Should Celebrity Ban Smoking on its Ships for Safety?

[JeriNP]

Based upon your thoughts on this matter, I should be allowed to take this a little further. I love the sounds of love making as long as it is mine or my wife's. Based upon your thoughts on smoking, I should be allowed to bring a whistle or some loud noise producing device to my cabin. When the couple next door are going hot and heavy and making noises in their cabin or on their balcony and I cannot sleep or read or whatever, it is perfectly ok for me to call their cabin and use the loud noise producing device into the phone? ;)

 

ROFLMAO!!! Actually, just the act of CALLING the cabin next door on the phone during "the act" is usually enough to put a damper on things. I know you meant your comments jokingly/sarcastically, but you've hit on a great idea. Unless you're shooting a porn film, please keep the noise down!

[Celebrity Addicts]

Tobacco smoke is not an allergen, it is an irritant.

 

Fine, call it an irritant. I'm guessing you have never had to administer medication due to an individual exercising their "freedom of choice" to smoke in their cabin on the prior cruise.

[BobBeaSea]

Fine, call it an irritant. I'm guessing you have never had to administer medication due to an individual exercising their "freedom of choice" to smoke in their cabin on the prior cruise.

 

Whether I am a smoker or not has nothing to do with my post. I also did not say non-smokers don't suffer ill-effects from smoke, some most definitely do...so why the the nastiness?

[CruiserJen]

Would cruise lines really lose $$ if they introduced a smoke-free cruise environment? No smoking anywhere. Wouldn't the smokers gravitate to cruise lines where they could smoke to their heart's content along with all the other smoke fiends, and no one would be irritated.... the non-smokers would gravitate to the smoke-free line and be happy .. Is that too optimistic?

 

Jenna

[newmexicoNita]

Would cruise lines really lose $$ if they introduced a smoke-free cruise environment? No smoking anywhere. Wouldn't the smokers gravitate to cruise lines where they could smoke to their heart's content along with all the other smoke fiends, and no one would be irritated.... the non-smokers would gravitate to the smoke-free line and be happy .. Is that too optimistic?

 

Jenna

Remember non smoking ships have been tried and it didn't quite work. this will happen eventually but not for awhile. Vegas has also tried non smoking casinos: didn't work and the non smoking areas of casinos never seem to be as busy. Someone pointed out on one of these threads: think about large groups which do make up a big part of the cruise occupancy level and families that cruise together: in most cases there will be at least one smoker in the crowd; this means 1-that person will have to spend one week without smoking (not likely) or 2-the group will have to find a line that allows smoking. It just isn't workable right now. NMnita

[Rumncoke]

...along with all the other smoke fiends...

Jenna

 

Nice.:rolleyes:

[Andipanda1]

Actually, reread your link and my post again. I said 10 minutes outside on a moving ship. Your article says "as little as 20 or 30 minutes", and it's talking about a closed-up environment, not a moving ship outdoors. It also says nothing to indicate a 7-day exposure to second hand smoke will have any long-term damage. The article says "repeated exposure for years". And, on a completely off-topic side note, cervical cancer is caused by an STD known as HPV, not smoking (as implied in the article).

 

I wasn't trying to debate all second-hand smoke. I for one agree that cruise casinos and rooms should be non-smoking. I have no problem with this at all. I do my best to keep smoke away from non-smokers, but that's not really at issue here. I'm simply trying to get everyone to see that a puff of smoke on a moving ship is not endangering your life.

 

And, because I really do wish people would stop for a second and think for yourselves about all kinds of issues instead of passively believing everything you're told, here's a link for you. http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/second.htm

 

A "research and education" fringe "anti-nanny government" site written by someone down in "big tobacco" country. Using quotes by ****'s to make a point. That's about as scholarly as Tom Cruise and his rants against psychiatry.

 

Really. I wish everyone would pull back and wait until there is conclusive evidence of what happened on the ship.

