Seattle will tax sugary soda — but not diet

[yuna628 9,873]

47 minutes ago, IAMX said:

I've noticed as people have become more educated about cigs a lot less people are smokers. It won't ever stop addicts from having their fix, but I think education has worked far better than trying to tax people out of bad habits.

If they want to ban cigs they'd have no reason to allow smoking weed. Smoke is smoke is smoke.

Smoke is not smoke.

Taxes on a substance that contributes to the death and harm of the smoker, and individuals who do not even smoke and contributes to higher health cost is fine by me. I quite agree with OriZ on this issue, they can keep putting the tax up as high as possible. I'd be happier with banning it completely.

 

 

[Umka36 781]

10 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

Probably because it's much easier to ease the people into things rather than whack em with everything all at once. I wouldn't doubt that processed foods will be targeted sometime in the future.

I guess so. Personally I just drink water as my beverage of choice and it's free at most places.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Just now, Umka36 said:

I guess so. Personally I just drink water as my beverage of choice and it's free at most places.

I have been drinking mainly bottled water for well over 20 years now. When I get a glass of water from the tap I can't believe how bad it tastes in most places. Not that there's any wrong with the water quality, it just tastes like chemicals.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

actually its not. Zero links between ,even heavy wed smoking and cancer

It's virtually every single kind of smoke that's carcinogenic -- cigarettes, weed, barbecue, incenses, vehicle exhaust, the list goes on and on, all carcinogenic.

 

As far as weed goes it's crazy pro marijuana rags that like to suggest there's no carcinogens in smoking weed.. here is an example:

 

https://merryjane.com/health/is-smoking-weed-just-as-bad-as-cigarettes

 

This site says cigs are cancerous, weed heals it, and it also has anti-infllammatory properties, leading one to think, if they relied on this junk, to believe it's not harmful. Obviously this is garbage politics masquerading as science.

 

If one doesn't want the heightened risk of cancer, go with edibles. In comparison, weed is likely to be even more carcinogenic when smoked than cigarettes..

 

 

 

Quote

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2516340/

Results:

There were 79 cases of lung cancer and 324 controls. The risk of lung cancer increased 8% (95% CI 2% to 15%) for each joint-year of cannabis smoking, after adjustment for confounding variables including cigarette smoking, and 7% (95% CI 5% to 9%) for each pack-year of cigarette smoking, after adjustment for confounding variables including cannabis smoking. The highest tertile of cannabis use was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer RR=5.7 (95% CI 1.5 to 21.6), after adjustment for confounding variables including cigarette smoking.

Conclusions:

Long term cannabis use increases the risk of lung cancer in young adults.

 

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071217110328.htm

Quote

In this new study, researchers compared marijuana smoke to tobacco smoke, using smoking machines to simulate the smoking habits of users. The scientists found that ammonia levels were 20 times higher in the marijuana smoke than in the tobacco smoke, while hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide and certain aromatic amines occurred at levels 3-5 times higher in the marijuana smoke, they say. The finding is "important information for public health and communication of the risk related to exposure to such materials," say the researchers.

 

http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/dangers-eating-smoked-meat-10162.html

 

Quote

Smoked meats are associated with an increased risk for certain cancers due to the presence of cancer-causing substances -- carcinogens. For example, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzopyrenes from wood smoke are toxic.

 

http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20080822/incense-linked-airway-cancers

Quote

Aug. 25, 2008 -- People who breathe burning incense over long periods have an increased risk of developing certain cancers, even if they don't smoke cigarettes, a new study shows.

 

Long-term exposure to incense fumes was associated with an increased risk for most upper respiratory cancers, as well as squamous cell lung cancer, the study shows. Squamous cell lung cancer is most common type of lung cancer in smokers.

The risk was seen in smokers and nonsmokers, suggesting that exposure to burning incense is an independent risk factor for certain cancers of the respiratory tract, says lead researcher Jeppe T. Friborg, MD, PhD, of Copenhagen's Statens Serum Institut.

