Do you smoke?
-
@unknownuser said:
they're effing expensive.. $12-$14 / pack whereas most of the country has them in the $5-$7 range..
In NZ I pay $46 for a 50 gram pack of tobacco, our govt has the bright idea that if they up the tax on anything it helps people give up. I started smoking at the age of 12 and at 67 I'm still smoking, no ill health problems yet as long as you don't consider not being capable of running up mountains a problem. I'm getting 'p'd off at the nanny state that we live in here, but as I both smoke and drink [both heavily taxed] I can't afford to leave.
-
My name is Steve, and I have been a nicotine addict for twenty years - and I'm currently really enjoying my first puff after getting home from work, despite being pretty confident of the evidence that it isn't terribly good for me.
Is that a rational choice? In a medical sense, of course not - but I have a funny feeling that one day, I'm probably going to die anyway, and I like to take whatever little pleasures I can on the journey.
Irrational? Hedonistic? You bet - but the current 'nannying' model of discouraging smoking is based entirely on sociological models of human behaviour ('game theory' et al) that disregard the fact that we all have a little devil on our shoulder that sometimes just wants to enjoy 'right now' without stressing over 'what might happen if...'.
It also disregards the fact that (especially to teenagers!),making a behaviour taboo often alienates the very people at whom the message is targeted. Were this an optimal strategy for eliminating smoking, we would already have eradicated heroin addiction.Supposedly, we live in the age of 'choice'. I heartily agree that those who choose to protect their health should not be forced to be exposed to my carcinogenic 'aura', and never light up without asking first - but this can surely be done without going to such lengths as banning even open air smoking. If you want people to smoke (or do anything) responsibly then this implies that they personally are allowed the responsibility for that choice.
Although smoking can be convincingly linked to certain specific illnesses, there has nevertheless still been a rise in many bronchial illnesses during the time that smoking has been in decline - it is unfair to turn smokers into scapegoats at the same time that there are indications that many rises in health problems can be linked to far more ubiquitous pollutants such as diesel particulates. As always the finger is pointed at 'irresponsible' citizens, rather than the industrial and commercial lobbies who lose no opportunity to chip away at legislation to improve the general environment. If automobile pollution or 'addiction' to sugar, salt and saturated fats were treated the same way as smoking, there would be civil unrest unlike any since the 'civil rights' era.
Still, there is always a silver lining - ever since being made to stand outside pubs/bars/clubs to smoke, I have never been short of someone to talk to - the front porch is so often the friendliest place to be!
-
@bill wilson said:
@unknownuser said:
they're effing expensive.. $12-$14 / pack whereas most of the country has them in the $5-$7 range..
In NZ I pay $46 for a 50 gram pack of tobacco, our govt has the bright idea that if they up the tax on anything it helps people give up. I started smoking at the age of 12 and at 67 I'm still smoking, no ill health problems yet as long as you don't consider not being capable of running up mountains a problem. I'm getting 'p'd off at the nanny state that we live in here, but as I both smoke and drink [both heavily taxed] I can't afford to leave.
I guess someone has to pay for new roads, Bill!!!!
-
@utiler said:
I guess someone has to pay for new roads, Bill!!!
Indeed; but do you not think that the disproportionate taxation of life's little pleasures, in what seems to many like a 'punitive' way, encourages a climate of resenting the principle of taxation?
-
@unknownuser said:
you know, fall asleep with a lit cigarette and set your house on fire.. do that here and you set a hundred people's house on fire
Serves you right for building your houses out of wood!
When I lived in America, I saw one guy in Seattle, in the 1980's extinguish his cigarette using the petrol from a petrol pump! However contrary to popular belief, it's the fumes from petrol that are inflammable, not petrol in its liquid state. Cigarettes actually burn at a very low temparature (well low enough not to cause ignition). This could possibly explain why more house are now being set on fire? (Cigs are now designed to burn within 70 seconds?- crazy!)
Despite there being strong evidence that there is a link between smoking and lung cancer (although you're on really in the danger zone apparently if you smoke 40+ a day), there is still very little evidence of a link between passive smoking and cancer. I've even found that in America, an independent study found that smoking under 10 cigarettes a day, may even be beneficial to your health!
-
I have a question for the smokers, and if it comes across as mean I am sorry, but I ask it sincerely....why? Why do you smoke? When I was a teen, I tried one, and I found that it left a nasty taste in my mouth. Plus, they smell, they are addictive, they are expensive, and they could lead to serious health problems, possibly death. So, why do it? What is enjoyable about smoking? I have always wondered that, and would like to know.
