• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Pregnant Smokers

There is no solid information pertaining to low levels of smoking and pregnancy. What you need to do is mind your own business, and forget about trying to legislate and control another person's life.

The rude person there is you, not her. She can buy however many cigarettes she wants, I would hope she isn't chain-smoking and has cut down, but it is none of your business either way.
 
There is no solid information pertaining to low levels of smoking and pregnancy. What you need to do is mind your own business, and forget about trying to legislate and control another person's life.

The rude person there is you, not her. She can buy however many cigarettes she wants, I would hope she isn't chain-smoking and has cut down, but it is none of your business either way.

Smoker, eh?
 
A believer in liberty and freedom. As well as someone who tends to look at things underlying studies and "news articles" purported as science rather than just gobbling up everything someone spits out.

There are studies that show the sun to be more harmful to babies than cigarettes through prolonged uv exposure, as well as tanning dangers. Studies that show you should never have carpet in a Baby's room. Studies that show you should not have raw juices, that you shouldn't eat any meat under well-done..there are thousands everywhere.

I have spoken at length about these studies in other threads, and the funny things people don't pay attention to. (Like that for infant deaths if the mother smoked virtually 100% were arbitrarily attributed to smoking completely in the Surgeon General's report, oddly enough she is on a board of a pharmaceutical company that makes Billions from smoking cessation products).

Harm and everything else aside. It isn't your business. Go remove the planks from your own eye and stop being so judgemental and critical of everyone else. I promise you there are plenty of things all of you do that are "unhealthy" to your kids or yourself according to one or another's standards. Manage your own life.
 
Yes... and how common are severe instance?

Not very.

On a scale of bad behaviors that are potentially harmful to a developing fetus -smoking is certainly bad, but it falls on the list below any number of other common poor behaviors.

I'm not going to quote myself. You know, the part about every day. I know that you really like to argue a lot-on just about everything. I'm not going there with you.
 
A believer in liberty and freedom. As well as someone who tends to look at things underlying studies and "news articles" purported as science rather than just gobbling up everything someone spits out.

There are studies that show the sun to be more harmful to babies than cigarettes through prolonged uv exposure, as well as tanning dangers. Studies that show you should never have carpet in a Baby's room. Studies that show you should not have raw juices, that you shouldn't eat any meat under well-done..there are thousands everywhere.

I have spoken at length about these studies in other threads, and the funny things people don't pay attention to. (Like that for infant deaths if the mother smoked virtually 100% were arbitrarily attributed to smoking completely in the Surgeon General's report, oddly enough he is on a board of a pharmaceutical company that makes Billions from smoking cessation products).

Harm and everything else aside. It isn't your business. Go remove the planks from your own eye and stop being so judgemental and critical of everyone else. I promise you there are plenty of things all of you do that are "unhealthy" to your kids or yourself according to one or another's standards. Manage your own life.

If we discussed a pregnant drug addict. Would that be private as well?
 
Whereas in decades past there seemed to be no harmful effects to the child from mom smoking while pregnant, they are now able to firmly attribute several psychological and physical problems to it.

My son's mom, in her infinite wisdom and maternal instinct, smoked about a pack and a half a day full-term while he was in the womb.

My son has been diagnosed with Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD). I'm not usually a big believer in psycho-babble and their alphabet soup, but my son displays every symptom, full-strength.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

Yeah, raising a kid isn't hard enough, let's give him a disorder that makes him compulsively hate authority and defy everyone around him.

Thanks mom! You're the best.
 
As does every God Fearing....er wait, there might not be a god...'Merican. With rights, liberty, and freedom comes responsibility. We want the first part, but have been very poor about dealing with consequences. Besides, is there any real necessity to smoke?

Smoke if ya want, but PAY for your healthcare. :ninja:

I do pay for my healthcare. I think everyone should, and who are you to tell me the health consequences (which you can't even invariably prove completely), are of more detriment than the benefit I gain from it. Bunch of people demonizing smoking. Go take care of your own problems.

I hold to Mark Twain's opinion

"I don't want any of your statistics; I took your whole batch and lit my pipe with it.

I hate your kind of people. You are always ciphering out how much a man's health is injured, and how much his intellect is impaired, and how many pitiful dollars and cents he wastes in the course of ninety-two years' indulgence in the fatal practice of smoking; and in the equally fatal practice of drinking coffee; and in playing billiards occasionally; and in taking a glass of wine at dinner, etc. etc. And you are always figuring out how many women have been burned to death because of the dangerous fashion of wearing expansive hoops, etc. etc. You never see more than one side of the question.

You are blind to the fact that most old men in America smoke and drink coffee, although, according to your theory, they ought to have died young; and that hearty old Englishmen drink wine and survive it, and portly old Dutchmen both drink and smoke freely, and yet grow older and fatter all the time. And you never try to find out how much solid comfort, relaxation, and enjoyment a man derives from smoking in the course of a lifetime (which is worth ten times the money he would save by letting it alone), nor the appalling aggregate of happiness lost in a lifetime by your kind of people from not smoking. Of course you can save money by denying yourself all those little vicious enjoyments for fifty years; but then what can you do with it? What use can you put it to? Money can't save your infinitesimal soul. All the use that money can be put to is to purchase comfort and enjoyment in this life; therefore, as you are an enemy to comfort and enjoyment where is the use of accumulating cash?

