Hot

Hot today, and I ended up comatose in the evening.

Earlier I’d gone to a couple of pubs, for a cool drink, and to interview a few smokers. I found the cool drinks, but I found no smokers at all. I suppose that if 80% of people don’t smoke, that means that 80% of the time I’m not going to find any smokers.

But if it’s slow going, it’s a fairly clear picture that’s emerging from the responses to the questionnaire. Some people are reporting no adverse effects from the smoking ban. Most are reporting some adverse effects. A few are reporting severe adverse effects. And nobody is reporting clear benefits. And the questionnaire does allow them to report benefits.

I’ve yet to encounter anyone who’s said that life has got better since the smoking ban, and they’ve been out more, and met more people. The responses I’m getting range from indifferent to strongly negative. “It’s a joke,” one wrote.

I can understand the people who report heavy impacts. After all, I’m one of them. I can also understand the people who report minor impacts. After all, if people were well embedded in a matrix of friends and family, they were probably fairly bomb-proof.

The people I don’t understand are the ones who report zero impact.

Like the tall guy who came out from the pub a day or two back, and lit up outside the front door, which was where I approached him. He agreed to do the questionnaire, and proceeded to fill it in rapidly, hitting all the zero impact options, and strongly approving of hospital smoking bans, before handing it back wordlessly. And then he stubbed out his cigarette and returned to rejoin his companions inside. About 20 minutes later he emerged and climbed into his car, lighting a new cigarette as he did so. He looked to me like he was a veritable chain-smoker. So why was he reporting zero impact?

I suspect that some of these people are just refusing to admit that smoking bans have any adverse effects on them at all. They’re just not going to let it get to them. For such people, I’ve thought that there should perhaps have been an additional question: “Is there ANYTHING that could happen that would cause you outrage?” And maybe they’d still say No.

There are other explanations. Such people might be trying to stop smoking, and feel ashamed of smoking, and so approve of smoking bans. One of the other Zero Impact respondents wrote that he approved of the ban because maybe it would stop young people starting smoking. And another Zero Impact respondent said – but didn’t write – that one the benefits of the ban was that he smoked less. Such people clearly had a negative view of smoking.

However I’ve yet to encounter an antismoker. Or at least not an outspoken one. Which doesn’t surprise me. They only seem to exist online.

Tomorrow I’ll probably go out again. And there’s an 80% likelihood that I won’t find any smokers then either.

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

58 Responses to Hot

  1. Actually Frank, if it was a truly miserable day out in terms of heat then I wouldn’t expect that you’d see a lot of smokers. Why would they leave a nice air-conditioned house to go sit outside in the heat every time they felt like having a smoke while sipping their beer?

    – MJM

    • reinholdfrombavaria says:

      Yes, and most smokers know that sitting outside in the heat sipping your beer makes you end up comatose in the evening.
      ;-)

    • Frank Davis says:

      Most people in Britain have yet to discover air-conditioning. But since there are probably only about 3 days a year when it would be handy, it’s not worth it. The USA seems to be an all round hotter country that Britain. In California pretty much every day is sunny, and even New York seems to get pretty hot at times (and also very cold). But Britain is usually somewhere in the middle. It seldom gets very, very hot, and it seldom gets very, very cold.

      I occasionally wonder if climate defines national temperament. Us Brits (and Dutch and Germans) are a pretty stolid bunch: we know how to endure lots of rain. Scandinavians are gloomy people, as befits a land where the sun hardly ever shines. Head south into France and you find a bit more joie de vivre. And even more in Spain and Italy. And in Russia, the long, dark, cold winters encourage deep introspection, and make people write books with names like War and Peace.

      But in America, everything’s far more volatile. The extremes are greater. There are things like hurricanes and tornadoes. And maybe the American character reflects this. Unless they live in states where the weather is much like Britain’s, in which case you find stolid people. Or much like Scandinavia, in which case you find gloomy people. Or much like Spain, in which case you find fun, party people.