-
Hi Daniel.
I don't smoke now, but I used to.
Do you drink whiskey? Do you drink coffee? Do you run or take other exercise?
I hated the smell that cigarettes used to leave on my breath and especially my clothes, and there is nothing worse than coming back from being out on the town for the night in your best clothes, and they all stink of saltpetre and ash.
But smoking used to have quite a calming effect on me. I used to be able to think much more clearly. I also remember having a better memory!
There are new types of ways of taking tobacco- you can suck it- as is in the case of snuss in Sweden, or you can now vapourise it- which doesn't actually burn anything, thus making the pleasure pretty much harmless. Yet the anti-smoking lobby are also trying to ban these now- which is preposterous. What I would like to know is why?
Another previous poster pointed out a very important point....
@clarencecat said:
Surely this is all about OUR freedom, all of us to make our own choice. Why can't there be smoking bars, there were non smoking bars before the ban.
Who are these people who want to treat us like children?Spot on! It IS about our freedom. No one it seems, can be trusted any more.
-
@alan fraser said:
Tom, it's perfectly apparent that you think everything is to do with 'mud huts'...even if it involves being staunchly anti-capitalist on one thread and supporting and promoting the profits and exploitative practices of some of the most powerful corporations on earth...like British American Tobacco on another. Citing alternate forms of smoking is pointless. That's not the reality; that's not what is being pushed by the tobacco companies. It will never amount to anything other than a niche market.
I don't see why? You run a niche cottage industry business don't you? What's so different?
And on the contrary, I am not anti-capitalist. In fact I'm very much the opposite! However some of the worlds biggest and most powerful environmental organisations are quite capable of using the power of emotional manipulation to make their point. In reality they are no different either.
@alan fraser said:
You can fantasise all you like about other possible causes, but in the case of Roy Castle, if someone who has never smoked in his life is found to have lungs half-full of tobacco tar you have to stand reason on its head to argue anything other than secondary smoke inhalation. Similarly with my grandfather; I'll take the word of the oncologists who treated him over your speculations, if you don't mind.
Sure, I don't blame you. I mean I am not qualified to tell you what your grandfather died from, but at least, considering his job, have an open mind about it. Hundreds of people die from lung cancer each year, who have never smoked in their lives. The circumstances of their fate also doesn't necessarily mean that they have died as a direct result of passive smoking either.
-
Tom, in general, I don't drink. Even most wines taste bitter, to me. I usually have one cup of coffee first thing in the morning, but can go without (usually do, when traveling or visiting friends/family, as I find the brown water they make and call coffee unpleasant). Since I spend too much time behind a computer, I work out with a trainer usually twice a week for my health. Neither of those have the unpleasant (to me) side affects that cigarettes do, though.
You mention that smoking had a calming effect, but did you know thta when you first started smoking? What convinced you to take it up in the first place?
I am not familiar with those other forms of tobacco, which you mentioned. We do have what is referred to as smokeless tobacco, or dipping tobacco; the user places a wad behind their lower lip (against their gums), and they go around spitting nasty brown liquid all the time. It's primarily favored by guys. Besides being nastier than smoking, it can lead to oral cancer.
The primary drive for banning smoking, in the U.S., are health cost related. The health care costs for treating smoking-related illnesses are exhorbitant (but, what isn't?), and since many people are on public health care, it ends up costing the tax payers.
-
@daniel said:
Tom, in general, I don't drink. Even most wines taste bitter, to me. I usually have one cup of coffee first thing in the morning, but can go without (usually do, when traveling or visiting friends/family, as I find the brown water they make and call coffee unpleasant). Since I spend too much time behind a computer, I work out with a trainer usually twice a week for my health. Neither of those have the unpleasant (to me) side affects that cigarettes do, though.
You mention that smoking had a calming effect, but did you know thta when you first started smoking? What convinced you to take it up in the first place?
I started smoking when I was 13. The classic cliche- round the back of the bike shed at school. It's true!
The first cigarettes made me feel really sick, and I quit pretty quickly. It was really a pose more than anything- to look "grown up" and to fit in I suppose? I started again when I was 27. Again so I could fit in, but more because I was bored, or they gave me the perfect excuse to 'have a break'. But that's besides the point. Everyone has their own reasons why they smoke, but it's not up to the state to tell you what you can and can't do. Yes the state can advise, but it should never intervene. Ever.
