It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The true cost of smoking

page: 10
9
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by nrky
Oh, and another thing, smokers always leave their filthy stinky cigarette butts all over the ground without a concern for anybody else. Not to mention the property damage done to the walls next to the front door done by smokers leaning up against them, putting their cigarettes out on the tiling, etc.


Wow. There are inconsiderate people all over. I find empty beer cans, Micky D's wrappers, soda cups and cans, and cigs. Of course... I've noticed that there are very few butts on the ground around the places that provide ASHTRAYS... Just as there are very few pieces of litter around places that provide trashcans.

Smokers have been thrust outside where they can have no personal ashtray (as in on their desk or whatever) and then nothing is provided for the butts.

As for me? I will remove the "cherry" and pocket the butt if no ash tray is available.

So don't single smokers out as if smoking and littering go hand in hand.


You smokers think you only affect yourselves and that the only (false?) concern the rest of us should have is that we might get cancer from it... well, that isn't the case. Being surrounded by smokers leads to passive smoking, and we can actually get addicted to cigarettes if we are exposed to enough smoke, which can lead to us becoming smokers, and getting cancer. Hence, passive smoking DOES kill, just not directly, so less culpability.


I have yet to meet a non-smoker who is hunting down a smoker to stand beside, asking for smoke to be blown their way, to get their "fix."

I suspect highly that this arguement is based on BS.




posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by theendisnear69
If someone dies because I was smoking next to them for 5 minutes, then their family can come tell me and I will pay for all the medical expenses.


Seriously I don't know anyone whos died because a guy was smoking at a bus stop.


Multiply that for the number of other people who has done the same. It can add up. Obviously, 5 minute smoke would do no harm but it adds up. Regardless, that problem has been *fixed* anyways because of public smoking bans.

While there are many other threads talking about smoking, I think this one is a bit ridiculous because the WHOLE SYSTEM OF INSURANCE is a joke. Smokers without insurance is a whole other problem...that is called irresponsible. "Smoking" did not cause that. The person that could not pay it did.




[edit on 30-1-2009 by FritosBBQTwist]



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Hi All

Well I really cant offer opinion with all the grumbling between the non smokers and the smokers and the taxes over there in the states. Because this is a no win for all of you, due to the fact there are 2 (but really 3 ) sides to your issue over there.

I have always said that I have done some stupid things in my life but smoking cigarettes had to be the dumb-est thing Ive ever done. But Ive always be polite enough not smoke around non smokers without asking if they minded, as in my mates or the people at my table or around me. this is common courtsey.

However I am happy to say I was a smoker unitil 8 weeks ago wehn I started taking a course of champix the newer nicotine receptor blocker drug.

It works. Very Well. No withdrawls, no cravings, I dont even notice i havent thought about a smoke all day and I was smoking 25 at least, coz i smoked in my home office.

I have had a couple since I went on champix and because you dont get a rush from the smoke as the drug blocks it, its truely foul. Its amazing how much thr rush of the nicotine covers up how bad ciggarettes are and taste and smell.

But I by nature am not a rude person who will ask a person to smoke elsewhere if they are in an allowed zone and so am I. I would move or hey JUST DEAL with it. We are supposed to be getting on better in the world so that the ACTUAL bigger issues like hate energy from peoples hearts and opinions can be cured and we can learn a differnt way to live.

Opinions are one persons perception, there are countless perceptions to every situation, instead of seeing only yours , those here ranting , arguing and rearguing their point about something they cant resolve - due to anothers opinion, why not try looking for a few more perceptions. then you willfree yourself from the burden your perception is giving you.

We do it to ourselves. You asked for it, you got it

themuse



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


hmm. lets see, so far they haven't actually ever proven a link between smoking, second hand smoke, and cancer, warts, ugliness, or anything else people claim. But they hedge themselves and say that it may cause.

so lets see. so far its just another 'oh smoking is icky' argument.

good day.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by themuse
 


Good for you.

I'm sure that you're already appreciating the health benefits.

Interesting to hear about that drug as well.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
I live in texas and my employers insur already has a tobacco premium, If you use any tobacco product it's an extra $600 pre year, and you have to be tobacco free for 6 months to get out of it. I quit smoking just over a year ago, it was hard but no regrets, and that extra cost was another good reason to quit. I does seem like if they have a premium for tobacco they should have one for some other bad habits.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by CoffinFeeder
 


They have proved a relationship between smoking and smoking related diseases.

