Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Hundreds of thousands when you include smokers, sure. Unlike smokers, car drivers are not so considerate as to filter their fumes through their own lungs before exposing the rest of us. But smoking in public is not frowned upon because of its effects on smokers. It is because of its effects on non-consenting bystanders. When you look only at second-hand smoke, which is what the question was really about, the numbers are very similar, in the low 10s of thousands. So again, they are extremely comparable and your attempts to deflect here are exactly the problem we’re discussing.
But more annoyingly, smokers puff their smoke into public spaces, like events, restaurants, streets etc.
Your statement leaves me truly speechless. Where do you think car fumes go, the fucking moon??? It’s amazing that those tens of thousands were able to afford a trip to the moon where they died from breathing car exhaust. Except, no, fumes in the air do not behave differently by source. They disperse and are breathed by people regardless.
I used US statistics because it’s what I’m familiar with. I doubt any developed country is substantially different. Most people drive in most developed countries, even the least car-dominated ones. Maybe pollution is 10-20% lower if that fraction don’t drive but the overall picture is the same even with that reduction.
I’m not talking about the behavior of the fumes, but the perception. Having a smoker next to you is a lot more visible and disgusting than having a car 20 meters away on the road literally already driving away.
That difference in experience makes a massive difference in how bothered people are. Hence there is a sensible reason people might pick different answers
I wear a respirator outside because of the cars. I don’t have to see them even and I can smell them the moment I leave my excessively air filtered house. There is no more go outside for fresh air in North american cities. I can’t run or bike without the respirator or I will feel out of breath instantly, walking feels like a chore. Maybe it’s better deep in the woods but people don’t live there. Compared to some small towns in europe I’ve been to where cars are only used when absolutely needed, we are so polluted yet everyone is blind to it because its always there. People literally drive their cars 400 meters to go to the local shopping center or to drop off their high school age kids at school.
Holy damn, I’m sorry to hear that. For context, I live in a small town in Europe.
I’ve been to Colorado once, it was a rather weird experience how insistent people were at staying in their car. But it did result in completely empty walking paths trough a local nature reserve/park which was great.
Except it’s not one car. It’s MILLIONS everywhere you go. Inescapable. As much as cigarettes were in the 70’s. Did we do something to change that, I can’t really remember…?
I guess that’s a difference in terms of where we live, there aren’t really a lot of cars near me most of the time. Smokers are found aside every darn outside door though
I have to cycle on the roads with cars every day. My favourite bar’s patio is literally in the parking lane of a busy 4 lane thoroughfare. I will take cigarette smokers any day over the fumes and noise I have to deal with from cars.
We only deal with it because it’s normalized and most people can’t imagine a convenient alternative.
But this is just culture, right? In the 70s smoking was normal and nobody was bothered by it. Now culture has changed and we see it as disgusting. With a bit of effort and luck, culture will change and driving a car in public will be seen to be just as disgusting as smoking is now.
Oh you’re 1000% right in my opinion. But that’s not what the example I pointed out shows.
Their research found a perceived difference tobacco vs car fumes. That’s a subjective experience, and so smokers are the ones more close by and incidental. They’re going to seem worse to people.
But the researcher is pulling the conclusion that people are brainwashed. I can think of half a dozen variables influencing his findings.
Hundreds of thousands when you include smokers, sure. Unlike smokers, car drivers are not so considerate as to filter their fumes through their own lungs before exposing the rest of us. But smoking in public is not frowned upon because of its effects on smokers. It is because of its effects on non-consenting bystanders. When you look only at second-hand smoke, which is what the question was really about, the numbers are very similar, in the low 10s of thousands. So again, they are extremely comparable and your attempts to deflect here are exactly the problem we’re discussing.
Your statement leaves me truly speechless. Where do you think car fumes go, the fucking moon??? It’s amazing that those tens of thousands were able to afford a trip to the moon where they died from breathing car exhaust. Except, no, fumes in the air do not behave differently by source. They disperse and are breathed by people regardless.
I used US statistics because it’s what I’m familiar with. I doubt any developed country is substantially different. Most people drive in most developed countries, even the least car-dominated ones. Maybe pollution is 10-20% lower if that fraction don’t drive but the overall picture is the same even with that reduction.
I’m not talking about the behavior of the fumes, but the perception. Having a smoker next to you is a lot more visible and disgusting than having a car 20 meters away on the road literally already driving away.
That difference in experience makes a massive difference in how bothered people are. Hence there is a sensible reason people might pick different answers
I wear a respirator outside because of the cars. I don’t have to see them even and I can smell them the moment I leave my excessively air filtered house. There is no more go outside for fresh air in North american cities. I can’t run or bike without the respirator or I will feel out of breath instantly, walking feels like a chore. Maybe it’s better deep in the woods but people don’t live there. Compared to some small towns in europe I’ve been to where cars are only used when absolutely needed, we are so polluted yet everyone is blind to it because its always there. People literally drive their cars 400 meters to go to the local shopping center or to drop off their high school age kids at school.
Holy damn, I’m sorry to hear that. For context, I live in a small town in Europe.
I’ve been to Colorado once, it was a rather weird experience how insistent people were at staying in their car. But it did result in completely empty walking paths trough a local nature reserve/park which was great.
Except it’s not one car. It’s MILLIONS everywhere you go. Inescapable. As much as cigarettes were in the 70’s. Did we do something to change that, I can’t really remember…?
I guess that’s a difference in terms of where we live, there aren’t really a lot of cars near me most of the time. Smokers are found aside every darn outside door though
I have to cycle on the roads with cars every day. My favourite bar’s patio is literally in the parking lane of a busy 4 lane thoroughfare. I will take cigarette smokers any day over the fumes and noise I have to deal with from cars.
We only deal with it because it’s normalized and most people can’t imagine a convenient alternative.
You don’t have seperate bike lanes? A bar with a parking lot? That is one odd place
But this is just culture, right? In the 70s smoking was normal and nobody was bothered by it. Now culture has changed and we see it as disgusting. With a bit of effort and luck, culture will change and driving a car in public will be seen to be just as disgusting as smoking is now.
Let’s hope so! Right now we have to get government support for publicly owned public transport
Imo the deaths caused by the fumes should have more weight in these sorts of discussions than how we perceive the fumes.
Oh you’re 1000% right in my opinion. But that’s not what the example I pointed out shows.
Their research found a perceived difference tobacco vs car fumes. That’s a subjective experience, and so smokers are the ones more close by and incidental. They’re going to seem worse to people.
But the researcher is pulling the conclusion that people are brainwashed. I can think of half a dozen variables influencing his findings.
Hence, take it with a jar of salt