      Or maybe it’s that when Europeans came to America, they picked places to live that were most like their native countries. The English and Dutch and Germans tended towards the northern states, and the French towards the central states, and the Spanish to the southern states. Those were the ones that were most like home. Something like that, anyway.

      If so, air conditioning may well destroy local culture, by making everything the same everywhere, all the time.

      • smokervoter says:

        I see eye to eye with you on this completely.

        I’ve lived in warm sunny southern Cal and cold rainy northern Cal and I know for a fact that southern Californians are much more easy-going, friendly and fun-loving. The women down south are lustier and favor dresses and makeup. Bay Area women wear trousers and flannel-shirts, no makeup and are generally more interested in the other females at the bar than me.

        It was 32.22C here today. It was 22.2C in San Francisco today. I was happy all day long. They were grouchy all day long. Case closed.

        • highstump says:

          In my little chunk of Oregon (Willamette Valley), I’m in between the Cascade and Coast ranges. The majority of years we have two seasons; winter and August. I look outside and its raining so better wear a hat today. If its raining sideways, that makes it hat and coat weather. If the sun is out then to hell with it, I’m calling in sick today!

      • Marie says:

        We get pretty much the same number of hours of daylight in north Norway as you do in the UK, we just get them squashed into a shorter period of the year. So whatever it is that makes some Norwegians gloomy, boring and ill mannered it isn’t lack of sunlight.

        • Frank Davis says:

          That still makes for a kind of extreme environment: long hot summers and long cold winters. It’s not volatile. It’s inexorable, unstoppable. And this might encourage a kind of fatalism, and the gloomy sense that everything is fore-ordained, pre-destined.

  2. Woodsy42 says:

    “I suppose that if 80% of people don’t smoke, that means that 80% of the time I’m not going to find any smokers.”
    Um no it doesn’t, unless the pubs you visit only have one other customer. It means that (on average) four out of five customers don’t smoke, and one does.

  3. Frank Davis says:

    Um no it doesn’t, unless the pubs you visit only have one other customer.

    And in the afternoons, that’s mostly pretty much how it is. Quite often there are none at all.

    There’s a local pub with a garden I go to quite often. Last year in summer there’d be a few people out there most days. This year, quite often it’s completely empty.

  4. mummybest says:

    The smokers that are still going to pubs and ‘nipping’ outside for a smoke are so embarrassed that they are actually doing this that they are saying that there has been no adverse impact on their lives. It’s all about saving face. Of course they are hating standing outside venues, but have to say that they are not bothered, or they would be made to look even stupider than they are for actually doing it.
    ALL the smokers that I know have been seriously affected negatively by the ban. These people will not be outside pubs to take the survey as they do not hardly ever go to pubs etc. any more.

    • Tom says:

      That might be very much the case, that to get a full range of respondees, one would have to get the ones not going out at all anymore and who would only feel comfortable answering the survey truthfully and honestly, if inside the anononymity and seclusion of their own homes, where they smoke w/o having to deal with the denormalization of the bans.

      It was a while back, probably 2007 to 2008 time frame, I attempted on my own, single-handedly, to go around SF with little slips of paper, printed out with some anti-smoking ban websites, which back then was mainly Forces, F2C just starting up and trying to spur interest among smokers, including down below UCSF in the commercial district there.

      What I got was a lot of yawns, mostly, but also some unexpected results, such as giggling non-stop as if the whole idea of it was hilarious, feigning interest then ripping the thing up and throwing it in the trash the minute I began to walk away and being severely yelled at with fists raised (I think because they thought I was promoting anti-“smoking”, not anti-“smoking ban”, in the one instance that occurred and suprised me).

      Interestingly, some of the places I canvassed are now totally outdoor smoking banned, just as I was trying to warn – and I do feel bad that I wasn’t able to elicit a better response rate back then, while there was still more time to do something at least to prevent the outdoor bans, which were just coming in.

