Hey smokers, how would you like to get denied a job because you smoke?

Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
Post a study from a neutral group. You're posting drug war propaganda. Studies from 'drugabuse' sites don't fly with me. They always over exaggerate their findings.

.gov ....

They decide what's good for you. Better pay attention to what they believe.

Besides, as I already said, you know MJ is bad for you. Stop pretending it isn't. You sound like any other junkie who claims their habit isn't bad for them. Just like a smoker, or an alcoholic. You can handle it... It doesn't affect you...

I don't care if you get high on MJ, or lick toads, or eat shrooms...just don't hurt others while you do it, and don't tell me it's not harming you.

I'm not buying it. I've seen the damage among friends, and I don't care to play the games.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
.gov ....

They decide what's good for you. Better pay attention to what they believe.

Besides, as I already said, you know MJ is bad for you. Stop pretending it isn't. You sound like any other junkie who claims their habit isn't bad for them. Just like a smoker, or an alcoholic. You can handle it... It doesn't affect you...

I don't care if you get high on MJ, or lick toads, or eat shrooms...just don't hurt others while you do it, and don't tell me it's not harming you.

I'm not buying it. I've seen the damage among friends, and I don't care to play the games.

Moderate, responsible use of MJ, even if smokes, IS harmful. However, the level of harm is about on par with soda.

If I smoke a joint, I can say 'technically this could be harmful' but I also could say the same thing when I crack open a Mountain Dew. I'd actually argue the MD is worse for you than MJ.
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,414
1,574
126
.gov ....

They decide what's good for you. Better pay attention to what they believe.

Besides, as I already said, you know MJ is bad for you. Stop pretending it isn't. You sound like any other junkie who claims their habit isn't bad for them. Just like a smoker, or an alcoholic. You can handle it... It doesn't affect you...

I don't care if you get high on MJ, or lick toads, or eat shrooms...just don't hurt others while you do it, and don't tell me it's not harming you.

I'm not buying it. I've seen the damage among friends, and I don't care to play the games.

Let's be real here - if we were banning things due to danger then there are a million things more dangerous than MJ that should be banned.


That said, I'm glad tobacco smokers are feeling the pain of MJ smokers now. Now we should roll out a test for alcohol so people can see how ridiculous this whole thing is.

Then let's take a ride down the slippery slope and ban coffee as well cuz god knows how much productivity is lost from "coffee breaks".
 

Vdubchaos

Lifer
Nov 11, 2009
10,411
10
0
As an employee

Only issues I have is that they stink and also get free breaks.

As an employer I can totally understand why 1 would not hire a smoker.
a) they are pretty stupid for smoking to begin with
b) breaks
c) healthcare burden on the company policy

Make sense to me
 

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
No, and neither does smokeless tobacco, not that that's any concern of an employer anyway. You're there to do a job, and your private life is private.

Smokeless tobacco is associated with increased risk of cancer of the mouth and throat.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
I'll give you the oral use of dry snuff, but that hasn't been popular since the early 20th century, when it was primarily used by women. I'd be amazed if anyone on this board knew of anyone who ever used dry snuff regularly.

My grandmother did. Dhe had a coffee can for a spitoon. I have 2of the brown glass snuff bottles she used with the wooden spoon.
 

Robsasman

Senior member
Dec 7, 2008
565
0
71
Well thanks to our new company's rules you get penalized for calling in, it's an "occurrence" that garners a point, clocking in one min. late is 1/2 point, 3 points in one year you get a write up, next point=gone. Oh AND they took away our sick-time so one cannot get paid if you call in AND we make an FDA regulated topical product, in this economy they can make any rule and because jobs are scarce people put up with it..

WTF do you work in N. Korea or Russia. Hold on, I dont think Russia is even that bad.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
As an employee

Only issues I have is that they stink and also get free breaks.

As an employer I can totally understand why 1 would not hire a smoker.
a) they are pretty stupid for smoking to begin with
b) breaks
c) healthcare burden on the company policy

Make sense to me

What burden on the HC policy? A worker who is 30 years old and smokes is less of a burden than the 55 year old on cholesterol and high blood pressure meds.
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
That's the issue right there. We have completely lost our minds in this country when it comes to employment screening. We have drug testing, facebook witch hunts, credit score checks... what the fuck? What happened to privacy?

