[Pookie]

Originally Posted by knox

Now, while the numbers of smokers is increasingly going down, more and more people have cancer.

Not true for the UK at least. The percentage of people smoking hasn't changed since 2007 (21%).

5% of all hospital admissions are attributed to smoking.

13% of cancer cases are smoking related.

18% of deaths (35 years+) are smoking related.

29% of cancer deaths are attributable to smoking.

Figures from the latest research by ONS.

FYI

[knox]

Some say it can cause brain tumors. I don't know.
There are many theories about how it makes you hungry, and it certainly does.

[alteredcourse]

Why does it make me want to shit ?

[knox]

Originally Posted by Pookie

Not true for the UK at least. The percentage of people smoking hasn't changed since 2007 (21%).

5% of all hospital admissions are attributed to smoking.

13% of cancer cases are smoking related.

18% of deaths (35 years+) are smoking related.

29% of cancer deaths are attributable to smoking.

Figures from the latest research by ONS.

FYI

But from let's say from the 80's to 2007 I'm pretty sure it decreased a lot. Because that's when the harshest policies against smoking came about, if I'm not mistaken. Especially the increases in price, which seem to be quite effective.

But I guess you're talking about older people who smoked most of their lives?

I did this huge assignment on smoking the other day (worldwide data) and it said that less and less people are taking up smoking.

It makes a lot of sense that 29% of cancer deaths are related to smoking, but sometimes I have the impression that people think that not smoking means no cancer.

I'm actually surprised only 13% of cancer cases are smoking related, I thought it'd be a lot more.

[knox]

Originally Posted by alteredcourse

Why does it make me want to shit ?

Because it wants you to eat more.

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by knox

But from let's say from the 80's to 2007 I'm pretty sure it decreased a lot. Because that's when the harshest policies against smoking came about, if I'm not mistaken. Especially the increases in price, which seem to be quite effective.

But I guess you're talking about older people who smoked most of their lives?

I did this huge assignment on smoking the other day (worldwide data) and it said that less and less people are taking up smoking.

It makes a lot of sense that 29% of cancer deaths are related to smoking, but sometimes I have the impression that people think that not smoking means no cancer.

I'm actually surprised only 13% of cancer cases are smoking related, I thought it'd be a lot more.

"21% of adults reported smoking, the same as in 2007 and lower than the 39% in 1980."

"Impact of the smokefree legislation:

On the 1st July 2007, smokefree legislation was introduced in England, banning smoking in enclosed public places.

1. There was no significant difference in cigarette smoking prevalence in adults 16 and over pre and post 1st July 2007. "

However there is no correlation between the cost of tobacco and a decrease in smoking. People will carry on smoking the same quantity regardless of price (probably why governments increase tax on cigarettes safe in the knowledge that it's a guaranteed money maker).

[alteredcourse]

I should just eat cigarettes and convert all meals to tobacco. Until thats not satisfying enough and I start eating the money instead. When the money runs out and I'm in emergency I'll move on to digest my brain and my organs, like what sea anemones do when they have found their place and dont need to move anymore.

[ink.]

the point of non smoking in enclosed spaces is to enable those who dont want to be exposed to reduce how much smoke they need to inhale.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Pookie

"21% of adults reported smoking, the same as in 2007 and lower than the 39% in 1980."

"Impact of the smokefree legislation:

On the 1st July 2007, smokefree legislation was introduced in England, banning smoking in enclosed public places.

1. There was no significant difference in cigarette smoking prevalence in adults 16 and over pre and post 1st July 2007. "

However there is no correlation between the cost of tobacco and a decrease in smoking. People will carry on smoking the same quantity regardless of price (probably why governments increase tax on cigarettes safe in the knowledge that it's a guaranteed money maker).

well, in that case I don't know which report is more bias. Where did you get that from? Perhaps I shouldn't have believed what I read.

Although there's a significant difference there, from 1980 to 2007.

I don't think banning smoking in enclosed places is a policy to make people smoke less.???

They claim that the governments increase tax on cigarettes to use that money for health care, which kind of makes sense.

[alteredcourse]

Originally Posted by ink.

the point of non smoking in enclosed spaces is to enable those who dont want to be exposed to reduce how much smoke they need to inhale.

...yes!

They claim that the governments increase tax on cigarettes to use that money for health care, which kind of makes sense.

This is something I've HEARD, but I cant remember the last time anyone bothered to inject some funds into heathcare...here, anyway.

[knox]

yeah but now they want to complain about us standing outside the shopping centre! It's never enough.

how long until the concentration camps?

[alteredcourse]

Originally Posted by knox

yeah but now they want to complain about us standing outside the shopping centre! It's never enough.

how long until the concentration camps?

Hehheh.

The cigarettes in cuba are wonderful tasting. And there are no chemicals, they cant afford to use em

[knox]

Well, smokers AND communists are equally bad so why not?

[Dr. Eugene Felikson]

xbumgoose676 has sent you a message:
About your Nickelback videos... 209643216
To:sevendeadlycinema,xbanditwolfx,popsiclepete,fra ctions1234567890,ehaqable,nickelbackfreak101,digit almafia918,cahbenvenuti,rubberduckynn9,woltemade,t elanza1,yerh012,bullorton,musicmenish,18xenia18,th eshape188,14catz,listentoothemusic,corndogandfrenc hfrys

Hеy!

I'll just gеt tο tհe рoіոt. I'm а biց fan οf Nіckelbaсk аոd I'd lіke to see mοre people ցet iոto tհеіr mսsiϲ. So I thοuցհt іt ԝoսld be nіce if yοս сoսld рut a lіոk to tհеіr itսոеѕ раge рaցe on yοur vіdeοѕ, it ϲoսld make at leаst а bit οf а differеոce. Evеո іf you dοո't gеt a lot of vіеԝs yοu never kոοԝ. So yеаհ, herе'ѕ the ituոeѕ lіnk, sհοrtened fοr yοur cοnveniеոce aոd evеrytհinց.
http://bit.ly/iITQrm
Jսѕt рaѕte іt iոto the vіdеo dеscriptіοո аnd say ѕοmеthіng lіkе 'Niсkеlbаck οո iTսnеs' οr 'Heаr mοrе from Nіckelback here--->'. Yοu cаn use tհе lοոg lіnk bսt it doеsn't reаlly lοok аll thаt ցreat. Maybe yoս сοսld еveո аdd οnе οf thosе aոոotatіοns tհіnցs ... more

You can reply to this message by visiting your inbox.
© 2011 YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066

[EVOLghost]

http://www.extremeironing.com/index.php

[EVOLghost]

quick question. The Martian Chronicles by Bradbury is a collection of short stories right or not?

[nicfit]

Originally Posted by EVOLghost

quick question. The Martian Chronicles by Bradbury is a collection of short stories right or not?

The Martian Chronicles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Martian Chronicles is a 1950 science fiction short story collection by Ray Bradbury .....

[Dr. Eugene Felikson]

Originally Posted by EVOLghost

quick question. The Martian Chronicles by Bradbury is a collection of short stories right or not?

Yes, one of my all-time favorites. I love that book to death.

[EVOLghost]

awesome. Now does anyone know where I can find The Million year Picnic (the last short story)online? I'm trying to look for it and can't seem to find it.

[EVOLghost]

yay I found it, now time for a whole day full of homework.