Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 6th September 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Doctors fired up on 'glamour' of smoking



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 07 July 2008
KEIRA Knightley in Atonement; Bruce Willis in Die Hard; Uma Thurman in Pulp Fiction – all three have used smoking to great effect, creating enduring images of stars lighting up.
But now, in an attempt to de-glamorise tobacco, the British Medical Association (BMA) has called for the portrayal of smoking to be taken into account when classifying films.

The BMA, which is holding its annual conference in Edinburgh this week, also wants anti-smoking adverts to appear before television programmes which show people lighting up.

Images ranging from chain-smoking young people in Channel 4's Skins to Dot Cotton lighting up in EastEnders can all contribute to making cigarettes seem acceptable, several international studies suggest.

A new report by the BMA – Forever Cool: the Influence of Smoking Imagery on Young People – said that most smokers started before the age of 18, with virtually all taking up the habit before 25.

What is of particular concern to doctors is how images in the media can help make smoking seem normal and attractive to young people.

Dr Vivienne Nathanson, the BMA's head of science and ethics, said cigarettes were made to appear a symbol of success.

She pointed to Independence Day, where Will Smith lights a cigar after killing aliens, and said that when films showed smoking in such a way, the British Board of Film Classification should raise the certificate.

"Where a film might be a 12 certificate, if it includes positive images of smoking then that should nudge the certificate up," she said.

Magazines also needed to consider the images of smoking they used. Dr Nathanson said rather than using pictures of Kate Moss or Amy Winehouse having a cigarette, photos of them not smoking should be used.

The BMA said that, along with other measures to reduce smoking, such as a ban on vending machines – proposed by the Scottish Government – the aim should be to make the UK tobacco-free by 2035.

But a spokesman for pro-choice smoking campaign group Forest said assessing the content of films was an act of censorship, and thus something that should bother everyone, including non-smokers.

Such a move would lead to films such as 101 Dalmatians – in which the villainous Cruella de Vil smokes throughout – receiving an 18 certificate, he said. "What kind of country has an 18 certificate on 101 Dalmatians? It's completely insane."

But health campaigners welcomed the BMA's call.

Professor Gerard Hastings, of Cancer Research UK, said: "Ultimately (young people] will only be truly protected when tobacco promotion and marketing in all its forms ceases to exist."

Shona Robison, Scotland's public health minister, welcomed the BMA's report.

"Like clinicians, the Scottish Government recognises that smoking is one of the main causes of preventable ill-health."

Stubbing out cigarettes remains an uphill battle

• IMAGES of smoking in films fell between 1950 and 1990, then began to rise, research suggests.

• In 2006, 22 per cent of people over the age of 16 smoked, government figures show.

• Among 16- to 19-year-olds in England, Scotland and Wales, 20 per cent smoked. The figure was 31 per cent among those aged 20 to 24.

• One in 20 of eight- to 15-year-olds questioned in Scotland in 2003 had smoked in the previous week. This varied from 2 per cent for those aged 12 to 29 per cent for those aged 15.

• Smoking is linked to deprivation. In 2006, 17 per cent of people in non-manual jobs smoked, but this figure was 28 per cent in manual jobs.

• Two-thirds of regular smokers aged 12 to 15 buy their cigarettes from a tobacconist, newsagent or sweetshop.

• Between 1970 and 2000, British men experienced the most rapid decrease in death rates from tobacco in the world as a result of smokers quitting. Surveys have shown that more than two-thirds of British smokers would like to stop.

• According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), in the EU in 2002, 80,000 people are estimated to have died from conditions related to second-hand tobacco smoke.

• Europe's biggest smokers are men in the Russian Federation. According to the WHO, 65.9 per cent of them smoke daily, compared with a European average of 40 per cent.

• Though smoking was linked with cancer during the 1950s, it took until 1962 until the Royal College of Physicians recommended stricter laws on sales and advertising.