      So it may be, although trying to do grass-roots on-foot and in-person is, I think, very important, it is reaching at this point a decimated and broken-apart bunch of people, since much of the original social and identification cohesiveness that existed prior to the bans, has been broken apart – which I also contend that in addition to other freedoms lost, freedom of assembly was also lost and a big point for them introducing the bans.

      The survey may need a two-pronged approach, some in-person to reach anyone not aware via the internet, but also on-line solicitation too, which reaches in to where people are more comfortable talking about it. It’s such a taboo subject, after bans get going and especially once they reach the point of outdoors and nearly everywhere, it’s something many are not going to want to even utter the words, out loud, in public.

      It’s akin to back when the world was normal and right-side up, then it might have been taboo to speak openly in public and said anything using words regarding sexual taboos or taboo “dirty words”. It’s like that, in public, only with anything to do with tobacco or smoking that’s been manufactured into “too taboo” to even freely talk about.

      But anyhow, “could be” and “just sayin'”.

      Might be easier too, in going door to door or pub to pub, going in pairs, since that way if someone explodes into a rage, at least someone else is there to back you up. There are some crazy MoFo’s out there who are at the drop of a pin just waiting for an excuse to bash “a smoker”. I’ve seen it. It exists.

      • reinholdfrombavaria says:

        with fists raised (I think because they thought I was promoting anti-”smoking”, not anti-”smoking ban”

        Yes, that’s a phenomenon I experienced several times, too, and just recently I heard from another one who experienced it as well.

      • Frank Davis says:

        There are some crazy MoFo’s out there who are at the drop of a pin just waiting for an excuse to bash “a smoker”

        Not round here. 99.99% of Brits would never dream of doing that (and I’m including the people who I’d class as antismoking). They’re all far too civilised.

        I really think you have to go SF for something like that.

  5. Smoky says:

    “About 20 minutes later he emerged and climbed into his car, lighting a new cigarette as he did so.”

    Shit Frank, maybe it will come home to him when they ban him from smoking IN HIS OWN FUCKING CAR!

  6. harleyrider1978 says:

    Romney: ‘Looking Forward to the Bust of Winston Churchill Being in the Oval Office Again’
    At an event in London, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said, “I’m looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again.”

    Mitt Romney at London fundraiser: “I’m looking forward to the bust of Winston Churchill being in the Oval Office again.” #watersedge?

    — Kasie Hunt (@kasie) July 26, 2012

    President Obama famously sent Churchill’s bust back to Britain soon after coming into office. As the Telegraph reported then:

    A bust of the former prime minister once voted the greatest Briton in history, which was loaned to George W Bush from the Government’s art collection after the September 11 attacks, has now been formally handed back.

    The bronze by Sir Jacob Epstein, worth hundreds of thousands of pounds if it were ever sold on the open market, enjoyed pride of place in the Oval Office during President Bush’s tenure.

    But when British officials offered to let Mr Obama to hang onto the bust for a further four years, the White House said: “Thanks, but no thanks.”

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-looking-forward-bust-winston-churchill-being-oval-office-again_649021.html

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Camerons been real buddy butt buddy with Owebummer the last couple of days!

      One nazi to another ehh!

  7. smokervoter says:

    Calling the inimitable Rose.

    The anti-smoking zealot Mr. Birke just chickened-out of his scheduled telephone interview appearance on the wildly popular John and Ken Show radio in Los Angeles.

    Neither of these two guys smoke but they simply detest anti-smokers and all busybodies and control-freak regulators in general. Their strong No on 29 stand no doubt kept Los Angeles county from going Yes, which could have been disastrous to us, given its huge population.

    Mr. Birke was about to get a major league public rectum reaming. I popped a cold beer and machine-rolled myself up a couple of extra cigarettes and kicked back in anticipation. Alas, he no-showed.

    While they were setting up the guest with some small talk about public attitudes towards smokers they mentioned a poll that said that only 25% of LA people approve of apartment bans on smoking, which surprised me.

