Smoking Cigarettes, The Most Disgusting Habit?

[Sensi]

I never have and never will but smoking is one of many addictions. I see no need to put them down for it.

 

[Bubonic]

Oh, I wasn't implying you'd said anything wrong... the sentence and choice of words just made me laugh - imagining you walking around like a chicken, red-faced, seething lol

Squawking at smokers while you ruffle your feathers heh.

They deserved it.

 

[The Chairman]

Having witnessed the ravages of smoking on both my grandmothers, I am vehemently against cigarette smoking. My dad's whole family smokes (even after watching my grandmother die, they'd go outside the house and have a smoke break) and it's disgusting. I would never date a smoker (unless she agreed to quit), and I try to have as little friends who smoke as possible.

 

[The Senator]

There's also laposcopic bands and medications to control hormonal and glandular issues, not to mention diet/nutrition and exercise approaches.

Yes, but cigarettes are only prescribed in extreme cases, where diet and exercise are not feasible alternatives. There is a chemical in nicotine which helps break down fat in people who have weird metabolisms. Hence part of the reason why this treatment is rarely prescribed, considering diet and exercise are feasible alternatives for most people.

At any rate, Julian McMahon plays a surgeon on Nip/Tuck but I wouldn't ever let him give me a nose job.

jag

There are plenty of jobs I'd let Hugh Laurie perform on me

 

[Shemtov]

jag and jmanspace........
i side with jag. smoking IS worse. at least physialogicly. pyscology- alchohol f'sure but i'm not talking bout psycology here.

see, if i'm a alcholoc and i quit, i have the same chace of my liver failing on me then people who were never alcholics. however, if i'm a serious smoker, even if i quit my chances of cancer are more then most people.
plus i cannot get gain the influences of alchohol if i stand near a drunk (even though he might beat me up in a drunken rage). if i stand near i smoker i do get some of nicotines effects. in fact people who are regualy exposed to second-hand smoke are more likely to get cancer then the actual smokers themselves.

 

[Shemtov]

dang double posting....

 

[jaguarr]

Yes, but cigarettes are only prescribed in extreme cases, where diet and exercise are not feasible alternatives. There is a chemical in nicotine which helps break down fat in people who have weird metabolisms. Hence part of the reason why this treatment is rarely prescribed, considering diet and exercise are feasible alternatives for most people.

I'd hardly call it a health benefit, personally.

There are plenty of jobs I'd let Hugh Laurie perform on me

jag

 

[Logan's Runt]

If you do it, then the Devil will have YOU on a leash.

jag

Hah. No worries. I'm over my 'lets do destructive things' stage.

 

[SuBe]

jag and jmanspace........
i side with jag. smoking IS worse. at least physialogicly. pyscology- alchohol f'sure but i'm not talking bout psycology here.

see, if i'm a alcholoc and i quit, i have the same chace of my liver failing on me then people who were never alcholics. however, if i'm a serious smoker, even if i quit my chances of cancer are more then most people.
plus i cannot get gain the influences of alchohol if i stand near a drunk (even though he might beat me up in a drunken rage). if i stand near i smoker i do get some of nicotines effects. in fact people who are regualy exposed to second-hand smoke are more likely to get cancer then the actual smokers themselves.

You can if he is driving.

 

[Shemtov]

You can if he is driving.

stab me in a drucken rage.....run me over smame thing more or less.

 

[The Senator]

jag and jmanspace........
i side with jag. smoking IS worse. at least physialogicly. pyscology- alchohol f'sure but i'm not talking bout psycology here.

see, if i'm a alcholoc and i quit, i have the same chace of my liver failing on me then people who were never alcholics. however, if i'm a serious smoker, even if i quit my chances of cancer are more then most people.
plus i cannot get gain the influences of alchohol if i stand near a drunk (even though he might beat me up in a drunken rage). if i stand near i smoker i do get some of nicotines effects. in fact people who are regualy exposed to second-hand smoke are more likely to get cancer then the actual smokers themselves.