The full article contains 737 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 06 July 2008 9:33 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Tobacco
 
1

Maisie from Morningside,

07/07/2008 00:29:10
Hmmm...Dot Cotton as a fashionable role model????
I don't see it myself.
2

Jason,

Japan 07/07/2008 01:15:42
Depends which "Die Hard" you mean, but "Atonement" is the only recent movie of the three. Always a problem between lending a glamour image to smoking and authenticity. Lent my "Atonement" disc, but do remember thinking the smoking scene gave a 1930's-'40's flavour.
But Uma Thurman, “Pulp Fiction”, best dancing scene sure, but did she really glamorise smoking? I like um disturbed, but not that disturbed.

3

Riverkidca,

Canada 07/07/2008 05:25:08
Kids can walk past any office building, pub, or for that matter, cinema, and they will see people from every walk of life advertising smoking, any time of the day or night, thanks to the busybody antis. They should also be certified (the antis I mean)
4

Bigwull,

edinburgh 07/07/2008 08:18:47
3 maybe they should smoke indoors then? Who will moan when the basic rate of tax will have to go up when there is no tax revenue from fags, and who'll pay for the pensions of everyone living to over 100?
5

DeniseX,

07/07/2008 08:27:41
Every shop(including children's shops) we walk pass, we see pictures of cigarettes. These no smoking signs glamourise smoking.
6

ChrisC,

The real world 07/07/2008 08:43:07
Want, want, want is all we hear from these healthists. Real life is too horrible for them so we must be sanitized and censored to appease their hatred. Surely these people should have sufficient commonsense to realise that all their screaming and demonising fails to achieve reduced smoking rates something that even most smokers would be happy to see.
It is they who keep smoking in the headlines.
It is they who forced it outside making it more visible and attractive to young people.
It is they who failed to deliver their promise of reduced smoking rates through education.
It is they who bring ridicule to their claims through their unrealistic, tainted proclamations and blatant spin.
It is they who believe coercion is better than encouragement and it is they who have created a serious schism in previously tolerant society.
The comment by Professor Gerard Hastings is particularly puzzling since it is they, CRUK and their allies, who have done more to publicise smoking than any film or tobacco company.
It is they who have no respect for anyone who disagrees with their dogma.
7

The Batboy,

07/07/2008 09:19:00
This is nuts! In the movies, there is ALWAYS a reason why the actor lights up. And it's NOT because it's cool.

I hope the film authorities tell this lot where they can stick their suggestions.

And no, I don't smoke btw. Never have!
8

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 07/07/2008 09:21:38
The tobacco companies have sponsored film production for over 70 years - as long as their cancer-causing products were featured. In the old days it was Bogart, Lauren Bacall, Bette Davis, Clark Gable, John Wayne, Jayne Russell, Barbra Stanwyck - all used to peddle the myth that tobacco = sexy; and many of them died of lung cancer.

These days - Big Tobacco has funded hundreds of films as long as the 'product placement' contract keeps their tobacco on screen in the mouth of sexy young things - or the tough macho guys:
Julia Roberts (My Best Friends Wedding, Bruce Willis (Die Hard), Kiera Knightley (Atonement, Edge of Love)

millions of people have been condemned to a horrible death coughing up blood and lumps of tumour - as a result of these evil companies and the films they sponsor. The BMA is right; change the film classification to 18+ if kids are likely to see 'heroic' figures smoking.
9

DeniseX,

07/07/2008 10:12:32
Alcohol is a more dangerous drug and the drinking of alcohol should not be shown on TV before 10pm. I know that this may upset 'soap' watchers, but we must stop glamourising alcohol. Films glamourising the drinking of alcohol should be given an X certificate.
10

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:16:15
"...can all contribute to making cigarettes seem acceptable..."

Cigarettes ARE acceptable. As are cigars. As are pipes.

The only thing that is NOT acceptable are these jack-booted morons trying to marginalise a significant section of society with their incessent drivel.
11

Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:20:47
Maybe they should also consider electronic removal of all smoking materials from black-and-white war movies depicting those heros who fought for our freedom during the second World War?

These were genuine heros (unlike Dot Cotton). However, the politically correct, pink and fluffy jack-boot brigade want to remove all the freedoms that they fought for.
12

Mcsnagpile,

07/07/2008 11:25:17
You lot get real.

Believe it or not the simulated murder of someone is against Islam and was banned on Saudi television. They only show the real thing. Of course Coronation St, East Enders etc are banned because it shows people drinking alcohol in a pub.
If we take out all the murder and violence from movies there is not much left.

