cigarettes can [censored] diagf

[kipin]

Seeing someone smoke on TV or a movie, even if it is in a negative type of situation just makes me want to light up.

I never even noticed smokers in film before I started smoking.

[I_AM_EVIL]

[ QUOTE ]
probably NOT
ill take the low quality beef over tar any day.
[ QUOTE ]
fast food and other crap we put in our bodies probably kills more than cigarettes. you want to make that illegal too?

[/ QUOTE ]
also u smokers smell so [censored] bad besides killing people with ur 2nd hand smoke u make everyone else around u smell like [censored] too u [censored] worthless pieces of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Show me proof that 2nd hand smoke has ever killed anyone.

[kevin017]

[ QUOTE ]
Show me proof that 2nd hand smoke has ever killed anyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

just because its hard to prove doesn't mean its unlikely.

[Abones]

I haven't smoked in 10 days, go me.

[ QUOTE ]
Seeing someone smoke on TV or a movie, even if it is in a negative type of situation just makes me want to light up.

I never even noticed smokers in film before I started smoking.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT- Californication


I just had 2 with lunch. To go out and personally attack people for smoking is pretty rediculous. Alot of smokers are quite considerate and go to great lengths not to let their habits negatively affect others. Which is more than I can say for alcohol and drug abusers.

FWIW in Australia it is illegal to smoke in any inclosed public space. We are aware of the harms of 2nd hand smoke, but you realise the pollution in LA is just as bad for you than the limited exposure to 2nd hand smoke that you are complainging about.

[cowboy2579]

pretty unlikely that 2nd hand smoke (unless in confined areas over a prolonged period of time) hurts anyone. even smoking could be alot less harmful, if it weren't for the way it was packaged.

its likely that the engineered nicotine delivery system is far more harmful than the tobacco itself. in fact, the filter of most domestic cigarettes contains a compound chemically similar to asbestos (fiberglass) which is meant to cut the surface of the lungs in order to increase the nicotine absorption rate. Heating a known carcinogen of inorganic composition and inhaling the particulates would logically be far more dangerous than organic (albeit still carcingenic) tar.

nicotine replacement therapies actually have a higher recitivisim rate than a cold turkey approach. in other words, NRT's actually feed the business of keeping people addicted to nicotine.

my granddad died in his early 80's from his 2nd heart attack. he smoked 2 packs of unfiltered camels a day for a long time. while this certainly contributed to his heart condition (he had to quit after #1) he did not get cancer. while this is anecodotal evidence at best, i believe that because he did not smoke filtered cigarettes, he dodged the most harmful effects of the current engineered cigarette.

i quit in early february, cold turkey. i still want one, but the cravings are MUCH farther in between now. I encourage you to quit (if you're ready) - but not to use NRT's or 'light' cigarettes as a catalyst to quit. Both are largely ineffective.

[westhoff]

I quit January 2006. I had smoked a pack a day for five years. I hadn't planned on it at all. I got the flu really bad and just stayed in bed for a week. When I got better I figured I could quit since I hadn't smoked in a week. I still have cravings once in awhile and actually wish I smoked sometimes to alleviate the major stress and anxiety I have. Anyway, I think the one thing that kept me from smoking was the disappointment it would give my family and friends if I started again. Plus it's [censored] expensive.

[kniper]

[ QUOTE ]
probably NOT
ill take the low quality beef over tar any day.
[ QUOTE ]
fast food and other crap we put in our bodies probably kills more than cigarettes. you want to make that illegal too?

[/ QUOTE ]
also u smokers smell so [censored] bad besides killing people with ur 2nd hand smoke u make everyone else around u smell like [censored] too u [censored] worthless pieces of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

lol @ low quality beef. its not just the beef dude. its the sugars, fats, aspertane (sp?), etc. all that coke full of sugars thats probably gonna give you diabetes. if they should tax anything in this country, it should be mcdonalds and coca cola. that [censored] is terrible for you, and people eat that crap like 5 times a week

health problems stemming from obesity should be the #1 cause of death if im not mistaken. so light up a cigarette you nits

[gimmetheloot]

smoked one cigarrete, felt AWFUL going into lungs, never again.

plus mom died from cancer from it, and grandma just looked like [censored].

also mom spent ~15k/yr on them (no [censored]) so ill never.

yay cleaner lungs.

[kevin017]

[ QUOTE ]
pretty unlikely that 2nd hand smoke (unless in confined areas over a prolonged period of time) hurts anyone. even smoking could be alot less harmful, if it weren't for the way it was packaged."

[/ QUOTE ]

"Smoking directly causes an estimated 430,000 deaths per year and is believed to kill some 50,000 non-smokers through repeated exposure to second-hand smoke."

The believed impact of second-hand smoke is hardly trivial.

[ QUOTE ]
its likely that the engineered nicotine delivery system is far more harmful than the tobacco itself. in fact, the filter of most domestic cigarettes contains a compound chemically similar to asbestos (fiberglass) which is meant to cut the surface of the lungs in order to increase the nicotine absorption rate. Heating a known carcinogen of inorganic composition and inhaling the particulates would logically be far more dangerous than organic (albeit still carcingenic) tar.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an urban legend. there is no fiberglass in cigarettes.

[ QUOTE ]
nicotine replacement therapies actually have a higher recitivisim rate than a cold turkey approach. in other words, NRT's actually feed the business of keeping people addicted to nicotine.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is false. As I mentioned above, the cold turkey approach has a success rate of ~5% after one year. NRT's have rates many times this.

[ QUOTE ]
my granddad died in his early 80's from his 2nd heart attack. he smoked 2 packs of unfiltered camels a day for a long time. while this certainly contributed to his heart condition (he had to quit after #1) he did not get cancer. while this is anecodotal evidence at best, i believe that because he did not smoke filtered cigarettes, he dodged the most harmful effects of the current engineered cigarette.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry to hear about your grandfather. however, the only thing that filters change is how concentrated the smoke is. Seeing as how much you smoke is driven by how much nicotine your body needs, and not by number of cigarettes, filtered vs. unfiltered is largely irrelevant.

[ QUOTE ]
i quit in early february, cold turkey. i still want one, but the cravings are MUCH farther in between now. I encourage you to quit (if you're ready) - but not to use NRT's or 'light' cigarettes as a catalyst to quit. Both are largely ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good for you for quitting, keep it up.