Topic: Cunard Smoking policy amended

QUOTE:

Just wanted to pop in and say Hi Dolan, Nice to have you on the Forum as well as Answers. Be nice to Christiann she's been through the mill a bit.

Regards to "C" from Neil and Ida

Thanks Neil. At least I have learned an important lesson, it's a waste of energy !

There is no evidence that breathing in perfume causes cancer unlike breathing in tobacco fumes

When I received the letter from Cunard it was so official I was thinking there was a major change to the itinerary, a port gone or worse the cruise cancelled because there was an accompanying letter from the travel agent too! My heart was thudding reading them through,
(Although obviously if I had been a smoker it would have been a major change)

[QUOTE=TipTop, Leeds;45697][SIZE=6]Perfumes Linked To Infertility, Cancer
From The Sunday Times's Lois Rogers
November 25, 2002
HIGH levels of a chemical blamed for causing infertility in men have been found in some of the world's best-known perfumes and cosmetics.

Chanel No5, Christian Dior's Poison, Eternity from Calvin Klein and Tresor by Lancome were among 34 toiletries found by a Swedish study to contain di-ethylhexyl phthalate or other phthalates.
The European Commission is proposing a ban on the use in cosmetics of two of the most potent forms of phthalates amid fears they cause genital abnormalities affecting up to 4 per cent of male babies. These genital abnormalities - which can include undescended testicles and malformation of the urinary tract - are blamed for soaring levels of testicular cancer in young men.



We have a

[]

Warning do not feed it :D

QUOTE:

We all have our likes and dislikes, one of my particular dislikes happens to be strong perfume, and I would say that it is as valid a dislike as other people's dislike of cigar smoke.
Of course one difference is that I would never smoke a cigar where it would inconvenience someone else, like in a line for dinner, but there are a lot of females who wear strong pefume in just that place, and you can't easily get away from it.

Nice photo by the way, can't say it looks like me but very nice anyway.

Well, something we agree on! I hate overpowering perfumes, especially the really artificial, chemically smelling ones. Perfume should just give a hint as a person walks past, not asphixiate every one for 500 yards. The cost of some of it, you'd think people would use it sparingly. Not just females either!

QUOTE:

We all have our likes and dislikes, one of my particular dislikes happens to be strong perfume, and I would say that it is as valid a dislike as other people's dislike of cigar smoke.
Of course one difference is that I would never smoke a cigar where it would inconvenience someone else, like in a line for dinner, but there are a lot of females who wear strong pefume in just that place, and you can't easily get away from it.

Nice photo by the way, can't say it looks like me but very nice anyway.

Whoa there Tip Top. Be careful. You are in grave danger of finding a couple of friends. I am with you 100% on the strong perfume front. I too hate it. Be subtle or not at all should be every one's motto. I remember when Giorgio Beverly Hills came out in the 80's, one was almost asphixiated.

QUOTE:

I said earlier on:

"One has also to remember that smokers are trapped by their addiction and are therefore subject to the strong urges that an addiction brings. It is only when one is able to break away from this trap that all becomes clear and the idea of filling your lungs with poisons becomes abhorrent. An addict is totally immersed in the cravings that the habit creates and all of their thinking is corrupted by it so you have to forgive the little tantrums, it's the addiction not the person causing the imbalance."

Is there not one smoker that is going to refute this? Is this statement rude, blunt or painful truth? Is this the equivalent of saying “you’re fat”? I thought at least one of you would say something like, “I am perfectly within my rights to abuse my body in any way I see fit or some such trite saying but no one has.

Is it because it is the plain straightforward unadulterated truth? ....Neil

Neil
I smoke
I agree it's an addiction and agree with the first paragraph, however your second paragraph reads (to me) as though you are trying to provoke a 'strong' response.

I only smoke in smoking areas and think myself lucky to be able to smoke in some indoor areas on some cruise lines and do my best not to blow smoke in the direction of others.
I, for one, am pleased that cruise lines offer enough choice of bars to be able to find smoking and non smoking venues.
I do not agree with allowing smoking in cabins as, to me, that may have an impact on the next passenger to occupy the cabin.

I've added my twopenneth, please don't hate me!

PS added this before reading to the end of the thread - just incase it's out of sync

QUOTE:

Neil
I smoke
I agree it's an addiction and agree with the first paragraph, however your second paragraph reads (to me) as though you are trying to provoke a 'strong' response.

I only smoke in smoking areas and think myself lucky to be able to smoke in some indoor areas on some cruise lines and do my best not to blow smoke in the direction of others.
I, for one, am pleased that cruise lines offer enough choice of bars to be able to find smoking and non smoking venues.
I do not agree with allowing smoking in cabins as, to me, that may have an impact on the next passenger to occupy the cabin.

I've added my twopenneth, please don't hate me!

PS added this before reading to the end of the thread - just incase it's out of sync

Firstly I don't hate anyone and in fact there are very few people I even dislike so no fears there.

Sure I have a very strong anti-smoking attitude but so do loads of others . We are now down to 10,000,000 smokers in the UK which is a huge achievement and we are almost at the end of Phase One.

Phase Two will start soon with the introduction of a law to stop people smoking in cars and later public places. This will signal the end of the general acceptance of smoking and it will become far more anti-social than it is now and as I have intimated so many times will probably be down to 100,000 by 2025, may be even sooner. Just look how far the anti-smoking movement has come in just seven years.

Think about it, life without a cigarette is wonderful. .........Neil

Here in Ontario, it is now an offence to smoke in your car with a child in the vehicle. Should do a lot to reduce childhood asthma.

BTW: I enjoy an occasional cigar (maybe 4 a year): But at least they're not saturated with chemicals. And, of course, I'd never do it indoors anywhere - or even upwind of anyone.

Regarding all the anti-smoker anger: I think it's more helpful to think of them as victims - coerced (usually at a young age) into a hard-to-kick habit that finds them sending larger and larger amounts of money to venal multinational corporations, spending small fortunes on dry-cleaning, and then dying young (statistically) of a wide variety of unpleasant diseases (imagine walking around with a plastic tube through which your urine passes into a bag, or drowning in your own fluid-filled lungs, or ...). Pity is really more appropriate than anger.

QUOTE:

Regarding all the anti-smoker anger: I think it's more helpful to think of them as victims - coerced (usually at a young age) into a hard-to-kick habit that finds them sending larger and larger amounts of money to venal multinational corporations, spending small fortunes on dry-cleaning, and then dying young (statistically) of a wide variety of unpleasant diseases (imagine walking around with a plastic tube through which your urine passes into a bag, or drowning in your own fluid-filled lungs, or ...). Pity is really more appropriate than anger.

Very true anger just puts backs up, the problem is what freedom goes next?