too bad they can't ban the urine smell, too!!

Reply

I have asthma and I totally agree with the activists that it could trigger an asthma attack. There is something about those sented strips that actomatically triggers me to cover my face. At that point anxiety sets in.

Reply

It's not about "handling" a scent. It's not about scents at all- It's about the irritating and often toxic chemicals used in producing *artificial* scents. I ended up in the hospital a few months ago (In the ER) with an asthma attack caused by being at a bus stop next to someone wearing a huge amount of artifically-fragranced perfume. Now, I understand that I take a risk by even leaving the house. But for the city to consciously choose to expose asthmatics (a huge number of whom are children and live in inner-city areas) to more chemical irritants, just in the name of advertising? That's ridiculous.

I encourage you to try doing some research about chemical sensitivities, asthma, allergies and/or environmental illness so that you'll understand that it's not about how something smells, it's about chemicals and irritation. What it comes down to is air pollution, and it's not just inconvenient- It's dangerous.

Reply

I have a colleague who has chemical sensitivities and honesetly I was wondering if the chocolate chip smell would be harmful for him. Perfumes and stuff (even in laundry detergent and lotions) cause physical pain for him.

Reply

I have asthma and so do my two kids, and I'm having a hard time believing that choc. chip aroma could trigger an attack. But I suppose that anything is possible.
What I am sure of is that if I had to stand in a bus shelter and smell choc chips I'd turn into a raging homicidal maniac in two shakes of a monkey's tail.

What a stupid idea.

Reply

It's a shame we have to market to the 2% of the folks that can't handle it! Kind'a like puttin' brail on an ATM's key pad???? For What!!!?

Reply

how and when, exactly, did we become such a chemically sensitive society? i was in my late 30's and acquired a sensitivity to pollens after a bout of pneumonia but a couple years of healthy eating and exercise and i pretty much was okay.

again, there are chemically sensitive people out there, and a lot of unnecessary scented irritants (i can't pass the perfume counter of most department stores, so i don't) but all of this PC sensitivity fails to address the root cause and creates a larger entitlement society where the needs of the few dictate the experiences of the many.

we have staggeringly high and growing rates of asthma in this country. why? if we had the answer to that question we wouldn't be attacking scented bus shelters, we'd be tilting at larger windmills.

Reply

Read the article, people. It said that no cases of asthma/allergic attacks were reported. It also stated that there were no chemicals used in the making of the strips. Honestly, you said it yourself that it's a risk leaving the house at all. I'm not lacking sympathy for anyone suffering from any sort of asthma/allergic attacks, but seriously, read before you type. I bet it didn't bother you til you read this article or found out they were banned.

Reply

the other problem with it is that it takes advertising one step further into my life where I don't think it belongs. Futurama's advertising fed into dreams scenario can't be far off.

Reply

I agree with #8. I'm sick of the sun burning my skin! I'm not going to stand for it, and I think all redheads will agree with me! Who needs the sun!

Seriously though, if there were no problems to begin with, why get rid of them?

Reply

First of all: The chemical sensitivity angle, while important, is not the biggest problem with this promotion.

Secondly: No chemicals? And you all believe this? I want you all to seriously think about that. ALL smells are chemical based, whether natural or artificial. "No chemicals" is a bald-faced lie.

Thirdly, and most importantly: The main issue is the increasing pervasiveness of intrusive advertising. I live in Los Angeles, where this is an extreme and increasing problem in the form of billboards, blaring TVs at checkout stands and in busses, etc. The targeting of bus passengers is especially odious, as it sets up a class gradient where only those who can afford private transportation are free of constant advertising.

This ad campaign infuriates me, and I *like* chocolate chip cookies.

Reply

OMG people have such farts up their butts...anything to just mess up anyone's good ideas of something so scrumptious and delicious as chocolate chip cookies...ok I undersatnd the awful smell of smoke coming from cigarettes and cigars. Thank God weed isn't legal because that crap stinks...! but what about the scents of peoples different perfumes? and so you think we should ban them? W

Reply

No chemicals? How is the scent infused in the scented material, by wishing it so? Perhaps there's a tree growing somewhere that produces cookie-scented leaves? There's something placed on those strips, and sure isn't warm cookies and wishes.

Reply

Everything has chemicals in it. And everything is or is composed of chemicals.

So sad that people limit the scope of the word to "nasty (but not good) man-made stuff".

Reply

I can't figure out why anyone would want a bus station that smells like chocolate chip cookies. The scent of flowers I could understand, but cookies? It doesn't make sense unless you put a chocolate chip cookie stand nearby to accommodate all the kids that will be crying for the cookies they can smell, because I don't think it's going to make kids crave milk.

The dairy industry spends $150 million a year on the "Got Milk?" campaign. I think they could have come up with something better than cookie smells in bus shelters. And although the scent strips haven't caused any problems yet, I can see not wanting to take chances just to assist a multimillion-dollar marketing canmpaign.

Reply

To #14: At least make an argument that is logically consistent. The problem with "understanding" a ban of certain smells you don't like is that it means our society opens itself up to banning other smells just because certain people don't like them. (I am of course ignoring for the sake of argument any public health issues of ANY smells).

Either be paternalistic or let the market decide - but you can't have your cookies and eat them too.

Reply

I'm a redhead (also a statistically very small portion of the population, though I imagine one exponentially larger than the "scent sensitive" is) and thus am somewhat photosensitive. Consequently, I think there should be some sort of publicly funded, Mr. Burns-esque project to blot out the sun to accommodate *my* specific situation rather than accepting that I have specific and rather unique limitations and modifying my own behavior accordingly. This will, of course, force everyone else around me to make needless, inconvenient and possibly expensive changes to accommodate my quirks, but I think that's completely fair.

Kthxby.

Reply

"use no chemicals"? Baloney. If it is made of matter, it is made of chemicals.

Reply

I am allergic to most perfumes. I would not have been able to sit or stand anywhere near the sign, or I would have gotten sick.

Reply

I agree with Kristie. I have allergic asthma and the scented strips are killers. Even magazines with the scent in them cause me to suffer for hours. Must be the chemicals in them that allows the scent to remain for long periods of time. The activists are right. Some of us suffer a great deal from these types of things.

Reply