"The findings from this study and the experimental research are sufficient to recommend that people avoid prolonged use of incense in areas where they spend a lot of time, like living rooms," Friborg says.

Daily Incense Use Common

Used since biblical times, incense is still an integral part of daily life in large parts of Asia and India. And many people in the U.S. and other Western countries also burn incense on a daily basis.

A wide variety of plants and oils are used to make incense. When burned, many of these mixtures have been shown to produce some of the same carcinogens that are found in cigarette smoke.

Because of this, a number of studies have examined a possible link between incense inhaled into the lungs and lung cancer, but the findings have not been conclusive.

The newly published study is the first to follow healthy people over time in an effort to understand the impact of long-term exposure to burning incense on cancer risk.

More than 60,000 Chinese residents of Singapore who were participants in a larger health study were followed from enrollment (which occurred between 1993 and 1998) and 2005.

None of the study participants had cancer at enrollment, and all were interviewed in detail about their dietary and lifestyle habits, including their exposure to incense.

Roughly three-quarters of the men and women reported being current incense users.

Over the course of the study, 325 upper respiratory tract cancers and 821 lung cancers were reported.

 

Quote

 

 

 

Honestly, this shouldn't be a surprise by now.. 

- Superheat component

- Burns off hydrocarbons (in smoke)

- Gets in the airway

- Screws with body's cells

- Chances of cancer increases

 

- Marijuana smoke is held in the airway and lungs for longer

- Risk of cancer increases

 

Easy.

 

But more importantly: 

 

Life lesson: Everything is carcinogenic.

 

Edit: I gave up trying to fix the forum screw-ups on quotes.

 

Edited June 7, 2017 by IAMX

[Ban Hammer 14,273]

3 hours ago, Teddy B said:

I hear that Val's Sammich Shop is offering a front door/back door special. Take the doors off your house and bring em down to Val's and you will get free sammiches for one week.

i was worried when i first started reading this about where you were going to go with it............

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

i was worried when i first started reading this about where you were going to go with it............

Lol I read it and had family friendly worries also 

[IAMX 3,055]

2 hours ago, Ban Hammer said:

i was worried when i first started reading this about where you were going to go with it............

Ban!

[OriZ 3,165]

8 hours ago, IAMX said:

I've noticed as people have become more educated about cigs a lot less people are smokers. It won't ever stop addicts from having their fix, but I think education has worked far better than trying to tax people out of bad habits.

If they want to ban cigs they'd have no reason to allow smoking weed. Smoke is smoke is smoke.

I agree that smoke is smoke, however there is alot more wrong with cigarettes than just the smoke, whereas weed doesn't have all the toxins. Also with weed there's oils and edibles so I would not compare the two. Honestly I'm not sure why something like cigarettes is even legal, but I guess because it has been for centuries and so many people still do it(not to mention the lobbying) it would be really difficult to outright ban it now, so they just tax it. I think maybe if they gradually kept making it more and more expensive, and more people decided they'd rather not spend their hard earned money on killing themselves and others(not to mention the smell, the dirt etc), maybe eventually if less than 10% of the population was still smoking they'd be able to ban it easier. 

 

6 hours ago, Teddy B said:

I have been drinking mainly bottled water for well over 20 years now. When I get a glass of water from the tap I can't believe how bad it tastes in most places. Not that there's any wrong with the water quality, it just tastes like chemicals.

We don't do tap water like ever. In restaurants we never touch the glass, we'd rather order something else. At times we'll actually tell them to not even bother bringing it to the table. At home we have zero water filter and it does a good job and the flavor changes dramatically. Even though VT water is already considered good with only around 150 tds, zero tastes much better. We've actually used the meter that comes with it to test even bottled water and while not at 150, we've found a brand of bottled water at around 60-70, the reason we tested it is because we could tell by the taste of it.

