EPTBurning wood, dangerous? - Page 3
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
| ||
|
Iksf
United Kingdom444 Posts
| ||
|
Sated
England4983 Posts
| ||
|
RogerX
New Zealand3180 Posts
Is it because its environmentally friendly that its safe for human health? | ||
|
[]Phase[]
Belgium927 Posts
The most wood I burn is in rare cases during winter, in a closed fireplace. I am ASSUMING it is still bad, but because its closed and has a ventilation system of itself most of the smoke goes away. Anyways, I don't really care too much. If I can't burn wood anymore so be it. if I dont eat young cows and chickens of whom I don't know where it comes from, due to a lot of suffering the animals have to go through, I can probably stop burning wood too lol. | ||
|
Saechiis
Netherlands4989 Posts
| ||
|
Intact
Sweden634 Posts
On February 03 2012 19:56 Eppa! wrote: This not something new. We have found bodies of people that have lungs that look similiar to people that smoke from around a 1000 years ago. Wood fire won't kill you but can increase the risk of lung cancer and CHD. Lungs? In bodies that are a thousand years old ? I'm going to call this complete bullshit or facts you pulled from thin air unless you can provide a solid source. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
if someone want's to smoke a cigarette, you're being a buffoon if you attempt to stop them - in an attempt to 'break the habit'. they're more than aware of the risks, but they enjoy a smoke and probably aren't worried about living to 78 years old instead of into their 80's. if you're chubby, the smoker has a right to turn around and pinch your hamburger and claim that he's worried for your health. on the subject of wood fires... gas central heating is faaaaaaaaaar moooooooore expensive than burning a coal fire. especially in a property with poor insulation or without double-glazing. my house gets to about 8-10 degrees celcius in winter, which is unbearably cold... the heating would have to be on 24/7 to raise that by a couple of degrees. i have a fireplace in the other room that's currently burning with wood on it... the smoke goes up the chimney and away - i certainly can't smell or see any smoke outside - it seems to go right up into the air. why is there wood on the fire? because last summer we had about 7-8 trees in the garden cut down because they were overgrown and interfering with telephone lines on the street... there is a pile of wood just lying there. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18074 Posts
Now my point: this is an amount of cognitive dissonance I am willing to accept. I know somethings are bad for me (or risky, or what have you), but I also have fun doing them. I therefore take the risk (I might even unconsciously make that risk disappear in my mind, because our minds abhor cognitive dissonance). Religious views and scientific findings also generate an amount of cognitive dissonance, but just as you won't convince me to stop enjoying a wood fire, your argument won't convince religious people to forsake their religion. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18074 Posts
On February 03 2012 20:17 Intact wrote: Lungs? In bodies that are a thousand years old ? I'm going to call this complete bullshit or facts you pulled from thin air unless you can provide a solid source. Peat bog mummies have lungs. So do bodies that got frozen solid in glaciers or siberia. Call bullshit all you like, but I'll believe him. | ||
|
Blacktion
United Kingdom1148 Posts
On February 03 2012 18:52 Klesky wrote: I think the point Sam Harris is trying to make has nothing to do with how recreational fires can cause cancer or health issues. He's trying to highlight the irrational resistance that he faces when he debates creationists and the religious. Although I think the metaphor could be a bit lost, because you can rationalise the wood-burning argument a bit by saying things like, "me and my $16 heat bill looked and laughed." I get that, but his arguement is completely invalid. My anger is nothing to do with being told not to have fires, its at the sensationalist "XXXX is bad for you!, XXXX is the new smoking!" and people supposing they know whats best for me. I know these things are bad for me, i do them anyway because i want to enjoy life. Thats my business, now fuck off. /rant EDIT. That fuck off is not aimed at the poster i was quoting | ||
|
EdSlyB
Portugal1621 Posts
On February 03 2012 18:43 Blacktion wrote: This. If we avoided everything that was bad for us we might all live for 120 years, but it would be 120 years of solid boredom and misery. Ill have a few guilty pleasures and die at 60 any day thanks. The way you spend your life is up to you. If you think that 120 years would be boring you should know that there is a big world out there, Bigger than you imagine because there is so much to see, to do, to learn, to experience than 120 would be little. I prefer to see things like this: if I can leave 60 years with a happy life without any disease or health problem that keeps me from living at full, then I will live like that. It beats living 60 years and having those last 10 with some problem in my lungs or heart that makes me have to stay at home doing nothing. Now, that's boredom and misery. | ||
|
Nizaris
Belgium2230 Posts
| ||
kcbgoku
Poland156 Posts
| ||
|
Ation
Finland102 Posts
Most of the particles generated by burning wood are smaller than one micron—a size believed to be most damaging to our lungs. In fact, these particles are so fine that they can evade our mucociliary defenses and travel directly into the bloodstream, posing a risk to the heart. I must say that this very specifically caught my attention. It is widely known that Finland - the land of thousand lakes and saunas... etc. - is having a lot of heart and blood circulation related diseases and issues. We have SICK amount of wood in our country and we make crazy amount of fire with it. | ||
|
Hefrosh
Denmark6 Posts
| ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
(Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings.) I stopped reading there ^^ But guess what guys, we should stop driving our cars around, because burning gasoline is poisonous! And what if you heat your house with oil or gas? Pointless article. | ||
|
Deleted_143
Australia256 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10776 Posts
I am quite baffled at all the "fear-mongering" accusations and generally hostile responses towards this article. I mean, neither the article nor the study behind it, is condemning people who burn wood. The study is simply stating, that it is proven that smoke from the combustion of wood is very dangerous to the health of you and people in the vicinity. Do what you want with that information, but the facts remain the same. See, thats exactly the problem. It's not VERY dangerous. It's not even DANGEROUS. It's unhealthy. Thats it. You shouldn't inhale it and avoid directly inhaling it (which every normal being does anyway)... But you won't fall over and die because it's so VERY DANGEROUS if you inhale it. Wrestling a Bear is VERY DANGEROUS. Sitting around a Fireplace isn't. | ||
|
edzet
24 Posts
i allready see some cool followup in couple years with huge promotion of stop using wood as a source of heat couse its bad for environment and what not when the true agenda is simply to hook more ppl into the system and give coorporate energy suppliers more income and power. there been many different scientists gettin shut down who were close or did come up with free/way more efficient energy solutions... but to hell with progress of mankind for the sake of making the rich richer . sad world | ||
| ||