There is a recent study published in the journal BMC cancer linked smoking to more than 70 % of the cancer death burden among Massachusetts men in 2003.

It is true that not 100% of the people that smoke get cancer but it dramatically increases your odds.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by themuse
However I am happy to say I was a smoker unitil 8 weeks ago wehn I started taking a course of champix the newer nicotine receptor blocker drug.


While I am happy to hear that Chantix (Champix) is doing its advertised job, I am VERY leery of the chemical(s) given all the horrors of the side effects listed.

Here's some info I found:

www.yourlawyer.com...


The Chantix label warns of various side effects, including nausea, changes in dreaming, constipation, gas and vomiting. But those warnings are more prominent and easier to find than the fine print on the package insert that warns of the possibility of psychotic and suicidal behavior. But since its approval, more and more Chantix users have reported these terrifying side effects.


www.peoplespharmacy.com...

whyquit.com...


"Does Chantix really work?" "Tell me the truth, what are my chances?" Frankly, not good. Putting aside for the moment growing concern over FDA acknowledged links between Chantix and suicide, if Chantix (whose chemical name is varenicline) is used as a stand-alone quitting aid without ongoing counseling or support, your chances of quitting smoking for one year are probably less than 1 in 11. But when accompanied by 24 to 25 weekly counseling or support sessions of up to 10 minutes each your chances could rise to 1 in 5 or even 1 in 4.

Yet sadly, Pfizer is today marketing varenicline as having a 44% success rate at 12 weeks, when that figure is really rather meaningless. In clinical trials the treatment period was 12 weeks and heavily supported and counseled users were still under the chemical's rather amazing influence. If addicted to using an external chemical to steal brain dopamine, how significant is a boast about successfully substituting another chemical that allows continued stealing?



There's lots more, but this will get you thinking.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by themuse

In January 2008, Pfizer added a prominent warning to the label of its smoking-cessation drug Chantix about the potential risks of suicidal behavior, depressed mood and other potential side effects. This came after a November 2007 update to Chantix's "post-marketing experience" section which said there had been reports of depressed mood, agitation, changes in behavior, suicidal ideation and suicide in patients attempting to quit smoking while taking Chantix.
Source: www.chantixsuicidelawsuit.com...

I'm glad it has worked for you, but let's be honest about this newest miracle cure. Chantix has caused a great many deaths itself, from suicide.

Last I heard, it is now illegal for anyone operating a commercial vehicle in the United States to take Chantix.

I'll stick to my smokes, thanks. Better the devil you know, and all that.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 



Maybe Im lucky and so is my fiance and his best mate and his wife, my dr and countless others in my small city whom i know and have had no DRASTIC side effects. I was skeptical of zyban and I have a mortal fear of anti deppresants etc, but i took the chance on this and its working.

All my fiance, his mate and wife and my dr have experienced was a 'short bout of the squirts' (sorry for the grossness of sharing that with you all I am blushing as I type) for half a day a week maybe if that and I asked everyone i knew who had taken them about side effects and read about them on the net also. I heard nothing drastically negative from real life people. My Business involves going into about 10 homes a day (im a photog) and I obviously chat with the owners, and this was over a few months before i took the chance on it. I estimate 40pax i spke with whom had it and worked and another 5 who took it and smoked anyway and then gave up champix for smoking and told me to stick to it!! (the gov here subsidies 3months at $30AU per month per year per person. If you drop it you have to pay fiull price 350 I think or wait 12 months to get the subsidy again.


Remember also side effects published may well be corporate espionage put out by the makers of patches and other less successful methods of quitting OR the tobacco companies themselves. Ie. 'the deaths could not be directly linked to the drug' was a statement in something i read on the web. Its an open statement. It could be an exploited message taking advantage of purely coincentdental deaths during trials. Or Not I dont know.

Dont believe all the hype you read.

But I do know it works for me and heaps of others i know and have met in real life. Go ask you DR. Mine took it himself and he is so glad he did.

themuse



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
I am in Australia by the way, so I am not sure how they recruited their test patients in the US, do they get paid for being in the trial, Are they people desperate for money then and subsequently overly stressed? Are they screened for a predisposion to a range of psychiatric and body health problems or do they just take anyone off the street? Do they have their regular doctor who knows their medical history put them into it it?