Edited June 8, 2017 by OriZ

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, OriZ said:

I agree that smoke is smoke, however there is alot more wrong with cigarettes than just the smoke, whereas weed doesn't have all the toxins. Also with weed there's oils and edibles so I would not compare the two. Honestly I'm not sure why something like cigarettes is even legal, but I guess because it has been for centuries and so many people still do it(not to mention the lobbying) it would be really difficult to outright ban it now, so they just tax it. I think maybe if they gradually kept making it more and more expensive, and more people decided they'd rather not spend their hard earned money on killing themselves and others(not to mention the smell, the dirt etc), maybe eventually if less than 10% of the population was still smoking they'd be able to ban it easier. 

 

We don't do tap water like ever. In restaurants we never touch the glass, we'd rather order something else. At times we'll actually tell them to not even bother bringing it to the table. At home we have zero water filter and it does a good job and the flavor changes dramatically. Even though VT water is already considered good with only around 150 tds, zero tastes much better. We've actually used the meter that comes with it to test even bottled water and while not at 150, we've found a brand of bottled water at around 60-70, the reason we tested it is because we could tell by the flavor. 

Can you explain this filter? Is it like one of those faucet or jug filters or are they in the under sink pipes or house? 

[OriZ 3,165]

1 minute ago, IAMX said:

Can you explain this filter? Is it like one of those faucet or jug filters or are they in the under sink pipes or house? 

It's a pitcher kinda like brita only does a better job. 

 

https://www.zerowater.com/

 

actually now that I look at the map on the site, shows VT at under 50. However specifically where we are which is well water we've tested it and it's around 150. 

[Dashinka 25,856]

14 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Smoke is not smoke.

Taxes on a substance that contributes to the death and harm of the smoker, and individuals who do not even smoke and contributes to higher health cost is fine by me. I quite agree with OriZ on this issue, they can keep putting the tax up as high as possible. I'd be happier with banning it completely.

 

 

While I agree that the products of combustion can be different depending on the organic material being burned, there are still questions regarding the myriad of compounds created by smoking weed and the potential danger to the smoker or those around them than burning tobacco.  There are studies on weed smoke that indicate the THC instead of nicotine may be helpful in negating the carcinogenic effects, but I don't think it is settled science, and you still have the other factors related to simply putting this smoke in your lungs.  The point is, that if someone wants to use cannibas, any intake method other than smoking it seems to be preferable.

 

http://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetruth/2013/11/14/vaporization-vs-combustion-which-is-safer/

 

 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

While I agree that the products of combustion can be different depending on the organic material being burned, there are still questions regarding the myriad of compounds created by smoking weed and the potential danger to the smoker or those around them than burning tobacco.  There are studies on weed smoke that indicate the THC instead of nicotine may be helpful in negating the carcinogenic effects, but I don't think it is settled science, and you still have the other factors related to simply putting this smoke in your lungs.  The point is, that if someone wants to use cannibas, any intake method other than smoking it seems to be preferable.

 

http://blog.sfgate.com/smellthetruth/2013/11/14/vaporization-vs-combustion-which-is-safer/

 

 

Would agree on that, but one time at band camp, someone made a whole tray of weed brownies. They got stoned,  follows by the munchies. They forget the brownies had weed in them.  You can figure out the rest 

[Teddy B 17,252]

13 hours ago, Ban Hammer said:

i was worried when i first started reading this about where you were going to go with it............

I was worried where I was going with it when I was typing it.

[Dashinka 25,856]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Would agree on that, but one time at band camp, someone made a whole tray of weed brownies. They got stoned,  follows by the munchies. They forget the brownies had weed in them.  You can figure out the rest 

Must have been one heck of a band concert!

 

[IAMX 3,055]

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Would agree on that, but one time at band camp, someone made a whole tray of weed brownies. They got stoned,  follows by the munchies. They forget the brownies had weed in them.  You can figure out the rest 

American Pie 6