You have the right to privacy. You also have the right not to work there if you value your privacy.
 

Cutterhead

Senior member
Jul 13, 2005
527
0
76
Regarding lxskllr, I understand why people are getting upset by him because he comes across very harshly, but I don't think he is trying to troll anybody. I'm not sure what exactly he was getting at with the sunflower comments, but I do agree that smokeless tobacco is not nearly as dangerous as we have been lead to believe. Understand that I'm not saying it's safe, but it is far less dangerous than smoking. Most people don't realize, for example, that smoking puts you at a much higher risk of oral cancer than chewing tobacco.

American chew and dip is fermented, a process which results in the creation of carcinogenic chemicals called nitrosamines from the tobacco. These same nitrosamines are also present in high quantities when tobacco is fire-cured for use in cigarettes.

In chewing tobacco, nitrosamines are found in concentrations high enough to cause cancer, but only after a very long (lifetime of) exposure. When you smoke, you are inhaling these nitrosamines along with hundreds of other chemicals from the combustion of tobacco, including carbon monoxide, directly into your mouth and lungs. To classify these habits as equally risky is really kind of silly, but in our crusade to label all tobacco use as unequivocally dangerous we sort of lost sight of what is rather obvious - one is a lot worse for you than the other.

Furthermore, Swedish snus is pasteurized rather than fermented, a process which results in only trace levels of nitrosamines. Snus has been used for hundreds of years in Sweden, and it is still very popular and ubiquitous over there even today. The rate of tobacco use in Sweden is comparable to that of any other first-world nation (roughly 25% of adults use tobacco), yet they have BY FAR the lowest lung cancer rates of any developed country in the world (http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2011-en/images/graphics/g1-04-02.gif).

The primary reason? More men in Sweden use pasteurized tobacco (aka snus) than smoke cigarettes. Their government also closely controls snus production and sets strict standards for allowable nitrosamine levels in their snus, which are a small fraction of the levels found in American dip. Note that American snus products (like Camel SNUS) are not held to any such standards - so they are generally not considered to be real snus.

So I am not saying there is any such thing as "safe" tobacco. But there absolutely is a difference in risk factors, and there absolutely has been a lot of misinformation given to the American people in this regard. Here is an article that discusses this issue: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2010/01/10/tobacco_truth_gets_smoked_99840.html

I particularly like this quote: "A 2005 study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that only 11 percent of smokers who were aware of smokeless tobacco think it is safer than cigarettes, while 83 percent disagree -- which is the equivalent of believing it's safer to drive without a seat belt than with one."

To use my own highly scientific model (adapted for consumption by ATOT), the risk graph looks something like this:
(BAD FOR YOU) smoking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dipping >>>>> snus >> coffee (NOT AS BAD FOR YOU)
 

Apple Of Sodom

Golden Member
Oct 7, 2007
1,808
0
0
As an employer I try not to hire smokers. You can't always tell, but these are mostly entry level jobs. What I have seen, speaking from actual experience and not from an ivory tower:

1) Smokers NEED breaks. They can't wait 15 more minutes, they need it now and get irritable. Fuck everyone else and how hard they are working, I need a break.
2) Smokers take a lot of breaks.
3) They fucking reek after their smoke breaks. I've told employees to leave and come back when they smell better because it is offensive to customers.
4) They have more health problems and sick days than non-smokers.

Sure, a lot of stuff is bad for you...but smokers are the worst. I'll take a nightly MJ toker over a pack-a-day smoker any time.
 

Apple Of Sodom

Golden Member
Oct 7, 2007
1,808
0
0
What burden on the HC policy? A worker who is 30 years old and smokes is less of a burden than the 55 year old on cholesterol and high blood pressure meds.

The problem is we can't fire the 55 year old (protected class, 40+) and that person may have had no choice in it.

The points is that a 30-year-old smoker is more of a burden than a 30-year-old non-smoker, so hire the non-smoker.
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,413
616
126
So your argument is that there is
no burden because there are bigger burdens?