Please could someone explain to me how one becomes part of a trial like this in the US.

cheers

themuse



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


Where do we draw the line on what we choose to pay for?
How do you get an organisation to prove your taxes weren't spent paying for the chemotherapy of a smoker? Is the IRS gonna send you an itemised account of what your taxes went on? And how much is that gonna cost? Well, let me tell you, I don't want my taxes to be spent helping out someone so committed to pissing money up against a wall in such a manner.
How would such a process work anyway? Example:
'My mother was killed by a drink driver. I don't want any of my money/taxes going towards any drink/liver disease/alcohol related illnesses.'
Why should I pay towards something I'm totally against, right?



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu

Originally posted by Wildbob77
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


Get me some statistics on the health care costs of smog and I might agree.


It's rather interesting... There have been virtually no studies funded to determine the effects of inhaling "second hand exhaust."

Gee. I wonder if the Oil and Car-Maker lobbies have anything to do with that fact....

Seriously, statistics are very hard to come by, but given the fact that we get ill in heavy concentrations, one might presume that low-level long term exposure cannot be good.


www.cbc.ca...




A recent study by the Ontario Medical Association estimates that smog costs Ontario more than $1 billion dollars a year in hospital admissions, emergency room visits and absenteeism. The Association's study, The Illness Costs of Air Pollution, concluded that about 1,900 people die prematurely in Ontario each year because of smog-related respiratory problems.


Here's one from Canada.

Oh, and smokers already pay an increase in federal, state, and sometimes local taxes on their cigarettes AND the tobacco industry provides MILLIONS to every state supposedly to combat the extra medical costs associated with smoking.

My employer doesn't provide me with health insurance coverage, the government doesn't provide me with health insurance coverage, I don't smoke and my husband does. Guess what? WE PAY A HIGHER INSURANCE RATE FOR INDEPENDENT COVERAGE.

Smokers already pay.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by themuse

Dont believe all the hype you read.

I don't, but when I personally talk to a half-dozen drivers who had to quit taking this drug because they attempted suicide over it, and have heard calls on trucking radio shows from other drivers who are now ex-drivers due to it, or spouses of drivers who died from it.... maybe sometimes what you read has a bit of truth in it.

Please, anyone on this drug now, be very very careful, and get to a doctor at the first sign of depression, no matter how small.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
reply to post by themuse
 


Good for you.

I'm sure that you're already appreciating the health benefits.

Interesting to hear about that drug as well.



Hey Thanks Wildbob

I am already feeling better, call me crazy but as soon as I felt better breathing wise I wanted to get fit again, I figured the best way to get me to regularly exercise was to take a cleaning job, fairly easy i vaccuum and mop a tennis court size room and some offices for 4 hours from 4am mon to fri. I dont need to do it as Im self employed and flat tack, but i just know im great at finding excuses to not go to the gym and my business isnt an body active thing. it took about 3 weeks of a red face and excessive sweating (but we had 40degree C days and 30 deg C nights those weeks) but the pain, sweat and red face are harder to get to now ad my reciovery time is quiet good already and I have more energy. Im not a largely overweight person, I am 12 australian size, just unfit from lack of movement and 8 + hours photoshpping nightly!

themuse



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by themuse

Dont believe all the hype you read.

I don't, but when I personally talk to a half-dozen drivers who had to quit taking this drug because they attempted suicide over it, and have heard calls on trucking radio shows from other drivers who are now ex-drivers due to it, or spouses of drivers who died from it.... maybe sometimes what you read has a bit of truth in it.

Please, anyone on this drug now, be very very careful, and get to a doctor at the first sign of depression, no matter how small.

TheRedneck


Oh I am sorry to hear of the ill effects on people you know. Makes me wonder if the drug is different over there and made different here or the obvious environmental issues differ here in australia and particularly where i live, ie I live in a mining city people make great sometimes obscene money and are mostly happy in their lives.

Australia hasnt felt the full effects that america has been going through for years and I guess we are therefore less stressed. the gov here pays well to those who are unemployed, minimum wage is good, health care free. Mining Boom has made our wallets fat and our lives carefree. Its all about to go pears now though.

Do you think the different environment or the different drug theory is likely?

themuse



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
They have proved a relationship between smoking and smoking related diseases.




