Smoking

I was given the rundown on how risky anaesthetic was to smokers when I had to go day surgery. "Don't smoke for at least 3 days before the op!" I've been smoking around 40 years so I was a particularly high risk contender. I stopped smoking 10 hours before the op (to be honest, because I didn't much care about going quietly at that time. I wouldn't know a thing about it and it seemed a pretty fine option to me really.)

The last thing I remember was the gas guy explaining the procedure and telling him to get on with it and knock me out because I was bloody starving and perishing for a cigarette. Someone sniggered, then ...
The smoking made no difference whatever. I came out of it faster than they expected and had no ill effects from the anaesthetic at all. 3 hours after the op I hoed into a steak and veggies dinner. and a ciggie.

A long since next door neighbour used to batter on death's door every time she had to have anaesthetic and was always in ICU for two days to recover.
She never smoked at all. I think while probably true that it's a risk for some, it is a beat up that never mentions that non-smokers can be badly affected by anaesthetics too.
 

Alcohol is the most socially disruptive drug in common use and tobacco is the most injurious to health.
Both are legal and widely available everywhere but society would be better off without either.

Yeah, yeah, I know, something else would just fill the vacuum but the facts still stand.
We need to delay the age of uptake by children as much as we possibly can.
At least until brain development is complete.
 
Di, anecdotal evidence is not really evidence.
I've never smoked and I handle anaesthetics extremely well too.
I never fight them, I go to sleep peacefully and wake up without feeling unwell.

So?
So nothing.

It's the large studies that present the clearest picture.

But you know that, don't you?
 

Do you not think that perhaps alcohol may turn out to be as injurious to health in the long run to today's youngsters....due to binge drinking and it's consequences?

I write this with some timidity, hating to interrupt a private ding-dong.....a little!
 
But you know that, don't you?
Click to expand...

Yes ... but it's nitpicking about the use and spin of the results by manipulators that are my little fetish. You know that too.

Hey Viv, our ding-dongs aren't private, we're just jousting for the hell of it. If there's ever a real one we'll do it via PMs, and you'll never know, we're alike in that at least.


See?? Told yas alcohol would be the next crusade. They're talking about it already. Bwaahahahaha.
 
I had a grandfather who was a medical doctor - he drank like a fish and smoked like a freight train and lived to be 86 years old. Some people are as tough as jack rabbits, and if they can take it, more power to them. Others, including me, I doubt if my body could take it. Everyone needs to do their own DD on the subject and make their own choices. I don't care what others do - but I don't want to be picking up anyone's hospital tab so I think the taxing of it is fair.
 
Diwundrin said:
Yes ... but it's nitpicking about the use and spin of the results by manipulators that are my little fetish. You know that too.

Hey Viv, our ding-dongs aren't private, we're just jousting for the hell of it. If there's ever a real one we'll do it via PMs, and you'll never know, we're alike in that at least.


See?? Told yas alcohol would be the next crusade. They're talking about it already. Bwaahahahaha.
Click to expand...
We argue all the time Vivjen. Feel free to wade in without fear or favour any time you like.

Di, alcohol isn't a new crusade. My chemistry book at school had warnings something like this:
"The effects of drinking methyl alcohol (wood alcohol) are blindness, insanity and death.
The effects of drinking ethyl alcohol are similar."

​
[Actually, someone ought to warn the kids of today about wood alcohol (CH3OH) and at the same time mention the down side consuming of its cousin, CH3CHOH]​

In those days the pubs closed at 6.00pm and the legal drinking age was 21.


So, crusaders versus vested interests with truckloads of money to lobby politicians?
Which side would you back with real money ?
 
Oh I'll bet on booze being around in some form while the planet turns.

It's just that there's so many professional campaign pushers out there they have to find a crusading cause to employ them. There are a few being cut adrift from the climate con campaign and the smoking thing seems to have been done to death so they have to find something new to write new phrases for and get research funding from. They also have to keep getting their nodding and tut tutting heads seen on TV to keep their status as 'experts'. They don't need to win, they get paid to try.

