I'm sorry to all of you smokers out there who read this and become offended, but thankfully someone is aware of the effects of second hand smoke to all of us who choose not to injure ourselves and the ones that we love by smoking. The Surgeon General has published the first new study since 1986 that has proved conclusively that second hand smoke doesn't 'possibly' cause lung cancer, it
definitely causes lung cancer. And not only that, it also affects second hand smoke inhalers by contributing to SIDS deaths and heart disease.
As the vice president of national policy and advocacy of the American Lung Association, Paul G. Billings is quoted as saying, "Essentially, the Surgeon General slammed the book on any scientific debate on secondhand smoke. The evidence is clear. Secondhand smoke is harmful and needs to be eliminated." (ScoutNews)
According to ScoutNews, 126 million Americans are exposed to second hand smoke. There are many risks associated with this, with adults being more likely to develop heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmokers, and ear infections, asthma attacks, respiratory problems, ear infections, and not least, SIDS. Secondhand smoke is a known human carcinogen (A substance capable of inducing cancer in an organism) and is composed of more than 50 carcinogens. Living with a smoker increases a nonsmoker's risk of lung cancer and heart disease by 30%, according to the Surgeon General's report.
I know that right now in St. Paul smoking is banned. In Minneapolis, smoking is prohibited in places that serve food. In Bloomington, smoking is banned in public places, including bars and restaurants. Golden Valley has smoking banned in indoor and outdoor areas of eating and drinking establishments and all public areas to 25' from the doors. And it hasn't hurt the economy, according to research done in the areas.
I realize that forcing smokers to be unable to go out and smoke is impinging on their rights to do what they want, but is it fair to be
affecting others' health while doing so? While those nonsmokers basically don't have a choice? Is it fair to be asking those nonsmokers to go to other places to avoid smoke when smokers are protesting that
exact reason? That
smokers are being forced to go other places to smoke? So who is more right here? Who is the law more on the side of? I think that if I had a behavior that was harmful to others I would try to keep that behavior from the others that I could potentially harm. Is it all right to have pregnant women inhaling smoke, only to give birth to a child who then dies of SIDS that attributable to the smoke?
I don't think so, and I hope that others do not find this acceptable, either. An innocent life, that hadn't even had a chance to do anything with the gift that they were granted, taken because someone thought that smoking is their right and whoever doesn't like it should just walk away. Not everyone has that choice - like some people in hospitality and tourism. For some of them, that job is their only source of income, and they cannot get any other job.
I am going to wrap up my diatribe now, but I ask of you smokers, please
please think of others also. They have just as much right to choose not to smoke as you do to smoke. But is their choice harming your health without your consent?