[Irviding]

The CDC also disagrees. I'll quote some excerpts from a paper I wrote on this in my freshman year.

QUOTE

However, it should not be forgotten that tobacco products, in the long run, cause a much bigger detriment to these states than whatever benefits they offer. Perhaps the most profound detriment caused by tobacco companies is loss of life. 443,000 deaths are caused annually by cigarettes (CDC). This is an incredible number to think about, and tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the US (CDC), above the more cited cause of obesity. Furthermore, it was found that an American who smokes cigarettes dies an average of 14 years earlier than an American who doesn’t. Not only is this a tremendous issue in terms of individual loss of life, but these deaths put a great strain on the healthcare systems of each state. In a four year period (2000-2004), cigarettes were estimated to cost $96 billion in medical costs (CDC). Programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, already put under significant financial strain, are struggling against the impact of cigarette smoking. This became such a drain on state coffers that the Attorney General of Mississippi filed suit against Tobacco companies (ABC News), seeking compensation for the ludicrous amount of money the state spends on providing medical care to smokers through Medicaid (both states and the federal government fund Medicaid, unlike Medicare).  Finally, the deaths and illness caused by tobacco products hinder our economy. A CDC study indicates that $97 billion were lost in productivity during the same four year period (CDC). That could be from not only workers who died and could not be replaced, but from employees who are not working to par due to the adverse health effects caused to them by cigarettes, or even people who were infected with a smoking related illness and are costing their company possibly millions in healthcare benefits.

[Melchior]

Like I said, it's untestable. You can attribute x amount of deaths to tobacco, but we don't know what the world would be like without cigarettes. Maybe the kind of person who smokes would die even earlier with all the stress in their life. It's disingenuous to say a habit is a burden on the rest of society, because your habit may allow you to contribute more to society in a number of ways. It's never that black and white.

But I don't actually know what we're discussing here, I'm sure you don't want cigarettes banned. Maybe you could make a case for the outrageous taxes, but I doubt you're going to convince me that I need to pay loads for my smokes to "make it up to the rest of society".

[finn4life]

QUOTE (Melchior @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 17:35)

Like I said, it's untestable. You can attribute x amount of deaths to tobacco, but we don't know what the world would be like without cigarettes. Maybe the kind of person who smokes would die even earlier with all the stress in their life. It's disingenuous to say a habit is a burden on the rest of society, because your habit may allow you to contribute more to society in a number of ways. It's never that black and white.

I had this debate once before, I went to look for the thread and found it was right here with the same person. I refer you to page 2 of this topic, smoking has a placebo effect.
Please don't use DeeperReds argument since the bandaid (smoking) is used to patch a wound which wouldn't have existed if it weren't for cigarettes.

Also please provide sources against mine (Good luck, i tried to no avail) before debating my point because i am not going to take your word against multiple sources just because you say so.

This post has been edited by finn4life on Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 07:54

[Irviding]

Melchior, why is it fair for the FDC to recall Tylenol cold because of brown specs in the pills, but not to recall cigarettes? If I synthesized a drug identical to cigarettes, the FDA would take it off the market so fast it'd make my head spin. How is that right ? It's a double standard, plain and simple.

And no, you're dead wrong - I'm sorry. Deaths can be directly attributed to cigarette smoking - CDC, WHO, Icarus' Canadian health department, states as such.

[lil weasel]

Because Congress told the FDC to regulate the drugs and the FDC said it was tested and safe to sell the drug.
Congress didn't put cigarettes in the FDC hands. Too many Congressmen have their fingers in the tobaco pie.

[Irviding]

QUOTE (lil weasel @ Tuesday, Aug 21 2012, 01:54)

Because Congress told the FDC to regulate the drugs and the FDC said it was tested and safe to sell the drug. Congress didn't put cigarettes in the FDC hands. Too many Congressmen have their fingers in the tobaco pie.

Twas a rhetorical question...

[Viperman]

I feel its either help everyone, regardless of bad habbits, for free. Or help no one at all. Let me explain.

I'm a smoker, weed smoker too. I pay 40% tax weekly out my wage because I'm a big earner. I pay more money per week in tax, than my girlfriend earns in a month. She isn't a smoker.