We would have to revert to Indian movies that sing and dance for two compulsory hours—with kebabs. Or Korean Telly shows that go on for the day with audience participation.

None the less to show the murder of people including aliens possibly is as immoral as showing smoking. All government military advertisements should have a government health warning. Joining the Services could damage your health.

We were all happy to see the Daleks go down the hole on Saturday. But at the end of the day all they did was loose. If they had won they would have done the same as we did. I am sure Davros had a light up in the end or on the end.
I know a Dave Ross who must be related.
13

DeniseX,

07/07/2008 11:54:36
Thank goodness we have Tom and Jerry. No smoking and drinking scenes. Oh, I forgot it's too violent.
14

Charles.D,

Johannesburg 07/07/2008 13:00:49
Do you all remember the British "Super Spy" 007, real bad man drank and smoked !! and well the latest incarnation drank a s**t load then destroyed an Aston Martin, must have been under the influence of cigarettes. this film should be 21 age restricted.
15

jock,

east kilbride. 07/07/2008 13:53:42
how are they going to elect a new pope without smoke?would Churchill and Attlee now be in jail today?
will smoked kippers be banned?
the madness goes on and on by the FUDS in our once tolerant society who deny dying patients the comfort they may find in a cigarette and serving soldiers made to stand outside along with other veterans who fought for our country when they wish a ciggy and a pint at their local servicemen's club.
the banners in our midst are are the the selfish element blighting this country .
enough is enough give us free choice
16

Richard P.,

Brechin, 07/07/2008 13:54:19
Cars kill people. By not only hitting them, but by gassing them as well. Do we ban movies with cars in them? More money is paid to the government through National Health contributions than is spent on treating smoking-related diseases. Let's not mention Custom & Excise Duty and VAT.(Those taxes are probably paying for Afghanistan and MP's second homes).
What about the 90yr old guy who ran the London Marathon and stopped for a pint and a fag.
I've been smoking for 45 years. I have no intention of quitting. No bureaucratic pillock is going to tell me how to run my life,even if he's a doctor, with time on his hands, thinking of ways to justify his existence.
If someone is shown smoking in a movie, it's bound to be the bad guy.
17

Proud to have Scots blood,

Brooklyn, N.Y. 07/07/2008 14:10:49
I love old films..........Maltese Falcon, Casablanca,
Sahara, Now Voyager, you get the idea. EVERYBODY is lighting up. Just watching them is enough to make you cough & give you emphysemia. It doesn't make me want to smoke. There is a warning on the packaging. If people don't want to heed it, it's their choice. I DO
object to having the smoke in my space. It was good that smoking be forbidden in restaurants. I had more than one expensive meal loused up with cigar smoke too.
18

DesertRat,

Southwest USA 07/07/2008 14:20:30
I don't use cigarettes, cigars, or smokeless tobacco but it appears to me the "war against smoking" is more about behavior control than health problems. A survey of a couple years ago of those opposed to smoking showed the vast majority were opposed to the smell of cigarettes and little concerned with health issues. Indications are that seventeen percent of smokers are subject to health problems as a result, while eighty-three percent are not.

On the other hand, the cost to society as a result of alcohol abuse exceeds the combined cost of illegal drugs and cigarettes by a margin of more that two to one. I haven't seen any statistics to support it but would bet that almost 100 percent of those opposed to smoking also drink alcohol, and by doing so, tacitly endorse alcohol abuse or turn a bind eye to it. Rather hypocritical, I should think.
19

Boggle fey the Bog,

07/07/2008 14:21:13
10 Alternative (High-Octane) Fuel Head,Edinburgh 07/07/2008 11:16:15

Beat me to it!!!! :-)

17 Proud to have Scots blood,Brooklyn, N.Y. 07/07/2008 14:10:49

Yeah and I've had more than one expensive meal ruined by whinging anti-smokers!!!

I see the old '80,000 people are estimated to have died from second hand smoke related illnesses' has raised it's unproven head again, 80,000 people in the EU is equal to 0.013% of the EU population.

Now consider, that 120,000 people are killed in Europe each year due to road traffic accidents (this is a documented fact, not a wooly guestimate), perhaps the BMA should be concerning themselves with banning motor vehicles, or are they 'too frit' as Maggie the Snatcher would say?

