Geek Boy

With this research any parent who smokes in front of the kids should be locked up.

Can you afford to risk it?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4214369.stm

gb

Reffro

The BBC has been very selective in writing that report. The 'three times more likely' tag can only be attributed to a small proportion of the the group, not to the whole group, which has been missed out in that report. Plus a total of 117 cancers, out of a group comprising 123,000 people, is a whole 0.09% of the group. A higher percentage of people will get cancer than that in the general population, let alone those who had inhaled secondary smoke as a child.

Scare mongering reporting.

I do smoke, but then I don't have children, and its only sensible that you don't smoke around children. As for your view about locking up people, well if I don't have anything nice to say, I had better stop here.

Geek Boy

I don't think any so called loving parent can afford to take the risk though.....

If there was a chance I could harm my child doing anything, I just wouldnt do it!

gb

Jerome

The most harmful thing about smoking around children, is the increased risk that they themselves will become smokers.

PG

Smokers cant see past the end of their next ***........They will deny all the facts and carry on harming themselves and others around them.

Reffro

True, but then I'm not in that position myself right now.

apples24

iTrader: (1)

i am a smoker i also smoke cannibis


from the minute my wife fell pregnant 3 yrs ago i stopped smoking in the house

we fully stripped and repainted everything


I think anyone who smokes in the house with kids are very selfish and obv dont care for the health of there young ones

fair enough smoke and enjoy as i do but for gods sake dont inflict it on the children, i wont even smoke in the car if they are present

Vegescoob

No.

OllyK

And anti-smokers don't twist things to suit their argument either?

I do love these "3 times more likey of developing X" stories regarding health, whether that be smoking, eating fatty foods, drinking etc. They don't tell you what the risk of not doing something is. If the risk is 0, then 3 times 0 is still 0.

I'd also like to see what controls they have taken to ensure that those showing an increased chance of X got that increased chance from the factors the researchers "think" they got them from and not from a completely different source, such as genetic pre-disposition.

Also remember car polution is "a major factor" in causing asthma in kids, which is a killer, so all car drivers should be shot for putting "our" kids at risk.