Smokers and Covid-19: Regular cigarette and e-cigarette users face 5,000 fine for lighting up in public

[Don Mega]

16 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

Was that you explaining, why not getting any?

Its a business model that works well when the missus has the painters in.... An idea for the non smokers that aren't getting any at home should consider.

[worgeordie]

There's a lot of smoking go on up North,it's not cigarettes ,but fields ,forests

and no one is been find,as there seems to be around to catch them.

regards worgeordie

[RJRS1301]

1 hour ago, Matzzon said:

Why have you been quoting richard_smith237, and put his comment under my name? Please edit your post, or face the consequence.

I am not sure which post you are referring to, I have used the auto quote selection, not cut and paste from or to any post.

 

[richard_smith237]

23 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

42 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I still think smoking should be banned in public. I don’t smoke, but have occasionally in the past. 

 

I just don’t believe shooting from the hip should and hysteria should be used to ban something, use intelligence, in this case, smoking in public areas impacts non-smokers and should be restricted to designated smoking areas.

First you think smoking should be banned in public. After that it should be allowed in designated areas. Where are those areas? Are they not in public? Are the smokers in the designated areas not a part of the public? Is it possible that you are condoning the gathering of smokers, where one could be carrying the virus an infect other smokers in the designated areas? Is there no other group of people in public that are walking by the designated smoking areas? 

As you clearly can read it´s not hysteria. Never get hysteric, and take the card dealt to me as they come. It´s not any shooting from the hip. I don´t believe in that due to the big possibility to miss the target. I only got for success with one shot. Regarding the use of your sharp intelligence. Can´t you just humour me, and try to sort my questions out? As you say, smoking should be totally banned, except in the comfort of your own balcony when the neighbour is not out at the same time. Or your own fenced yard.

Semantics... 

 

There is no evidence out there at all to suggest that exhaled smoke / vape carries a virus any further than regular exhaled air - all your other arguments, down to ‘resting your case’ as if in some strange delusion that you are a lawyer is hilarious, and now you are becoming childish in your desperation to win on all counts and are now seeming to lose grasp on reality. 

As you mentioned earlier, perhaps these discussions do make you mad, you lack the emotional tools to continue rational debate as you can no longer see the forest for the trees. 

 

Simple question for a simple answer:

Is there any evidence to suggest that exhaled smoke / vape carries a virus any further than regular exhaled breath?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bkkcanuck8]

I have seen nothing to back up this 'theory'.... and I am one of those anti-smoking zealots so to speak....   I think someone gave him a very bad auto-translated story.

[morrobay]

Well I guess this virus isnt all bad news 

[EricTh]

I agree with what the officer said and I can verify based on personal experience.

 

Whenever I walk pass by somebody smoking, I can feel my throat starting to cough and phlegm swells within seconds. 

 

Yes, virus can spread through air and smoke easily.

 

Is there a hotline that I can call if spot a smoker in public?

Edited March 22, 2020 by EricTh

[EricTh]

46 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

There's a lot of smoking go on up North,it's not cigarettes ,but fields ,forests

and no one is been find,as there seems to be around to catch them.

regards worgeordie

The fire smoke isn't as poisonous as nicotine or virus. Forest burned at a far distance.

 

I don't have much reaction to fire smoke from afar but do have reaction to nicotine smoke.

Edited March 22, 2020 by EricTh

[Matzzon]

45 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Simple question for a simple answer:

Is there any evidence to suggest that exhaled smoke / vape carries a virus any further than regular exhaled breath?

Simple question as an answer the asks for a simple answer:
Is there any evidence that suggest the opposite?

 

After you got your head around that, I will refer to post #119

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, Don Mega said:

Its a business model that works well when the missus has the painters in.... An idea for the non smokers that aren't getting any at home should consider.

Yeah, I understand you massive problem. It must be incredibly hard to wait a week.

[Don Mega]

1 minute ago, Matzzon said:

Yeah, I understand you massive problem. It must be incredibly hard to wait a week.

most weeks its hard to wait a day.