In some instances, I would argue that the psychological effects of those who are exposed to alcoholics over a long period of time are equivalent to or worse than the physical effects from second-hand smoke.

 

[jaguarr]

Some food for thought, since there's this insistence on comparing regular smokers to raging alcoholics, here: alcoholics have to go to extreme amounts of regular consumption to inflict physical and psychological damage to themselves (and possibly to others), however regular smokers can reap all the negative implications of smoking with just a moderate intake. The very fact that you have to compare a moderate habit to an extreme habit just to reference similar damage undermines your argument.

jag

 

[The Senator]

Some food for thought, since there's this insistence on comparing regular smokers to raging alcoholics, here: alcoholics have to go to extreme amounts of regular consumption to inflict physical and psychological damage to themselves (and possibly to others), however regular smokers can reap all the negative implications of smoking with just a moderate intake. The very fact that you have to compare a moderate habit to an extreme habit just to reference similar damage undermines your argument.

jag

But at the same time, every single case is different. I have been smoking for two years and my doctor-- while he advises me to quit (which is interesting, because that automatically implies I am addicted; which I am not)-- says I am in excellent health. My father has been smoking for thirty years now, and he too is in excellent health, aside from a minor health problem which is not related to smoking.

My mother, meanwhile, has been an alcoholic for the same amount of time and her health is deteriorating. She is in denial, obviously, but I have seen some of the medication she has been prescribed and it is directly related to her alcohol abuse. She also smokes, and she sounds as if she has some serious lung problems.

So, to claim that smokers are automatically damned because they smoke on a regular or semi-regular basis is sort of inaccurate. Numerous people have gone an entire life smoking without noticeable health problems, while others have died directly as a result of smoking itself. Meanwhile, many alcoholics have had it worse than smokers, so I think that the argument that alcohol can be worse than smoking is definitely a valid point to make.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

But at the same time, every single case is different. I have been smoking for two years and my doctor-- while he advises me to quit (which is interesting, because that automatically implies I am addicted; which I am not)

How does that automatically imply you're addicted?

 

[knowsbleed]

Thor, you may never be able to spell properly. Some brain damage side effects are permanent.

jag

Tee hee.

Some food for thought, since there's this insistence on comparing regular smokers to raging alcoholics, here: alcoholics have to go to extreme amounts of regular consumption to inflict physical and psychological damage to themselves (and possibly to others), however regular smokers can reap all the negative implications of smoking with just a moderate intake. The very fact that you have to compare a moderate habit to an extreme habit just to reference similar damage undermines your argument.

jag

Exactly.

If I truly wanted to quit smoking and I were addicted... I could wear a patch or take a pill. The motion of bringing your hand up to your mouth and BSing at the smoke pit is honestly more addicting to me than the actual act of inhaling smoke.

But I'm in the process of quitting right now... again. I quit when I was 21 for 6 years. Started smoking again because I was under tremendous pressure and needed an escape from the workcenter... and now I'm going to quit again. Hopefully for good.

 

[The Senator]

How does that automatically imply you're addicted?

I think most people immediately associate "smoker" with "he's addicted to smoking." And when I attempt to explain that I am not addicted, people automatically assume I am making excuses.

I went two days last week without a cigarette. I had no desire to smoke at all, either.

 

[AndThePickles]

I think most people immediately associate "smoker" with "he's addicted to smoking." And when I attempt to explain that I am not addicted, people automatically assume I am making excuses.

I went two days last week without a cigarette. I had no desire to smoke at all, either.

Out of pure curiosity: How many days do you think you could go without smoking? And also, you say you aren't addicted, so now I can't help but wonder, why do you smoke?