No. My arguement that smokers are less to no burden to a company'shhealth insurance. Smoking health issues normally dont show up until later in life. Medicare is what takes the big hit for smoking.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
No. My arguement that smokers are less to no burden to a company'shhealth insurance. Smoking health issues normally dont show up until later in life. Medicare is what takes the big hit for smoking.

Insurance companies charge more for smokers, period. It costs more to insure smokers, young or old. That's a burden.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
You have the right to privacy. You also have the right not to work there if you value your privacy.

No, that's not what privacy means. Privacy means that you show up at work, do your job, do it well, and go home, and as long as you do that the company can go fuck itself if it wants to know what you're doing there.

There are obvious exceptions. Someone who is the public face of a company gives up some privacy, and we can make a legitimate argument for drug testing bus drivers and pilots.
 

dabuddha

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
19,579
17
81
No, that's not what privacy means. Privacy means that you show up at work, do your job, do it well, and go home, and as long as you do that the company can go fuck itself if it wants to know what you're doing there.

There are obvious exceptions. Someone who is the public face of a company gives up some privacy, and we can make a legitimate argument for drug testing bus drivers and pilots.

pri·va·cy/ˈprīvəsē/

Noun:
  • The state or condition of being free from being observed or disturbed by other people.
  • The state of being free from public attention.


You are free from being observed and/or disturbed by other people. I'm guessing you don't really understand what it means. Again, you're not being forced to work for this company.
 

Vdubchaos

Lifer
Nov 11, 2009
10,411
10
0
What burden on the HC policy? A worker who is 30 years old and smokes is less of a burden than the 55 year old on cholesterol and high blood pressure meds.

And there is PLENTY of 55 year olds not getting hired over 30 year olds this day and age.

yes you are correct

I'm not saying what's right or wrong, just stating what it is (and no life is not fair, get over it)
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
Moderate, responsible use of MJ, even if smokes, IS harmful. However, the level of harm is about on par with soda.

If I smoke a joint, I can say 'technically this could be harmful' but I also could say the same thing when I crack open a Mountain Dew. I'd actually argue the MD is worse for you than MJ.

You can say just about whatever you want...

I would like to point out that NYC thinks soda is bad for you and has enacted restrictions on how much you can buy at one time...and other cities also like the idea of restricting whatever they decide is bad for you...since you compared MJ to soda...

Just don't sue the MJ suppliers in a few years for it's effects on you as if you had no idea it was harmful...or addictive...

Maybe you can get some sort of disability payments when all you can do is sit in the corner and not be bothered with the real world for hours at a time, all the while claiming it's not bothering you...sort of like a video game junkie...
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,414
1,574
126
You can say just about whatever you want...

I would like to point out that NYC thinks soda is bad for you and has enacted restrictions on how much you can buy at one time...and other cities also like the idea of restricting whatever they decide is bad for you...since you compared MJ to soda...

Just don't sue the MJ suppliers in a few years for it's effects on you as if you had no idea it was harmful...or addictive...

Maybe you can get some sort of disability payments when all you can do is sit in the corner and not be bothered with the real world for hours at a time, all the while claiming it's not bothering you...sort of like a video game junkie...

How about we just accept that MJ has risks similar to everything else in life and move on.

EVERYTHING causes fucking cancer these days and everything will kill you.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
You can say just about whatever you want...

I would like to point out that NYC thinks soda is bad for you and has enacted restrictions on how much you can buy at one time...and other cities also like the idea of restricting whatever they decide is bad for you...since you compared MJ to soda...

Just don't sue the MJ suppliers in a few years for it's effects on you as if you had no idea it was harmful...or addictive...

Maybe you can get some sort of disability payments when all you can do is sit in the corner and not be bothered with the real world for hours at a time, all the while claiming it's not bothering you...sort of like a video game junkie...

Whoa.. this guy's totally a victim of drug war propaganda. How's that koolaid of hate and misinformation taste?
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
How about we just accept that MJ has risks similar to everything else in life and move on.

EVERYTHING causes fucking cancer these days and everything will kill you.

Fine with me, it's the idea of praising MJ smoking and persecuting tobacco smoking that I don't understand. They should be treated equally.

I suspect they eventually will be as more people openly smoke MJ and the health effects become more openly known.

MJ smokers reek, too. Nobody wants to smell that anymore than they want to smell a walking tobacco ashtray.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |