SMOKERS....I simply don't understand your habit.

[Eastend_Chic]

b/c I said how cigerettes has a large amnount of harmful additives in it that are put there to make it addicting AND cancerous and I said if cigs are legal weed should be legal because at least it's natural and has proven health BENEFITS...imagine that!

-DG724

 

 

I get what you mean and I agree. Not big on drugs or whatever but i dont see how cigs are better than marijuana.

 

anyway ignore the name calling, apparently they're going thru withdrawls of not smoking since the last 5 mins

[love4life]

Fair enough. It's good that you care about this person's well-being. But, at the end of the day, it's out of your control. Don't know if you've read much of the break-up forums on here, but it's the same idea there. Dumpees trying to do all they can to "convince" their ex to come back just won't work, and neither will trying to convince a smoker to quit. You have to go "NC" with this smoker - as in, don't react, don't say anything about the habit at all.

 

With my mother, I used to harp on her all the time and she would get defensive; it seemed, in a twisted way that she was doing it to spite everyone. The more I pushed, the more pleasure she'd take in smoking. For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. If the smoker you know is stubborn, like my mother, you're best bet is to stay quiet on the subject - don't even flinch if he/she lights up. Act like nothing happened. The smoker may actually find they get less enjoyment out of the act if no one's paying attention....

 

Edit: This goes for all the anti-smoking campaigns out there, too. I think if there were less media frenzy over it, you'd see a greater decline in the habit. Just another one of my whacked out theories!

[Zorba]

So weed is natural and tobacco isn't? Hmmmm. Unless you grow your own, not so much. Weed also has been blamed for serious neurological damge and carcinomas of the throat and lungs. Weed is a cause celebre for may so it escapes a lot of the rhetoric. It also has benefits. In any case the second hand smoke link is tenuous to say the least. It's being blamed for everything nowadays.

 

Asthma is the classic example. 40 years ago asthma was a much rarer disease, now it has reached near epidemic proportions, yet 40 years ago, more people smoked, in more places.

 

A 40 year study on the heath and lifestyle in Californian males showed that tobacco use had dropped from almost 70% to less than 12% in that time, yet lung cancer rates didn't change.

 

Pipe smokers are another grouping that if they don't inhale live slightly longer than non smokers and if they do inhale around the same. Yet pipe smokers get a far higher hit of nicotine and tar than cigarette smokers.

 

Does smoking cause lung cancer? Yes it can, but it is better to think of it as a co factor, rather than a singular cause. If it was the singular cause then a drop in use of tobacco would show a concomitant drop in incidence of the disease. Also exposure would correlate more tightly with incidence of disease. It correlates but not as tightly as is often portrayed. If it did all smokers would be dead by 60 and very very few non smokers would get lung cancer. Sadly this is not the case.

 

Asbestiosis is a good example of obvious cause and effect. When asbestos was outlawed in many countries because of the risks from exposure the incidences of the disease dropped very rapidly. It is a much much rarer disease than before. Ironically in the case of that disease smoking actually appears to have had a protective effect. It also appears to have a protective effect in the case of parkinsons and some other neurological diseases. Nicotine has as good or better effect on ADD as ritilin etc, with less side effects. It improves memory and concentration in those afflicted. Like everything else nothing is all bad. The world would be a lovely cuddly place full of certainty if it was. It isn't.

 

In Europe the Greeks have the highest rate of tobacco use yet the second lowest rate of lung cancer and chronic obstructive lung disease and are among the longest lived. The Japanese have one of the highest smoking rates in the world yet are the longest lived in the world. The French, drink smoke and eat more saturated fat than Americans, yet live on average 4 years longer and healthier. The good old "French paradox". Populations are full of them. The Maasai positively thrive on a diet of saturated fats that would have most dieticians swooning in shock. The Inuit the same. Diabetes and obesity are very rare diseases in those populations.

 

All of this just goes to show that absolutes when dealing with humanity are dubious.

 

As an ex smoker, I will say I enjoyed the taste and the smell. People say they don't and that's fine, but I did. I never got teh hacking coughs or any of that. My lung capacity was higher than average when I smoked and is fine now.

 

Would I recommend the habit? No, of course not. Anything that becomes that required for one's own sense of relaxation is not good. Dependence on anything is not good and there obviously are health issues, that add to the evryday exposures we're all susceptible to. Did I find it hard to give up? You bet I did. Doubly so because I like the smell of a good tobacco(pipe or cigar), unlike many ex smokers who hate the smell.

 

I will say this, nagging will not work. Holier than though attitudes will not work either. Maybe it's some built in rebellious streak in those with addictive personalities, but that angle will usually make people less determined to quit.

[Beginningandend]

 

Sorry to be so blunt, but you don't make the rules for everyone.

Is your anger and flipping out helping the situation? Or is it going to contribute to an ulcer or a heart attack for you?

