US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

[Nobody]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

... Another issue comes dow to employees, and a "safe work environment."

Another issue comes in adding a requirement for people to be smokers before they are hired, or the legal headache of illegally asking people to sign away rights that they can't really sign away and have them be very strong as a defense in court when the employee sues over getting lung cancer.

If a company switched to a Smoker's Club, could they legally fire people because they were not smokers? -- "Injure yourself or we will fire you."...

I believe that in order to show harm, you have to show causation. I have not yet heard a strong medical argument that 'second-hand smoke' causes anything other than airway irritation.

People who refuse to work in a smoking environment in an 'at-will' State have just voluntarily quit. People who agree to work in a smoking environment accept 'second-hand smoke' as a possible hazard of their employment.

I believe people have the right to do just about anything they can consensually arrange, provided they inform others who may be present in advance. In this fashion, they consider the will of the others and enable them to consent or exclude themselves. I think this applies in all aspects of a creature's life, professional and private.

[TheCotMan]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

I believe that in order to show harm, you have to show causation. I have not yet heard a strong medical argument that 'second-hand smoke' causes anything other than airway irritation.

url1:

Young children exposed to passive, or second-hand, smoke have a higher risk of ear infections, asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia than children of non-smokers. In the United States, surveys show that almost 40 percent of children under five live with a smoker. Yet there have been few studies of ways to protect children from the harmful effects of tobacco smoke, Emmons remarks.

Of course correlation is not causation, just strong association. (Not being sarcastic)

url2

Anderson: According to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, secondhand smoke is responsible for at least 3,000 lung cancer deaths and more then 35,000 cardiovascular deaths each year.

A claim of a claim, but the CDC could be mis quoted, or also be using correlation. (Not being sarcastic)

Researchers at the University of Minnesota followed non-smoking women who visited casinos, where they were exposed to second hand smoke for a period of four hours. When we compared levels of a tobacco-specific carcinogen called NNK from before and after the visit, we found these women had elevated levels of this chemical, which could only come from tobacco smoke. We’d expect that restaurant and bar employees working longer shifts would test positive for even higher levels of this cancer-causing chemical.

Just because a higher level of carcinogens are found with with people around 2nd hand smoke is higher than when they are not, does not mean they will get cancer. Afterall, we are exposed to radiation everyday, and not everyone gets cancer from it... (Not being sarcastic)

url3:
There isn't really a conspiracy, businesses are just trying to ensure their profits. (Not being sarcastic)

url4

STUDY FINDS THAT COMBINED EXPOSURE TO SECOND-HAND SMOKE AND URBAN AIR POLLUTANTS DURING PREGNANCY ADVERSELY AFFECTS BIRTH OUTCOMES

(Their capitalization, not mine. Sorry.)
Perhaps the 2nd hand smoke was not the cause. Maybe it was just the other air pollution? (This is said with sarcasm.)

url5

These results indicate that chronic exposure to second-hand smoke in children significantly increased their risk of developing lung cancer as an adult. Individuals whose parents smoked may wish to speak with their risks and possible screening for lung cancer with their physician.

What would you consider evidence of causation? Second, is it possible to provide such evidence with the laws that exist on human experimentation?

People who refuse to work in a smoking environment in an 'at-will' State have just voluntarily quit. People who agree to work in a smoking environment accept 'second-hand smoke' as a possible hazard of their employment.

This is probably the same defense use by coal mining operations with respect to "black lung disease."
"If you want to work for us, accept the risk."
However, today's workers are given better protection than the coal miners from just 60 years ago. I Sense that if this was a justifiable defense, Coal Miners would not receive the added protection provided byt their employers.

I believe people have the right to do just about anything they can consensually arrange, provided they inform others who may be present in advance. In this fashion, they consider the will of the others and enable them to consent or exclude themselves. I think this applies in all aspects of a creature's life, professional and private.

Indentured servitued has a history throughout the world, and in some cultures, unpaid debts could lead to contractual slavery until debts were paid. With these considered, it is possible for both slavery and indentured servitude to be consentualy agreed as possible outcomes in contracts between two people.

From your view, are there any limits to what two people can do with each other if they both consent in a contract?

Are there any age requirements, in your view, for age of consent?

Next, if you do have limits to what agreements between consenting people are possible, why do you set those limits?

[Chris]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

Why is it that all you assholes think the government is lying to you about everything EXCEPT second hand smoke?

[converge]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

I saw a smoker the other day.. and like.. my eyes started bleeding.. and teehee.. I think we should ban smokers altogether because they're evil.

I mean, c'mon.. haven't you seen the commercial with the black charred, tar-filled pregnant 9 year old that fell off a cliff and into a pile of Rod Stewart because someone was smoking in a restaurant somewhere in the world the day before?

I mean.. c'mon.

[TheCotMan]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

Why is it that all you assholes think the government is lying to you about everything EXCEPT second hand smoke?

Maybe you are upset because you have to pay for your smoke, while any freeloading hippie bums around you get it for free. (?)

Maybe smokers should charge people for the expensive 2nd hand smoke being breathed by everyone else. (?)

When (if ever) do you think Casinos in Las Vegas will legally be required to not allow smoking?

[Chris]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

Maybe you are upset because you have to pay for your smoke, while any freeloading hippie bums around you get it for free. (?)

Maybe smokers should charge people for the expensive 2nd hand smoke being breathed by everyone else. (?)

When (if ever) do you think Casinos in Las Vegas will legally be required to not allow smoking?

My guess is that smoking at the gaming tables will be pretty much prohibited within 5 years.

[astcell]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

My guess is that smoking at the gaming tables will be pretty much prohibited within 5 years.

And what about other vices that can affect the family unit, like drinking and gambling?

[alklloyd]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

My guess is that smoking at the gaming tables will be pretty much prohibited within 5 years.

Vegas? VEGAS? You reminded me of Escape from LA: "The United States is a non-smoking country".
American Spirit, my ass.

Al

[alklloyd]

Re: US Marriott hotel chain bans smoking

And what about other vices that can affect the family unit, like drinking and gambling?

I have a feeling those will probably continue....without whining commentary.

Al