So to help her in later life with high blood pressure, but not me is ludicrous. But yet the lazy sod that has done f*ck all but live of the governments pocket, albeit living a healthy lifestyle, deserves treatment, over me? Wrong on so many levels.

It is impossible to seperate the nation into, deserves, or not deserves treatment. Completely regardless of the choosen lifestyle.

[lil weasel]

You all do realize that INSURANCE is based on Actuary Data, unless government interferes. The Company estimates (very well, too) how many people will have an occurrence and base the fee on that. They are in the business to make money, not pay out. When government forces The Company to take on Risks the fee HAS to go up. That’s why preexisting conditions would void the policy and other preexisting clients are denied coverage. My last employer lost coverage because the healthy employees weren’t buying into the Policy.
You can’t expect a Private Insurance Company to take on Sick people and payout on claims without charging higher fees, (and make a profit for the Stockholders.)
The only way for universal coverage is for the Government to run the system, and pay for it by collecting taxes from everyone (universally).
The lack of money in the Medicare/Medicaid is because the money is being spent elsewhere by the Congress. Congress has also included non-paying clients to further dilute the purse.
There are a few choices to be made. The best answer is euthanasia for chronically ill and otherwise incurable. It’s not like we aren’t going to reincarnated.
Normally Nature does this through Plagues, War, and Global disasters, but humans are working to stop this natural culling. It’s much like the Forest Fires currently causing problems.
Smoking, Drinking, Eating, Drugging, aren't anything new.
It's just the Social Engineers are gaining POWER, (That's the catch word) they don't believe the stupid people should have any rights not conceded by the Government.

Just look in the History Books and you can see how well Prohibition worked in the 20s.
Once the Government disarms the wild and crazy people they can get to work straightening out our Social Ills.

[Melchior]

QUOTE (Irviding @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 18:35)

Melchior, why is it fair for the FDC to recall Tylenol cold because of brown specs in the pills, but not to recall cigarettes? If I synthesized a drug identical to cigarettes, the FDA would take it off the market so fast it'd make my head spin. How is that right ? It's a double standard, plain and simple.

Because we are all aware of the side effects of smoking. Because it's a recreational drug, not a medicinal one. You don't take Tylenol for fun, you have to take it when you have a headache. It's a very poor parallel.

Of course, you're right that if tobacco was discovered tomorrow it would probably be banned - or at least discussion of banning it would come up - it's only because people have been smoking for centuries that nobody in their right mind talks about banning cigarettes, but how does that mean that my smoking "burdens" others? Nobody here is denying that smoking is dangerous - I'm just pointing out that things are never that black and white. And hey, look at it this way, if I die at 60 from lung cancer, I'll never collect my pension! The government might break even

QUOTE

I refer you to page 2 of this topic, smoking has a placebo effect.

I'm familiar with the concept of withdrawls. Yes, on some level you're constantly going through nicotine withdrawls, that doesn't mean smoking doesn't help after an argument with your friends, or when you're just feeling blue. If you're an incredibly agreeable person with no problems, then smoking will do you more harm than good, but those aren't the kind of people who smoke. From your sources:

"Second, when the mental health of a large group of people was tracked over a long period of time, researchers found that taking up smoking in the teens leads to various psychological problems further down the line; and these problems weren’t as prevalent in people that didn’t start smoking. (1)"

"However, the stress levels of adult smokers are slightly higher than those of nonsmokers, adolescent smokers report increasing levels of stress as they develop regular patterns of smoking, and smoking cessation leads to reduced stress."

A much more logical conclusion would be that the kind of person who starts smoking in their teens are also the kind of people prone to neuroses. And I don't know how they measure "stress" because I meant blood-pressure; the kind that can put you in an early grave. If smoking were capable of killing you by stressing you to death, I'm sure they'd put that on the pack.