 

LOL and it's priceless. The OP is saying smoking weed is A-Okay. Such a more healthy kind of smoke. LOLOL

 

THis debate appears to be turning into one that is disrespectful to others opinions so I am out.

Good day.

 

Indeed....especially since there is so much more than just pot in there nowadays.......chances are that pot too is laced with something else.

 

Not to be rude, but smoking bad for you?............duh. Where in the entire history of mankind has breathing smoke into your lungs EVER been a good idea? It is an ADDICTION, and like any addiction(which I won't name anymore , since so many have been brought up) it's an unhealthy one. Problem is trying to dictate someone else's life or as it appears to be nowadays especially with smokers, demonizing them does not work.

 

In regards to cigarettes taking away someone's freedoms because they are now addicted, sorry that theory doesn't hold any water. The decision to pick up and light the first cigarette especially knowing the dangers is a CHOICE. A good one? Of course not, but it is ultimately a decision a person makes and it is not something forced on them.

 

In regards to saying smoking is different from other pollutants, how do you figure? I have to drive to work, I have to be out in public as it is part of my job. So tell me how exactly do I avoid carcinogens, diesel fumes, paint chemicals and god only knows what else when I am out? Wear a mask? Doesn't exactly sport a good image now does it?

 

I'm not trying to pass this off as a "well, something has to kill you" speech, but if you are going to demonize one, than do it to all of them. Smokers, truck drivers, pilots, cargo boat captains, paint makers, welders, tanning booth owners and makers, alcoholics, drug dealers, fast food retailers, and so on....

 

I just want to know why it is ok for these people to harm(or potentially harm) my health while smokers take all of the abuse.

[JadedStar]

THank you Zorba. Resectful and informative.

 

I too am a former smoker so maybe knwoing how hard it is to quit is why i am not as arrogant about it but all of what you said is true. Nagging doesn't work - it makes it worse as the smoker hangs on to their right to smoke even harder. Exasorbates the issue.

 

And the comments about weed being natural and tobacco isn't always makes me chuckle.

[JadedStar]

I just want to know why it is ok for these people to harm(or potentially harm) my health while smokers take all of the abuse.

 

Exactly. Industry and progress is very unhealthy much of the time. You can't point a finger to just one carcinogen and turn a blind eye to the others.

[15 Storeys High]

Still, no two people are alike. Some people may die from emphysema or lung cancer, but I've certainly hear of those 95-year old grannies who've smoked they're whole lives and never suffered a day because of it. Body compositions vary and what may harm one person drastically, may have little to no long-term effects on another.

 

If you smoke you will get some form of respiratory problem whether it is emphysema or cancer eventually unless you die of something else first. You will probably find that these 95 year olds have lung injury/damage but it wasn't detected or the symptoms weren't as evident as other problems.

[JadedStar]

I get what you mean and I agree. Not big on drugs or whatever but i dont see how cigs are better than marijuana.

 

anyway ignore the name calling, apparently they're going thru withdrawls of not smoking since the last 5 mins

 

Most of the people debating this do not smoke, myself included.

[someguy88]

Dragonfly, why do you have Ron Paul links in your signature? LMAO!!!

 

You're spouting off that there should be more government control on cigarettes but Ron Paul's platform is mostly based on less government control and more personal freedom and more individual responsibility.

 

By all means weed should be legal, at least it's NATURAL and has health BENEFITS!! But we wont go there, dont get me started on "The BS war on drugs" EYES:

 

-DG724

 

Who cares if weed is natural or not? It's my right to put whatever the hell I want into my body. If I want to drink gasoline that's my right.

 

Honestly, from your posts I don't even think you understand the concept of rights. Rights are not privileges nor are they granted by any state or country. Throw the Bill of Rights out the window because it doesn't really mean a thing. It's just a list of our rights. The rights we were all born with.

 

 

without getting too detailed, just understand that I HAVE NO CHOICE but to be around this person, ok. and even if I wasn't around it everyday it would still negetively effect the relationship I have with this person.

 

-DG724

 

ROFL!!! What do you mean you "HAVE NO CHOICE"? That's funny considering you've been talking an awful lot about free will. You have the right not to be around anyone. No one is forcing your hand.

 

And it is NOT THAT EASY to just move out, so please leave the overly generic comments out Thank you.

 

-DG724

 

HA! Who told you that you have the right to live on someone else's property and dictate how they live?

[DragonGirl724]

It's understandable that you are angry about your current situation and although this person is partially to blame you must understand that these issues to do with smoking were not that well known until only a few years ago, and it's really only the last three years that has produced a huge anti smoking outcry. I would suspect that your family member wishes he/she had never started smoking but they did and they must live with it and try to accept it. I would also make a bet that this person is continuing to smoke because they have realised that quitting now will not change anything and they are not willing to put themselves through the pain of quitting only to continue to suffer with the emphysema. Do you see what I mean?

 

Well...somewhat...I dont know if this person would never have started if they knew then what they know now...but still what you knonw NOW should be enough to stop.

 

And I disagree with the fact that 'issues to do with smoking were not that well known until only a few years ago'

 

It wa made MANDATORY in 1965 (Public Law 89-92) that all cigerette companies must put labels on their packages that say: SMOKING IS A HZARD TO YOUR HEALTH.

 

In June 1967 the Federal Trade Commission made it madatory to put: ""Warning: Cigarette Smoking Is Dangerous to Health and May Cause Death from Cancer and Other Diseases" on their packages

 

 

and in 1981 the FTC made it mandatory to have the following SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNINGS: Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, and May Complicate Pregnancy. • SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health.

• SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Smoking by Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth, and Low Birth Weight.

• SURGEON GENERAL’S WARNING: Cigarette Smoke Contains Carbon Monoxide

 

 

So it's been well known for quite some time. And though emphasima isn't curable, it will improve as soon as toxins are no longer entering the body. The brain also begins to heal and lungs start to cleanse themselves..tho it may be too late for emphasima, it's not too late to prevent lung cancer...

 

 

-DG724

[DragonGirl724]

 

 

 

If you are going to speak intellgently then do so your previous post is complete nonsense. grow up.

 

-DG724

[DragonGirl724]

I haven't missed your point, nor have other posters. No reason to scream with all caps. And how can I be anything but overly generic if you refuse to go into detail? If you don't like where you're living, for any reason, move out. It *is* that simple, actually.

 

If you want to know why people smoke, that's one thing, but I'm not sure this is the correct forum to lecture people about their smoking only to argue with them when they respond. Maybe you should vent some of this by working for truth, or the ALA. Forcing your message down peoples' throats is probably not going to be that effective.

 

I'm not sure your anger is proportionate to the situation.

 

 

DO TO REASONS THAT ARE NOT OF YOUR BUSINESS OF KNOWING I AM LIVING HERE. END OF STORY.

[15 Storeys High]

Emphysema will kill this person. Sorry to be blunt but it will. Preventing lung cancer by stopping now is a mute point because they're already dying, just a bit slower than having cancer. Stopping smoking will slow down the disease but it will not repair any damage already done to the lungs and it doesn't mean that further damage won't happen because it will.

 

When I said "well known", I meant that there wasn't a huge public outcry and anti-smoking campaign until only a few years ago. Smoking was far more socially acceptable even in the early millennium than it is now.

 

NB - Please stop being so aggressive with some of your posts.

[bulletproof]

There's really no reason to be rude. I hope that you find a good place for your anger.

[Kiwi_Sweet]

THank you Zorba. Resectful and informative.

 

I too am a former smoker so maybe knwoing how hard it is to quit is why i am not as arrogant about it but all of what you said is true. Nagging doesn't work - it makes it worse as the smoker hangs on to their right to smoke even harder. Exasorbates the issue.

 

And the comments about weed being natural and tobacco isn't always makes me chuckle.

 

Well then it's no wonder you get all emotional about people "disagreeing" with smokers.

 

This said, I think you are being the hypocrite. Essentially, you have no say in this topic, because you were once a smoker..."YUCKY"...

 

So you cannot put yourself in a "non-smokers" shoes..

[Kiwi_Sweet]

I'm so evil at times...I'll admit!

[someguy88]

If you are going to speak intellgently then do so your previous post is complete nonsense. grow up.

 

-DG724

 

Was this comment referring to my post where I pointed out that you being a Ron Paul supporter is contradictory to your position on freedom and smoking?

[DragonGirl724]

Was this comment referring to my post where I pointed out that you being a Ron Paul supporter is contradictory to your position on freedom and smoking?

 

 

READ MY ORIGINAL POST WHEN HAVE I EVER SAID SMOKING SHOULD BE ILLEGAL!?!?

 

I dont think cigerettes should be illegal. personally I THINK they should be altered so the harmful, addicting, cancerous additives are removed. BUT THAT ASIDE That has NOTHING to do with my original post, so leave the topic since you have nothing to bring forth about my original post.

 

GOODBYE

 

-DG724

[DN]

Thread closed

[Beginningandend]

Well then it's no wonder you get all emotional about people "disagreeing" with smokers.

 

This said, I think you are being the hypocrite. Essentially, you have no say in this topic, because you were once a smoker..."YUCKY"...

 

So you cannot put yourself in a "non-smokers" shoes..

 

Um, sorry but that's a huge cop out. If anything I'd trust a former smoker's opinion over a non smokers any day of the week. They know the ins and outs, and can tell you the harms first hand, and are very familiar with the addiction. As opposed to non-smokers spewing statistical data.

 

I'm sure a book could tell me how to build a house too, but I'd probably understand the job better from someone there who has hands on work doing it.