Smoking affects others.

Smoking in the presence of others is assault.

Toi, google 3rd hand smoke. A new study shows the smoke can linger in a area for over 30 years, and will affect anyone who walks through that area.

“My right to breathe beats your “right to do want I want.” You can do without smoking (try it). I can’t do without breathing.”

It’s right to smoke on public property. Since it’s legal for me to do sO, I will continue doing it.

It’s not nice to do, that I understand. It’s not nice to yell obscenities at people either. But it’s perfectly legal to do so.

Your perceived health issues isn’t my problem.

You can always move, or buy yourself a few Acres of property, sit in the middle of it and not be exposed to my smoke.

Sorry for the typos

The answers so far:

RY: it’s disgusting (true)

Avi K.: it’s assault (what??)

FNY: there’s little indication that occasional second hand smoke actually does anything besides annoy you (true)

Midwest: rodef (what??)

Me: it can’t be “rodef” or “assault” because it’s mutter l’halacha

LIK: I have- no shame,
Lots of chutzpah,
Bad character traits,
No Torah values
And should be ignored

Health: Avi K. Is wrong, it’s not assault. It’s attempted murder. (what???????)

Subtitles: somthing about sikrikim shouting Nazi ( thank God for Goodwin’s law) and something about ethics.

Hyperbole much?

When the terms assault, attempted murder, and rodef are used, it’s not a question of ethical good behavior, it’s a question of halacha.

You should be this aggravated the next time you see a conservative Jew doing chulel Shabbos. C”v

What’s going on with the ad homimem attacks?
Smoking affects others like eating garlic affects others.
Also, there are folks that work themselves into a tizzy over seeing someone else smoke. But those folks shouldn’t blame the smoker. It’s not his fault that they have issues. Get therapy or something. Maybe have a cigarette or something. But don’t blame the world for your problems.

yitzchokm:

Come on. No one here is portraying anyone as vicious killers. Several of us are simply reporting known medical science about the dangers of smoking and second hand smoke. You may Google that information. It is not secret. There are also several well referenced NIH publications on the subject, and these are not political, just scientific. No one needs to tone down anything. Halacha demands that we take matters of danger even more stringently than matters of halacha. You keep quoting Reb Moshe as saying there is no issur, and it has been demonstrated that this is erroneous. You are then confronted about the matter of smoking being offensive to others, and all you can do is tell us all that you haven’t a care for anyone’s health or ability to breathe normal air, and would exercise your “right” to smoke in our presence. Your attitude on that stinks, and it needs to be toned down.

You might refer to the sefer I repeatedly quoted and referenced חיים ללא עישון where several of the poskim address the offensiveness, and attach that as an additional issur. Mostly, you are dictating to us all that you can do whatever you want, rewrite halacha if it suits you, and exercise a “right” that secular law has not taken from you. Midos, and the ways of Torah seem to have zero bearing to you. We should tone down? Maybe you should look up the references several of the commenters here shared, and then tell us if you wish to be a בר פלוגתא going up against the vast list of recent and contemporary poskim who gave their piskei halacha that you don’t prefer. Once you are coming from a position of having studied the subject, you should be able to approach the subject with logic and rational thinking. Sorry, but your stand of “I can do whatever I want” is babyish. And that is overly kind.

TLIK – The sefer you repeatedly quote, is it right? I think that’s part of the question regarding first-hand smoke. I think it is not. Quoting from it again will not help. Regarding 2nd-hand smoke outdoors, the sefer, plainly, like your opinion, is well-intentioned, yet completely irrelevant.

No one is forcing anyone to smoke. Indeed, over the last 15 years, it became unlawful to smoke in many indoor public places. Chill out. Have a cigarette.

I don’t talk to babies

Health,
I’m not a victim. Nor am I afraid of your hyperbole.

Viewers that are willing to actually go through the entire thread here, would realize that’s my response about the right to smoke came with the backdrop of people like Health, claiming that second-hand smoke is akin to assault or even attempted murder.

As I’ve posted before, although according to Jewish law most rabanim strongly discourage smoking, most agree it’s not completely forbidden. https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/isnt-smoking-אסור#post-1540415

I despise the smell of smoke. I’ve never smoked a day in my life. No one in my immediate family smokes. I have no skin in the game.

When discussing something intelligently, emotion shouldn’t play a role. This is a question of whether or not something is permissible according to Jewish law, and what’s the stablished thing it is, how to deal with Society.
Of course you shouldn’t be a nuisance to others. The question is if you have the right to impose your idea of what’s considered being nice on others. They obviously have an addiction. That’s why they smoke. It’s sad, but that’s the way it is. Not allowing them to smoke in public places is more harmful to them than it is to you.