Time we stood up for our right to choose, after all is that not what the 'London and Holyrood governments' are suppossed to be all about, freedom to choose?

Well apparently not, as I can't choose to have my freedom to smoke with my beer, or even smoke in my smokers club, this is a crackpot, illegal act, against the ECHR and believe it or not the Scottish Constitution, as Scotland is the only part of the UK that has a written Constitution, that embodies the ECHR (The Scotland Act).

So c'mon Eck stop all those ne'er do well do-gooders, in thier tracks and restore our freedoms, if you do that some of us may actually vote for you after Independence ;-)
20

monkey man,

07/07/2008 14:38:25
Doctors and healthcare workers should just shut up and get on with their daily jobs. They can ask their patients if they wish to stop smoking and if they don't respect their wishes instead.
21

Flash67,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 16:47:18
This is a good idea, (for movies) as long as it's not retrospective (eg the 101 dalmations, casablanca scenarios). But we already see fewer smoking scenes in films and TV - I think they are getting at the fashion and gossip mags showing models / stars with a fag in their hand... and this type of thing is far more likely to paint a picture to kids that it's a cool thing to do. Not a lot we can do about what pics the mags publish though, apart from appealing to their sense of judgement! Maybe they could publish more pics showing how hacket this crud makes you look when older!
22

Thomas Laprade,

Thunder Bay Ont. Canada 07/07/2008 16:50:23
"80,000 people are estimated to have died from conditions related to second-hand tobacco smoke."

No one on this planet ever died or got cancer solely from second-hand smoke.

If your figure is true then you must be able to produce three names and their 'death' certificates stating,"This person died from second-hand smoke."
If you can't produce my request then you are just 'blowing' smoke.

http://smokersclubinc.com
http://pasan.thetruthisalie.com
23

Flash67,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 17:06:33
The big problem is that smoking is legal. Until we grasp the nettle and classify this weed along with cannabis, then the problem will never go away. And to be honest, it's mainly those who don't have the brains to stop themselves smoking who are going to be upset anyway, so why stall on this? (Yet another survey out recently showed that it is those in deprived [i.e. genetically low iq] areas who are the heaviest smokers anyway)
24

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 07/07/2008 19:45:17
OI SCOTSMAN, WILL YOU DESIST FROM TIMING ME OUT SO THAT I HAVE TO LOG IN AGAIN AND AGAIN - OR ARE YOU REALLY THAT DEPENDENT ON SIGN INS FOR YOUR FINANCES< LIKE LABOUR SEEM TO DEPENDENT ON SIGN ONS FOR THEIR VOTES?

Why shouldn't smoking be shown in films or on tv? It reflects real life. Or do the fascists want to pretend it doesn't?
25

Irish Oaks,

Ripley TN USA 07/07/2008 23:08:49
Y'all need to come over the pond if you want to have trouble with smoking. My husband and I quit in 1995. But let me let you in on a secret, the smoking police are out there to get every one. Taxes keep on going up on those who imbibe with tobacco in any form. There are those who want to make it criminal for those who smoke in vehicles where children are riding--second hand smoke and all that.
It is almost as bad as Christian bashing.
26

Stef,

Edinburgh 07/07/2008 23:20:08
#6 Chris C,
You are absolutely correct in all of what you have said in your post. We should also include, that they have bankrupted 1000's of business's, made many 1000's of folk unemployed. Everywhere we look we signs, telling us what to do and not, I also charge them with 'vandalism', it is a ugly environment they have created. Live music is gradually being silenced with all these closures of venues. What a really dull society they are creating. #15 Jock, E. Kilbride, mentions the servicemens clubs these are also rapidly disappearing, as well as the many Social & Welfare Clubs.
Gerard Hastings, now here we have a leading,and subliminal character in this mass corruption. I ask everyone to Google this man. You will find it all very interesting where this man gets his funding from. He is one of these pseudo academics, that make loads of cash from the most doubtful of sources.
27

