Smoking

[Quzor]

Spoiler for space saver:

Originally Posted by Cinocard

We literally don't have a choice to use a car or not.

However, everyone has a choice: to smoke and to not smoke. At the beginning, smoking does absolutely no good, just harm. So why start smoking? Fat people eat fat food because it tastes good, even for the first time they eat it, or may be their parents brought them up the wrong way. But nicotine never tastes good for the first time.

And smokers annoy non-smokers.

Of course, there are a whole lot reasons behind a smoker. But accept it, most of those reasons are stupid (peer pressure, self-image building, temporarily stress avoidance, and what not). Most of them are considered one's mistake at one point of life. If I were a smoker, and someone force me to choose between continuing to smoke, and to stop it, I would have the first choice. But to choose between Starting to smoke, and to not doing it, is a whole different thing.Banning cigarette would prevent the next generation from making the same mistake.

First of all, you absolutely do have a choice whether you buy a car or not. I currently do not own a vehicle, and walking/biking to my destinations proves just as effective as a car, despite it being slower.

Also, I'm glad that smokers annoy you, but they do not annoy me. However, I am disgusted (a form of annoyance) by people who find it necessary to blame society for their morbid obesity, people who chew with their mouths open, and people who ignore the healthy portions of their meals in favor of another dessert. Call me an asshole if you want, but the argument that smokers annoy non-smokers, and so smoking should be banned (which is what you infer, even if you didn't say it directly), is specious, opinionated, and false. People are annoyed by a multitude of things; some by smokers, some not.

Lastly, banning cigarettes would have precisely the opposite effect you suggest. If you don't believe me, I suggest you do some research into marijuana use in the United States. Particularly search for the time of it's first introduction (when it was legal c. 1920), the time of it's classification as a level 1 drug, and the "participation" statistics from those two points in time onward. Illegality breeds interest, especially insofar as minor illegalities are concerned.

Spoiler for space saver:

Originally Posted by Cinocard

Well, not everyone is like Mrs-Hummer-American-housewife. Many ppl do try to avoid buying a car if they can manage without it. But, as we all see, not everyone can.

To be sufficient with just a bike, or with public transportation is good, but...taxis? Are you kidding me? Are they that cheap at your place?



Fact, I don't say a tobacco ban works or not. I say it's good if it works.

Fact, I don't say there's nothing in food that doesn't cause addiction. I say it tastes good even for the first time you eat it. You don't have to force yourself through several time to get used to good food. That way, I say it is more reasonable to try out new food compare to picking up cigarette.

Fact, I said "temporarily stress avoidance." Didn't see that? Reread it.
To me, using alcohol or tobacco to release stress are all just short-sighted thinking all together. In a sense, some "shit head" teenagers under so much peer pressure may even have a more valid reason to start smoking than the so-called "adults." So don't call them shit head so easily.

And I haven't even touched your "habit" argument. Right there, very questionable.

If you don't understand a single thing I wrote, don't talk about it. Oh wait, you did understand the "car" part.

Fact: Every ban on harmful substances is good if it works. They almost never do.
Fact: Not every American housewife owns a Hummer. In fact, the large majority of them probably don't.
Fact: Just because you think you have to "force yourself" through a few smokes to enjoy it, doesn't make it so. Also, I don't even "taste" my smokes any more. And I certainly never despised the taste. It was just something I had to get used to; like NEW FOODS!
Everyone may have many reasons to start smoking; no one deserves to be called a shit-head for their personal decisions. Also, if you don't think the "habit" argument is a valid one, then you must be the most perfect person in the world, with no habits of any kind. Habit is a very valid argument for people's continued smoking. There are even people who struggle to quit smoking, not because they can't get over the nicotine addiction, but because of their "reaching habit."

Spoiler for space saver:

Originally Posted by Cinocard

Oh, okay, but I will never use taxis in my life, except for when I'm at an airport, or, when I need to send a chick home And anyone been to South East Asia? They have this "motorbike taxi" business there, which is very cheap and pretty cool

By the way, Hummer is a GM's brand of cars, often considered "monstrous," and is quite a favorite between American housewives

I don't even understand how this fits into the discussion. You can't survive without your car? Bummer for you I guess. I can't survive without my cigarettes. Bummer for me? Sure is. We all have our vices. Yours happens to be a car, mine happens to be a cigarette.

And I contend that you either live in a very "socially dependant" area, or watch too much television, to get your opinions on American's and their housewives (I'm honestly thinking you watch that show "Real Housewives of *insert city*" to get your information). Note: I define a "socially dependant" area as an area where people struggle to get the very best of everything, because they think it will make them better people, or some such nonsense.

[KimmyChan]

My grandad died from smoking-related cancer, and I'm quite scared that my younger sister will end up dying from some kind of smoking-related cancer in the future aswell

[lsley]

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Smoking is a shitty pastime. It's bad for you, it makes the air smell like shit,

Once upon a time, well actually not so long ago Smoking was allowed in the disco. Everything smelled like smoke and it wasn't bad, almost noone had a problem with this.
Now it's forbidden. There's a mix of thousands of smells you would have never expected to be this strong and all of them are disgusting. Sweat, barf, pee and whatever undefinable stuff.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

and not to mention it's bad for the environment

really, why? Because of the CO²? Hilarious

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

and the growing of tobacco takes up space that could go to feeding people who are starving.

The EU throws away thousands of tons of food every year. I assume the US do the same. The problem is the transport and all this stuff. It's not that if there's more food on the planet that noone will starve.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Nicotine is worse than pot even, at least pot is not technically addictive.

They are both in the same way mentally addictive.

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

When I walk by someone who's smoking, I just stop breathing for awhile. However, sometimes they blow the smoke right into you and it stays on your clothes.

The smell doesn't stick to your clothes if you just walk through the cloud of a solitary smoker

Originally Posted by -KarumA-

My dad used to smoke cigars everyday until at some point he started losing his voice, he went to the doctor who told him he had to stop smoking ASAP because his vocal glands or whatever they're called started rotting away because of the smoke.

Well, cigars are just not made for inhaling, they are made for puffing.

And a little question at the *BANN SMOKING*-people:
Why should something just you dont like be banned? It's the same as if I say ban sweet drinks and fatty food!

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by lsley

And a little question at the *BANN SMOKING*-people:
Why should something just you dont like be banned? It's the same as if I say ban sweet drinks and fatty food!

I support this ban even if I have to give up the skin on my chicken. Please, start the ball rolling and I'll make sure it rolls on.

[KimmyChan]

I remember when I was about 15 taking my first puff on a cigarette & almost choking

After that I knew that smoking just wasn't for me at all

[Woodchips]

Wow there's a lot of... crap being stated on both sides of the argument on this forum. How does driving have anything to do with smoking?

Anyway...

As a health-professional who deals with end-stage emphysema, chronic bronchitis and lung carcinoma patients, let me tell you how unattractive, painful and debilitating that death is, and how deeply my patients regret their habit when they come to the end of that long and painful road.

A common argument I hear among my smoking patients is: "Well, you have to die from something." Very true, that. But slowly suffocating to death, or suffering a fatal haemoptysis (dying through coughing up blood and bleeding out) is not a nice way to go for either the patient, or their loved ones.

Not only do these patients suffer severe shortness-of-breath just sitting down, they exhaust themselves trying to get their next breath, suffer crippling anxiety and fear for months before their deaths, suffer multiple hospital admissions and suffer the indignity of not having the ability to walk themselves to the toilet in time.

If you want an idea of what it is like to be one of these patients, try closing your mouth around a straw and breathing through that. Wait to see how long it takes before your lungs start burning from the lack of oxygen. That's what it is like to be an emphysema sufferer.

From a medical standpoint smoking causes or increases the risk of:
- Small-cell lung carcinoma (Very rarely found outside smoking populations-- and the most aggresive form of lung cancer)
- Emphysema
- Chronic Bronchitis
- Blood clots
- Poor healing rates
- Atherosclerosis (Hardening of the artery walls -- increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke)
- Stroke
- Mouth and face cancers
- Throat cancers
- Oesophogeal cancers
- Tongue cancers
- Predisposes to gangrene.
- Vascular claudication (Restricted blood flow to the feet/hands)
- Osteoporosis
- Decreased fertility and impaired sexual function. Impotence and erectile dysfunction in men.

This is all based on first-hand smokers, but recent evidence suggests second-hand smokers are at an even higher risk of developing these complications, so I would suggest to any smoker that they if they are happy taking these risks for their health, to try to consider the future health of your partners, children or friends before you light up near them.

Regardless of my opinions on the habit, outlawing smoking will never work, as has been previously stated. If people want to smoke, even after knowing the risks -- so be it -- it's their health and their choice. I don't understand it; but I understand they have the right to make that choice. I would hope that if they do make that choice, that they also understand that those who choose not to smoke should not be subjected to breathing in a by-product that is just as dangerous to them as to the smoker.

Smokers would not be very happy with someone standing and blowing asbestos into their faces, so I don't see how some can't see how non-smokers would be bothered having cigarette smoke blown in theirs.

I've ranted enough.

[Throne Invader]

Originally Posted by Woodchips

Wow there's a lot of... crap being stated on both sides of the argument on this forum. How does driving have anything to do with smoking?

Anyway...

As a health-professional who deals with end-stage emphysema, chronic bronchitis and lung carcinoma patients, let me tell you how unattractive, painful and debilitating that death is, and how deeply my patients regret their habit when they come to the end of that long and painful road.

A common argument I hear among my smoking patients is: "Well, you have to die from something." Very true, that. But slowly suffocating to death, or suffering a fatal haemoptysis (dying through coughing up blood and bleeding out) is not a nice way to go for either the patient, or their loved ones.

Not only do these patients suffer severe shortness-of-breath just sitting down, they exhaust themselves trying to get their next breath, suffer crippling anxiety and fear for months before their deaths, suffer multiple hospital admissions and suffer the indignity of not having the ability to walk themselves to the toilet in time.

If you want an idea of what it is like to be one of these patients, try closing your mouth around a straw and breathing through that. Wait to see how long it takes before your lungs start burning from the lack of oxygen. That's what it is like to be an emphysema sufferer.

From a medical standpoint smoking causes or increases the risk of:
- Small-cell lung carcinoma (Very rarely found outside smoking populations-- and the most aggresive form of lung cancer)
- Emphysema
- Chronic Bronchitis
- Blood clots
- Poor healing rates
- Atherosclerosis (Hardening of the artery walls -- increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke)
- Stroke
- Mouth and face cancers
- Throat cancers
- Oesophogeal cancers
- Tongue cancers
- Predisposes to gangrene.
- Vascular claudication (Restricted blood flow to the feet/hands)
- Osteoporosis
- Decreased fertility and impaired sexual function. Impotence and erectile dysfunction in men.

This is all based on first-hand smokers, but recent evidence suggests second-hand smokers are at an even higher risk of developing these complications, so I would suggest to any smoker that they if they are happy taking these risks for their health, to try to consider the future health of your partners, children or friends before you light up near them.

Regardless of my opinions on the habit, outlawing smoking will never work, as has been previously stated. If people want to smoke, even after knowing the risks -- so be it -- it's their health and their choice. I don't understand it; but I understand they have the right to make that choice. I would hope that if they do make that choice, that they also understand that those who choose not to smoke should not be subjected to breathing in a by-product that is just as dangerous to them as to the smoker.

Smokers would not be very happy with someone standing and blowing asbestos into their faces, so I don't see how some can't see how non-smokers would be bothered having cigarette smoke blown in theirs.

I've ranted enough.

There you have it. You guys got it first hand from a professional. Now you could probably explain the damages it does financially and probably some minds are gonna change.

[Cinocard]

Well, that called off-topic discussing. It's hard to have a serious debate like in the abortion topic anyway. At most it's just personal arguments, you see. I think it's fun that way

First of all, you absolutely do have a choice whether you buy a car or not. I currently do not own a vehicle, and walking/biking to my destinations proves just as effective as a car, despite it being slower.

Yeah, right, nothing is absolute. An idiot know that. Of course there's ppl who are just fine without cars. But look at how vital cars is to many nowadays. And looks at how "vital" tobacco is to people under stress that just want to find an easy way to escape it temporarily. It's like saying inflicting harm to protect oneself from a mad killer is absurd. Because that person absolutely does have a choice whether to inflict harm, or to be killed

Lastly, banning cigarettes would have precisely the opposite effect you suggest.
...
Fact: Every ban on harmful substances is good if it works. They almost never do.

Yeah, sure, may be that was my grammar mistake. Should have written "if it worked" instead of "if it works" See anywhere I said that banning smokers completely would have positive effects overall? "IF it works" means that if there's no harmful consequences. Again, grammar error
And now we have someone here saying making smoking illegal would boost the smokers rate from the current ~20% to more Yeah, imagine 20% population violating drugs law everyday because of "curiosity." What example.

Call me an asshole if you want, but the argument that smokers annoy non-smokers, and so smoking should be banned

Where did I say it? All of my point was: smoking is bad for the person himself. The most valid reason for start doing so may be to use nicotine for a temporarily stress avoidance, is also not wise. It also bothers the public. Therefore, people who haven't smoked should never do it. And we need a method to ensure that the next generation does not make the mistake of picking up tobacco. Understand now?

I'm glad that smokers annoy you, but they do not annoy me

Oh, right, you are a smoker, or a saint to tolerate someone who put a pair of haven't-washed-for-days-dirty-socks next to your nose. I insults you? Sorry, but it's that bad.

Fact: Not every American housewife owns a Hummer. In fact, the large majority of them probably don't.
...
And I contend that you either live in a very "socially dependant" area, or watch too much television, to get your opinions on American's and their housewives

Sure, That's why I said: "not everyone is like," to support my point that many try to not buy a car if they can, but people that didn't smoke at first had better ways to release stress, why sought help from nicotine? Anyway, that's the term credible experts in the fields use to criticize the wastefulness of SUV (housewives using Hummers to do groceries runs) What's wrong with using it? Plz, read more before talk.

Spoiler for .:

Everyone may have many reasons to start smoking; no one deserves to be called a shit-head for their personal decisions.

Yeah, someone called teenagers who start smoking to be cool shit-head. But sorry, it wasn't me. I was trying to defend for them, you see.

Spoiler for .:

Fact: Just because you think you have to "force yourself" through a few smokes to enjoy it, doesn't make it so. Also, I don't even "taste" my smokes any more. And I certainly never despised the taste. It was just something I had to get used to; like NEW FOODS!
...
Also, if you don't think the "habit" argument is a valid one, then you must be the most perfect person in the world, with no habits of any kind. Habit is a very valid argument for people's continued smoking.

Woa, I haven't talked about how it's wrong yet, how do you know what I want to talk about? How do you know how my point will be wrong? You are a genius, dude.

Brilliant, it's a perfect excuse for ppl to CONTINUE smoking, but not what I was talking about For ppl who choose to start smoking, it's not a habit yet, why choose to smoke, to get that bad habit? Why not try to prevent the next generation from getting that bad habit? And to "Ridiculing a person for a habit is stupid." But to ridicule him for a BAD habit that discommodes the public is totally fine. "I'm used to shit in public. Don't ridicule me, woo hoo!" Now that wasn't from you, but from someone I replied to before. Again, read first before talk.

And, yeah, it's that way because you already smoke for a long time. But how many people think tobacco tastes good for the FIRST TIME? But when a new good type of ice-cream comes out, I eat it and enjoy it immediately Again, I'm talking about how unreasonable ppl choose to start smoking is, not about people that already smoked should quit it or not.

Spoiler for .:

I don't even understand how this fits into the discussion. You can't survive without your car? Bummer for you I guess. I can't survive without my cigarettes. Bummer for me? Sure is. We all have our vices. Yours happens to be a car, mine happens to be a cigarette.

"Bang, I was born in America, I live in America, I have to commute to work. I need CAR." It at least sounds somewhat reasonable. It's not in my control that my life requires me to be like that.

"Bang, I was born into this world, I somehow got addicted to smoking. I need to smoke." Sorry mate, but it's your fault that you start smoking and got addicted to it. Now, if you somehow were addicted to it without a choice (ex: working in a tobacco factory to live), I won't complain.

You are another excellent example of the swarm in many board that write before read, freely interpreting others' texts for your own convenience, then start bashing it. Reread it, then you will see what I wrote and what you bashed were about completely different points I reasoned smoking is bad and we should prevent the young to unreasonably pick up the bad habit, you ranted about how people that already smokes heavily now are all good and righteous. You even offended me for something I never said (shit-head part). It's so wrong every in single sentence that I had to quote so many.

[Narona]

Originally Posted by AmoreDoll

There you have it. You guys got it first hand from a professional. Now you could probably explain the damages it does financially and probably some minds are gonna change.

Not that i want to defend those who smoke (I never smoked and don't plan to start), but I don't think that minds are gonna change that easily. Here in France, there are more people than in the past who take preventive actions. There are also a lot of debates and articles in newspaper.

However, the number of young people who smokes is increasing, and they start at a very early age.

It's the same with alcohol and drugs (not ontly cannabis, but now also cocaine). Lots of preventive actions and bans, but still increasing, and not only among the young people. When I did see a documentary about a village of only 300 people where there were dealers and lots of people who were buying drugs, I was like "what?".

I don't have any better solution, but I just point out that banning something or saying to people that "they will die if they don't stop" don't seem to work that greatly for now. Though I think it's better to try something rather than doing nothing, so I am not against the actions that our government takes.

[FateAnomaly]

Oh i get it! Since second hand smoke is more dangerous, those who smoke are actually safer than those who don't! Thats why they choose to smoke.

Seriously though i don't understand why tobacco company put those poisonous filler materials into cigarettes. The addictive component is nicotine which isn't that harmful in itself.
Shouldn't they try to ensure the health of its customers so they will stay alive to buy its product?

[LeoXiao]

"Bang, I was born in America, I live in America, I have to commute to work. I need CAR." It at least sounds somewhat reasonable. It's not in my control that my life requires me to be like that.

You don't need a car even if you live in America. Ever heard of something called a bike? They're cheaper, easy to ride, and probably safer since you can go where the cars don't and therefore avoid serious accidents.

Seriously though i don't understand why tobacco company put those poisonous filler materials into cigarettes.

I hear they put stuff like fiber glass in them so that your lungs get cut and the nicotine gets into your blood faster and therefore the chances of getting hooked are higher.
The poisonous stuff is probably to keep the cigarette in one piece (glue).

[Woodchips]

Originally Posted by Narona

Not that i want to defend those who smoke (I never smoked and don't plan to start), but I don't think that minds are gonna change that easily.

Very true. If it were that easy I'd be seeing significantly less of these patients per day. QUIT Australia ran a successful programme of graphic advertisements and pictures on packets to help discourage young people from smoking. I find it amazing that these people were more affected by effects on their looks than by health consequences.

If you want to see an example of these, follow the link below. If you're queasy, maybe not. Shows a mouth cancer, and amputation.

http://www.quit.org.au/browse.asp?Co...advertisement1

On a personal level my opinions on smoking and obesity are much the same: If you're smoking, or eating much more than you should, then all the suffering you experience has been self-made and you're an idiot. I personally get frustrated that so many resources, are wasted on people who are doing nothing to help themselves. When you see stroke patients unable to get funding for botox injections to help them walk again, yet see a patient drain the health department's resources from exacerbations of COAD from smoking, or getting treated for burns because they blew themselves up by smoking while on bottled O2, you get very jaded. Even more so when I see younger people light up -- at least older generations weren't informed of the dangers when they took it up.

[Clarste]

Not that it's completely relevant, but there seems to be some confusion regarding the car analogy. Driving cars is indeed often a choice. But being a pedestrian or bus rider or bike rider still puts you at risk from cars. You're still using the car-infested streets. So it's not really about driving cars or owning cars so much as it is living in car-oriented society.

Which I guess makes cars closer to second hand smoke than smoking.

[Throne Invader]

Originally Posted by Narona

Not that i want to defend those who smoke (I never smoked and don't plan to start), but I don't think that minds are gonna change that easily.

Ok......then hopefully some minds can change.

[Narona]

Originally Posted by Woodchips

Very true. If it were that easy I'd be seeing significantly less of these patients per day. QUIT Australia ran a successful programme of graphic advertisements and pictures on packets to help discourage young people from smoking. I find it amazing that these people were more affected by effects on their looks than by health consequences.

If you want to see an example of these, follow the link below. If you're queasy, maybe not. Shows a mouth cancer, and amputation.

http://www.quit.org.au/browse.asp?Co...advertisement1

On a personal level my opinions on smoking and obesity are much the same: If you're smoking, or eating much more than you should, then all the suffering you experience has been self-made and you're an idiot. I personally get frustrated that so many resources, are wasted on people who are doing nothing to help themselves. When you see stroke patients unable to get funding for botox injections to help them walk again, yet see a patient drain the health department's resources from exacerbations of COAD from smoking, or getting treated for burns because they blew themselves up by smoking while on bottled O2, you get very jaded. Even more so when I see younger people light up -- at least older generations weren't informed of the dangers when they took it up.

I clicked And I am not against that kind of preventive actions. It has more chance to increase public awareness than just saying "you might die".

Anyway, without showing any images, maybe the parents should start to talk a lot with their childrens about all those health problems. We could think that they already do that, but it's nowhere near the case for a lot of them here in France.

Originally Posted by AmoreDoll

Ok......then hopefully some minds can change.

Yes, that's why I am not against the preventive actions. Because even if you help only one person, it's still better than not helping anyone at all.

Originally Posted by Clarste

Not that it's completely relevant, but there seems to be some confusion regarding the car analogy. Driving cars is indeed often a choice. But being a pedestrian or bus rider or bike rider still puts you at risk from cars. You're still using the car-infested streets. So it's not really about driving cars or owning cars so much as it is living in car-oriented society.

Which I guess makes cars closer to second hand smoke than smoking.

In big cities like Paris, a whole bunch of people don'tb have or not use a car. That doesn't increase the risk of being involved in a car accident. With the subway and such, many people really prefer to not use a car.

Actually, there are even some people who reply that driving in a big cities can be annoying (because there are too many cars and it's a pain to park a car) and stressful.

[Cinocard]

That's not what is relevant here. It's misleading.

No matter what we say, the fact is that a large number of people in core economic regions own cars. Yet a good percentage of them never enjoy driving, nor do they wish to live in a "car society." So it is very different from smoking, when people can choose to smoke or not from the start.

If you have stress, you can take a pill, take an absent, go on a picnic or something (yeah, I know, sometime life is not nice), smoking is just a final solution. But if you have a job 40 miles away from your suburban house, you can either: Buy a new house? Find a new job? Of course, drive a car.

[LeoXiao]

Originally Posted by Clarste

Which I guess makes cars closer to second hand smoke than smoking.

Well, according to a certain guy from Darker than Black, smoking is actually more harmful to the bystander than it is the smoker. Probably not true though.

[Throne Invader]

Originally Posted by LeoXiao

Well, according to a certain guy from Darker than Black, smoking is actually more harmful to the bystander than it is the smoker. Probably not true though.

It is true

[Cinocard]

Nope, it's NOT true. At least not true the way most people understand it.

It depends a lot on how you measure it, and how you define SHS. "Secondhand smoke" refers to the smoke exhaled from smokers' lungs, and that smoke which has already gone through the lung once is more harmful than smoke that is directly inhaled in by smokers. But it doesn't mean that BYSTANDERS have a greater chance of catching diseases than actual smokers. Because, you see, anyone who smokes himself is also a secondhand smoker.

[lsley]

Originally Posted by Woodchips

http://www.quit.org.au/browse.asp?Co...advertisement1

uh ._. I'm happy I'll die from a car accident before I can get this ugly friend
...but honestly, this is a mouth you might get in one of x cases. e.g. for meth it's like you'll get something really close to this for sure, there are still lots of people doing it. So I guess it might stop some people, but not too many.