Society's Child

Plane escorted by jets back to Toronto because of in-flight smoking!

Paul Johnston
CP24.com
Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:41 UTC

Ah! The good old days!

Comment: Two fighter jets were deployed and an entire flight returned because two 20-year old females drunk and smoked in the plane's lavatory, which latter caused the smoke alarm to go off. What a hystericized society we live in! And what a waste of resources, time and grey matter.

Charges are pending against two women after a flight bound for Cuba was forced back to Toronto under fighter jet escort Wednesday night.

Peel police said that the 4:30 p.m. Sunwing Airlines flight bound for Varadero was forced to return to Toronto Pearson International Airport after a mid-flight disruption involving two women.

Two Canadian CF-18 fighter jets based out of Bagotville, Que., escorted the plane, which was forced to turn back over North Carolina.

"This is Norad's regular procedure," Maj. Julie Roberge, with Norad, said of the response. "Under an abundance of caution, the jets were launched to monitor the situation from the air."

The jets have since returned to their home base, Roberge said.

The women, believed to be in their 20s, were arrested when the plane arrived back in Toronto at around 8:30 p.m.

"At this point, there haven't been any charges laid, however they are pending," Peel police Const. George Tudos said.

"We're still investigating exactly what occurred on that plane and we will be speaking with other passengers," he said.

In a statement issued Wednesday night, a representative with Sunwing said that the plane was diverted after a smoke alarm was triggered.

"It is reported that the passengers consumed a significant quantity of their duty-free alcohol purchase in the lavatory and lit a cigarette, triggering the smoke detector alarm," Sunwing's Janice Chapman said.

"These passengers proceeded to get into a physical altercation with each other and made a threat against the aircraft, which was considered non-credible given their condition. Our flight crew followed the appropriate procedures and the aircraft was diverted back to Toronto where it has now landed."

The flight was expected to take off again at around 11 p.m., the statement said. Customers will be provided complimentary meal vouchers.

"We are very apologetic for the inconvenience experienced by our customers and thankful to our flight crew for their efforts to safely manage the situation," the statement concludes.

Reader Comments

aurora · 2014-08-28T14:04:59Z

They did not know

They should have clogged the smoke detector with duct tape and then smoked. My boss smoked in the lavatory while in flight to USA but first he clogged the detector.

gdpetti · 2014-08-28T14:09:18Z

Isn't that called addiction?

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:25:25Z

Study says smokers are not addicted to nicotine

Craving for cigarettes is more to do with the mind than the addictive influence of nicotine. In other words, it is the psychological element of smoking that makes one addicted to cigarettes, a new study conducted by Israeli scientists has revealed.

The psychological element of smoking is the key factor deciding the intensity of craving for cigarettes in a smoker compared to the physiological effects of nicotine as an addictive chemical, says Dr. Reuven Dar of Tel Aviv University's Department of Psychology.

"These findings might not be popular with advocates of the nicotine addiction theory, because they undermine the physiological role of nicotine and emphasize mind over matter when it comes to smoking," says Dr. Dar, in his new study published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

[Link]

lydia · 2014-08-28T16:20:44Z

I don't know

if I have to laugh or if I have to cry.

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:16:26Z

This pretty well destroys the Myth

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

[Link]
Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...........................

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:16:50Z

Reference Manual on Scientific Evid

Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

nap.edu

This sorta says it all

These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.

So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ''SAFE LEVELS''

OSHA SAFE LEVELS

All this is in a small sealed room 9x20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes.

"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes.

"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes.

For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time.

The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA.

Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science!

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:19:59Z

thankful to our flight crew for their efforts to safely manage the situation," the statement concludes.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In normal times they would have been brining the ladies more booze and smokes!

In todays leftist progressive world of PROHIBITION the WOMEN are treated worse than TERRORISTS WITH BOMBS IN THEIR PANTIES. Their crime SECOND HAND SMOKE A WMD! ROFLMAO..............

This WMDs chemical breakdown goes like this:

About 90% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a minor amount of carbon dioxide. The volume of water vapor of second hand smoke becomes even larger as it qickly disperses into the air,depending upon the humidity factors within a set location indoors or outdoors. Exhaled smoke from a smoker will provide 20% more water vapor to the smoke as it exists the smokers mouth.

4 % is carbon monoxide.

6 % is those supposed 4,000 chemicals to be found in tobacco smoke. Unfortunatley for the smoke free advocates these supposed chemicals are more theorized than actually found.What is found is so small to even call them threats to humans is beyond belief.Nanograms,picograms and femptograms......
(1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80).

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:27:55Z

SOMEBODY IN AUSTRALIA FINALLY FIGURED IT OUT! OMG

Smoking ‘ok’ inside?

Posted by: 3AW Breakfast | 28 August, 2014 – 11:21 AM

Smoking
A workplace expert has said that smoking inside a workplace can be legal, as long as occupational health and safety requirements are not breached.

A caller to 3AW Breakfast’s Rumour File claimed he witnessed staff members of a European embassy smoking inside while serving guests on Wednesday.

The University of Melbourne Centre for Workplace Leadership director Professor Peter Gahan told Ross and John the embassy’s case is a “grey area”.

“For a lot of workplaces they’ll have policies which prevent smoking, but the law doesn’t require you to have that sort of policy,” Professor Gahan said.

“There’s nothing sort of, unlawful about it unless of course it doesn’t meet those duty of care type obligations.”

LISTEN: Professor Peter Gahan speaks with Ross and John

[Link]

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:28:33Z

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) could not even produce evidence that passive smoke is significantly harmful inside, this is what they wrote prior to the smoking ban in article 9 OC255/15 9 "The evidential link between individual circumstances of exposure to risk in exempted premises will be hard to establish. In essence, HSE cannot produce epidemiological evidence to link levels of exposure to SHS to the raised risk of contracting specific diseases and it is therefore difficult to prove health-related breaches of the Health and Safety at Work Act". The reason the ban was brought in under the Health Act 2006, and not by the HSE, because no proof of harm was needed with the Health Act 2006, and the HSE have to have proof, seems the DM has lost rational thought about anything smoke related.

HATE IS A TERRIBLE THING TO WASTE

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:30:45Z

It appears OSHA had it right all those years ago………..and weve had to endure 30 years of second hand B.S.

As Mike points out here on the Forbes story:

The only category of exposure that showed a trend
toward increased risk was living in the same
house with a smoker for 30 years or more.”

A Confidence Interval **THAT INCLUDES 1.0** is now being stated, in a scientific journal, to be STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT! Oh, yes, they add a weasel-word qualifier of “borderline” but that’s sort of like the Princess Bride guy saying “Well, he’s only MOSTLY dead.” or you trying to tell your girlfriend’s dad that “I only got her a LITTLE BIT pregnant!”

There’s no such thing as a finding with 1.0 being counted as statistically significant. At least not in any NORMAL science. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it even in the perverted world of antismoking science

Then we look to OSHA standards

The proper standard to compare to is the OSHA standard for indoor air quality for respirable particulate (not otherwise specified) for nuisance dusts and smoke. That standard is 5000 ug/m3 on a time-weighted average (8 hours a day, 5 days a week) and is intended to be protective of health over an average working life of 30 years!

I was thinking about this if exposure is at 30 years and that’s roughly 168 hours per week and OSHA allows 40 hours a week that would tend to put the standard for a bar or waitress or casino staff at roughly 120 years of a safe workplace………Going by OSHA and the 30 year work rule as compared to the study.

Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997

WHAT! DILUTED BELOW PERMISSABLE LEVELS

[Link]

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T08:33:25Z

We await the REPEALS of all the smoking bans WORLDWIDE!

19th Century Law in the 21st Century

Heres a time line starting in 1900,dont be surprised to see the same thing playing out today nearly 100 years later.

1901: REGULATION: Strong anti-cigarette activity in 43 of the 45 states. "Only Wyoming and Louisiana had paid no attention to the cigarette controversy, while the other forty-three states either already had anti-cigarette laws on the books or were considering new or tougher anti-cigarette laws, or were the scenes of heavy anti- cigarette activity" (Dillow, 1981:10).

1904: New York: A judge sends a woman is sent to jail for 30 days for smoking in front of her children.

1904: New York City. A woman is arrested for smoking a cigarette in an automobile. "You can't do that on Fifth Avenue," the arresting officer says.

1907: Business owners are refusing to hire smokers. On August 8, the New York Times writes: "Business ... is doing what all the anti-cigarette specialists could not do."

1917: SMOKEFREE: Tobacco control laws have fallen, including smoking bans in numerous cities, and the states of Arkansas, Iowa, Idaho and Tennessee.

1937: hitler institutes laws against smoking.This one you can google.

harleyrider1978 · 2014-08-29T12:45:15Z

we all use the air

Smokers have as much right to the air to smoke as any non-smoker have a right to breathe the air! Non-smokers don't own it we all use it like everyone else............

Even the cars use the air, restaraunts, cookouts, fireworks along with cooking at home and each and everyone of those things including non-smokers releases hundreds and thousands to millions of the same chemicals found in that same cigarette smoke!

So go outlaw yourselves under the same pre-text as you used for smoking you HUMAN CARCINOGEN MACHINES!

We are all guilty of tobacco smoking in the same way they claim it via chemical exposures and production only second hand smoke is tens of billions of time less than in the quantities produced from all other sources of the same things they claim cause death and disease.

You see SHS/ETS is 90% water and ordinairy atmospheric air pg 80 surgeon generals report 1989!

Highland Fleet Lute · 2014-08-29T18:08:26Z

I was talking to my tobacconist the other day (the last old style tobacconist in The City of London)….[Link]
…he was telling me that in the villages in India, in the region where he was brought up, all the locals take tobacco snuff. Due to its beneficial effects in the nasal and ocular regions, no one is short-sighted, no one has to wear glasses.

I reported it yesterday morning. I had seen the report in the French news the day before already. [Link]

LindaMay

I wonder if the people who do have conversations with themselves have trouble quieting the mind, as for meditation.

ReRan

Elon should put X on the 'plaid mode'....lol

Gator

When isreali's realise that they too are victims of this regime they will then know their true status. This regime has but one mission. To further...

Peter Jennings

How George Washington lost his cherry...

Baybars

Society's Child

Plane escorted by jets back to Toronto because of in-flight smoking!

Reader Comments

Latest News

Picture of the Day

Quote of the Day

Recent Comments

Quantum Quirk