ChrisC,

Still in the real world 08/07/2008 02:13:27
Stef - You are so right but the list of unintended consequences could go on to include the isolation and depression caused to so many who find themselves excluded from their long time social venues.
Cafes, clubs, bingo halls and pubs have, prior to this ban, offered comfort to all but comfort is now denied to all smokers and even non-smokers are affected when their friends no longer appear or worse still when the venue is closed.
Depression and isolation are renowned killers but the extremists who justify these bans must also accept they are the cause of many premature deaths.
It is they also who peddle so-called miracle cessation drugs such as Champix despite well documented side effects resulting in many suicides. Many employers in America have even banned their use by employees yet our experts still offer it to quitters in this country - still what does it matter, their agenda has no respect for smokers or, in fact, for anyone who questions their righteousness.
Add to this the misery of the bankruptcy and unemployment you mentioned and compare all this to the b*llsh*t we hear from our inept, do-gooding politicians and we have a recipe for real disaster.
28

tomi,

08/07/2008 04:12:11
UK tobacco free by 2035?

Impossible while the government is addicted to cigarette tax.
29

James Davies (101),

UK 08/07/2008 12:59:06
To Mr Tweedmouth, no.8. regarding the deaths of smoking movie stars.

Humphrey Bogart - Throat cancer (I'll give you that one)
Bette Davis - Breast cancer (at 81! - not a bad innings)
Clark Gable - Heart attack (age 59 - he'd just finished filming scenes where he was dragged by horses!)
John Wayne - Stomach cancer (at 72)
Barbara Stanwyck - Heart disease (at 83 - again, I wouldn't be disappointed with that)

Jane Russell (87) and Lauren Bacall (84) are still alive!

Get your facts straight next time; not a lung cancer among them although Bogart clearly died of smoking related illness.

JD.
30

ChrisC,

looking seaward 08/07/2008 13:44:45
James 29 - they never gave cigarettes a glamourous image - it was they who were glamourous.
Far more glamourous than Prof Gerard Hastings' opinions, a man who enjoys a glamorous lifestyle that many of us would like. Choose your hatred, get in the clique, get your expenses(+) sorted, fly around the world pontificating, bias your studies to suit the funding, spread the poison and demonise your fellow man's lifestyle.
A downright insult to all with essential, often joyless, everyday jobs on average and below pay rates, with no 'jollies' and certainly not able to dip into the trough of 'charitable research' funding.
31

Debtman,

Derry 08/07/2008 13:53:14
Telling kids that something is bad and then hiding it away is the ultimate glamour. I often wonder if the BMA are actually paid by the tobacco companies because their policies drive more children to smoking. For years schools have spread the message that smoking is bad for you and that smokers die horrible deaths at an early age. It is now clear to children that this is a myth as they see smokers of all ages enjoying a cigarette outside pubs while inside pubs are dead and smell of flatulence.

It is not difficult to see which option appeals most.
32

David from New Mills,

Fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 08/07/2008 14:28:05
#31, Debtman.
If the insides of pubs are so empty, where is the flatulence coming from, or is that what cleared them? Interesting to note that one of the consequences of smoking restrictions, is the reported downturn in business for dry cleaners. The odour of alleged flatulence does not cling to the clothing and hair as effectively as tobacco smoke it would appear.
I'll be happy to choose the option of being inside, and watch the smokers dissipating their fumes outside in the open, wet or otherwise.
33

ChrisC,

gazing outward 08/07/2008 14:50:34
David - Many of us would rather you be inside on your own.
We'd far sooner be enjoying the company of our friends both old and new well away from the flatulence of intolerance.
34

Debtman,

Derry 08/07/2008 15:49:52
David.
I did not say that the pubs were empty inside but dead! Soulless and boring. The atmosphere has disappeared and I do not mean just the smoke. Individuals scattered around with their heads stuck in books, groups of friends either separated or all outside and the bar staff standing looking for something to polish as few people sit at the bar chatting anymore. If that is your type of night out then I hope you enjoy it while your pub struggles to survive but it is certainly not my idea of a good night's fun.
35

DeniseX,

smug free London 08/07/2008 17:26:00
Sly smokers story.

David from New Mills,Pleasantville, U.K. 08/07/2008 12:04:40
#18/19.
Has Brian considered euthanasia?