[gracecarmo]

After reading many of these posts, it seems that the main complaint that non smokers have is concerning the cabins. They can avoid the casino, and other heavily populated areas that have smoke.

I really can't figure out why cruise ships do not have non smoking rooms, like many hotels?

I am a non smoker, as well as all of my family members, but had to cancel a family cruise (17 of us) due to my grandaughter's really bad asthma. There is not a cruise line (other than Oceania, not really for families) that could guarantee us a non smoking environment in a cabin for her.

 

I would vote for at least non smoking cabins. Other smokey areas can be avoided.

[GottaLuvCruising]

After reading many of these posts, it seems that the main complaint that non smokers have is concerning the cabins. They can avoid the casino, and other heavily populated areas that have smoke.

I really can't figure out why cruise ships do not have non smoking rooms, like many hotels?

I am a non smoker, as well as all of my family members, but had to cancel a family cruise (17 of us) due to my grandaughter's really bad asthma. There is not a cruise line (other than Oceania, not really for families) that could guarantee us a non smoking environment in a cabin for her.

 

I would vote for at least non smoking cabins. Other smokey areas can be avoided.

 

Grace,

 

Check out Disney Cruise Line. All staterooms are smoke-free and it's a great option for a family cruise. Book far in advance for the best fares.

 

Janet

[GottaLuvCruising]

Really. I wish everyone would pull back and wait until there is conclusive evidence of what happened on the ship.

 

It just doesn't matter what caused the fire on the Star Princess. The issue is so much bigger than that. The fire just fueled an already heated debate on the problem of second hand smoke on cruise ships.

 

Personally, I hope they prove the fire was caused by an irresponsible smoker. That might possibly be the impetus for some very important changes resulting in a safer, cleaner, healthier cruise environment.

[chronic travelitis]

It's interesting that no one mentioned Renaissance, which "was" a completely non-smoking line.

 

I'd also like to know if it would be allright for me to carry a spray bottle full of water to spritz people who come near me wearing heavy perfume or cologne, which gives me a bad headache and upset stomach due to allergies? Or could we just relegate them to specific areas of the ship, too?

[Eleris]

You guys are forgetting the biggest issue on cruise ships.... the Captains and Staff Captains are big time smokers!!! Who will drive the ship if they ban smoking??? I can't do it I will be at the bar drinking:D so do we have any volunteers??? If they ever ban smoking they better start training new staff now.

 

All kidding aside split the difference and designate enough personal space to keep everyone happy. It can be done it just takes a little cooperation from both sides.

[Hondu]

If ANY cruise line banned smoking, they would lose A LOT of customers and I would guess (since I AM a smoker)..that the murder rate on the cruises would go up quite a bit:D . I know that I would not cruise if they did ban it.

 

These doomsday predictions never come to pass. I remember back in the early 80s when Muse Airlines out of Dallas was non-smoking. The smokers said the same thing. But Muse did not survive because they went head to head with Southwest Airlines. (Hey, nobody can compete with the latter). Now we have all the airlines non-smoking and the smokers have no problem flying any airline.

[Hondu]

It's interesting that no one mentioned Renaissance, which "was" a completely non-smoking line.

 

I'd also like to know if it would be allright for me to carry a spray bottle full of water to spritz people who come near me wearing heavy perfume or cologne, which gives me a bad headache and upset stomach due to allergies? Or could we just relegate them to specific areas of the ship, too?

 

Renaissance may not have been mentioned because that line did not go out of business due to it nonsmoking policy.

The real reason it no longer exist is because the company cut off all travel agents and tried to book the ships inhouse. Also, 9/11 push them over the brink.

To use their non-smoking policy is just self-fulfilling.

[heartofamerica]

It just doesn't matter what caused the fire on the Star Princess. The issue is so much bigger than that. The fire just fueled an already heated debate on the problem of second hand smoke on cruise ships.