    I’ve been pretty hard on the freeway-choked place lately on here, perhaps I should lay off old L.A.

    • Rose says:

      How very disappointing, I wonder why.

      Family Evicted After Father Hoses Neighbors Over Smoking

      “WOODLAND HILLS (CBS) — A court ruled this week that a Woodland Hills man was a nuisance when he sprayed water at sunbathing smokers two years ago at an apartment complex pool.

      John Birke and his wife, Caryl, have lived at Oakwood Apartments for nearly 15 years. They have an 11-year-old daughter, Melinda, who suffers from asthma.

      John claims he sprayed the smokers with water because their secondhand smoke was irritating his daughter’s condition.

      “I went and got a water spray bottle and came back to make a point and stood behind them and started spraying water in the area. And I said, ‘if that’s the way you enjoy the pool, this is the way I enjoy the pool,’” he said.”
      http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/07/26/family-evicted-after-father-hoses-neighbors-over-secondhand-smoke/

      Doesn’t this remind you of that peculiar statement about antismokers drinking beer and the end result of their pleasure was urine and how would smokers like drinkers standing on a chair and urinating all over them,or words to that effect,that was posted on smoking threads ad infinitum in 2007. I had wondered what halfwit thought it up, it was so very counter productive.
      But the parrots seemed to think that they were being very clever.

      I noticed that “grey faced smoker” one I’d first seen in America, didn’t last very long in England.

  8. smokervoter says:

    FYI.

    The John and Ken Show airs from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m..[2]
    The program is the most listened to local talk radio program in the United States: in the peak hour of their daily broadcasts, they draw an estimated audience of approximately 1.1 million listeners.

    Nationally, the definitely pro-smoking Rush Limbaugh draws an audience of 15 million.

  9. Tom and Reinhold: it was in expectation of that reaction (smokers assuming that anything about smoking HAD to be antismoking) that Brains had its plain glossy white cover with black print for its first few years. It actually worked quite well at bars, on the street, in a few local bookstores where I tried it out, but the cover did NOT work on Amazon — where it looked like a few typewritten letters floating in space.

    – MJM

  10. Rose says:

    One in three smokers admit sabotaging friends’ efforts to quit cigarettes

    “A third of smokers have admitted to sabotaging another person’s attempt to quit, research suggests.
    Jealousy, guilt about their own habit and wanting a smoking “buddy” were among the reasons to wreck other people’s quitting attempts.

    The data, collated from 6,300 current and former smokers by Pfizer as part of its Don’t Go Cold Turkey campaign, shows that 31%. of smokers admitted being saboteurs.”
    http://www.standard.co.uk/incoming/one-in-three-smokers-admit-sabotaging-friends-efforts-to-quit-cigarettes-7981388.html

    I wonder if that’s how they are trying to explain the dismal failure rates, this time.
    Don’t Go Cold Turkey campaign. That’s really a bit transparent isn’t it?

    Oh, I see.

    Smokers’ Cold Turkey Attempts Sabotaged
    http://news.sky.com/story/965698/smokers-cold-turkey-attempts-sabotaged

    But they can’t do it if you already have a head full of Champix?

  11. Margo says:

    Here’s what’s just happened to me:
    Yesterday I was invited to visit my new grandchild for the first time. I was told, on the phone, ‘There’s just one thing – the smoking.’ (I haven’t smoked in their house for years – both parents smoked once, but the mother gave up, the father was made to go outside to smoke and then he gave up. There’s a lot of history here, but I won’t bore you all with it.) I was reminded on the phone that even if I smoked outside I’d smell of it when I came back and that wouldn’t really be acceptable near the baby.
    So I went to see the baby, stayed an hour or so, and came home.
    This has upset me. I grew up in the 1950s. My parents kept a drinks-cabinet and on the table was a silver cigarette-box. When people came, both these items were well stocked and freely available. This was normal practice in those days, in the circles my parents moved in. It was about hospitality, making sure your guests felt comfortable and had a good time. Politeness, friendship and tolerance of each other, in other words.
    These are the things that have gone. Apparently, it’s now considered perfectly all right to come right out and make it clear that a fresh-smelling house is more important to you than the fostering of bonds between people, even between child and grandparent.