What a pheasant plucker. Meeting David, would probably make many think of it.
36

David from New Mills,

Breathing freely in fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 08/07/2008 19:20:05
#33,ChrisC,gazing outward.
Whatever Chris's preference, I am usually happy to be inside sans fug, and rarely in an empty pub. Chris and his mates are welcome to stay outside and thus not impose the arrogance of air pollution on those inside.
37

David from New Mills,

Fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 08/07/2008 19:28:57
#34,Debtman,Derry.
Whatever DD meant, I've yet to come across pubs with corpses slumped over unread books, finished off by the terminating flatulence, or otherwise. I shall continue to support my fug free pubs, without even posing the question of what constitutes a good night's fun for DD, behind drawn curtains, or otherwise.
38

David from New Mills,

Fug free Pleasantville, U.K 08/07/2008 19:39:16
#35,Deni seX,smug free London.
To avoid any confusion in readers' minds, Deni is alluding to my posting #20 on the "Sly smokers spark more pub inspections" thread. This was in response to #18/19 from Brian the Barbarian, which I regarded as very much tongue in cheek. If Deni took these seriously, then perhaps one of us might just have an assessment problem somewhere?
39

Bill Crombie,

09/07/2008 19:21:22
Exactly when did doctors become the guardians of film censorship? For a so called profession that has resided over the biggest increase in hospital-induced infections and subsequent deaths, they really should get their priorities in order. Like the smoking ban, these ranting idiots should be ignored.

Gratuituous sex and violence in films is OK, but a lit cigarette become a nuclear bomb in these poor soul's minds. Perspective - these people do not understand the meaning of the word. As for Keira Knightley puffing on a cigarette - she is as sexy as hell with or without!! This is more than can be said for the resident anti-smoking blogger - David of New Mills.
40

David from New Mills,

Fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 09/07/2008 20:31:06
#39,Bill Crombie.
BC, as one of the many pro-smoking bloggers on these forums, is more than welcome to hazard a guess as to my sexual attraction to females, males, or even dogs for that matter, if he so wishes. However, in this repect, one advantage I have over the smoking fraternity and sorority is that my breath doesn't smell of fetid old socks.
41

DeniseX,

09/07/2008 20:43:56
Obviously, David goes about smelling 'fetid old socks'. Good luck to him, that's his choice.
42

David from New Mills,

Fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 09/07/2008 22:09:55
#41,Deni seX.
I try to avoid smelling fetid old socks, just as much as I prefer to avoid smokers' fumes, both of which are quite repugnant to me. Both preferences are my choice. Dead simple, really.
43

Bill Crombie,

11/07/2008 14:01:16
David of New Mills needs to seriously get some therapy for his aversion of tobacco smoke and smelly breath. A polo mint or Wrigley's chewing gum does the trick. His rantings are becoming more nonsensical by the day.

You will note that he will not leave this post unchallenged. Like a child, he always likes to have the last word!!
44

DeniseX,

11/07/2008 15:16:17
Bill
We noticed that ages ago and it's best not to answer his stupid comments. What he really needs is odour eaters.
Back to story. Isn't it strange that prior to anti-smokers, we had adverts for cigarettes everywhere and yet the number of smokers declined year on year.
45

Stef,

Edinburgh 11/07/2008 17:31:56
#43/44 Bill & Denise
Yes, I can totally agree with you in regard to the poor soul from New Mills. Sadly, I do not hold out much hope that any form of therapy would help this sad critter. I did suggest it to him more than 2 years and 1000's of his childish postings ago. However! he does serve one useful purpose in showing the bottom line of how really mad and stupid these fanatical lunatics are.
I would also take this opportunity too thank Chris C #27, 30, 33, for his well written postings. I suppose that without all the sensible contributors, there to heckle, David would have little or no other social interaction whatsoever, thankfully most people are more tolerant and can see that he suffers from some form of mental illness. There is more to be pitied than scorned with these characters.
46

Stef,

Edinburgh 11/07/2008 17:40:34
Bill,
Aye you are right, he will be back later no doubt, ranting some more of his childish rubbish. I have this image of the lonely and rejected schoolboy. you know the ones, nobody had time for and the girls would ridicule.
47

Bill Crombie,

11/07/2008 20:06:34
Stef - Well it looks as though the rabid anti-smoker, David of New Mills, may not be returning to this thread
after all. No great loss, but is is noticeable that the antis are reducing in number on these blogs - lost the argument no doubt.