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, Rookiescot said:

OK there's a possibility that smoking prevents you getting corona because it kills the virus.

No, there isn´t. That is just living in your imagination and you do best in keeping it there before you show too much of your true self.

[Don Mega]

Just now, Matzzon said:

No, there isn´t.

Do you have proof to back that statement ?

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, DannyCarlton said:

Use common sense. Ever tried that one?

No, I only beg other to do, and use, that so I finally can understand what it is without asking a stupid question.

[DannyCarlton]

3 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

No, I only beg other to do, and use, that so I finally can understand what it is without asking a stupid question.

And what others are begging you to do is to produce just one shred of evidence for your wild and unfounded assertions.

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, RJRS1301 said:

I am not sure which post you are referring to, I have used the auto quote selection, not cut and paste from or to any post.

 

Post #84 and post #86. The texts that stands under only my name in your quotes, is not my writing. On is from richard_smith237 in post #77 and the other was also written by richard in post #82

See, now I´ve done all work for you. You only had to look it up yourself, but that was to much for you. You also only had to say sorry and it was your mistake, but that was also to much for you. Can you please, now! Learn how to post when using cut and paste.

[vogie]

But there again you can always tell a smoker, but you can't tell him much.

 

"Covid-19 is predominantly a disease of the respiratory tract, with emerging evidence indicating that cellular entry, viral replication and virion shedding occurs within the respiratory tract. [1] The virus has been shown to enter cells using the ACE-2 receptor, which is abundant in mucosal epithelial cells and the lung alveolar tissue. [2] Research on a similar respiratory virus, respiratory syncytial virus, has shown that inhaled tobacco smoke increases the rate of transmission and severity of viral respiratory tract infections. [3] Hence, it has been argued that smokers are at increased risk of contracting covid-19. Notably, smoking involves repetitive hand-to-face movements, which provide a route of entry for viral capsules. Smoking rates in countries that report sizable outbreaks of covid-19 (e.g. China, South Korea, Italy) remain high at approximately 19-27% of the population. [4]"

 

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/03/20/covid-19-the-role-of-smoking-cessation-during-respiratory-virus-epidemics/

[Matzzon]

12 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

And what others are begging you to do is to produce just one shred of evidence for your wild and unfounded assertions.

Yeah, yeah! Just keep it between you and me. Don´t tell anyone.

[DannyCarlton]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

But there again you can always tell a smoker, but you can't tell him much.

 

"Covid-19 is predominantly a disease of the respiratory tract, with emerging evidence indicating that cellular entry, viral replication and virion shedding occurs within the respiratory tract. [1] The virus has been shown to enter cells using the ACE-2 receptor, which is abundant in mucosal epithelial cells and the lung alveolar tissue. [2] Research on a similar respiratory virus, respiratory syncytial virus, has shown that inhaled tobacco smoke increases the rate of transmission and severity of viral respiratory tract infections. [3] Hence, it has been argued that smokers are at increased risk of contracting covid-19. Notably, smoking involves repetitive hand-to-face movements, which provide a route of entry for viral capsules. Smoking rates in countries that report sizable outbreaks of covid-19 (e.g. China, South Korea, Italy) remain high at approximately 19-27% of the population. [4]"

 

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/03/20/covid-19-the-role-of-smoking-cessation-during-respiratory-virus-epidemics/

Spot on vogie but unfortunately irrelevant to this thread.

[Matzzon]

18 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

Do you have proof to back that statement ?

No, you know I don´t, but I have proof that smoking in public will pose a greater risk for people to catch and die of the virus.

Smoking is well know to cause respiratory disease. Even affects the respiratory system of passive smokers. Due to that this virus has been proven to attack old, weak and people with diseases harder. Hell Yeah, then I think you can do the math all by yourself.

[Matzzon]

23 minutes ago, Don Mega said:

most weeks its hard to wait a day.

Yeah, as I said I totally understand you. Have to take a break now, it´s time. Even a couple of hours is too much.

[Don Mega]

1 minute ago, Matzzon said:

No, you know I don´t, but I have proof that smoking in public will pose a greater risk for people to catch and die of the virus.

 

Care to post it up ?

[Rookiescot]

37 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

No, there isn´t. That is just living in your imagination and you do best in keeping it there before you show too much of your true self.

Physician heal thyself.

You have somehow managed, without a shred of evidence, to proclaim as fact that smoking increases the risk of others catching corona.

Now I was trying to be diplomatic but now I am going to call it for what it is.

It is a lie.

[Don Mega]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

Physician heal thyself.

You have somehow managed, without a shred of evidence, to proclaim as fact that smoking increases the risk of others catching corona.

Now I was trying to be diplomatic but now I am going to call it for what it is.

It is a lie.

Matzzon is known for spreading porky pies so don't be surprised he offers no evidence.

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, EricTh said:

I agree with what the officer said and I can verify based on personal experience.

 

Whenever I walk pass by somebody smoking, I can feel my throat starting to cough and phlegm swells within seconds. 

 

Yes, virus can spread through air and smoke easily.

 

Is there a hotline that I can call if spot a smoker in public?

Could be a medal in it for you.

Keep up the good work agent Eric.

[khunpa]

I am a smoker and I don’t mind any silly rules they come up with. 
 

But I would be really grateful, if they could stop the burning here in CM, which is worse than all the smokers in the world combined.

[Misterwhisper]

15 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Khajornsak said that when smokers exhale their smoke carries their phlegm and bacteria on particles far and wide.

Mr. Khajornsak: With every single breath people exhale (or when they speak) they omit microscopic particles of body fluid that dissipate "far and wide" in the air surrounding them and - if they are infected - carry the virus.

 

There is no scientific evidence whatsoever that suggests e-vapor or cigarette smoke particles would carry the virus "farer and wider" than normal breathing or speaking would.

 

What do you propose? That we all must stop breathing now? Smokers and non-smokers alike? 

[moontang]

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, Matzzon said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Simple question for a simple answer:

Is there any evidence to suggest that exhaled smoke / vape carries a virus any further than regular exhaled breath?

Simple question as an answer the asks for a simple answer:
Is there any evidence that suggest the opposite?

 

After you got your head around that, I will refer to post #119

OK, so you can’t answer my question, or rather you are avoiding to answer your question because you know there is no evidence. 

 

Equally so, there is no evidence to suggest exhaled smoke / vape doesn’t carries a virus further than regular exhaled breath. 

 

If the absence of evidence that smoke / vape doesn’t carry a virus further than regular exhaled breath your only argument, then your argument is fundamentally flawed to the point of being pedantic. 

[Monomial]

6 hours ago, Matzzon said:

You shouldn´t read such a complicated document if you can´t connect the dots of probability. And, if there is even a microscopic chance, why take it and why potentially risk other peoples wellbeing?

 

Excuse me??? I've been reading scientific papers for my entire career, and probably understand more about probability than most everyone on this board. 

 

The problem here is there is NOTHING in that paper at all (and remember the research is from the 1940's) that deals with what happens in vivo. There is absolutely no reason to believe that an unexplained effect which occurs OUTSIDE the body, and potentially traps and filters viral particles from ever even entering the body, would do anything for viral particles INSIDE the body. It could in fact, make it worse.

 

I am not risking other people's wellbeing. I am trying to help, because I know most of you are completely incapable of actually reading a paper like that (its behind a paywall) and understanding it (you need to be a skilled researcher).  There are too many flat earthers on the internet who believe anything that is said because they have no basis to see the part of the iceberg under the water. They see just the tip and say "see how tiny that is? There is no way it could be dangerous." 

 

I am not saying you can not do research if you want to investigate a hypothesis about the effects of smoking propylene glycol on viruses. I am saying however, that there is no support in that paper for your thesis.