Automatic Monkey
Banned
I'm sorry. For people without respiratory conditions it is not a health hazard. You're going to have to go on hating it for strictly aesthetic reasons.
The "other" danger of playing in most casinos
- Thread starter Thunder
- Start date
I'm sorry. For people without respiratory conditions it is not a health hazard. You're going to have to go on hating it for strictly aesthetic reasons.
I agree. I prefer not to be around smoking. When I return from a casino, I often throw all clothes I was wearing into the laundry. However, I do not believe the smoke has any serious effect on my health. People who have health problems because of smoking are smokers who have been inhaling the smoke directly into their lungs for years.
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
Differentiate
I agree if a business sets itself apart from a group they can benefit. The one smoke free casino would attract all the non smokers.
If someone built a new casino they should consider 2 mirror casinos side by side, smoking and non.
I agree if a business sets itself apart from a group they can benefit. The one smoke free casino would attract all the non smokers.
If someone built a new casino they should consider 2 mirror casinos side by side, smoking and non.
aslan
Well-Known Member
I believe you are mixing a risk that we are more or less required to take, namely, driving a car, with a risk that is wholly unnecessary. Whether you agree or not, does not really matter, if enough people have a problem with it and science backs it up, and that seems to be enough the case on both points, then smoking should be banned in confined areas. I personally believe that smokers should be allowed to pursue their often deadly practice to their heart's content in the wide open spaces where their only victim, real or imagined, is themselves.
aslan
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone is going to have to go on hating it for strictly aesthetic reasons at all. What will happen is that smoking will be banned in all confined public places and it is the smoker who will have to go on hating his smoke-free environment. It only makes sense-- except, of course, to smokers.
Are you actually serious? Studies have come out and keep coming out that say shs is harmful. Where are you getting your information from?? Are you one of those conspiracy theorists or something?
I mean, not that I need any studies to tell me that shs is bad for you. I've experienced it first hand. I come out of a casino stinking like smoke. I have a headache and feel fatigued for at least the next day and I find that I get out of breath easier when exercising afterwards. That just cannot be good for you. I can't imagine what that smoke does to cells in my lungs.
I've realized that this is just not good and can't continue and that's why I'm cutting way back on card counting. Maybe the occasional twice a year trip to vegas or reno or if I'm ever in Canada or when they do finally ban smoking in US casinos.
Gamblor
Well-Known Member
People dying from second hand smoke is almost certainly a myth perpetuated by the media. Think of it this way, there are people, namely smokers, who directly inhale cigarette smoke, in many cases for decades, directly into their lungs. They certainly have a higher incidence of smoking related illnesses and deaths, but aren't exactly dropping like flies. But your telling me, that somebody who indirectly also breathes in smoke diffused through the air also has a significant increased chance of smoking related illnesses? Patently absurd, use some common sense. AM is right, should be more concerned about real dangers, like auto safety, than living in fear of some remote and in all likelihood non-threat.
Katweezel
Well-Known Member
Gamblor, time for you to get up to date. If you have a beef with this article you can take it up with the Uni of Minnesota. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story, OK?
* University of Minnesota
Secondhand Smoke Facts
Secondhand smoke, also known as passive or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), is a combination of:
Mainstream smoke: exhaled by smokers
Sidestream smoke: given off by the burning end of a cigarette, cigar, or pipe
Between 70% and 90% of non-smokers in the American population, children and adults, are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke. It is estimated that only 15% of cigarette smoke gets inhaled by the smoker. The remaining 85% lingers in the air for everyone to breathe. If a person spends more than two hours in a room where someone is smoking, the nonsmoker inhales the equivalent of four cigarettes.
Secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of disability and early death (after active smoking and alcohol) in the United States. For every eight smokers who die from smoking, one innocent bystander dies from secondhand smoke.
Secondhand smoke contains over 4000 chemicals including more than 40 cancer causing agents and 200 known poisons.
Secondhand smoke has been classified by the EPA as a Class A carcinogen - a substance known to cause cancer in humans.
Secondhand smoke contains twice as much tar and nicotine per unit volume as does smoke inhaled from a cigarette. It contains 3X as much cancer-causing benzpyrene, 5X as much carbon monoxide, and 50X as much ammonia. Secondhand smoke from pipes and cigars is equally as harmful, if not more so (Mayo Clinic release, Aug 97).
Over the past two decades, medical research has shown that non-smokers suffer many of the diseases of active smoking when they breathe secondhand smoke.
Secondhand smoke causes lung cancer and contributes to the development of heart disease. Never smoking women who live with a smoker have a 91% greater risk of heart disease. They also have twice the risk of dying from lung cancer.
Never-smoking spouses who are exposed to secondhand smoke have about 20% higher death rates for both lung cancer and heart disease.
Secondhand smoke increases heart rate and shortens time to exhaustion. Repeated exposure causes thickening of the walls of the carotid arteries (accelerates atherosclerosis) and damages the lining of these arteries.
When a pregnant woman is exposed to secondhand smoke, the nicotine she ingests is passed on to her unborn baby.