 

Personally, I hope they prove the fire was caused by an irresponsible smoker. That might possibly be the impetus for some very important changes resulting in a safer, cleaner, healthier cruise environment.

But you don't care if the sprinkler systems are inadequate...just as long as the nasty smokers can't smoke? I don't care what caused the Princess fire...the bottom line is, it should NEVER...read that again...NEVER consumed 150 cabins and got hot enough to melt locks. You go right ahead and ban smoking...I think, if it's safety you're after, I'll continue to press for more stringent controls on fire suppression equipment.

[GottaLuvCruising]

But you don't care if the sprinkler systems are inadequate...just as long as the nasty smokers can't smoke? I don't care what caused the Princess fire...the bottom line is, it should NEVER...read that again...NEVER consumed 150 cabins and got hot enough to melt locks. You go right ahead and ban smoking...I think, if it's safety you're after, I'll continue to press for more stringent controls on fire suppression equipment.

 

The topic of this thread is whether or not smoking on ships should be banned. That is the topic to which I was posting, specifically in response to another member's comments.

 

But, yes, to answer your question, I most definitely would like to see the "nasty smokers" more restricted for the safety, health and comfort of those who choose not to participate in the "nasty smokers" self-imposed addiction.

 

However, if you'd like to start another thread asking "who would like to see safety measures to avoid a fire spreading so quickly and aggressively," it will be my pleasure to agree with you.

[heartofamerica]

The topic of this thread is whether or not smoking on ships should be banned. That is the topic to which I was posting, specifically in response to another member's comments.

 

But, yes, to answer your question, I most definitely would like to see the "nasty smokers" more restricted for the safety, health and comfort of those who choose not to participate in the "nasty smokers" self-imposed addiction.

 

However, if you'd like to start another thread asking "who would like to see safety measures to avoid a fire spreading so quickly and aggressively," it will be my pleasure to agree with you.

And this thread got started primarily because of a fire on the Star Princess that was presumably started by a cigarette. You say smoking is a hazard. I say that inadequate fire suppression equipment might end your life far quicker than passing thru the casino and breathing in second hand smoke. I smoke, my wife doesn't...know what we did? We walked outside on the promenade deck and AROUND the casino so she didn't have to breathe the smoky air. You know something...as a vile smoker, I'm actually a very good husband and father, and most folks find me quite likeable. It's a shame some people can form an opinon of a person because of a cigarette in their hand.

[GottaLuvCruising]

And this thread got started primarily because of a fire on the Star Princess that was presumably started by a cigarette. You say smoking is a hazard. I say that inadequate fire suppression equipment might end your life far quicker than passing thru the casino and breathing in second hand smoke. I smoke, my wife doesn't...know what we did? We walked outside on the promenade deck and AROUND the casino so she didn't have to breathe the smoky air. You know something...as a vile smoker, I'm actually a very good husband and father, and most folks find me quite likeable. It's a shame some people can form an opinon of a person because of a cigarette in their hand.

 

Please re-read my posts...all of them. I did not say "smoking is a hazard". (I do think that, but I did not write that...before this.) Apparently you are putting words in my posts and now you are also deciding how I think and feel on other topics.

 

My beloved brother is a smoker. My brother saw his son through encephalopathy (sp?) at age six and its resulting brain damage. Despite his son's challenges, he is now a wonderful young man. My brother is the most amazing father I have ever known - incredibly nurturing and a wonderful advocate. The sad fact that he smokes (outside his home only, for the safety of this family) has no bearing on the caliber of his parenting. I worry about my brother and I could just cry when I hear him cough. But I would never make any such assumptions about another person...and someone I'd never even met???

 

If you'd like my opinion, please feel free to ask for it. As you obviously have noted, I'm not afraid to share it. But I'd appreciate you not deciding for yourself how I think or feel about any topic.

[ala-kat]

I'm a smoker, so you know I don't agree with banning smoking. I do think a few more restrictions could be tolerated. I for one travel with non-smokers and never smoke in the room, so that wouldn't bother me too much. But as for the various comments floating around this board and others today on smoking, I can't resist commenting any more.

 

1. Second hand smoke has not been proven to cause any damage whatsoever to anyone who briefly encountered puffs of smoke outdoors. Start researching and thinking for yourselves and quit listening to the media. Ten minutes a day seven days in a row of smelling smoke on your balcony on a moving ship with the wind blowing will not kill you. I promise.

 

2. For those of you who still are not convinced, you should also know that the body is a miraculous machine. Your lungs automatically begin repairing themselves as soon as there are no toxins present. In other words, the fumes you inhale in those ten minutes have most likely been repaired already by the time you suck in ten minutes of second-hand smoke the next day. Lock a young child in a closed-up house or car with a heavy smoker every day for 6 months or a year, and yes, they will be damaged. But even then, their bodies will still repair the damage if they are no longer in the same conditions.

 

3. The problem with smoking accidents is very rarely ever smoking. The problem is almost always something else. Either the person is drunk, stupid, or careless. Accidents (even tragic ones) can and do happen every day when those three things occur, without smoking being involved. Personally, I think we should ban drunks, idiots, and fools from all cruise lines.

 

4. Banning smoking from a restaurant is NOT the same as banning it from a cruise ship. If I go to a restaurant or bar where smoking is prohibited, I can go outside. And it's only two, three hours max that I'm in there. Going seven or more days without a cigarette will pose a greater danger to the non-smokers than if I'm allowed to smoke. I promise.

 

And don't think I don't actively seek out restaurants where I can smoke (there are 3 or 4 where I live). I will and do patronize these establishments even though I don't like the food that much.

 

5. As for the throwing of butts off balconies (and yes I'm talking about cigarettes). My guess is they aren't all thrown off the balcony. I have yet to see anyone stop for a second and realize you are on a moving ship with sometimes very strong winds. People leave butts in ashtrays on balconies. It's a fire danger to empty them in the trash after you just put it out. Perhaps the wind just blew them off the balcony and they happened to land on yours. Not every smoker is rude and careless.

 

Will you marry me?

[ala-kat]

Drinking ON A CRUISE SHIP does not adversely affect anyone else.

 

Beg to differ....

[ala-kat]

I don't remember the name of the poster, but someone in this thread said "Smokers are a dying breed." Very clever!

 

No one here gets out alive.

[C 2 C]

Smokers are a dying breed. Statistically the air will get cleaner as we get older and many of the smokers will not be around to enjoy it.

 

Nothing like burying a problem.. unfortunately after the damage has been done.:(

[slivers]

According to Anne Campbell in a report on cruisemates.com, "The flammable agent that caused the fire to spread so quickly is probably paint (external paint is flammable, I'm told)." IF that's true, noting, as pointed out by ocngypz, that there has been no report, nevertheless, isn't what allowed the fire to spread so quickly a bigger concern than the initial cause of ignition? Lot's of things could provide a source of ignition, but if there is no easy way for it to spread -- outside the cabins, so smoke detectors couldn't sense it -- then it's just a sputtering spark or tiny flame. So what else is flammable on ships: drapes, bedding, carpets, wall coverings, paneling?

[jaybird from SC]

I definitely would like to see all cruise lines ban smoking in the cabins and restrict it to specific areas of the ship. It has been proven that smoking is harmful to the human body and it is also a health hazard to all of us who have no choice but to breath the second hand smoke.

[Sky Sweet]

In yesterday's paper there was an article titled "Smoking bans spur boost in restaurant revenue". A study found that most of the US States and Cities that banned smoking in their restaurants saw a significant increase in revenue. In addition, a Zagat Survey for New York found that 23 percent of respondants dined out more often after the ban while only 4 percent said they dined out less. On the other hand, the opposite trend occurred in Ireland.