    • roobeedoo2 says:

      Margo, your daughter in law is a git. Anti-smoking fever gives licence to gits to be gits. Take solace that your grandchild will eventually rebel against the git and will love nanny more because you’re not a git. Or just wait until they need a loan (children are expensive) or a late notice babysitter.

      I’d recommend everyone to read ‘The Fourth Turning’. It’s all seasonal and generational. As Mark Twain said ‘history doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

      • Margo says:

        Many thanks for your supportive comments, roobeedoo2 and lleweton. Haven’t heard of The Fourth Turning – will seek it out. Nice one from Mark Twain. As for that early form of Newspeak, ‘Thank you for Not Smoking’, was it Dennis Potter or Martin Amis who gave us the response to that? – you light up and say, ‘It’s OK, you don’t have to thank me, I AM smoking.’

        • Margo, very sad. It’s been building for years though. I wrote about it in “Brains” back in 2004: two quotes:

          p.195
          “The Appeal to Emotion can also be quite effective on the individual level if the population is vulnerable. The sweet little old grandmother whose only vice is an after-dinner cigarette with her sherry can be convinced to quit if she can be made to believe that traces of her “poisons” may be killing her grandchildren even if she only smokes outside.
          She’ll be told, “Think about that sweet baby that loves you more than it loves itself.” And if that doesn’t work, Crusaders will stoop even lower and seek to convince the elderly soul that she’s giving her cats cancer. Love is a powerful motivator (Carole Sanders. http://www.anmlangls.org/smokers.htm; Julie Marshall. dailycamera.com 01/03/03)”

          and p.214

          “Even sadder, as noted earlier, we’ve seen children educated to believe that kissing a smoking family mem-ber is “like licking an ashtray.” Picture a grandmother being rejected with that comment by her formerly loving grandchildren and think about what that does to the quality of her life.”

          It’s gotten worse in recent years with Winickoff and his insane thirdhand smoke thing. Maybe you could make some headway with your children if you shared this with them:

          http://globalhealthlaw.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/third-hand-smoke/#comment-52

          or

          Click to access StilettoGenv5h.pdf

          but on the other hand it might just aggravate the conflict and cause you more pain than its worth.

          :/
          Michael

        • smokervoter says:

          “Thank You For Not Smoking”. Yet another of the foul C. Everett Koop’s newspeak legacies. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. He was Big Brother incarnate.

          I’m not a conspiracy theorist nor a UFO-believer, far from it, but I do believe that Orwell correctly foresaw C. Everett Koop and his speech on May 20, 1984 to the American Lung Association in Miami calling for a smoke-free society by the year 2000. It set off this bizarre, ugly totalitarian brave new that 1.5 billion of us now find ourselves trapped in.

          And speaking of conspiracy theorists, I’ve absolutely had it with Alex Jones. He’s become a vicious anti-smoker and an organic food nutcase. I can’t stand him any more. He can take his infowars and prisonplanet rot and shove it where the sun don’t shine.

    • lleweton says:

      ‘It was about hospitality, making sure your guests felt comfortable and had a good time. ‘ Absolutely agree with you Margo. It is nearly 40 years since I first saw a notice on a friend’s mantlepiece which said, in the coy way which, a few of us already saw would turn into something much more ferocious in society as the years passed: ‘Thank you for not smoking’. That person is still a very good friend but I thought then, in the early 70s, and I also think now, that the notice infringed the principles of hospitality. I have never commented on it and would not do so now. I think my friend would not understand and feel genuinely upset if I did. Significantly, maybe, I was the only smoker in that circle of academics, even then, 40 years ago.

