What Annoys You More


#122

Yep.
His offspring now owe 530k


#123

If you can show some data that said him smoking contributed to his prolonged life, it should be considered.

Best of luck there.


#124

lolno, we should get an extra $530k.


#125

Some may have figured they quit long enough ago that they can classify themselves as a non-smoker. That’s probably the most common, non-contextual, reason for it.


#126

Mr grandfather went to 93. Also a pack a day guy since he was 15.

He did give it up when he was about 80, but then took it back up again when he was about 90. I remember having a crack at him about it and he said “I’m 90, what’s it going to do, kill me?”


#127

They don’t all come through emergency. The most expensive patients in a hospital are patients with head and neck surgery, they come through the “elective” route. In 2 years of working in the area I’ve had 1 patient who wasn’t a smoker.

Also a lot of my vascular patients don’t come through emergency and a lot of their problems are smoking related too

Not that you care, you just like to be perverse.


#128

At least 87.7% of ex-smokers will die earlier than non-smokers due to being smokers once. Unless the non-smokers were actually at least partially passive-smokers. Statistics for ex-passive smokers get a little more complicated.


#129

My aunts would panic at my grandfather wanting a second beer when he was 90.
They would get a sanitised version of, ‘ffs, Auntie Mary…’

Anyway, if you elected me king of smoking ten years ago, when I asked you to, there’d be no tobacco smoking in this country at all now.


#130

No, it goes into reverse once you pass the allocated span.


#131

Very reasonable point.
Two counterpoints.

  1. I was asked what I saw, and am pretty obviously not in a position to say what I…don’t see?
  2. This discussion, and all my responses to it, come from the idea that smokers shouldn’t get healthcare. I don’t think it’s quite fair that you should call my reaction to that, ‘perverse.’

#132

You’re argument started that way, but has evolved beyond that.

(I do agree that everyone should get healthcare regardless of the care)


#133

Merely extensions.
Arguments tend to get silly when brought beyond a certain point, particularly when based on a ridiculous premise.


#134

I liked the bit where a fire started by dropping the thing smouldering in your mouth had nothing to do with that initial smouldering thing.

Because as a non smoker I almost always have things smouldering in my mouth.


#135

Yes, you mentioned that.
And non-drinkers don’t hurt their back carrying slabs.


#136

this is going to be one of those threads


#137

Let’s cut it short then.
Who here thinks smokers should not get health care?


#138

Yep. Before I drank i’d never ever seen a box before, much less picked one up.

Whereas as a non smoker, I often light an object a litle bit on fire and put it into an orifice in my body.


#139

And presumably as a non-smoker you’ve never used fire.


#140

As far as I can see it was literally only
1 person.

Most of us don’t want you to die choking on your own sputum.


#141

Right.
I’m arguing against that one person. Who hasn’t replied since.
W.T.F. are the rest of you doing?