Skip to comments.Pensioner who has smoked 292,000 cigarettes celebrates his 100th birthday
Posted on 09/25/2010 1:50:50 PM PDT by smokingfrog
click here to read article
10 is half a pack a day.
I know people that smoke a pack a day...
Bravo! And may he live another hundred years in roaring good health!
It’s great to hear of someone hurling defiance into the teeth of all the namby-pamby that’s-bad-for-you nannies whom he has probably already outlived anyway.
Many happy returns!
My drill sergeant smokes probably a pack a day and can outrun anyone.
But only 290,000 died from his second hand smoke.
You found the anomaly, hence it’s news...
Walk the halls of any cancer treatment center and you’ll find the majority of patients are there because of...smoking.
1-1/2 packs a day for about 38 yrs. Enjoyed it immensely, but my genes weren’t made to handle it. I think some people can.
Quit at age 50...yes, I started at age 12, thanks to a friend who thought it was cooool. Needless to say, after spending a week in the hospital testing because of my chest pains, I didn’t even crave a cigarette all the time there and after I got out.
One of the rewards for not smoking is no more smell. Yuk!
I often wondered why I was never asked...smoking or non-smoking?
If you meant that sarcastically, then that’s funny.
I didn’t think it need any.
I still think whatever happens, it’s all in the person’s makeup
whether they can smoke, eat fat, whatever. Some people’s bodies are going to get cancer no matter what they do right.
That is such liberal BS I can't believe any FReeper would forward such a notion.
It is a burning leaf and paper. There is far worse reaching your lungs in much higher numbers, starting with the second hand smoke from the tailpipe of YOUR car.
I hope FR can remain a place free of mindless hysterics.
Oh get a grip! Liber BS your azz.
You have it exactly correct. Loved the part about you now noticing how much cigs stink. That's what I noticed when I quit. I too knew my genes were not up to the task of defending against my habbit.
"Alpha-1 antitrypsin is a major protein in the blood that it is produced mainly in liver cells. When you don't have enough alpha-1 antitrypsin, you might have Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency, sometimes called Alpha-1. Alpha-1 can affect two major organs in the body - the lungs and the liver. The reason is because the defective protein that characterizes Alpha-1 is important to both of these vital organs. When Alpha-1 affects the lungs, it can cause COPD and is called Alpha-1 Deficiency or inherited emphysema."
"My Doctor is dead, has been for about 30 years now."
If the average smoker could confine himself to half-a-pack per day, most would probably suffer no ill effects.
This former drill sergeant, who smoked since age 7, ran and completed recently London marathon at age 101, smoking few while running:
It will surprise many (in these days of intense antismoking brainwashing), but this is not some kind of fluke. Over the last five decades many animal experiments were done all showing that lifelong smoking animals, from hamsters and mice to dogs and monkeys, live longer and in better health than non-smoking animals. This despite the often heavy and unnatural smoking conditions such as 5+ packs a day concentrated into 6 hour daily smoke exposures, with concentration at the very edge of asphyxiation - yet smoking animals still end up living by ~20% longer, while remaining thinner and sharper throughout.
Intense research, mostly funded by the same pharmaceutical industry which funds (having created them) most of antismoking groups, laws and propaganda, has uncovered numerous concrete biochemical mechanisms by which tobacco smoke accomplishes these life and youth extending effects. Like the above animal experiments, you will never hear about any of this in the mainstream media, although it is all available in the scientific papers published over last few decades.
If you wish to follow the white rabbit a bit deeper and get glimpse at the upcoming smoking heresy, there is much more info with numerous scientific references in a recent thread in imminst.org forum (life-extension, nootropics, health) titled, of of all things:
which I started. As expected, the pandemonium broke lose when all these medically & scientifically well educated health fanatics jumped in to refute the claims (many members are grad students & researchers in biological & medical fields).
Yet, each paper they brought up in support of their antismoking position either backfired (showing upon closer inspection that the findings were exactly the opposite than what they appeared to be from the paper abstracts) or it didn't show anything at all (the usual antismoking junk science). Watch them squirm as all the _hard_ science (experiments, lab analysis) kept going the "wrong" way.
Here are some highlights of the "debate" (no contest actually, it wasn't even close; I post as "nightlight"):
1. Dogs exposed to radon or radon+smoke: 5% of smoking dogs and 37% of non-smoking dogs got lung cancers. link
2. Massive National Cancer Institute sponsored experiments that backfired terribly, setting back the NCI's workplace smoking bans agenda for more than a decade. link
3. The crowning experiments (2004, 2005) of six decades of antismoking "science", the pinnacle -- again backfired badly, as they always do -- at the end, more than twice as many smoking animals alive than non-smoking ones. link
4. Self-medication with tobacco link
5. Common genes for lung cancer & smoking link
(R.A. Fisher suspected this to be the case in 1950s, he also suggested self-medication possibility, see page 163, where he compares taking cigarettes away from some poor chap to taking the walking stick from a blind man.) pdf
6. Hazards of quitting (triggers lung cancers in animal experiments) link
7. Emphysema/COPD - smoking protective rather than cause link
8. How does antismoking "science" lie with stats (how to "prove" that -- Prozac causes depression -- using the master method of antismoking "science") link
9. Heart attacks from SHS myths (a 'friend saying Boo' is more "hazardous" for your heart than SHS) link
10. Glycotoxins/AGE in tobacco smoke -- backfires badly link
11. Smoking protects against cancers (reversal of values in cancer state and another common sleight of hand), Smoking vs Caloric Restrictions (and on fundamental wrong-headedness of CR) link
12. More on anti-carcinogenicity of tobacco smoke and how to translate Orwellian antismoking "science" to real science link
13. ** why take a chance
14. Smoking and diabetes, insulin sensitivity -- another "proof" backfires link
15. How to "prove" that 'Lifting weights is harmful for muscles' - pinhole vision sleight of hand of antismoking "science" illustrated link
16. Oxidative stress, breast cancer, "randomizing non-randomized variables" sleight of hand -- more antismoking junk science claims turned upside-down by facts of hard science link
17. Can one replicate the health benefits of tobacco smoke (the short list given) using supplements and pharmaceuticals? Even if it were possible, can one do it for < $1 day (cost for a pack of roll-your-own cigarettes with natural, additive free tobacco)? "link
18. Who knows more about biochemistry of life and its molecular engineering -- one little cell in your little toe or all the biochemists and molecular biologists in the world taken together? Is "Sickness Industry" good for your health? link
Arthur Langran...claims the secret behind his longevity is always doing
what everyone tells him not to.
Memo to the medical scientists that are going to examine the genetics/metabolism
of an aging British rocker in hopes of finding the “Ozzie Osburne” gene(s)...
you guys need to also go looking for the Arthur Langran gene.
Might give some good clues about preventing/treating lung cancer!!!
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.