Government scare tactics

Tourist · Post by **Tourist** » Monday Sep 18, 2006 10:25 pm

Good point.

But do the warnings stop people? Not really. They just keep the voters happy. Why don't they just ban smoking? It's a balancing act between votes and revenue. My opinion only.

rwh · Post by **rwh** » Tuesday Sep 19, 2006 2:10 am

Well, they're banning smoking in pubs and bars in Victoria next year. Already done in NSW I hear. Thank bloody god. I hate returning home stinking. Oh, one last thing: all of the taxes on alcohol and tobacco don't cover the cost of the health care associated with their use. In fact, of all drugs, tobacco costs society the most, followed by alcohol.

Having said that, I do drink (but don't smoke). Feel free to ignore me!

blandy · Post by **blandy** » Tuesday Sep 19, 2006 7:53 am

There's a much more imteresting article about alcohol, and to be more specific, BEER, in The Age today.

corks · Post by **corks** » Tuesday Sep 19, 2006 9:59 am

care to elaborate please, im a long way for the age at the moment.
and god-dam do i miss it.

morgs · Post by **morgs** » Tuesday Sep 19, 2006 10:46 am

ever heard of a thing called the internet?

blandy · Post by **blandy** » Tuesday Sep 19, 2006 11:44 am

It was the main article in the Epicure section, about how lots of families were opening up microbreweries in the country.

111222333 · Post by **111222333** » Thursday Sep 21, 2006 10:49 am

drtom wrote:There was an article in today's Age which I didn't read, but the blurb on the front page of the web site said a study had found that people who drink are richer than people who don't. Sounded good to me. Cheers!

T.
Enjoying a (bought) dunkelweizen.

Read that one, was a bit of a disappointment. Basically drinkers network beter coz there sociallising when at the pub .. , so get the good jobs ect ...

T

blandy · Post by **blandy** » Thursday Sep 21, 2006 11:22 am

And homebrewers are even richer because it's so cheap!

damonpeyo · Post by **damonpeyo** » Monday Sep 25, 2006 10:25 pm

I have a T-shirt says:

STUPIDITY causes CANCER.

Beerdrinker32 · Post by **Beerdrinker32** » Monday Oct 02, 2006 9:25 pm

vb could possibly cause cancer

and a drop like bintang?????? ireckon hb is good for you,no bad chems

Lukejones01 · Post by **Lukejones01** » Sunday Oct 08, 2006 12:02 pm

In regards to evidence that beer causes cancer - In the words of Homer Simpson: "You can get statistics to prove anything Kent, 76% of people know that."

With regards to beer being bad for you in any way I'll quote an unknown source from the internet.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Homebrew in one hand - BBQ Sausage in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO- HOO!, What a Ride"

lethaldog · Post by **lethaldog** » Sunday Oct 08, 2006 2:51 pm

Lukejones01 wrote:In regards to evidence that beer causes cancer - In the words of Homer Simpson: "You can get statistics to prove anything Kent, 76% of people know that."

With regards to beer being bad for you in any way I'll quote an unknown source from the internet.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Homebrew in one hand - BBQ Sausage in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO- HOO!, What a Ride"

Nice quote im willing to go along with that one

biased99 · Post by **biased99** » Tuesday Oct 24, 2006 10:17 pm

You'd wonder (alright I wonder!) what makes beer more carcinogenic than, say, red wine...

I mean, it can't be the alcohol content.
True, red wine probably has more anti-oxidants, but it surprises me that beer "seems" to be that much worse for you (according to our beloved media!

)

It's true that I'm still brewing "from the tin", so I have to take it on faith that the ingredients in the tins are all natural (and still in good nick by the time I use them). Apart from that, I'm only adding LDM, Dextrose, Reverse-Osmosis filtered water and some white sugar to prime the bottles (about to try my first bulk-prime using dextrose). Oh, and a bit of yeast

Without the preservatives (and christ knows what else) the commercial brewers add to their beer, you'd think the humble HB wouldn't be that bad for you...What do you blokes (and ladies

) think?

Of course, a bit of "mitigation" (ie. exercising 4-5 times a week) probably doesn't hurt either...

rwh · Post by **rwh** » Tuesday Oct 24, 2006 11:12 pm

Look, they really haven't done all that many studies. There was an article in New Scientist recently that suggested that a glass of beer a day is as good for you as a glass of red. If it makes you happy, I reckon it's bloody well worth it, and the stress-reduction probably will make you live longer too.

My dad is really fit and healty, but was recently diagnosed with melanoma which has spread throughout his body. Makes you really think that no matter how healthy you are, you're going to die sometime, so just enjoy the time you have.

timmy · Post by **timmy** » Wednesday Oct 25, 2006 7:32 am

I don't think the Salvo's will be getting any more donations from me in the future.

They can keep their tee-totalling ways to themselves.

MOFO · Post by **MOFO** » Wednesday Oct 25, 2006 11:23 am

This out today in The Age - looks like the Salvos got it wrong. I back this research team... despite the fact they were probably financially backed by Bud or Millers or CUB or something

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/ ... ?from=top5

Boonie · Post by **Boonie** » Wednesday Oct 25, 2006 9:13 pm

MOFO wrote:This out today in The Age - looks like the Salvos got it wrong. I back this research team... despite the fact they were probably financially backed by Bud or Millers or CUB or something

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/ ... ?from=top5

Tried that one on my wife, she reckons we are all a bunch of pisspots

But at least i will live longer

Post by **Oliver** » Thursday Nov 09, 2006 6:58 pm

MOFO wrote:This out today in The Age - looks like the Salvos got it wrong. I back this research team... despite the fact they were probably financially backed by Bud or Millers or CUB or something

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2006/ ... ?from=top5

You can, of course, believe everything you read in The Age (and me saying that doesn't have anything at all to do with the fact that they pay my wages

)

Cheers,

Oliver

pacman · Post by **pacman** » Thursday Nov 09, 2006 9:39 pm

Reading through this topic, I have a question. Perhaps more than one!

Why are people who work in various entertainment industries suddenly so grateful that smoking bans have been introduced?

Were they unaware when they commenced their employment that they would be working in tobacco smoking environments? Well, I'll be!!

Next thing, they complain about the drunken behaviour of some of the clients they serve with, no, don't tell me, alcoholic beverages!

Reminds me of some of our local (Toowoomba, Qld) residents who, having built or purchased their houses in areas adjacent to our crappy little airport, suddenly begin campaigning for the airport to be relocated. Even though the airport was in existence long before their surrounding dwellings!

Some people definitely have issues.

I could go on. And on. And on. But that would simply be over indulging.

blandy · Post by **blandy** » Friday Nov 10, 2006 12:27 pm

pacman wrote:Why are people who work in various entertainment industries suddenly so grateful that smoking bans have been introduced?

Not that I work in the entertainment industry or anything, but I could have a guess:

Anyone applying for jobs in this situation (before the bans) definately should have known what they were signing up for, and maybe while considering smoky working environments a downside, decided that on the whole they'd like the job.

That said, I'm sure most of them would be non-smokers (it's highly probable anyway), and would be happy to have the smoke removed from their workplace, even if they were willing to put up with it.

I was happy working at my local newsagent before the boss put the air conditioners in, that doesn't mean I'm not greatful for the gesture.

As for complaining about the airport, I'm with you there. The airport got there first, no grounds for rational complaint, but I'm sure they'd still appreciate a noise reduction.