Author |
Message |
Lancecrossfire
Animoderator
07-13-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:19 pm
Non smoking areas in a building are the same as non-peeing areas in a swimming pool.
|
Native_texan
Member
08-24-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:19 pm
As I said somewhere else earlier today, what I found so disturbing this morning was that Dr. Tim Johnson suggested that research funds are way less for lung cancer than for other cancers because the powers that be may believe the majority of the patients deserve it. My mother is currently waiting for the results of a lung biopsy. One of the possibilities is cancer. My mother does not smoke. I can probably count on my hand the number of times I ever smoked around my mother but still...
|
Hukdonreality
Member
09-29-2003
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:23 pm
Geesh, this topic was talked about in the "passings" thread, and I didn't like it any more there than here. When I pass, and if it is from lung cancer...if anyone at the funeral home dares to say, "she was a smoker, wasn't she" I swear to God if there is any way I can get out of that coffin and slap them, I will. Some will say that they didn't say that smokers "deserve" it...but you might as well. The implication is there by its very mention.
|
Wendo
Member
08-07-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:25 pm
N_T, I too saw on the news last night the disparity in federal spending on lung cancer research. (NBC Nightly News) It was definitely suggested that part of the reason for the low funding is because of smoking; that some believe research money shouldn't go towards a disease that people bring on themselves by smoking. Merrysea, like California, Chicago has no smoking bans for restaurants and public buildings. I can't even remember the last time I ate in a restaurant with a smoking section. ETA: Exactly Huk.
|
Mocha
Member
08-12-2001
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:27 pm
Dang that Huk was a smoker wasn't she? 
|
Newman
Member
09-25-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:29 pm
Good points. I always thought my Colorado was on the forefront of progressive environmentalism. Why things move so slowly on this front is beyond me. It's a joke to be in the non-smoking section of a restaurant, while the smoke just waltzes on over. I just hope her death spurs on more legislation. To die at 44, of lung cancer, and not even be a smoker, that is so hard to swallow. A lot of people say there is no such thing as global warming. Others say that second hand smoke doesn't matter. I hope people wake up. But I'm afraid I'm just preaching to the choir. The aware ones already know these things. The unaware, well, ... Why isn't every restaurant and public building smoke free? Is that asking so much? I heard that she was coughing. For a year. People told her it was probably "allergies". Then they found the lung cancer and of course it was too late. How sad. I want doctors to be better too! Dr. House would have spotted it. He would have been a jerk with his bedside manner with Dana, but he would have found it in time. Don't you automatically think that celebs would get better health care than us normal folk? Sigh...
|
Hukdonreality
Member
09-29-2003
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:31 pm
slaps the hell out of Mocha for being a wise a*s 
|
Native_texan
Member
08-24-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:33 pm
Newman, the point is research in lung cancer and treatment is far behind all other cancers so it doesn't matter how much money you have or how famous you are.
|
Mocha
Member
08-12-2001
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:33 pm
takes stilleto and bashes huk in the back o' the head and drags her ass back to her coffin...
|
Hukdonreality
Member
09-29-2003
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:38 pm
pulls Mocha into the coffin with her and shuts the lid. SEE YA Mocha! ...and I'll bet you're not even one of those damed evil, thoughtless, idiot smokers either
|
Marysafan
Member
08-07-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:46 pm
It's been my experience that there have been political reasons behind some of the health related issues. There are some very powerful lobbies. We all know how the tobacco industry functioned for years lining the pockets of politicians, but they aren't the only ones. There are other reasons for lung cancer, but they aren't brought up because if we knew, then we would be demanding changes, and that would cost somebody some money and we can't be having that. Look how hard and how long people had to fight those responsible in the past for poluting our environment. When my husband was diagnosed as being diabetic, you could have knocked me over with feather. There was absolutely no diabetes in his family, and he was skinny as all get out and fit as a fiddle to boot. I happened to mention my surprise to an online buddy who worked in the environmental department in Washington DC. He asked if hubby enjoyed soft drinks. I laughed and said that he had a serious Mountain Dew habit. The friend said that there is research ongoing that seems to indicate that there is a direct link from soft drinks to the onset of type II diabetes in mid-life males. But, he said, don't expect that to see the light of day anytime soon. At the time, there were 6 million men in the US with type II diabetes. I heard last night that there are now 8 million. And no one is asking why. Obesity is a very serious problem in our children, and just now there are items on the news concerning the access to soft drinks in our schools. Personally, I think there is way too much tampering with our food supply...and that's bound to have some serious ramifications somewhere along the line. Oranges don't need to be as big as softballs. But that's a whole other discussion. There are a whole host of reasons that people are fat too...and not all of them are about will power.
|
Wendo
Member
08-07-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 4:48 pm
Why is it so hard to swallow that Dana Reeve, a non-smoker, died of lung cancer? Lung cancer does occur in non smoking human beings. Would it be easier to swallow if she had smoked? And, if so, well, less tragic because by smoking you bring it on yourself? Again, the inference is, if you smoked and die of lung cancer then somehow, it's not as hard to swallow, it's not as tragic, and somehow, you deserved it. I say anyone who dies of lung cancer, an often terrible and painful death, is tragic. ETA: Mary, interesting about soft drinks and the possible links to diabetes. Had not heard of that but not surprising.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 5:13 pm
It's tragic when anyone dies prematurely, whether they contributed to their own death behaviorally or not. I guess I don't see anything wrong with asking if someone who died from cancer was a smoker. We want/need to understand the cause of illness. And no doubt it makes some people feel better if the dead one contributed to their illness somehow. But who cares what people think? They will think what they will think. Asking the question in this case, the case of a well-liked public personality has shed important light on this issue. So I'm glad it was asked. Now people will know more truth about lung cancer. I think that's a good thing.