      • Mr A says:

        Indeed. When I invite people to my home I think nothing of serving up vegetarian dishes for my veggie friend despite the fact that doing so is a major pain in the arse as they are the only person there who requires additional, separate catering. Yet, I want them there and so doing so is merely hospitable. It does seem a bit rich therefore when I am not allowed to smoke in their homes (especially when most of them are “social smokers” who end up cadging my fags for most of the evening). Still, this is fine. But if anyone said to me, “You can’t come because you smoke” or “I’ll come to your house but please don’t smoke” I would end that friendship immediately.

        And Margo, I feel very sorry about your story but in some ways I think you needed to make a stand. To capitulate is to somehow admit that they are not being hypochondriacal and that their behaviour is somehow not aberrant. I know the cost would be great but these people need to be reminded that their attitudes are abnormal….

      • Tom says:

        I wonder how many CA Real Estate agents realize how sometimes they utterly turn people off and destroy any chance of making a sale when they are out showing properties and smugly say something about how it’s not the “kind of place where you see smokers hanging about” – which, yes, I have had RE agents say that to me – proudly and smugly, hoping that would induce someone to want to buy there. But in CA, I have heard that a few times – plus some RE listings will go out of their way to inform potential buyers or renters that it was a “nonsmoking” household. To make matters worse, in Las Vegas, NV, I have come across ads for rental property management companies that state quite clearly, one of the things they promise in their renter screening process is that they weed out “the smokers” and make sure that the only properties they will handle will stipulate in the leases they must remain smoke “free”. Since the CA EPA was quick to declare SHS a “danger” and “carcinogenic pollutant”, I am waiting for the day soon, since it’s only a single political party in effect in state government, declare that “Third Hand Smoke” is a “danger” and “carcinogenic pollutant”, then like with asbestos, require it be disclosed to potentia buyers and renters and begin licensing special HazMat removal businesses, along the lines of asbestos removal businesses, and that any property previously smoked in must be stripped bare to the wall studs, and everything including insulation, wiring, plumbing and sheet rock all be replaced, essentially all rebuilt from the frames out, by law. And I sincerely DO believe CA will eventually move to that position, legally, using their own CA EPA, which is in excess beyond the US EPA in its demands.

    • Frank Davis says:

      a fresh-smelling house is more important to you than the fostering of bonds between people,

      Then let them lose those ties. They obviously don’t matter very much to them.

      • lleweton says:

        Margo: back to your original post. All this is evil. It is part of a deep-seated attack on the family. Love bestows health, regardless of the utterly trivial matter of whether the person who loves smokes tobacco or not. Love is greater than Pharisaic rules of behaviour. Those rules destroy and abuse the healing and health-giving powers of Love. But I’m sure your family wants the best for your grandchild. That is the tragic and wicked irony in this whole trend.

      • Margo says:

        Thanks to all of you. I’m aiming for the dignified silence, for the moment. We’ll see what happens next. When – and if – they bring the child to my house, I may suggest they go and stand in the garden, or just sod off home, when I feel like lighting up. There’s hope for the future – I’ve got other grandchildren who have grown into lovely tolerant teenagers.

    • churchmouse says:

      Hello, Margo

      I am sorry about the experience with your family, especially on the occasion of visiting your new grandchild — a cause for much joy.

      My better half and I have a silver cigarette box and a drinks cabinet, partly for the reasons you mention: politeness, hospitality and friendship.

      Tolerance wasn’t even an issue when we were growing up, just an unspoken norm.

  12. roobeedoo2 says:

    Need some info please. I am debating the benefits of smoking with a work colleague who is trying to give up and is attending a quit smoking course. She wants to give up because it ‘reduces the oxygen in your blood’. Can somebody point me in the direction of research or whatever to confirms or refutes this opinion? Cheers.

    Re: the quit course, she started last week and there were 20 attendees, last night only 13 turned up. she feels sorry for the never-smoker gals running the course as there will probably be only 2 left at the end. I laughed.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Smokers have higher co levels than non-smokers,however its been found co levels have benefits!