Am I the only one who found the above statement to be hugely and ironically funny? It's like saying "we have proved a relationship between Fred and his relatives. " Umm .. what??

Okay, if they're really "smoking related" diseases, we don't really need to prove a further relationship, do we?

 


I find it interesting that people on a conspiracy website quote government statistics like they're gospel. Uh .. hello?

We KNOW they're lying to us about something. Regardless WHICH lie you happen to be convinced about (MKUltra, Roswell, JFK, etc. etc.), how can you know that they aren't to be trusted in one area and then act like they can be implicitly trusted in another area?

Wait I know .. it's because THIS particular set of "facts" happen to be ones you WANT to believe in because they make you the protector of children and innocents and your own precious health rather than just some person who doesn't like the smell of cigarette smoke and has been (collectively) given the power to make it so that you never have to smell it if you buy into the misinformation and disinformation that says how BAD cigarette smoke is.

 


I'm going to keep asking this question until someone answers me. Why is that the people who smoke are your targets but NOT the people (companies) who put all the noxious (and unnecessary) chemicals into the cigarettes in the first place?

 


Anyone here besides me old enough to remember when cyclamates (an artificial sweetener from before saccharin) was banned because it causes cancer? Well, guess what .. they've kept using it all these years in Europe and it isn't causing any problems!! So are Americans just weaklings predisposed to cancer or was, perhaps, the dear old Govt just a smidge less than honest about the DANGERS of cyclamates (and saccharin, for that matter)? And now that we know that cyclamates isn't dangerous, why hasn't it been brought back? Because it's cheap, tastes great, and the sugar industry is still afraid of it? Hmmmm.

Come on people, wake up! Use a little COMMON SENSE. Second hand smoke is hype. Third hand smoke is even more hype and disinformation. My husband smokes a pack a day, or more, and I smoke 1/2 a pack a day. Most of my coworkers don't even know I smoke.

Y'all are somehow managing to ignore the REAL FACTS which are that smoking continues to DECREASE while Cancer continues to INCREASE. If smoking caused cancer, the reverse would be true.

The so-called health risks of SHS are propaganda which is used to enable people to feel good about hating smokers and give tacit permission for smokers' rights to be taken from them.

Someday, if you live long enough, you'll realize what happened - how one group after another has had their rights chipped away while everyone else allowed it to happen, and by the time the final freedoms are stripped away from everyone and you can see the pattern and how they did it, it will be too late.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


To the original post, smokers here in the UK DO pay for the health system. We pay £4b a year (at least)

And second hand smoke, i know it does kill people, but only if you smoke indoors with them. Smoking outdoors hardly has any effect unless you constantly blow it in their face, if you look closely, you would see that smoke RAISES quite high, too high for people to inhale.

Its just blown straight out of proportion by TV and health ad's.



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by themuse

To be honest, I really don't know what the difference is. There does seem to be a difference, however, based on our differing anecdotal evidence. I would personally tend to attribute it to a different recipe for the drug barring evidence to the contrary.

BTW, my replies to you are not so much an argument, but intended more as a warning for those in the US (and elsewhere there have been problems) with Chantix. I'm glad to hear it has worked well for you, and I hope you continue to experience no ill effects.

Now, if I could get some of the anti-smokers on here to simply offer a similar well-wish to those of us who want to smoke...

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 30 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I am hearing you. I liked smoking also it was just time to give it up and I am sure I will have to odd one here and there in the future I am just stoked to not be addicted to them anymore. I knew your post wasnt aimed at me, My post was aimed at those that may want to quit, I didnt bother with the fight between nonsmokers and smokers. its pointless. we can do what we want to ourselves and those that preach second hand smoke issues are likely eating canned food with preservatives, soda with additives that cause brain chemisrty to change and hence being totally hipocritical just for argurments sake, that kind of behaviour doesnt help personal stress levels or help teach emotional control. Nay sayers etc need to start within first,, ask themselves 'whats really bugging me, why do i blame everyone else?!! and then maybe they will beable to see and respect peoples perceptions. These issues are a destraction from the world around us.

Another poster just stated also that cancer is still a large killer and smoking is on the decrease.

hmm. I do wonder though if the drug is different over there than here or social economic reasons are the difference.

all the best

themuse

PS Smoke all you want at my house. if you are ever in OZ !!


[edit on 30/1/2009 by themuse]




top topics



 
9
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join