Women who smoke or are exposed to secondhand smoke during pregnancy:
have a higher rate of miscarriges and stillbirths
have an increased risk of low birthweight infants
have children born with decreased lung function
have children with greater risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)
Children exposed to secondhand smoke are more likely to experience increased frequency of:
asthma, colds, bronchitis, pneumonia, and other lung diseases
middle ear infections
sinus infections
caries in deciduous teeth
Ventilation systems and designated smoking sections do not protect patrons from ETS.
Current estimates of how smoking increases the risk of various diseases are dramatically underestimated because the ill effects of secondhand smoke inhalation are not taken into account.
http://www1.umn.edu/perio/tobacco/secondhandsmoke.html
That is not common sense. Common sense is that the non-smoker breathes diffused smoke in the casino or similar environments. The smoker smokes his 1 pack or 2 packs or 3 packs all day every day. At the casino, at home, in the car; everywhere. And he purposely draws the smoke directly into his lungs instead of just breathing. That, over years, is what causes the health problem.
Katweezel
Well-Known Member
Tax QUIT dollars at work...
Attachments
aslan
Well-Known Member
It is true that I do not get the full "benefit" of the smoker's smoke when it is second hand. I do, however, get a constant barrage of the lower level smoke in my breathing environment, so that every breath, not just those where one might inhale when smoking a cigarette, is a toxin filled breath that finds its way to my lungs through simple breathing, which I find "direct" enough. This, over the years, for those who frequent such places that are very smoky, is what causes the health problem. The fact that my clothes reek of smoke hours after leaving such an environment is evidence of just how toxic that environment is. The same smoke that permeates and sticks to my clothing has surely permeated and stuck to my lungs.
Sorry, your unfounded belief is wrong and not backed up by evidence. If you look at the whole body of evidence on shs, you will see that, in fact, somebody who indirectly also breathes in smoke diffused through the air also has a significant increased chance of smoking related illnesses.
The body of evidence is made up of studies conducted by people with an agenda, and I, therefore, do not accept their conclusions. That being said, I would like to see smoking banned in casinos because it is disgusting and it stinks. I just cannot buy the health issue for non-smokers as a reason.
Gamblor
Well-Known Member
Exactly as Shoofly says, wake up a bit. People with agendas. Do I get high when I walk into a place where people are smoking pot? Should we all be alarmed by second hand high-ness?
Next thing you'll tell me is the gov't should start taxing my gas and "carbon footprint" more due to global warming, and all the "body of evidence" that supports that. Or whatever fashionable cause that that comes and goes that contains a toxic mix of "science" and politics.
Zach Black
Active Member
Split 10's
I've split 10's before the index to get rid of a obnoixous smoker with clove cigarettes.
It worked, and I was able to get a good heads up hand which made it worth it.
The dealer suggested that I ask the PC for a non-smoking table after the smoker left as she said that was few sitiations splitting 10's make sense.
I've split 10's before the index to get rid of a obnoixous smoker with clove cigarettes.
It worked, and I was able to get a good heads up hand which made it worth it.
The dealer suggested that I ask the PC for a non-smoking table after the smoker left as she said that was few sitiations splitting 10's make sense.
Actually, many of these are independent double blind etc., well controlled studies.
On a side note, there have been many studies linking firefighters with an increased risk of all kinds of cancers and they even use protection against inhaling all the smoke. Are you gonna tell me those studies too are done by people with an agenda? There are casinos where you can see the fog from the smokers and you are gonna tell me that inhaling that air for hours on end is not harmful to at least cells lining your lungs? Apparently, you do know that smoke is a carcinogen and can cause cells to mutate which can lead to cancer. Now, inhaling that smoke indirectly is still inhaling the smoke, just not as much of it so it will cause those same cells to mutate. Now, of course, second hand smoke is less dangerous than first hand, but still dangerous nonetheless.
Another study has been done that shows that lung cancer rates, since 1968, in south central los angeles county, have been consistently high, of course controlling for other possible confounding variables. This is because of the well known smog in LA. Is this not the same mechanism as second hand smoke?
I saw an article that listed the 10 cities with the worst air and not coincidentally, they had among the highest rates of cancer, heart disease, birth defects.
Now, go ahead and check out the air quality of casinos. I suggest you do a little research on wizardofodds.com. He gives his own personally documented air quality readings for casinos in las vegas. Let me help you out here: http://wizardofodds.com/news/Casino-Air-Quality-Survey.html
Uh, yes I do get high when someone else is smoking weed right next to me. Its called hotboxing a car. And getting basically "high" off of cigarette smoke actually happens to me in a casino as I get dizzy and get headaches. I don't have any kind of respiratory condition.
I can't imagine going to a smoky casino day in day out playing blackjack because I've felt the effects of going once every two weeks and its not good, especially since I play tennis. These are short term adverse health effects and, thus, I can't imagine what this would do to my lungs long term.
The theory behind the overwhelming body of evidence makes perfect sense
On another side note, your gasoline will be taxed or the price just jacked waaay up or both in the future because our planet's oil will actually run out by, if I remember correctly, 2050, if no other major alternative energy source is becomes widespread.