      Carbon Monoxide Gas Is Used by Brain Cells As a Neurotransmitter
      By GINA KOLATA
      Published: January 26, 1993Sign In to E-Mail

      Print

      Single-Page

      THE simple gas carbon monoxide is used by nerve cells to signal each other, researchers have found in a discovery that could open the way to a new understanding of how the brain operates.

      The discovery follows a finding that another simple gas, nitric oxide, can also signal nerve cells. Together the two gases break all the old rules on how neurotransmitters work.

      Neurobiologists have been finding neurotransmitters since the 1920’s and thought they had the rules for nerve signaling in hand. Each substance was thought to be stable and specific. One nerve cell would release the transmitter and it would fit into the next cell like a key in a lock.

      http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/26/science/carbon-monoxide-gas-is-used-by-brain-cells-as-a-neurotransmitter.html?src=pm

    • Margo says:

      I think there was a study done involving climbing up mountains, and the smokers did best with high altitudes. I expect Rose will know about it.

    • Smoking increases the amount of carbon monoxide in the blood which in turn reduces the amount of oxygen the red blood cells carry. This effect isn’t as strong as the Antismokers make it out to be with their twisted numbers, but it can be important if you have a compromised circulatory system. However, as Harley correctly points out, there is thought to be some degree of benefit from higher CO levels as well (although I would say that on balance it’s probably more of a detriment in most cases… just not always a significant one!)

      – MJM

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    Heres a tidbit Miss Rose had awhile back:

    discoveries of the health benefits of low level carbon monoxide have accelerated.

    Early days, but by no means the first of the discoveries.

    Harvard and U. Pittsburgh researchers explain carbon monoxide’s anti-inflammatory effects

    “In a study appearing in the April 2007 issue of The FASEB Journal, scientists from Harvard University and the University of Pittsburgh have shown for the first time that the anti-inflammatory effects of carbon monoxide originate within cells’ own molecular engines, mitochondria. Specifically, mitochondria react to low levels of carbon monoxide by releasing chemical signals that reduce or shut down the body’s inflammatory response, raising the possibility for the development of new anti-inflammatory therapies, one of which may be low levels of inhaled carbon monoxide.”
    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-03/foas-hau031307.php

  14. Rose says:

    Margo

    My collection of clippings on the newly discovered properties of low dose carbon monoxide, who knew that we had been making it ourselves since the dawn of time.
    http://www.forces.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=363&t=1429

    Mountain climbers and other stuff on nitric oxide.
    http://www.forces.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=363&t=1876&sid=7c85cc90fc0146ef5242f6589af00529

    Premature Babies Benefit From Inhaling Nitric Oxide At Shands At The University Of Florida

    “A gas commonly found in smog and cigarette smoke actually helps premature babies by opening blood vessels in their underdeveloped lungs, causing blood oxygen levels to rise, University of Florida researchers report.”
    http: //www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1997/03/970328095354.htm

    Swings and roundabouts I suppose, it certainly seems to work for Tibetans.

    Nitric oxide helps high-altitude survival
    “CLEVELAND, Nov. 6 US researchers have discovered high blood levels of nitric oxide allow people to live at high altitudes where air has low levels of oxygen.”
    “The Tibetans were found to have 10 times more nitric oxide and more than double the forearm blood flow of sea-level dwellers.”

    • Rose says:

      Sorry, when I look back , that should have been addressed to roobeedoo2.

      Obviously due to insufficient coffee, I shall rectify that immediately.

      • churchmouse says:

        Rose, I tried the remedy you cited for staunching the blood from a cut finger with a bit of green tobacco leaf.

        It worked wonders — immediately. Normally, I would have had to pause, lift my finger up and wrap it in a wet paper towel. Not this time. Right now, it looks like a paper cut.

        Many thanks!!

        • Frank Davis says:

          Interesting. Must try that!

          Did you do anything to the leaf before applying it (like squeezing it)?

