Do you smoke?
-
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.
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.
-
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?When did we give them the right to make laws curbing our freedom without a referendum? I don't remember anyone asking me what i thought.
Suddenly it became law & we all rolled over & accepted it - never mind passive smoking, we are becoming passive tv watching, game playing, facebook users & twitts.Ok smoking might be bad for you, drugs might not do your health any good in the long run - certainly alcohol in excess is bad, but is life all about
being safe?I gave up smoking 18 months ago & i feel better for it, not to mention all the tax i used to give the government, but i loved smoking, i really did!
-
Smoking...?
Who me...?
Although my avatar tells a different story, I haven't been smoking since I was a kid...
-
@frederik said:
Although my avatar tells a different story, I haven't been smoking since I was a kid...
Well, your avatar is telling that exact story.
-
-
From a non smoker as i have already indicated....
I despise the smell; It's just not what i like. I like smelling nice stuff like rain, autumn and grandma's freshly baked scones..... As much as it urks me that my brothers do smoke considering the health issues; at the end of the day I just don't like the smell.....
I have a few brothers that do and i explain it like this:
If you don't like the smell of other peoples farts then don't expect me to enjoy the filth you blow in my face.
Scones are good.
-
Andrew, I also hate the smell of stale cigs but I do enjoy the first whiff of a light up in the morning!
I am currently smoking rollies. I buy my stock in Spain a couple of times a year for VERY low money. Smoking rollies gives me an added satisfaction, knowing that for every twenty that I smoke, I am not paying approx €5+ in TAX!
Another thing I noticed about rollies! They go out when I put it in the ashtray. Standard cigs don't because they have added 'burn on' ingredients akin the rocket fuel. Has any of the EU Governments done anything about this, NO. No, because they are more interested in collecting taxes than lessening the ill effects of cig smoke on smokers!
Getting into rollies at first is a bit time consuming but once you get set up with a good machine and know the paper and tips that suit you best, there is a certain satisfaction in the rollie making process.
The up side is that I DO smoke far less with rollies as I often get two or more smokes from a rollie. It works like this! I get the urge to smoke, make a rollie, have a few drags and put it in the ashtray, after a minute or so it goes out! When I get the next urge I relight if its of a decent length! Okay, I use far more lighters but at least the room is not being filed with smoke!
-
I used to roll my own when I was a student. I used Clan pipe tobacco. The smell was heavenly, but the taste and drug never did anything for me, so I gave it up and saved the money for the other two things....whiskey and wild, wild women.
-
hear here...
-
@mike lucey said:
Andrew, I also hate the smell of stale cigs but I do enjoy the first whiff of a light up in the morning!
I am currently smoking rollies. I buy my stock in Spain a couple of times a year for VERY low money. Smoking rollies gives me an added satisfaction, knowing that for every twenty that I smoke, I am not paying approx €5+ in TAX!
You ol' schemer !!!!!
-
@mike lucey said:
Another thing I noticed about rollies! They go out when I put it in the ashtray. Standard cigs don't because they have added 'burn on' ingredients akin the rocket fuel. Has any of the EU Governments done anything about this, NO. No, because they are more interested in collecting taxes than lessening the ill effects of cig smoke on smokers!
in nyc, it's illegal to sell cigarettes that burn longer than 70 seconds.. new york cigarettes have to have the burning agent removed (akin to salt peter so i hear)..
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
that said, they're effing expensive.. $12-$14 / pack whereas most of the country has them in the $5-$7 range..
-
@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.
Advertisement