 

[jaguarr]

But at the same time, every single case is different. I have been smoking for two years and my doctor-- while he advises me to quit (which is interesting, because that automatically implies I am addicted; which I am not)-- says I am in excellent health. My father has been smoking for thirty years now, and he too is in excellent health, aside from a minor health problem which is not related to smoking.

My mother, meanwhile, has been an alcoholic for the same amount of time and her health is deteriorating. She is in denial, obviously, but I have seen some of the medication she has been prescribed and it is directly related to her alcohol abuse. She also smokes, and she sounds as if she has some serious lung problems.

So, to claim that smokers are automatically damned because they smoke on a regular or semi-regular basis is sort of inaccurate. Numerous people have gone an entire life smoking without noticeable health problems, while others have died directly as a result of smoking itself. Meanwhile, many alcoholics have had it worse than smokers, so I think that the argument that alcohol can be worse than smoking is definitely a valid point to make.

First, we're talking about averages here; on the whole, people who smoke are statistically at higher risk for a multitude of diseases. Period. Even people who only smoke a little bit. Yes, alcoholics are also at risk, but the sheer amount of alcohol they have to ingest on a regular basis to incur that kind of damage requires extreme behavior as opposed to the damage that can occur from moderate smoking habits. So, I'm glad that you and your dad are in good health, even with a smoking habit, but the statistics are very much against you, at least in the long term. Every statistic has outliers, though, and that very well could be you and your father. I think the message is not that smokers are automatically damned to health problems because of their habit, but it is very, very likely that they will from a statistical standpoint.

jag

 

[The Senator]

Out of pure curiosity: How many days do you think you could go without smoking?

I've gone six days in between smoking, and I could probably go longer. I just don't want to quit right now.

And also, why do you smoke?

Intern for the fourth-ranking Senator in the United States Senate at the birth of the financial crisis. That's where I began smoking.

Then work on a campaign and try juggling work, school and family crises.

Smoking is an excellent stress reliever for me. And it's entirely voluntary.

 

[Logan's Runt]

I wasn't physically addicted when I smoked, but I was psychologically. When I quit, I decided to quit, smoked the last in my pack and was done. It wasn't hard. The hard part is the 'good' times associated with it and the psychological aspects. I still want smokes now and then, like now, but there's no physical aspect so it's easy to ignore.

 

[Logan's Runt]

I wasn't physically addicted when I smoked, but I was psychologically. When I quit, I decided to quit, smoked the last in my pack and was done. It wasn't hard. The hard part is the 'good' times associated with it and the psychological aspects. I still want smokes now and then, like now, but there's no physical aspect so it's easy to ignore.

 

[Shemtov]

so jmanspace....i thought if you smoked 'bacco your addicted no matter what.

so.....you must be smoking lettuce.

 

[ObakeTora]

This month it would have been 2 years since my last Marlboro light 100!!

Obake ftw!

IN YOUR FACE LUNG CANCER!!!!!!

 

[jaguarr]

I wasn't physically addicted when I smoked, but I was psychologically. When I quit, I decided to quit, smoked the last in my pack and was done. It wasn't hard. The hard part is the 'good' times associated with it and the psychological aspects. I still want smokes now and then, like now, but there's no physical aspect so it's easy to ignore.

My addiction was psychological as well. When I decided I was ready to just be done with it, I chain-smoked one after the other until I threw up. My last memory of smoking is not a pleasant one. Self mind-f**k FTW!

so jmanspace....i thought if you smoked 'bacco your addicted no matter what.

so.....you must be smoking lettuce.

Yeah, J. Man Space! What about that!?

jag

 

[JLBats]

I've gone six days in between smoking, and I could probably go longer. I just don't want to quit right now.



Intern for the fourth-ranking Senator in the United States Senate at the birth of the financial crisis. That's where I began smoking.

Then work on a campaign and try juggling work, school and family crises.

Smoking is an excellent stress reliever for me. And it's entirely voluntary.

Awww, man, you're like a tail-wagging puppy on its way to be put down