It won't do for you to say that you can use it to better purpose in furnishing a good table, and in charities, and in supporting tract societies, because you know yourself that you people who have no petty vices are never known to give away a cent, and that you stint yourselves so in the matter of food that you are always feeble and hungry. And you never dare to laugh in the daytime for fear some poor wretch, seeing you in a good humor, will try to borrow a dollar of you; and in church you are always down on your knees, with your ears buried in the cushion, when the contribution-box comes around; and you never give the revenue officers a full statement of your income.

Now you know all these things yourself, don't you? Very well, then, what is the use of your stringing out your miserable lives to a lean and withered old age? What is the use of your saving money that is so utterly worthless to you? In a word, why don't you go off somewhere and die, and not be always trying to seduce people into becoming as ornery and unlovable as you are yourselves, by your villainous "moral statistics"?

Now, I don't approve of dissipation, and I don't indulge in it either; but I haven't a particle of confidence in a man who has no redeeming petty vices. And so I don't want to hear from you any more. I think you are the very same man who read me a long lecture last week about the degrading vice of smoking cigars, and then came back, in my absence, with your reprehensible fire-proof gloves on, and carried off my beautiful parlor stove. "

As for people making strawmen arguments and non-sequiturs, uh..well if they were doing this you would care. Stop it, learn logic.

If a pregnant woman was stabbing herself in the belly with a sword, yes that is tragic. No it is not the same as smoking, no matter how much you want to convince yourself that it is. The difference between now and a while back, we keep the idiots alive and absolve them of their consequences.
 
Awesome. Unfortunately, I have a hospital that's about 40-50% full of people on the taxpayer's dime.

Well that's a completely different issue. Not to mention you would never be able to accurately track that down to smoking or a host of other problems.

Are you trying to link the two, that smoking is some huge expense to tax-payers? Do you have any data whatsoever, or is this just your bias and smoker-hate coming out any way it can?

Do you have control subjects who are on taxpayer money only whom have only smoked and not done other harmful health things throughout their lives?

So, should we legislate against cheeseburgers? Since obesity causes more health problems?

Maybe then instead we should concentrate on not entitling all these people, but don't sit here and self-righteously link it all to smoking.
 
It is??? You sure about that? You need to get to know more healthcare workers and/or social workers.

As for the cheeseburger argument, it's a nice diversion tactic, but further proof that we don't need smoking given the poor health we're already in. We all need to eat, right. Do we need to smoke?

There are 500 things, it isn't a diversionary tactic. We may all need to eat, but we don't need to eat cheeseburgers, or things with above a certain percentage fat content. I can tell that you are one of those anti-smoking shills however. It's not your business and it isn't linked.

You want to post data fine. Go ahead, you want to just spout stuff out and say this is the way it is that may work for people not taught critical thinking, but not for me. You want to discuss the Surgeon General's report, or another meta-analysis, or something on SHS or something else, fine bring it up.

Your saying 40-60 percent is first of all (for all I know a made-up number), secondly has no bearing on smoking whatsoever, please provide a definitive link since I need "to know more healthcare workers and social workers (I worked at a DME for 4 years, I know quite a few thank you, some are shills who repeat whatever the media says, some critically think over the data presented). Please show me your control groups with the populations you cite. You can't. You don't have it. Stop spouting out stuff designed to hit emotions and stick to the facts.

As I said above, Mark Twain sums up my thoughts nicely.

Just another crusader, filled with hate, demonizing what they don't like.

I am mostly a thoughtful smoker, walking away from people to smoke, going further than neccessary, just because I know a lot of people make a big deal out of it. It's people like you that make me want to walk in the middle of crowds and blow it in their faces.
 
You're more than welcome to not support your points with actual statistics.

Just for a note - the plural of anecdote is not evidence.

Funny. I didn't use either word. You are simply proving one of my points.

I don't care enough about arguing with you to dig up stats about this subject. I don't need to.

I'll now leave this thread alone so that you can practice the argumentative self indulgence that you seem so fond of.
 
You want to post data fine. Go ahead, you want to just spout stuff out and say this is the way it is that may work for people not taught critical thinking, but not for me.

You can tell me everything you know and this is teh interw3b, but I've got 10 years of experience and the degree. People can post studies, it's folks like me who treat the people in those studies. Aight? So, what do I know about smokers?? You in your experiences trumps 10 years of experience and a degree, eh?
 
Funny. I didn't use either word. You are simply proving one of my points.

Yes, your point seems to be that there are dangers to the fetus from smoking - while ignoring relative likelihoods of harm.

I don't care enough about arguing with you to dig up stats about this subject. I don't need to.

"Yeah, I know I can't support my point... but it's just because you aren't worth it - not because I can't"


I'll now leave this thread alone so that you can practice the argumentative self indulgence that you seem so fond of.

Yes, I'm fond of debate based on data as opposed to spouting unsupported assertions.
 

Latest posts