My point in the original questions about coffee, exercise and alcohol was that they all make the body release endorphins that make you feel good. Cigarettes do the same- if you've smoked for long enough that is.
I like my coffee with cream (double and thick). I get the most funny expressions from people when I ask for it (because it is now food that our government are trying to control- heard of Jamie Oliver?! Say no more! lol! ). Starbucks make the best takeout coffee imo.
-
I've never engaged in any risky behavior to "fit in," so I find the concept hard to understand. But I see it all the time, especially young adults. And not just with cigarettes. With illicit drug use. I've never heard of drug addiction having a positive effect on someone's life, yet people still do it. I just don't understand, when there is so much information out there explaining how damaging a behavior is, why anyone would engage in it, especially when the "benefits" seem negligable in comparison.
-
@daniel said:
I've never engaged in any risky behavior to "fit in," so I find the concept hard to understand. But I see it all the time, especially young adults. And not just with cigarettes. With illicit drug use. I've never heard of drug addiction having a positive effect on someone's life, yet people still do it. I just don't understand, when there is so much information out there explaining how damaging a behavior is, why anyone would engage in it, especially when the "benefits" seem negligable in comparison.
Are you real? It is nice to know that you have a trainer, or are you still in trainers? Yep it does cost a lot of money to sort out problems that smokers have, that is what the excessive amounts of money we pay in taxes on each and every packet of tobacco and cigarettes we buy are meant to pay for. Do you ever require medical assistance? Who paid for it? Or are you perfect? If not please try to get a life.
-
I tried the e-cig a couple of years ago but got no satisfaction with the 'drag'! The battery was just not strong enough and lasted no time. However, a few months ago I got one of the latest models (eGO) with an 1100mAh battery which lasts for ages!
If you really want a good blast, the thing to do is pop a drop of the e-liquid nicotine directly on to the vaporizer! And if you are using menthol flavor, its enough to clear the sinuses for the day
It also works out a hell of a lot cheaper than cigarettes after initial purchase (€59) and if you are cheeky enough you can vaporize anywhere you like, in pubs, restaurants, offices, public building, airplanes etc etc.
-
@daniel said:
I've never engaged in any risky behavior to "fit in," so I find the concept hard to understand. But I see it all the time, especially young adults. And not just with cigarettes. With illicit drug use. I've never heard of drug addiction having a positive effect on someone's life, yet people still do it. I just don't understand, when there is so much information out there explaining how damaging a behavior is, why anyone would engage in it, especially when the "benefits" seem negligable in comparison.
Daniel, that's absolutely fine to think that, and your opinions are shared by tens of thousands of others worldwide.
However,
It doesn't give you, or all those others the right to tell another adult that they should or shouldn't be doing it. Right?
People should be given the freedom to form their own opinions rather having someone else decide what they think for them. No matter what evidence or breach of human rights those self appointed decision makers may throw up against them or against their case.
-
@alan fraser said:
Another advantage of smoking is that it kills the desire for sleep, so that you can still post to the forum well into the wee small hours of the morning....like Mike.
I don't know there Alan....
I used to sleep better after a fag or two in the evening...
-
Another advantage of smoking is that it apparently kills the desire for sleep, so that you can still post to the forum well into the wee small hours of the morning....like Mike.
-
I quit 6 days ago, so far so good
-
Good lad!
-
-
Hi folks.
I am a non smoker.
One day I was having a beer with a few friends the backyard of one of these people. One of them was smoking. The smoke was pushed by the wind in my direction so I grumbled a little and changed place. The smoker looked at me as if saying "what's wrong". I told him that the smoke was bothering me. He told me to continue drinking my beer and let him continue smoking his cigarette. I replied that I was not forcing anyone to taste my beer.
As for smoking in a car, let me tell you that. One of my wife's niece has a car and smoke a lot. The result is that her car is impregnated with tobacco smell. I know since I had to move this car once. What an experience. I was in this car for two minutes and I was so happy to get out. Now the bad part. She also has two children, one of them with bad asthma. The young guy needs pumps. These kids are often traveling with the mother. When they are inside the car, she don't smoke but the result is still bad, real bad.
When I am in the bus, traveling to work, I can tell that the person seated next to me is a smoker just by the smell.
I also can tell with some good certitude if a woman is a heavy smoker just by its voice. The smoke is having an effect on vocal chords.
Just ideas.
Advertisement