[finn4life]

QUOTE (Melchior @ Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 02:38)

QUOTE (Irviding @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 18:35) Melchior, why is it fair for the FDC to recall Tylenol cold because of brown specs in the pills, but not to recall cigarettes? If I synthesized a drug identical to cigarettes, the FDA would take it off the market so fast it'd make my head spin. How is that right ? It's a double standard, plain and simple. Because we are all aware of the side effects of smoking. Because it's a recreational drug, not a medicinal one. You don't take Tylenol for fun, you have to take it when you have a headache. It's a very poor parallel. Of course, you're right that if tobacco was discovered tomorrow it would probably be banned - or at least discussion of banning it would come up - it's only because people have been smoking for centuries that nobody in their right mind talks about banning cigarettes, but how does that mean that my smoking "burdens" others? Nobody here is denying that smoking is dangerous - I'm just pointing out that things are never that black and white. And hey, look at it this way, if I die at 60 from lung cancer, I'll never collect my pension! The government might break even QUOTE I refer you to page 2 of this topic, smoking has a placebo effect. I'm familiar with the concept of withdrawls. Yes, on some level you're constantly going through nicotine withdrawls, that doesn't mean smoking doesn't help after an argument with your friends, or when you're just feeling blue. If you're an incredibly agreeable person with no problems, then smoking will do you more harm than good, but those aren't the kind of people who smoke. From your sources: "Second, when the mental health of a large group of people was tracked over a long period of time, researchers found that taking up smoking in the teens leads to various psychological problems further down the line; and these problems weren’t as prevalent in people that didn’t start smoking. (1)" "However, the stress levels of adult smokers are slightly higher than those of nonsmokers, adolescent smokers report increasing levels of stress as they develop regular patterns of smoking, and smoking cessation leads to reduced stress."

So you were agreeing with me?

QUOTE

A much more logical conclusion would be that the kind of person who starts smoking in their teens are also the kind of people prone to neuroses. And I don't know how they measure "stress" because I meant blood-pressure; the kind that can put you in an early grave. If smoking were capable of killing you by stressing you to death, I'm sure they'd put that on the pack.

I wasn't trying to state that smoking causes so much stress it kills people, i am just saying that smoking isn't going to reduce stress and prevent deaths like that (Suicide).

[Melchior]

QUOTE (finn4life @ Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 07:27)

I wasn't trying to state that smoking causes so much stress it kills people, i am just saying that smoking isn't going to reduce stress and prevent deaths like that (Suicide).

And I am saying it totally does reduce stress, after something has just stressed you out. You're assertion that smoking increases your stress all-round and therefore has no stress reducing effects is only accurate if everything in your life is perfect accept nicotine withdrawls.

Nicotine reduces stress, it doesn't just "get you back to normal". Ridiculous.

[finn4life]

QUOTE (Melchior @ Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 16:13)

QUOTE (finn4life @ Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 07:27) I wasn't trying to state that smoking causes so much stress it kills people, i am just saying that smoking isn't going to reduce stress and prevent deaths like that (Suicide). And I am saying it totally does reduce stress, after something has just stressed you out. You're assertion that smoking increases your stress all-round and therefore has no stress reducing effects is only accurate if everything in your life is perfect accept nicotine withdrawls. Nicotine reduces stress, it doesn't just "get you back to normal". Ridiculous.

Well it's not ridiculous according to every single article i linked, in fact it is quite the opposite.
If you have an argument with your wife as an example, and you decide "Man i need a cigarette" and you go outside and feel better after smoking, well the cigarette is just going to bring you to normal, sitting outside quietly having a think is going to bring it down the rest of the way and the deep breathing you practice.

Imagine the same situation again, you had an argument with your wife and decided to go outside except this time you are not a smoker "Man i need a breather" so you sit outside and take some deep breaths and think, you will feel better than if you were the same man except you smoked.

Since you don't seem to understand that you are wrong (Until you can prove me with sources that you are not wrong) i am just going to quote the key points of the articles i linked that support what i am saying...again.

If you are going to ignore all that i have posted and continue debating without any sources to support your claims, you are one most naive individual in my eyes.

Source

QUOTE

Professor Parrott reviewed studies on the smoking/stress relationship, first in adult smokers, then in novice adolescent smokers and lastly during smoking cessation. For adult smokers, the research shows that the positive mood changes experienced during smoking may only reflect the reversal of unpleasant abstinence effects. "Regular smokers, therefore, experience periods of heightened stress between cigarettes, and smoking briefly restores their stress levels to normal," said Professor Parrott. "However, soon they need another cigarette to forestall abstinence symptoms from developing again. If you smoke to reduce stress, you are only adding to your stress, according to a new review of psychological studies in the October issue of the American Psychological Association's American Psychologist. Psychologist Andy Parrott, Ph.D., of the University of East London says the evidence shows that the apparent relaxant effect of smoking only reflects the reversal of the tension and irritability that develop during nicotine depletion. Far from acting as an aid for mood control, nicotine dependency seems to increase stress.

QUOTE

The psychologist said regular smoking halts the onset of withdrawal symptoms, creating a psychological link between cigarettes and feeling good. He called on the Government's anti-smoking campaigns to shatter the myth that cigarettes relieve stress.

Source

QUOTE

The psychologist said that regular smoking halts the onset of withdrawal symptoms, creating a psychological link between cigarettes and feeling good.

Source

QUOTE

So yes when you smoke you may feel slightly relaxed - this is down to the way you breathe when you smoke. So basically when you smoke you are just practicing deep breathing exercises. The deep breaths provide your body and organs with more oxygen, which helps you to relax and release stress to a degree. So smoking itself doesn't actually reduce stress, or help you concentrate in any way - it's the way you breathe that does that for you.

Source

QUOTE

Smokers often report that cigarettes help relieve feelings of stress. However, the stress levels of adult smokers are slightly higher than those of nonsmokers, adolescent smokers report increasing levels of stress as they develop regular patterns of smoking, and smoking cessation leads to reduced stress. Far from acting as an aid for mood control, nicotine dependency seems to exacerbate stress. This is confirmed in the daily mood patterns described by smokers, with normal moods during smoking and worsening moods between cigarettes. Thus, the apparent relaxant effect of smoking only reflects the reversal of the tension and irritability that develop during nicotine depletion. Dependent smokers need nicotine to remain feeling normal.

Source

QUOTE

you have a certain level of stress, then you light up a cigarette, and that certain amount of stress reduces.  Based on your first hand experience, cigarettes are relaxing, and what more evidence could you possibly need than your own first hand experience? The theory behind this is called the ‘Deprivation Reversal Model’.  Smoking creates stress between cigarettes, and removes it during and immediately after smoking.  There’s a little experiment that you can do that will make the idea behind this model more clear.  First, find a wall.  Any good, solid wall will do.  Next, walk right up to it, so you’re toes are touching it.  Then, repeatedly bash your head into the wall.  Go ahead!  Keep doing it for about a minute, taking note of how you feel.  Then stop, and again take note of how you feel.

This post has been edited by finn4life on Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 07:34

[bud23]

@finn4life;smoking has a placebo effect.

Tobacco is a drug,and like all drugs has the capability of producing physical dependence. If you stop to smoke abruptly your body will suffer these Withdrawal symptoms. return to smoking produces a reduction of these symptoms, but the effect is f*cking REAL and only produced by the nicotine effect, there is no placebo effect at all.

Smoking is really so bad? when the Inactivity(sedentary life) 'killing as many as smoking',yeah is a Lancet study.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-18876880

Yeah,smoking is not so bad at all.


If a really smart guy as the president of US smokes......can´t be so so bad.

[sivispacem]

Worldwide, inactivity is more prevalent than smoking. Ergo, even though they kill the same number of people, smoking is a considerably higher risk pursuit per capita. In an average European country, perhaps 10-15% of the population smoke, and as much as half don't do enough physical activity, so the comparative risk posed by smoking is statistically much higher. You've also got to remember that the tobacco lobby spent billions of dollars and several generations trying to conceal the effects of smoking under self-funded pseudoscience, commissioned reports that made it look anywhere between relatively harmless and downright beneficial, and attempted to injuct or sue anyone who legitimately criticised them. They still do fund favourable scientific coverage by fringe academics.

[Irviding]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Wednesday, Aug 22 2012, 08:32)

Worldwide, inactivity is more prevalent than smoking. Ergo, even though they kill the same number of people, smoking is a considerably higher risk pursuit per capita. In an average European country, perhaps 10-15% of the population smoke, and as much as half don't do enough physical activity, so the comparative risk posed by smoking is statistically much higher. You've also got to remember that the tobacco lobby spent billions of dollars and several generations trying to conceal the effects of smoking under self-funded pseudoscience, commissioned reports that made it look anywhere between relatively harmless and downright beneficial, and attempted to injuct or sue anyone who legitimately criticised them. They still do fund favourable scientific coverage by fringe academics.