How is Edinburgh? I haven't been up there for about five years.
48

David from New Mills,

Ever pleasantly fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 11/07/2008 20:46:20
#43, Bill Crombie.
Amusing, if predictable, how the pro-smoking lobby always rises to the bait of trying to quash any contrary point of view.
Anway, in turn, BC is quite right in that a polo mint or something similar will help to mitigate the smoker's fetid breath, even if it does not eradicate his underlying cancer.
BC should perhaps recall that it is usually the wiser adult who has the last word over the petulant child.
49

David from New Mills,

Ever pleasantly fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 11/07/2008 20:50:29
#44,Deni seX.
Then, why does Deni bother? Self flaggelation, perhaps?
I would suggest it's the smoker who needs air fresheners or odour eaters.
Perhaps most smokers got wise to the tobacco adverts' baselessness?
50

David from New Mills,

Ever pleasantly fug free Pleasantville, U.K. 11/07/2008 20:59:02
#45/6, Wee Stef from Edinburgh.
David from the mental asylum is more than happy to be amused by stef's typical attempts at logical argument. Perhaps if he feels that he was rejected by his treatment at the hands of his classmates, male or female, he could build his self esteem by trying to find another lost cause in supporting Wee Shuggie Howitt in the Glasgow East by-election. With a bit of luck, HH may just poll a tad more votes than 91, this time? Go for it Steffie!
51

Bill Crombie,

11/07/2008 21:06:02
I have always been a strong advocate of freedom of speech David and whilst I may disagree with most of your rantings, you are entitled to put them forward. However, I note that your recent efforts seem bizarre to say the least - almost to the point of being manic. Even when you think you have got your own way with the smoking ban, you still don't seem very happy with life. Perhaps it is because all your previous friends don't frequent the pubs anymore and you're left alone in the sterile atmosphere of your smokefree existance. The question is did you have any real friends in the first place - probably not.
52

David from New Mills,

Ever pleasantly fug free and non-manic Pleasantvil 11/07/2008 23:05:23
#47 & 51, Bill Crombie.
If BC and his fellow rabid advocates of free speech think they have won some kind of argument, then good luck to them, but in the meantime, I shall continue to enjoy life in my lonely, sterile, friendless pubs, whilst BC and his mates enjoy some form of "existance", as they shiver outside, puffing away frantically on their nicotine sticks.
53

Stef,

Edinburgh 12/07/2008 06:44:52
#51 Bill,
Wow! Davids last few postings, have really fully exposed his illness. What can anyone say??? This guy is seriously in need of help. His comments are almost to be described as insane. Clearly, he has no respect for anyone, young, old, sick or like himself the insane.
This legislation and all this ongoing madness has created a playing field for these fanatics that have little or no regard for their fellow beings, whilst many are profiteering and jubilant out of all the unhappiness they are causing. Like David, they are quite disgusting in their attitude.
54

DeniseX,

12/07/2008 09:40:13
Hamish may not have got many votes, but he still got TEN times the number of votes that Tony Farnon got, standing for anti-smokers.
There is more chance of contracting an illness from the fumes of David's feet than from the fumes of cigarettes.
SMOKE HATERS STINK
55

David from New Mills,

Sweet smelling and fug free Pleasantville. 12/07/2008 11:20:01
#54,Deni seX.
Perhaps this simply indicates the satisfaction of the vast majority of the electorate with the status quo regarding smoking restrictions.
Flushed with his relative success, Shuggie may move on to even dizzier heights and impress the poor souls of Glasgow East, being regarded as one of their own, and gain a result running into three figures? Time will tell.
As Deni is never likely to get anywhere near my feet, he should be free of any danger in that respect.
SMOKING SUCKS.
56

DeniseX,

12/07/2008 11:48:05
HE! He! Davina is getting confused with his/her sexuality!
57

David from New Mills,

Sweet smelling and fug free Pleasantville 12/07/2008 12:00:25
#56, Deni seX.
Deni's finally flipped, I see. Never mind, there's always euthanasia as an option.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.