Politicians have more at stake, it'll be interesting to see who throws a leg over which saddle to ride out for that stoush.

So far the Left is tutting loudest but that stance could pose a few problems. For one thing they were in charge (NSW) when the youth binge-drinking fad started heading Hellwards and for a decade they did buggar all to stop it. Now '5 minutes' after they were turfed out they demand that the Right get off their bums and fix it overnight. See the hypocrasy there?

Another problem for the Left is that their voting demographic are mainly younger than the Right's. It's the bogans who indulge in these drunken stoushes who are their voting base. So who ya gonna call?

It may not have been a huge number but from hearsay, mainly on talkback shows, I'd say that many smokers turned against Labor( Federal) over the constant hammering of their Nanny politicians. Most smokers are an older demographic and more prone to switch sides easier to suit their changing circumstances. But many who phoned were old Labor voters who had simply had enough of being trashed by the Party they'd supported all their lives. A lot must have switched for a lot of reasons to have figured in such a landslide ousting. All these little Nanny niggles add up. For every minority they pander to, there's another that they've ticked off big time.

The Right have their own image problems to consider. They can't be seen to be doing nothing but if they raise the drinking age*, the civil libertarians will cry foul. If they restrict drinking hours, they'll put the more mature club scene denizens offside. These are the ones more likely to be their own voters, not to mention the donations they'll lose from the liquor industry.

Should be some entertainment in watching them dancing around this one.

Coincidentally just heard O'Barrel is to announced a 'severe crackdown' on it. Can't wait to hear how that's worded.

*Heard something interesting about that drinking age being dropped to 18. I'd forgotten, but it was brought in when 'Nam conscripts were deemed old enough to be sent out to die but not old enough to have a beer with their mates if they made it home.
The Leftist libertarians who are crusading for something to be done about it now, are the ones who crusaded to have it dropped to 18 all those years ago.

These 'rights' things are slippery critters which do tend to bite us on the arse aren't they?
It's just that most people don't remember the whole story, and that's exactly what they're counting on.
 
They'll take my cigarettes when they pry them from my cold, dead fingers.

... wait ... that doesn't sound quite right ... how come it works so well for the gun lobby? :confused:
 
Old thread but I`m new :) Quit smoking on Nov. 17th,1988. Had smoke for 20 years and smoked (yikes) 5 packs a day. Tareyton 100s to boot-well, until the last year, then I had switched to Barclay`s,not 100s. Of course,that was when I started the extra pack-had "only" been 4 a day up til then. Then one morning,I saw Yul Brynner being interviewed on TV. He knew he was dying of cancer at that point. She asked him "If you could change one thing about your life,what would it be?" He answered "The cigarettes." It just hit me so hard that I put out the cig I was smoking and never smoked another. Two days later dh quit as well so we are 25+ years smoke free now.
 
Good for you and hubby Mrs. R. With the heavy habit you had, it's so amazing you were able to quit so cold turkey. I'll bet you felt not only felt much better, but really enjoyed the financial windfall of not having to burn up so much money on cigs.

Never smoked, but I have a lot of respect for the will power it takes. My hubby quit 10 years ago and I was thrilled. I got so tired of sitting in restaurants by myself finishing dinner because he had to immediately go outside and smoke when he finished eating...I spent a lot of time by myself while he was outside smoking.
 
Oh wow Phil-that made me cry. When I think back on it,I always think I was watching him "live" but he had already been dead for 3 years in 1988. I`m thinking that they were probably showing an old interview with him that day because it was also the "Great American Smokeout" day that day-which had absolutely nothing to do with why I quit....it was totally about what Brynner said...
 
OH SH*T !!! Wish I'd been told about it's affect on those hallowed 'T' levels. aaaagh!. That might account for why I'm female do ya think?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top