Quote:
|
As tempted as i am, i won't be rude about this (I only want to be rude because it's the easiest response). Trust me when i tell you, none of the above is correct.
|
I don't see why you would avoid being rude here, you've already shown yourself to be quite good at it.
I agree with Yakk that what it comes down to is smokers ignoring the evidence completely, just take a look at my signature. If the evidence interferes with and flatly contradicts your pre-chosen belief that's too bad. It seems we've gone to great lengths to prove whether or not second hand smoke is bad for you. All you have to do is break it down: Smoke is not good for human beings to breathe in. Smoking is not good for human beings. Second hand smoke is not good for human beings. You might as well light a section of the building on fire and inhale the fumes for an hour.
I couldn't imagine arguing that second smoke is not bad for you, it seems completely illogical to me.