Aim away from face

Discuss LXF Team Blog entries here

Moderators: ChrisThornett, LXF moderators

Aim away from face

Postby nordle » Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:57 pm

I think your right about the sherbet dib dabs, the number of times I've breathed in at exactly the moment of placing a generously heaped lolly in my gob, the result is a violent coughing fit which sends what remained of the powdered content up my nose and I expell a lung in the process.

I bet Kate Moss doesn't have this bother! :)

It should clearly state on the packet, "do not inhale through mouth while consuming product"

Time to sue me thinks. ;)
User avatar
nordle
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:56 pm

RE: Aim away from face

Postby linuxgirlie » Tue Nov 29, 2005 6:36 pm

I prefer as see on a superman cloak - This garment does not enable wearer to fly.
Or a strange one I saw once on the Internet for a chainsaw. Do not use on genitals... :twisted:
My knowledge comes with no warranty...........

Server operating system designed for schools:http://www.linuxschools.com
linuxgirlie
LXF regular
 
Posts: 787
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 6:34 pm
Location: Kent...UK

RE: Aim away from face

Postby Rhakios » Tue Nov 29, 2005 8:27 pm

Depends on whose genitals :twisted: :twisted:
Bye, Rhakios
User avatar
Rhakios
Moderator
 
Posts: 7634
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Midlands, UK

RE: Aim away from face

Postby nordle » Tue Nov 29, 2005 9:30 pm

On fag packets in the UK, they now have MASSIVE government warnings "SMOKING KILLS", "SMOKING CAUSES FATAL DISEASES", "SMOKING CAUSES YOUR KNOB TO FALL OFF....EHHH.. IF YOU HAD ONE TO BEGIN WITH" (thats on the superking packs :) )

But I wonder, do they have health warnings on the sides of guns and/or packets of bullets? Maybe they should, the USA has over 30,000 deaths a year from gun related causes (what a strange phrase, why not just say got shot? I mean, 25,000 cant have been from hitting themselves over the head with it!).
Anyway, with warnings like the fag packets, maybe less people would die from gun related causes...

Then again...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3022350.stm

http://www.fakefags.co.uk/
I think, therefore I compile
User avatar
nordle
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1500
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 9:56 pm

RE: Aim away from face

Postby M-Saunders » Wed Nov 30, 2005 9:38 am

Yeah, I don't think the warnings are very effective:

"Smokers die younger"

But that French woman who lived to be 121 started smoking at 70, IIRC!

"Smoke contains formaldehyde"

Cool! Surely that will preserve my lungs!

"Smoking decreases fertility"

So a load of youngsters think it saves them money on contraceptives...

(Seriously though, smoking's a horrible habit, and one I wish to rid myself of some day. If I'd known the extent to which nicotine was so intolerably addictive I'd have never gone anywhere near cigarettes. I think the warnings would be much more effective if they showed foul tar-encrusted lungs. It certainly makes me shiver...)

M
User avatar
M-Saunders
LXF regular
 
Posts: 2893
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:14 pm

RE: Aim away from face

Postby Rhakios » Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:02 am

Perhaps they should have a warning saying "Smoking can stunt your growth". When exactly did you become an addict Mike?
Bye, Rhakios
User avatar
Rhakios
Moderator
 
Posts: 7634
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 11:18 pm
Location: Midlands, UK

Re: RE: Aim away from face

Postby Dave2 » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:18 pm

M-Saunders wrote:I think the warnings would be much more effective if they showed foul tar-encrusted lungs.

A la the Canadian ones?
Bloat. The crappiest Perl script in the world? You decide!
User avatar
Dave2
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:43 pm
Location: Bath, England

Postby shifty_ben » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:25 pm

A la the Canadian ones?


Oh yeah I remember those packets too well, I was used to warnings being on packets, but when I went to Canada I wasnt expecting those images, then again it didnt stop me wanting one, but I guess that may be because Id already started. Interestingly you have to be 19 to smoke in Canada, yet they have just as many people do it as us.
User avatar
shifty_ben
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:56 am
Location: Ipswich

Postby Dave2 » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:41 pm

Who, honestly, even starts at 16 though? I find that most people (in my experience) tend to start younger than that, as it seems to be the "cool" thing to do to them.
Bloat. The crappiest Perl script in the world? You decide!
User avatar
Dave2
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2005 10:43 pm
Location: Bath, England

Postby shifty_ben » Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:46 pm

Its the age old issue of of whether setting an age makes things cooler. If people would be more responsible about selling and supplying to kids things would be better though
Need a New Signature
User avatar
shifty_ben
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1292
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:56 am
Location: Ipswich

Postby Nigel » Wed Nov 30, 2005 3:09 pm

Dave2 wrote:Who, honestly, even starts at 16 though? I find that most people (in my experience) tend to start younger than that, as it seems to be the "cool" thing to do to them.


I started smoking at age 17 and gave up at age 34. Working in computer rooms meant that I was never a heavy smoker, but it would still have been better had I not started in the first place.
User avatar
Nigel
LXF regular
 
Posts: 1141
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Gloucestershire, UK


Return to LXF Blog Comments

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest