smoking is bad, right?

well, it got my attention on TV it was some kind of documentary

we all know that smoking is bad, even before the writings on the boxes. Lung cancer and impotency and all that stuff. But if someone knows all that stuff, some still judge him/her for it.

there was an example:
Person A is a smoker and is lighting a cigarette, and Person B is a non smoker and judgmental and is all "how can you do that to yourself? Don't you know that smoking is bad, and ...."

Now if there was a large woman/man in a McDonald's eating for tree would someone yell at her " how can you do that to yourself? watch your cholesterol? look at the size of you"

how is this different?

Smoking has no health benefit at all, whereas food does. It is easy for us to misconstrue the use of food.

The example you gave is problematic since how do you know the person in McDonalds was not eating one entire meal for the day as part of their new diet regime, where previously they ate much greater portions? The person could have lost a considerable amount of weight and your comments would be presumptious, discriminatory and discouraging.

Is there such a thing as second hand colesterol?

ok, not McDonalds, somewhere else
eating has health benefit, but not in the case of the lady
what I ask is, why the second example is less acceptable than the first one?
I an non smoker and still don't mind it when someone smokes
amd many things are bad for us but we do them anyway
some may say that antidepresives are just for people who can't work out their own problems on their own (quoting) but they are still given by doctors
what my point is, there are more vices but they make it like smoking is the worst of them all.
how can we judge someone for smoking? he knows the risks, do we all lead such healthy and righteous life? and if we judge, can we judge about one thing and not about the other?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papayahed

Is there such a thing as second hand colesterol?

---

no there is not, i get your point, but smoking open-doors, and now there are non smoking areas, at least in my country.
that is not the point, read the upper post

Whatever the difference, the ongoing Burka thread is instructive. We in the West feel it is unacceptable for foreigners to coerce all women to wear the burka. Yet most on the forum feel free to coerce all women to refrain from wearing a burka in the West. A cultural double standard?

On the radio this morning, I learnt more of the 1952 suicide of Alan Turing, UK codebreaker and artificial intelligence pioneer. In 1952, Turing was convicted of homosexuality and forcibly administered an experimental chemical castration agent.

Returning to the issue of criticising smoking: many pillars of society in 1952 felt free not only to criticise Turning's sexual preference and to prosecute him accordingly, but also to venture a human experiment befitting of Josef Mengele. These same pillars would have been horrified at the voicing of criticism of a large woman or man eating fast food!

I think the hatred for smoking is the only thing saving it. People smoke because it's cool. It wouldn't be cool if it were universally accepted. Smokers thrive on your hatred of them. They also have mommy issues...all of them. Every last one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Delta40

Smoking has no health benefit at all, whereas food does. It is easy for us to misconstrue the use of food.

The example you gave is problematic since how do you know the person in McDonalds was not eating one entire meal for the day as part of their new diet regime, where previously they ate much greater portions? The person could have lost a considerable amount of weight and your comments would be presumptious, discriminatory and discouraging.

---

i have to say that a strong majority of food at McDonalds has few health benefits, other than an excess of caloric intake per meal.

You are right of course but we cannot measure the caloric intake that the person had prior to that, which may have been much greater. For all we know their purchase may have been a reduction in comparison to what they were used to and on those grounds, the comments would be inappropriate.

It isn't likely that we will live in a society that will serve food portions based on the size and health of the customer is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rimbaud

smoking is bad, and ...."

---

No, smoking is not bad in and of itself. There has been a huge amount of noise about how bad it is, but the basics are almost always wrong. Smoking tobacco (I assume that you were referring only to tobacco) is not wrong. In addition, smoking tobacco in moderation is not unhealthy, and the claims by the government and others do not even disagree with this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

No, smoking is not bad in and of itself. There has been a huge amount of noise about how bad it is, but the basics are almost always wrong. Smoking tobacco (I assume that you were referring only to tobacco) is not wrong. In addition, smoking tobacco in moderation is not unhealthy, and the claims by the government and others do not even disagree with this point.

---

Smoking in moderation maybe, but this ignores the fact that smoking is addictive (though some people can resist). I know many people who began smoking 'socially' (in moderation), but are now pack-a-day smokers.

I have no issues with people smoking - if properly informed of the health risks (hard not to be). My only problem is people smoking around others...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazz_

Smoking in moderation maybe, but this ignores the fact that smoking is addictive (though some people can resist). I know many people who began smoking 'socially' (in moderation), but are now pack-a-day smokers.

---

It does not ignore the fact that nicotine is addictive. Addiction is not a major issue.

If your reasoning is that smoking is not a problem when in moderation (but is when someone smokes often), the fact that they are addictive is a major issue. If moderate smoking leads to heavy smoking, which leads to health problems, then surely the original moderate smoking is bad?

Are you saying that something that is addictive does not lead to excessive use? I'm sorry but I disagree, smoking has very serious consequences, and the fact that it is addictive exacerbates the problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manchegan

I think the hatred for smoking is the only thing saving it. People smoke because it's cool. It wouldn't be cool if it were universally accepted. Smokers thrive on your hatred of them. They also have mommy issues...all of them. Every last one.

---

:thumbs_up

Indeed. Indeed.

wow this discussion totally went off the track ha. i believe it is a bit of a double standard, how can you look down on someone for their own choices? what makes you so damn righteous that you can judge others? im not that religious but damn, he who is without sin throw the first stone! and who is to say, on the idea that the woman in maccas is cutting down, that the guy smoking isnt cutting down as well?? what if hes down from 2 packs a day to only half a pack??

people are too quick to critise, too judgemental. if you were inhaling the smoke move away, or ask them to, but that wasnt the point, she said that "dont you know smoking is bad??" well duh the guy isnt stupid, but people take risks everyday you wake up you take risks, and if he likes to enjoy a cigarette bloody well let him it is his life, his body, freedom and all that. he doesnt deserve to be critised just like fat people shouldnt be looked down upon for ordering an extra large fries with a side of fries.

out..

I think that there are a large amount of people who are generally uncomfortable with the idea of other people having the freedom to think for themselves and act as they choose. I remember, once, in a discussion around public nudity, that someone mentioned this idea that there is a 'social contract' which the majority believe we are somehow signed up for and anyone not behaving in accordance with the 'social contract' is a loose cannon, not to be trusted, because if they can break one rule they can break them all right? And then there'd be anarchy, wouldn't there? So it makes people nervous when others fly in the face of these grey 'rules' because 'control' and 'order' are no longer established.

Possibly the only difference between your two examples is the length of time in which it has been against the 'social contract' to behave in that manner. Certainly the anti-smoking message has been around for the duration of my lifetime, whereas the anti-obesity message is still in its infancy. So perhaps in 20 or 30 years time your second scenario will become more commonplace. I find both scenarios deplorable; I don't understand why it is that, in the absence of injury to another, one person's fear should outweigh another person's freedom. If someone wants to smoke let them smoke providing that does not force another person to inhale such smoke against their will. If someone wants to eat and eat and eat until they give themselves a heart attack, let them. It's their choice. But I think the idea that people choose to do these things regardless of the 'known' risk, makes others very nervous.

But you could apply this scenario to many examples. Should people be judged for undertaking risky sports, like mountaineering, coasteering, potholing, sailing? Should people be judged for permitting their children to play out unsupervised? Should people be judged for not washing their hands before dinner? Should people be judged for crossing the road at places other than the designated crossing point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Manchegan

I think the hatred for smoking is the only thing saving it. People smoke because it's cool. It wouldn't be cool if it were universally accepted. Smokers thrive on your hatred of them. They also have mommy issues...all of them. Every last one.

---

Haha, very random... MOMMY! where is my mommy?

It's not really a big deal whether a person smokes or not. It's his choice after all, if he wants to look cool at the expense of his health. However, I am greatly bothered by people who smoke around others. It seems like they don't give a damn care at all to people around them. Studies show that secondhand smoke is deadlier so poor us non-smokers who get affected. I guess, it's more of a question of having consideration towards the immediate surroundings. Like, if you see a kid nearby, you should at all cost refrain from smoking. Or better yet, so as not to impede your smoking habits, go to a smoking area.

I have gotten the impression that the people who are significantly opposed to smoking do not know what tobacco, especially nicotine, does. Coolth has nothing to do with wh people smoke. Most people smoke because nicotine has a pleasant effect. Nicotine is a powerful anti-depressant and euphoriant, but it is not appreciated by all people. Generally, the people who enjoy smoking the most are most affected by nicotine. and their bides metabolize nicotine, so they want more; thus the addiction. Most people who do not become addicted to nicotine are not affected by it, but there are some who enjoy it and do not become addicted. The physically damaging effects of nicotine are minor for most people, and people who metabolize it quickly usually repair the damage from smoking, which is why one a small percentage of long term smokers have major health effects. Conversely, the people who do not become addicted do not repair the damage from smoking as quickly, and the damage can be cumulative, so the non-addicts are more likely to have major health effects.

When discussing nicotine, one should keep in mind that it acts strongly in the brain. Addiction to nicotine is related closely with its effect as a neuro-transmitter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

Coolth has nothing to do with wh people smoke. Most people smoke because nicotine has a pleasant effect.

---

But then one must wonder what the contributing factors were that inspired Suzy Smoker to pick up cigarettes (and for that matter, stick to them since I don’t imagine that the first few attempts would be the smoothest most natural-feeling means to nirvana) to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

I have gotten the impression that the people who are significantly opposed to smoking do not know what tobacco, especially nicotine, does. Coolth has nothing to do with wh people smoke. Most people smoke because nicotine has a pleasant effect. Nicotine is a powerful anti-depressant and euphoriant, but it is not appreciated by all people. Generally, the people who enjoy smoking the most are most affected by nicotine. and their bides metabolize nicotine, so they want more; thus the addiction. Most people who do not become addicted to nicotine are not affected by it, but there are some who enjoy it and do not become addicted. The physically damaging effects of nicotine are minor for most people, and people who metabolize it quickly usually repair the damage from smoking, which is why one a small percentage of long term smokers have major health effects. Conversely, the people who do not become addicted do not repair the damage from smoking as quickly, and the damage can be cumulative, so the non-addicts are more likely to have major health effects.

When discussing nicotine, one should keep in mind that it acts strongly in the brain. Addiction to nicotine is related closely with its effect as a neuro-transmitter.

---

:nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Madame X

But then one must wonder what the contributing factors were that inspired Suzy Smoker to pick up cigarettes (and for that matter, stick to them since I don’t imagine that the first few attempts would be the smoothest most natural-feeling means to nirvana) to begin with.

---

The general press has never had a really good piece about nicotine. It is one of the most powerful drugs known, but the effects are "slam you over the head with pleasure" as it is with some drugs. Suzy Smoker felt the effects before she ever took a drag, and it felt better then wonderful. Many people feel dizzy from cigarettes at first, but that is not the effect of nicotine; it is the body's reaction to a powerful drug. If the beginning smoker took just the tiniest drag at first, that would be effective, and that would prevent the dizziness that many peopple experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

The general press has never had a really good piece about nicotine. It is one of the most powerful drugs known, but the effects are "slam you over the head with pleasure" as it is with some drugs. Suzy Smoker felt the effects before she ever took a drag, and it felt better then wonderful. Many people feel dizzy from cigarettes at first, but that is not the effect of nicotine; it is the body's reaction to a powerful drug. If the beginning smoker took just the tiniest drag at first, that would be effective, and that would prevent the dizziness that many peopple experience.

---

If Suzy Smoker smoked pot before, then I wouldn't expect coughing or dizziness when she tried a cigarette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NickAdams

If Suzy Smoker smoked pot before, then I wouldn't expect coughing or dizziness when she tried a cigarette.

---

Yes, she would almost certainly not cough and she might not get dizzy.

No, I smoked pot before I started smoking cigarettes and didn't cough but I definitely got light headed and very dizzy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

Most people smoke because nicotine has a pleasant effect. Nicotine is a powerful anti-depressant and euphoriant......

---

This is a very important point!

As a smoker; I must admit that anti-depressant/euphoriant is the major reason I continue to smoke in spite of the fact that I KNOW risks of the dangerous side-effects. I feel certain that, while going through many of the rough patches of my life I may well have become a homicidal maniac were it not for the calming effects of cigarettes.

Rather than standing idle and counting to ten when trying to control one's temper; sometimes the time it takes to fish out your pack, find your lighter and light up (not to mention the flood of nicotine to the pleasure-centers of the brain) means the difference between being able to laugh it off and getting into a bar brawl.

I will not deny that I am addicted. (half a pack a day)
I will not deny that I have "mommy issues" (though I doubt that they are related to my smoking)

Hi all, just thought I would say something about the issue of smoking. I have family and know numerous elder generation. (In the 70's bracket) That were actually prescribed smoking as a fight against childhood diseases in the early forties. Sounds silly I know, however the elderly gentleman I was speaking to recently said that he was forced to start smoking (by a doctor) as an eight year old, to not contract Chicken Pox and The Measles. Sixty years later he is still smoking. Doesn't have lung cancer and get this - has never had the Chicken Pox or the Measles. Was that doctor right or is it luck of the draw? Not sure. I don't smoke and never have, and I have had all the childhood diseases. Is it just coincidence, maybe? Or not...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maryd.

Hi all, just thought I would say something about the issue of smoking. I have family and know numerous elder generation. (In the 70's bracket) That were actually prescribed smoking as a fight against childhood diseases in the early forties. Sounds silly I know, however the elderly gentleman I was speaking to recently said that he was forced to start smoking (by a doctor) as an eight year old, to not contract Chicken Pox and The Measles. Sixty years later he is still smoking. Doesn't have lung cancer and get this - has never had the Chicken Pox or the Measles. Was that doctor right or is it luck of the draw? Not sure. I don't smoke and never have, and I have had all the childhood diseases. Is it just coincidence, maybe? Or not...

---

I hadn't heard about Chicken Pox and Measles, but smoking stops the development of Tuberculosis at the beginning.

Nicotine has also been shown to stop the onset or development of Alzheimer's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PeterL

I hadn't heard about Chicken Pox and Measles, but smoking stops the development of Tuberculosis at the beginning.

Nicotine has also been shown to stop the onset or development of Alzheimer's.

---

To be totally honest with you Peter, I don't know if it really does stop any childhood illnesses. All I know is what these elderly people are quoting. I just thought it was quite a coincidence that the fellow I spoke of was forced to smoke to help prevent the above said diseases and it worked. Very weird to say the least. But true too - well for him anyway. (This gentleman lived in Cyprus at the time)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maryd.

To be totally honest with you Peter, I don't know if it really does stop any childhood illnesses. All I know is what these elderly people are quoting. I just thought it was quite a coincidence that the fellow I spoke of was forced to smoke to help prevent the above said diseases and it worked. Very weird to say the least. But true too - well for him anyway. (This gentleman lived in Cyprus at the time)

---

I understand. I just looked it up and found nothing to support it, but there is information to counter what was a common prescription 150 years ago; i.e., smoke cigars to avoid getting TB.

i'm sure george carlin would've had something funny tosay to end this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbrekken

i'm sure george carlin would've had something funny tosay to end this.

---

Why don't you just relax with a beer and a few cigarettes?

I do not smoke, but I am pretty sure that if I did and if someone started giving me an epistle on the topic, I'd probably feel the urge to punch him.
People have the right to self-destructive behaviour if they don't harm others. Stuff that shortens one's life might improve the quality of it.

Health and long life are not ultimate goods, one shouldn't make them a religion.


(Now the problem might be that other people might have emotions towards the person with self-destructive behaviour, and thus, out of empathy, would like him to stop, but I think they wouldn't be derisive towards the person.)

Our well-being is not entirely in our control but I think it's important for us to make an effort to stay healthy. We are all participants in a physical environment and our potential to ameliorate the world around us is limited by our ability to control it. Your disregard for your body is a disregard for your ability to physically help others.


It's kind of parasitic to revel in unhealthy amounts of self indulgence all while expecting taxpayers to repair you when your body starts giving out. This only applies to countries with universal health care but... that's like almost everywhere now, isn't it? If your paying to fix yourself after you self-destruct than I would have no problem with it.


Nootropic drug use (LSD, caffeine, nicotine, etc... ) has benefited society as a whole so I advocate people doing whatever they need to do to their brains in order to form and work out the ideas they feel necessary to contribute. Although I believe in maintaining a healthy body, I think the mind is capable of forming longer lasting value than the body is. Physical damage can be fairly traded for some important ideas.