        • churchmouse says:

          Frank — in reply to your question, did I do anything before then? I gently washed my finger, then applied the piece of tobacco leaf (about 3/4″ square — the right size for my cut).

          By applied, I really mean just that. No pressing, just placing the leaf lightly on the wound to make contact — not unlike a plaster (bandage, for my American friends).

          It should be better than a styptic pencil for shaving cuts, although it is a seasonal remedy for most of us.

        • Rose says:

          I didn’t even get that far, being over enthusiastic with a rake, I managed to smash the end of the handle right into the centre of my thumbnail, it split in half across the centre, the pain was excruciating and there was blood everywhere.

          Remembering my research on battlefield medicine I just ripped a leaf off one of the plants, crushed it with my good hand, wound it round my thumb, which was dripping with blood and held it tight.

          Funny how these things come back to you in a moment of extreme need.

          Of the Tabaco and of His Greate Vertues

          “THIS herb, which commonly is called tobacco, is an herb be of much antiquity, and known amongst the Indians, and in especially among them of the new Spain, and after that those countries were gotten by our Spaniards, being taught of the Indians, they did profit themselves of those things, in the Wounds which they received in their Wars, healing themselves therewith, to the great benefit of them
          http://archive.tobacco.org/History/monardes.html

          The wound didn’t get washed until I was feeling much better and it did seem to heal very quickly.

  15. Junican says:

    @ Roobeedoo.

    I think that I have found just what you need. I had to trawl through a massive amount of propaganda first before I found what I wanted. The propaganda keeps shouting about how carbon monoxide stops red blood cells absorbing oxygen and make a huge problem of it. Here is the url for a simple study which found hardly any difference at all between smokers and non-smokers:

    Click to access 20100217020347_922.pdf

    Here is the abstract in full:

    Smoking kills 5.4 million people per year (Mackay, 2007). One possible reason people
    smoke is because of their lack of understanding of the harm it actually does to the body.
    For example, smokers may not be aware of the effect of smoking on their blood
    oxygenation levels, as the smoke inhaled damages the biological mechanisms needed to
    carry oxygen through the bloodstream (Witting, 2008; Polito, 2005). This research
    project examines the relationship between smoking and blood oxygenation levels by
    comparing two groups, smokers and non-smokers, and by using a pulse oximeter to
    measure blood oxygenation levels. Based on previous research, the results from this
    project should show that smokers’ blood oxygenation levels are lower than non-smokers,
    because smokers’ bodies transport oxygen less efficiently. Means, standard deviations,
    and t-tests were used to calculate the differences between each groups’ blood
    oxygenation levels. While it was hoped there would be a drastic difference between
    groups, no significant difference was found.

    Frankly, I am amazed that this study has not been pulled by the Holy Zealots!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Cousin on my last CBC blood work up my Co was high but within normal ranges and that was a 3 pack day that was tested! These Nazis really cant prove anything,but with Billions to spread lies they can get lots of dupes to buy it,UNTIL!

      We come along………….

    • Junican, Excellent catch! I’m actually surprised: I thought the CO/oxy thing was pretty firmly established. Of course this was done by a student and based on a fairly small sample, but I would still have expected to see a stronger effect, particularly given the clear bias noted throughout the writing and, in particular, in the graphing of the data.

      The student deserves an award for honest scientific work! Even with the best of intentions I would have expected that some degree of unavoidable unconscious experimenter bias would have crept in to enough of a degree to jiggle the results as desired. Of course that bias may indeed have crept in and simply not been sufficient to produce the desired result, but again, the student should be recognized for her honesty in presentation!

      Michael J. McFadden
      Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”

  16. RooBeeDoo says:

    To all of Frank’s fabulous commentators, thank you – you’re the best!

  17. lleweton says:

    Not at all, Frank. Your site is a catalyst.

  18. I heard that Love is greater than Pharisaic rules of behaviour.

  19. Pingback: ISIS Survey Data Entry | Frank Davis

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.