Exactly. Melchior, I'm not necessarily saying cigs should or should not be banned. What I'm saying is, we have a situation where drugs are pulled off the market for the same effects. From a pure legalistic standpoint, under the FDA's standards, cigarettes should be banned. It's that simple. We have a double standard where people who smoke cost the healthcare system billions of dollars a year. Something has to be figured out.

As mentioned, I have plenty of stress in my life and I don't need cigarettes to relax. I choose to lift weights instead - best stress relief IMO.

[Melchior]

QUOTE (Irviding @ Thursday, Aug 23 2012, 13:55)

We have a double standard where people who smoke cost the healthcare system billions of dollars a year. Something has to be figured out.

But the "problem" of smoking "burdening" society cannot be evaluated because there is no way to isolate the variables, therefore, no solution can be offered - nothing can be "figured out". I think there's a term for what you're doing here: nirvana fallacy?

QUOTE

As mentioned, I have plenty of stress in my life and I don't need cigarettes to relax. I choose to lift weights instead - best stress relief IMO.

Yeah, why people don't just lift weights while at work or out with their friends is beyond me.

[Mike Tequeli]

QUOTE (finn4life @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 07:35)

I had this debate once before, I went to look for the thread and found it was right here with the same person. I refer you to page 2 of this topic, smoking has a placebo effect.

Are you suggesting that cigarettes have no psychoactive effect? Have you ever smoked a cigarette?

[finn4life]

QUOTE (Mike Tequeli @ Wednesday, Aug 29 2012, 08:38)

QUOTE (finn4life @ Sunday, Aug 19 2012, 07:35) I had this debate once before, I went to look for the thread and found it was right here with the same person. I refer you to page 2 of this topic, smoking has a placebo effect. Are you suggesting that cigarettes have no psychoactive effect? Have you ever smoked a cigarette?

No I am not, perhaps that was a bad choice of word and yes I have tried cigarettes on two occasions to try and understandwhy, both times they tasted like ass and did nothing.
I am saying (please read my previous posts and sources) in a nutshell that smoking creates an addiction then withdrawal symptoms make the smoker irritated with higher stress levels and having a cigarette brings the stress levels back down to normal levels.
So if you didn't smoke you would feel how you feel after having a cigarette all the time.
Again I state if you are going to debate this find.counter sources against what I have already posted.

[Irviding]

QUOTE

Yeah, why people don't just lift weights while at work or out with their friends is beyond me.

Not sure what you mean by that, but you could go ahead and head to a gym. Would be a lot better for your overall health than lighting up a cigarette.

[Melchior]

QUOTE (finn4life @ Wednesday, Aug 29 2012, 08:48)

I am saying (please read my previous posts and sources)  in a nutshell that smoking creates an addiction then withdrawal symptoms make the smoker irritated with higher stress levels and having a cigarette brings the stress levels back down to normal levels. So if you didn't smoke you would feel how you feel after having a cigarette all the time.

So basically, you are saying that smoking has no psychoactive effects - that it doesn't release serotonin or relieve stress, it only causes the withdrawal symptoms to subside. That is your whole contention.

QUOTE

Again I state if you are going to debate this find.counter sources against what I have already posted.

You want a source to say that cigarettes relax you? I thought it was common knowledge and that finding scientific literature that specifically states that fact would be a huge waste of time, but fine, here you go: "Nicotine extends duration of pleasant effects of dopamine"

What's more, nicotine itself is not addictive, it's the other compounds in tobacco that are addictive - and as such, produce the withdrawal effects. Logic dictates that if you were to consume nicotine on it's own, you would get the serotonin and dopamine releasing effects (and thus stress relief) without the withdrawals even being present - how can you suggest that the only effects of nicotine come from something that isn't even found in nicotine itself? Furthermore, how in your mind is it even possible to become addicted to something that has no psychoactive effects? Why would your body crave nicotine if it wasn't being significantly relaxed by it?

QUOTE (Irviding @ Wednesday, Aug 29 2012, 13:44)

QUOTE Yeah, why people don't just lift weights while at work or out with their friends is beyond me. Not sure what you mean by that, but you could go ahead and head to a gym. Would be a lot better for your overall health than lighting up a cigarette.

Right, but you can't head to a gym whenever you're stressed. People get stressed at work, at the pub, at friends' houses, while running errands etc. were you really suggesting that someone can replace cigarettes with exercise?