant to conduct research on policies related to tobacco retail sales.
http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2018/09/stanford-to-participate-in-nih-study-of-tobacco-policies.html?linkId=57142285

 

eggrollpiper

Can't Leave
Jul 27, 2018
378
38
Seldom, I think I misspoke there. I guess by we I meant I and whomever agrees w me. And I didn't realize it was related to a topic category. It wasn't an attack against you, so I'm sorry if seemed that way. Really I thought it would help however misguided.

Anyway I'm on your side, I agree with you 100%. I would think you would take more issue with those in denial and ignorance than me saying I wouldn't start such a thread.

This whole issue is something I've considered for some time.

And Npod, any chance you could back us up on the legitimacy of third hand smoke and take home toxins?

Lastly third hand smoke is an unfortunate name for something real since it sounds like bs, it's not really smoke, it's the debris or residue that precipitates from the smoke..

 

seacaptain

Lifer
Apr 24, 2015
1,829
7
It's ironic that the people who want to rid the planet of tobacco are almost always the same people that think anyone should be able to smoke pot if they want to.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,575
I thought this forum was about “Pipes and Tobacco” not “Anti-Cigarette/HydroCarbon propaganda.”

 

jpmcwjr

Moderator
Staff member
May 12, 2015
24,708
27,310
Carmel Valley, CA
I am far more concerned with minute droplets of urine and sublimated fecal matter that get flung into the air when the toilet is flushed..
But the subject is serious, more for curtailing our freedoms than risks to children. Gotta listen to George Carlin again.

 
Dec 24, 2012
7,195
456
What I liked best is that the author of the article says she has no friends who smoke and that she avoids smokers. That to me sounds like reason enough for me to smoke.

 

mso489

Lifer
Feb 21, 2013
41,210
60,455
With our ongoing flooding problems from Hurricane Florence, and overflowing hog lagoons, industrial poultry houses, and coal ash pits in North Carolina, it is evident that we will have to screen out minors at the border. Like the pipe and tobacco sites, if you're under 18 or 21, click here. Back to Virginia or Tennessee with you. And of course, citizens traveling elsewhere who might have residue on their clothes, it's a no-go for sure.

 

brian64

Lifer
Jan 31, 2011
9,629
14,732
It's ironic that the people who want to rid the planet of tobacco are almost always the same people that think anyone should be able to smoke pot if they want to.
I'd say that is generally true...but so is the inverse. The power which we grant to the government to criminalize any particular plant/substance/drug is the same power with which they will criminalize tobacco.

 

seldom

Lifer
Mar 11, 2018
1,035
940
A Google search of the author reveals that her husband, a long time cigarette smoker, succumbed to lung cancer. I've enough empathy to imagine her anguish.

It may be that pipe smokers are such a small demographic these days that a distinction isn't made between us and cigarette smokers. All of us are smokers. Like anything I believe the concern expressed can be taken too far. Would the author suggest that, say, wildland fire fighters abstain from smoking?

Yes we live in a time when air quality is a serious menace to our health. An easily imagined retort would be that smoking is more easily curtailed.

I fret a bit over where this line of reasoning ends. Smoking a pipe outside on the porch after the children are in bed makes you a child abuser. In this age of helicopter parents I rebel. Not just over the regrettably labeled 3rd hand smoking, but over the conceited belief that allowing your child to have time to explore alone equates to neglect. Had not my parents allowed me time to explore the woods, streams, and fields as a child I would not be the man I am today. There is no end to this line of control freak thinking.

Anyhow, I see that posting this article here has caused some hard feelings but I think that discussion of these issues warrants the butthurt.

 

seldom

Lifer
Mar 11, 2018
1,035
940
I'd say that is generally true...but so is the inverse. The power which we grant to the government to criminalize any particular plant/substance/drug is the same power with which they will criminalize tobacco.
Yes!

 
Status
Not open for further replies.