Smoking gives me bodily movements and functions I wouldn't otherwise have. Plus, it makes me feel cool which is something that makes me happy. And when happy, I am relaxed, and I consider this state a positive thing because when I reach alpha mode, I am calm and full of peace - all is tranquill. Smoking helps me to endure the agitation of dealing with people I dislike everyday: when approached by someone I begin smoking in the hope they'll go away soon. Generally, when smoke gets in your eyes you begin squinting, or pulling a wince and a look of malice and spite pervades the features and this is off-putting to the approaching adversary. If they are smokers as well, I begin smoking in order to raise as much smoke as possible so that I can first hide, and then disappear, as though by some sort of magic. So, in a way smoking shows both my indifference and will power to do as I please and also my ability of stealth. I am, because of smoking, a sort of amateur ninja. Imagine Michael Dudikoff wielding a fag rather than a death star or pair of nunchakus in the film American Ninja...

"Why don't you just relax with a beer and a few cigarettes?" - PeterL

O yes....... roll on seven o' clock!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wlz

"Why don't you just relax with a beer and a few cigarettes?" - PeterL

---

I assume that you now know why you feel good and cool after smoking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rimbaud

well, it got my attention on TV it was some kind of documentary

we all know that smoking is bad, even before the writings on the boxes. Lung cancer and impotency and all that stuff. But if someone knows all that stuff, some still judge him/her for it.

there was an example:
Person A is a smoker and is lighting a cigarette, and Person B is a non smoker and judgmental and is all "how can you do that to yourself? Don't you know that smoking is bad, and ...."

Now if there was a large woman/man in a McDonald's eating for tree would someone yell at her " how can you do that to yourself? watch your cholesterol? look at the size of you"

how is this different?

---

many many religions consume smoke of many diferent herbs (including tobacco) as a sort of spiritual cleansing. To make any comment about the inherent evil of smoking is pretty judgemental in any viewpoint, if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mathor

many many religions consume smoke of many diferent herbs (including tobacco) as a sort of spiritual cleansing. To make any comment about the inherent evil of smoking is pretty judgemental in any viewpoint, if you ask me.

---

Humans judge everything. So commenting that humans are judgmental is not very informative.

Nothing good ever came from smoking. All it does is slowly destroy your body and harm the bodies of those in the vicinity of the smoker. You can quote a few shallow reasons why it's ok or cool or even say that it's a question of personal choice, but the truth, as I have said, is that we all know that nothing good ever came from smoking.

It's not that different, but the effects of smoking are a little more visible in my opinion. Plus I think the reason people may seem a bit more judgmental toward smokers is that when people do smoke it affects the air that everyone else breathes in and people just don't care for that. I believe smoking is just a little bit grosser than eating a quarterpounder with cheese.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mathor

many many religions consume smoke of many diferent herbs (including tobacco) as a sort of spiritual cleansing. To make any comment about the inherent evil of smoking is pretty judgemental in any viewpoint, if you ask me.

---

Which are these many many religions? I presume you're not talking about things like joss/ incense sticks, because the point of these is as an offering to Gods/ teachers - not the consumption of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wlz

Smoking gives me bodily movements and functions I wouldn't otherwise have. Plus, it makes me feel cool which is something that makes me happy. And when happy, I am relaxed, and I consider this state a positive thing because when I reach alpha mode, I am calm and full of peace - all is tranquill. Smoking helps me to endure the agitation of dealing with people I dislike everyday: when approached by someone I begin smoking in the hope they'll go away soon. Generally, when smoke gets in your eyes you begin squinting, or pulling a wince and a look of malice and spite pervades the features and this is off-putting to the approaching adversary. If they are smokers as well, I begin smoking in order to raise as much smoke as possible so that I can first hide, and then disappear, as though by some sort of magic. So, in a way smoking shows both my indifference and will power to do as I please and also my ability of stealth. I am, because of smoking, a sort of amateur ninja. Imagine Michael Dudikoff wielding a fag rather than a death star or pair of nunchakus in the film American Ninja...

---

Smoking is all very well if it's all about you. The trouble is smoking can't be confined to yourself. In asserting their liberty to smoke, smokers are denying others' liberty not to smoke. Of course if your smoking is unobtusive, then no problem. Smkers rarelytake this attitude though.