Health, although you like to portray yourself as a health professional, the fact is this issue has nothing to do with science. It’s your personal feelings in the matter and frankly, you’re wrong.

In a recent study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, headlined “No Clear Link Between Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer” the study proves that second hand smoke, contrary to popular belief, does not cause lung cancer. The only slight statistical increase in lung cancer caused by second-hand smoke, were people living in houses where people smoked constantly. But the increase was so nominal, it’s not considered statistically important. Being exposed to secondhand smoke occasionally has absolutely nothing to do with lung cancer. It’s free to read the study, I’d urge you to read it on your own.

yitzchokm- why are you only raising the point re lung cancer? That’s not the only smoking related illness. There’s a long list of illnesses as well as other conditions which are worsened by exposure to secondhand smoke. Asthmatic people often have attacks triggered by passing someone smoking on the street.

Even worse- miscarriage and birth defect rates for babies whose fathers are smokers are more than twice the rate of babies whose fathers are non smokers. Smoking kills thousands of unborn children every year. Many men laugh it off but it’s an absolute fact that a father’s health will affect their future children’s health.

It is not been proven that second-hand smoke causes miscarriage, although, there’s a an increase of risk. Definitely not the cause of thousands and thousands of deaths.

And even the studies that have been performed, it was done in households in which the pregnant woman was constantly exposed to secondhand smoke. Occasional second hand smoke has no known side effects.

In terms of triggering asthma attacks, many, many environmental factors trigger asthma attacks. Yes, secondhand smoke is on the list as well. As is exercise, changes in weather, pollination, some medications, perfume, deodorant, paint, nights, fog, excitement, stress, anger, Etc. Of the hundreds of triggers, second hand smoke is one of them. Banning something because of it is nonsense.

yitzchokm -“The only slight statistical increase in lung cancer caused by second-hand smoke, were people living in houses where people smoked constantly. ”

Stop with your PATHETIC Defense of Smoking!
You must of missed my previous post – here it is again:
“I know a Frum couple who died – He from Smoking & his wife from 2nd-hand Smoking.”
So in that case the man smoked in his house.
Is a guy who smokes in his house a Rodef?!?
Try to be honest!!!

yitzchokm -“Health, You skiped the next sentence. “But the increase was so nominal, it’s not considered statistically important.”

It wasn’t part of the point I was making.

“Chances are, the wife did not die from secondhand smoke.”

Don’t CONFUSE yourself with the Facts – She DID!

“Statistically, there is no real difference between secondhand smoke and no second hand Smoke in terms of lung cancer”

Thanks for the info, but it’s Not Reality.
BTW, How much do you smoke/day? I’m curious about how much time you have left?!?

every time i breath in second hand smoke i literally cough up a storm.
to be honest, i should do it right in the face of whoever smoked near me.
if youre gonna smoke, go to your backyard or roof or place where literally nobody is and go smoke your lungs out but keep it a good distance away from other people (or at least other people who may be non-smokers)

From NIH – Cancer.gov:
“Lung cancer includes two main types: non-small cell lung cancer and small cell lung cancer. Smoking causes most lung cancers, …”

Health,

I showed you the study. Second hand smoke doesn’t cause lung disease/lung cancer. It just doesn’t.

yitzchokm -“Health, I showed you the study. Second hand smoke doesn’t cause lung disease/lung cancer. It just doesn’t.”

Did you ever go to college?
Did you take Statistics?
You can’t understand studies without it.
All that study proves that there is No causation, Not correlation!

please cite an actual scientific study you can prove us. Hint: You won’t find any.

I found quite a few. If links would be allowed I’d post them here but there were many studies proving this. Do a little research and you’ll see. For starters check out article #27113031 from pubmed.

yitzchokm – not only low counts but also damage to the genetic material. There were genetic abnormalities found as well. From what I’ve read the more abnormalities you can see on a microscope, the more actual genetic damage there is.

Health, read the study. The CDC statistics are based on flawed methodology.

Their methodology is like yours, you say you know two people, one a smoker and one, a secondhand smoker.
According to you, they both died of lung disease or cancer. You’re saying, that the second hand smoke caused the lung cancer. The study proves that the lung cancer was not caused by secondhand smoke.

The CDC will still view it as such, because of people like you which assume that that’s the reason. Their numbers come from Hospital statistics, that for example, such-and-such amount people who were victims of secondhand smoke have cancer. They don’t know what caused it. THEY ASSUME it’s because of second-hand smoke. Actual Studies have proven that not to be true. Correlation doesn’t equal causation.

Gamanit:
the study you linked says nothing of genetic abnormalities that affect future offspring