Or a healthy as can be expected enviroment
What's wrong with improving things instead of saying, "that's how they are, we'd just better put up with it"? because ever since we started listening to all the 'experts' and 'doctors' saying we should eat right, and exercise regularly, obesity has become the number one medical problem in the western world
First, how ridiculous. Second, you've got the timeline wrong there, people started getting fat a while ago and only recently has the government in the U.K. started going on (a lot) about exercise and eating healthly. The problem is simply that the availability of bad food has increased, people drive more now, people watch more TV now etc This is actually the fault of the corporations who make the stuff, advertise it and keep on pushing it. Of course it's 100% also the fault of the people that choose to eat it and not excercise. What's worse is they subject their kids to the same unhealthy regime. But at the end of the day, eating what you feel like is your own choice (it won't affect other people's health in public), it's just a real shame if it affects your kids. Which people
the *majority* who don't smoke. It alsomight encourage some of the smokers to cut down which is no bad thing for them AND the NHS bill. Just because someone is a 'professional' doesn't make them right or impartial.
I agree. However what would you rather have a) a government made of people that made it their live's mission to get into politics for whatever reason, who are not specialised in their fields, not particularly intelligent, who take money from corporations, and who have their own agendas or b) a selection of the best minds and experts in their own fields who also pass other tests to show they have a minimum "corruption index" etc. or c) members of the public randomly selected and who are forced to serve as MPs or d) something else, maybe a giant computer, just as long as it's not running Microsoft Government 2020 :-) First of all, I've already listed documents that have yet to be falsified
Look, lets just get logical about this OK? Smoking is proven to hugely increase chances of lung cancer and other lung problems, and heart problems also. Do you agree on that, or is that made up too? So, what is the difference between inhaling it yourself from a fag or sitting in a room and breathing it in from the air? Do you think that all the cancer causing agents are absorbed by the first user and that all that's left is a smelly residue? I don't think so. Second-hand smoke makes my eyes water, my throat and lungs feel sore, and gives me a generally light headed feeling. Do you think that doing this every day if you worked in a pub would have literally NO effect on your health. It just doesn't seem logical. In the same way if you worked everyday next to a busy road I'm sure you would fall ill. You are 100% correct that car fumes are a very bad problem and probably worse than cigarette smoke which can at least be avoided if you want no social life.