Posted on 09/11/2008 6:31:25 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
I have for the most part been avoiding restaurants and bars within the Philly bordaer, and have instead been going to establishments in the 'burbs, where one can still smoke. As someone said just the other day, probably not for much longer.
Where will it end?
Smoking does not "CAUSE" cancer. There has never been any proof whatsoever that tobacco is a carcinogen.
All smoking can do is increase a persons risk factor; that is, if a person is predisposed to developing a cancer, smoking increases their risk factor by weakening cell resistance to cancer development.
Lung cancer. People who don't smoke are just as likely to get lung cancer as those that do smoke.
In fact, if a smoker who develops lung cancer had never started smoking, they probably would have developed lung cancer anyways- probably just a little later. The reason he developed lung cancer sooner was because smoking increased his risk factor. But it did not CAUSE the cancer itself.
Second hand smoke does not cause cancer. In fact most of the good stuff has been taken out of the smoke by the smoker. Therefore, second hand smoke does not increase anyones risk factor near as much as first hand smoke.
Other things than can increase a persons risk factor for developing lung cancer are:
Car exaust.
Jogging along busy streets and inhaling street dust thrown up by passing cars (which contains brake dust, bits of rust, asbestos (which IS a carcinogen)
Plain ordinary field dust.
Breathing the air in general. We are constantly being bombarded by tiny particles from space, small comets burning up in the atmosphere, etc.
Any injury to lung tissue cells. Unhealthy living in general. A run down immune system, poor diet, bad sleeping patterns predisposes a person to lng cancer, and all other types of cancer for that matter, smoker or non-smoker.
A healthy smoker who otherwise is in good health is less likely to get lung cancer than a unhealthy, fat, out of shape and junk food eating non-smoker.
I hate to tell you but those are NOT the raw facts. Those are the made up facts.
Tobacco was not even considered addictive until the Sturgeon Generalty changed the definition of "Addictive" so that tobacco could be included.
The question of whether tobacco IS addictive is one that still has yet to be answered.
My own take on the subject is that for some types of personalities it could be considered so, just like chocolate, or caffeine.
As for being terrible for your health, so are many other things.
A lot of being affected by tobacco smoking is in the genes. As in your own personal genes.
If you don't have the freedom to make bad decisions you don't have freedom, period.
I know many people that tried cigarettes, or pipes, or cigars and didn't like it so they never did it again.
I know others that tried it, smoked for several years, then quit and never went back to smoking.
I know others that smoked the "one cigarette", liked it, and continued.
For most folks, it's a habituation, not an addiction.
It is NOT worse than pot. Pot smoke contains most of (and in some cases higher concentrations) the same "toxins as tobbaco, tar, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide, Benzine, etc etc. It doesn't have nicotine,(the addictive substance of tobacco) but it has THC instead. Pot is more 'woody' and the smoke is much more harsh because it contains higher concentrations of toxins. It is actually WORSE than tobacco smoke.
There are substances that are addictive for some and not addictive for others.
Nicotine seems to be one of these.
I believe that it is the individual that makes the difference on whether smoking tobacco is habitual or addictive.
Oh it' addiction, plain and simple. Nicotine is very adictive, like heroine.
I smoked for 35 years, I had a hell of a time quiting. It;'s been a few years now, but I still get the odd passing urge once in a while. I was never an "unhealthy" smoker however. I ran 12 miles a day on average when I smoked. Never had lung problems. I was in better shape than most non- smokers.
I'm more unhealthy now than when I smoked. I don't run anymore. I don't exercise anymore, and I could stand to loose 60-80 lbs. I feel like crap. But that due to a few years in a wheel chair after a bad accident.
Bingo.
Distilling spirits even for personal consumption is strictly illegal however.
But that doesn’t mean you can’t distill other stuff, so having a still is not illegal.
Oh, please, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Pure nicotine is poison, period.
The doses that you get from smoking may, or may not, be addictive depending on the individual.
I also smoked for about 35 years and quit with no problems.
Opinions, personalities, and experience vary.
That means for some it's habituation, not addiction.
It won't.
It is NOT absolutely true. I’m inclined to agree that premade store bought cigarettes are probably worse than straight cannabis, because of the chemicals added — many of the additives required by the government. However, pure tobacco, without additives Is not fatally addictive.
I smoked pot for years, I got out of that migraine inducing zombie state decades ago.
You cannot produce spirits for beverage purposes without paying taxes and without prior approval of paperwork to operate a distilled spirits plant. [See 26 U.S.C. 5601 & 5602 for some of the criminal penalties.]
There are numerous requirements that must be met that make it impractical to produce spirits for personal or beverage use. Some of these requirements are paying special tax, filing an extensive application, filing a bond, providing adequate equipment to measure spirits, providing suitable tanks and pipelines, providing a separate building (other than a dwelling) and maintaining detailed records, and filing reports. All of these requirements are listed in 27 CFR Part 19.
Spirits may be produced for non-beverage purposes for fuel use only without payment of tax, but you also must file an application, receive TTB's approval, and follow requirements, such as construction, use, records and reports.
I’ve never met a smoker who wasn’t addicted and didn’t have great difficulty quiting (or trying) You must be one of a kind.
That’s why they make all that quit smoking crap (that doesn’t work) like ncotine gum, various pills (loratadine) to control addiction withdrawl.
Tobacco only became "highly addictive" when the US Surgeon General changed the definition of addiction.
The so-called addictive substance in tobacco is nicotine, a naturally occurring substance in many foods, and an additive to practically anything everyone eats on a daily basis.
I know a good number that smoked over 10 years that I know of and quit with no problems.
I also know a higher number that tried to quit and couldn't.
That tells me that it is an individual thing as to whether smoking is addictive or habitual.
You’re preeching to the choir, my FRiend :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.