|
Native_texan
Member
08-24-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:10 pm
Kar, I agree. What's sad is that in too many situations it isn't until a celebrity is the victim do people start demanding answers. On one hand, the medical community feels that people with lung cancer got what they deserve. On the other hand, alcoholics are receiving liver transplants thereby depriving another in need who, not necessarily but probably, is more likely to take better care of that gift. [Now trying to make sure I stay out of Mocha and Hukd's way]
|
Wendo
Member
08-07-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:13 pm
I care what people think when it leads to less funding for disease research. As I noted earlier, one of the reasons for less funding towards lung cancer research has to do with the notion that less money should be put into research for a disease someone brings on themselves. When those in control of the purse strings feel that smokers cause their disease, then the likelihood that those purse strings will remain closed. I do agree, though, that awareness of lung cancer is important and Reeve's death has shed light on it. Hopefully, education will be provided that's accurate.
|
Native_texan
Member
08-24-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:18 pm
At the risk of sounding harsh, I have to ask if Dana Reeve will just be considered collateral damage by those with the purse strings.
|
Max
Moderator
08-12-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:24 pm
I don't have any statistics or hard facts to offer. But I do transcription/editing for a living and sure do spend a lot of time transcribing medical conferences discussing research into new drugs for lung cancer. There is work going on, but I have no idea how it compares to other cancer research. 44 is a terribly young age to pass. 
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:28 pm
I know lung cancer gets less money per death caused, but I wonder what the incidence rate is? Perhaps some of the reason it gets less is because there are less people effected? And while I am wildly sympathetic to anyone who dies a tragic death at a younger than elderly age, the stats I think I saw were that 80% of lung cancer deaths were smoking related, which is a choice (and an addiction, I'm well aware). Perhaps what we need is more research into how to help people break cigarette addiction? If that drops lung cancer deaths by 80% wouldn't that be a tremendous lessening in these tragic deaths? That's not to say we shouldn't research the other causes. I believe radon gas is the second leading cause of lung cancer, and who knew? I have a radon detector in my garage, since the soils here are at risk. I monitor it carefully, and should the need arise, I'll have work done to make my home more safe. But I imagine large numbers of people have no clue about this risk.
|
Maris
Member
03-28-2002
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:46 pm
And while I am wildly sympathetic to anyone who dies a tragic death at a younger than elderly age, the stats I think I saw were that 80% of lung cancer deaths were smoking related, which is a choice You couold also argue that Christopher Reeve's paralysis and ultimate death was due to choice as well. he chose to participate in a dangerous sport which ultimately killed him. I dont think it really matters how someone got the disease. I remember when people were up in arms over Mickey Mantle getting a transplant after decades of alcoholism, same with David Crosby. I think smoking related diseases deserve the same attention and funding as other illnesses.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 6:57 pm
Well, frankly, I would still be up in arms over someone who continued to drink getting a liver transplant IF someone who was also compatible could use the liver. And I felt that way about my own family members as well. I'm relatively sure such decisions take into account the possible success of treatment and how that would be effective in someone who continued in the same damaging behavior that caused the illness, as well as compatibility and urgency of need. I know it's done that way where I live, and I agree with weighing those factors carefully. I'm also not in favor of prolonged care on the public dole for motorcyclists who don't wear helmets. I'd much rather see that money go to universal child health care. If we only have so much money to spend, difficult decisions must be made about how to spend it. Those who are advocates of finding cures regardless of personal responsibility are free to raise money for research themselves. It's not that I don't think it's tragic. But I am a realist. Personal accountability matters too. That's the way life works.
|
Wendo
Member
08-07-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 7:17 pm
People make choices all the time, choices that others may not agree with. But just because one disagrees with it they shouldn't have access to public funds? Sounds a lot like a second class setup to me; especially since alcohol and tobacco are legal products. I'm with Maris, it shouldn't matter how one gets a disease and/or injury. While it can be useful for statistical analysis and research purposes, it shouldn't be used to preclude somone from public funds and the like.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-31-2000
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 7:22 pm
I didn't say they shouldn't have access. Not once. I would prefer they fund research and aid on ending addiction instead of solving the problems caused by addiction. Seems to me a much better deal when public funds are, in the real world, limited. Individuals aren't the only ones who need to and should be able to make choices.
|
Cndeariso
Member
06-28-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 7:35 pm
i don't know that lung cancer deaths are any less common than other cancers but it could be. i do know that in the office where i work (there are 27 of us when fully staffed) that from sept until dec of this past year 3 of us lost parents to lung cancer. and, another one is waiting for their father to die from it. that's four out of 27 with parents having lung cancer. i was one of the ones and i lost my father at age 68. he smoked for 40 years and had quit because of a heart attack and 6 by-passes 9 years before he was diagnosed with lung cancer.
|
Dogdoc
Member
09-29-2001
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 7:38 pm
Karuuna, in Pennsylvania they recently dropped the requirement that motorcyclists have to wear helmets. Isn't that a smart move! They didn't even give a good reason for it. I rarely see anyone wearing a helmet now. Long term care here we come.
|
Vacanick
Member
07-12-2004
| Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 7:47 pm
My mother died at age 65 from lung disease caused by second hand smoke. She had never smoked in her life. Her lungs could have been damaged from her father when she was a child and he smoked a pipe. Or from my father who smoked for years until quitting 20 years ago. Or it could have been enviromental. Either way it was not her choice and it was a tragic, unnecessary death!! Cndeariso ... I'm sorry about your father. I agree there should be more funding for smoking related diseases.
|