Since Oct. 24, I have been a nonsmoker.
I have gone more than three weeks without a cigarette thanks to the nicotine patch and my own resolve.
But I’d like to clarify something for anti-smoking Nazis, and being unable to smoke within 25 feet of an entrance had nothing to do with my decision.
Negative health effects and the desire not to spend two minutes coughing every morning sealed the deal, as well as the annoyance of every negative advertisement, dirty look and nagging reminder from friends and family.
That’s what the advertisements from the “Infect Truth” campaign did. They forced me to internalize the phrase “If I quit, will you please, for the love of my sanity, stop playing these damn ads?”
Fortunately, I’ve regained my sense of smell now, and I see both sides of the story — cigarettes stink. You smokers (I should say “we smokers,” because once an addict, always an addict) don’t know how bad those things smell until you regain the ability to smell.
I’ve discovered a few odors in my apartment which had previously escaped my formerly spot-on schnozz and now need to be sought out and summarily destroyed.
The odiferous effects are the only reason I can see to keep people from smoking within 25 feet of the door, and it seems to be a pretty arbitrary number.
While I found copious amounts of evidence from respected journals, medical researchers, government organizations and other authoritatively impressive sources which outline the negative effects of environmental tobacco smoke in enclosed or poorly-ventilated spaces, I have not found a shred of evidence that says someone who passes within 25 feet of a smoker is going to get lung cancer.
I even called the Oklahoma State Department of Health to find out evidence that supports the 25-foot rule, but hadn’t heard back from them by the time this column went to press.
There are probably more negative health effects when people treat smokers as second-class citizens. Smokers have butane-based lighters, a product which the Transportation Security Administration bans in both carryon and checked luggage.
Who knows what these ecological terrorists could do, especially if you deprive them of their precious, stress-relieving “Vitamin N.”
So, the 25-foot rule, or possibly the campus-wide smoking ban, amounts to little more than legislating politeness.
To be in the vicinity of a diesel truck for three seconds is probably a trillion times worse than to pass by even the rudest of smokers and breathe those aromatic carcinogens. Also, OSU’s transit system hasn’t yet switched to a fuel which burns cleaner than diesel.
Maybe we should ban the busses on campus, too.
As we slash and burn the right to pollute everyone’s sinuses, let’s ban anyone who refuses to wear deodorant or bathe frequently enough.
It’s true I play devil’s advocate, but who’s to say the devil himself is a smoker?
The old argument “Where there’s smoke, there’s fire” doesn’t necessarily hold true when it comes to smokers, and it certainly doesn’t necessitate the response of a four-alarm committee.
All I ask for are some honest arguments and a little rationality when it comes to sweeping decisions that effect people you may not necessarily like but still have to tolerate.
In the meantime, here’s to our campus putting out the brush fires of real health issues for a change.
Originally printed in the Daily O’Collegian, November 17th, 2006.
Comment on this post below
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.