"Science" claims that second hand smoke is harmful to children?

Question

...because it always puts the child at risk.

(Can you name me something, anything, that doesn't put a child or adult at risk?? Doesn't giving a child a penny put them at risk because it can be swallowed? Isn't every person walking down the street "at risk"?

Answer 1

OMG. Do you really need someone to explain to you that THERE ARE VARYING DEGREES OF RISK?

Of course, anything will put a child or an adult at risk. But that doesn't mean that all risk is equal. Some risk is infinitessimal and unavoidable, and other risk is significant and avoidable.

Letting a child play in a playpen is a negligible risk. Letting the child play next to a busy street is a significant (and unforgiveable) risk.

Giving an infant a teething ring to play with is a neglibigle risk. Giving an infant a penny is a significant (and unforgiveable) risk.

Smoking for one day in the presence of a child is a negligible risk. Doing it continuously for years is a significant (and unforgiveable) risk.

To try and suggest that all risk is equal, is just ... absurd.

Do you really need someone to explain that to you?

Answer 2

Feathers generally don't put anyone at risk. A glass of water's pretty harmless too. Second-hand smoke, on the other hand, has been proven to cause lung cancer, asthmatic symptoms, and other lung diseases. Yes, there's danger in every day life, but probability tells us that there's a very small chance of you dying by some coincidence on the street. Breathing polluted air however is essentially like playing Russian Roulette... eventually, you'll wind up underground, probably sooner than later.

Answer 3

You fail to put the " risk " in proper statistical appreciation; the degree of risk in walking down the street is several orders of magnitude less than second hand smoke, which kills about 50,000 people a year. 400,000 people a year were killed by smoking, not that long ago. Compared to the amount of people smoking to every one who walks down the street, is statistically incoherent. Seems you have a agenda you are promoting by minimizing the damage of cigarettes.

Answer 4

This takes the cake for ridiculous questions. Nothing tops driving along the highway in the winter and seeing people smoking in their car with the windows closed and the kids in the back... but that is about par for the course when it comes to smokers. It seems they have no problem encroaching on other peoples rights, but if you ever asked them to butt out, well get ready to have the riot act read.
As for your "other" at risk questions, well, they all involve choice. Unfortunately, the child in the back seat of the car can not get out while the vehicle is speeding down the highway....

Answer 5

Yes, you absolutely can get addicted to cigarettes through second hand smoke; either through the actual product that is in the cigarette itself, or from the act of someone you respect or care for smoking around you.

Answer 6

Yes, but whatever can be stopped should be stopped. Smoking is an option and second hand smoke (passive smoke) is also an unnecessary option. So can be stopped. Should be stopped.

Not only fro children, even for you and your friends, smoking is bad.

Answer 7

Yes secon hand smoke is had for children. Luckily, the lung doesn't filter all the harmful chemicals into you, so when you breath it out, theres still some chemicals.

Answer 8

Yes, it is true there is always a "risk" at living... but still I don't like the idea of children growing in a smokey environment... can't do any good to them...

Answer 9

to some extent the whole earth is at risk of something...like the sun stop burning heat?

Answer 10

Can anyone even prove second hand smoke is harmful at all?