Bacteria in tobacco

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


I don't know why I waste my time with this...

You drone on about the politicization and agenda of such studies, but employ your own amazing dose of it by proclaiming all sorts of things without having actually read this study.

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Loam

I have provided strong evidence of corrupted science and a politicized process.

Your sole response is to agree with me that what I say is true and then to assert that you "believe" the study to be "different"

Are we talking science or religion here?

I guess we're talking about YOUR 'religion' here, not mine.

The world I live in does not require that evidence of bias in some scientific studies requires a conclusion of bias in EVERY scientific study.

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks

Please explain why you think this study is different or are you basing your belief simply on faith.

Ps I have been unable to examine the study because of problems with the site. However I will provide this link showing that tobacco smoke is anti-microbial

Because I read it....which is apparently more than I can say of you.

But obviously, that wont stop you. Will it?

For example:

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Further - the press release indicates that hundreds of bacteria were found in tobacco. This is stated over and over again to create a feeling of panic but careful reading shows that only one species of bacteria was actually found in the smoke.

M'kay.

Never let the facts stand in the way of a good point of view:

FROM THE ACTUAL STUDY:

Fifteen different classes of bacteria were detected in the cigarette samples (Table 1). Members of the following phyla were detected in nearly all of the samples: Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes,Chloroflexi, Cyanobacteria, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria (Alphaproteobacteria,Betaproteobacteria, Deltaproteobacteria, and Gammaproteobacteria). As expected,Nicotiana tabacum 16S chloroplast rRNA genes also were detected in every sample.

Our microarray was designed to detect microorganisms at both the genus and species level. A variety of environmental bacterial organisms were identified in all
samples, including Amaracoccus, Legionellales, Methylobacterium, Nostoc, Paracoccus,Pseudomonas chlororaphis, and Pseudomonas cichorii, to name a few. A broad range of gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial genera and species that are medically important to humans and/or potential human pathogens were also detected in the cigarette samples (Table 2). Most notably, the following organisms were detected in ≥ 90% of all samples: Acinetobacter; Bacillus; Burkholderia; Clostridium; Klebsiella oxytoca;
Pseudomonas, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Pseudomonas stutzeri; and Serratia.

I have to go eat turkey.

Suffice it to say the rest of your post is nonsense too.

[edit on 26-11-2009 by loam]

I'm not even going to bother posting how many different types of bacteria there is in the food purchased. Not to mention the injected turkey your shoven in your pie hole.
Shoot cheese is made by bacteria, LETS BAN it!

Yet alone living creatures, in beef, fish, and bread, flour, etc...etc...

Lets ban them too.

end of rant.

[edit on 26-11-2009 by Doc Holiday]

three cheers for Dager - you got that right buddy - we are living longer healthier lives than ever in the history of mankind and yet the papers are full each and every single day of studies purporting that something is dangerous.

Loam - obviously you don't wish to debate. The information you provided shows that there is bacteria in tobacco. Hip hip hurrah! Not surprising considering that there is bacteria in anything growing in soil.

So that just proves my point - What was the purpose of the study and why do press release to provide the absolutely astounding information that there is bacteria in anything that grows in soil.

Ho HUM - as I suspected - not a credible scientific enquiry - just another commercial from Big Pharma. Ending with "we need more money to do more studies just like this one"

Tired of Control Freaks

Now here is an interesting study

www.sciencedaily.com...

Smoking can prevent allergies!

And you want to know why I believe this study and not the bacteria study. Because it matches with what is known about smoking in previous studies and was never made known to the public through press releases.

It also matches with the real world knowledge that the incidence of allergies has been increasing in the population in almost lockstep with the decrease of smoking in the general population.

It also matches with what people know from their own general observations - who is the one always whining about allergies and asthma - why non-smokers of course.


Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by DOADOA
you can tell me there's flesh eating maggot that will burrow through my brain or HIV viruses, cancer causing chemicals, radiation, etc.... and i would still smoke. " oh it's bad for you, you should quit." shut. the. hell. up. stop acting like you care. only reason why you don't want smoker to smoke is it might affect the longevity of YOUR own life. just stay away from us, nobody asked you to stand there.

I raise my glass and toast your conviction.

Is it any wonder that, since the mandation of innoculations and the airborn fallout from nuclear testing, lung and other cancers/disease has risen exponentially?

No it is not.

There is two sides to these arguments, but the only one that gets published or MSM attention is the side that those who manipulate and control access to information, food, drugs and the almighty "patentable" applications of unnatural concoctions that simulate or try at best most often the achievements that nature has accomplished and is documented throughout written human history.

As an example:

The National Health Federation (NHF) is an alliance of promoters and followers who engage in lobbying campaigns and many other activities. It is antagonistic toward established medical practices and uses the words "alternative," and "freedom" to suit its own purposes.

Source:

Another stance that is nary ever a word whispered about,

Be Wary of the National Health Federation (1993)

The National Health Federation (NHF) is an alliance of promoters and followers who engage in lobbying campaigns and many other activities. It is antagonistic toward established medical practices and uses the words "alternative," and "freedom" to suit its own purposes. The information in this article was published in 1993 as part of a chapter on "Health Freedom Crusaders" in my book, The Health Robbers: A Close Look at Quackery in America. As you read this article, keep in mind that it describes things as they were more than ten years ago. Nearly all of the people mentioned are no longer in leadership positions, some have died, and I suspect that NHF has fewer members than it did in 1993. However, its focus and activities have not changed.
...

Since its formation, NHF's stated purpose has been to promote "freedom of choice" by consumers. As expressed for years in its Bulletin:

NHF opposes monopoly and compulsion in things related to health where the safety and welfare of others are not concerned. NHF does not oppose nor approve any specific healing profession or their methods, but it does oppose the efforts of any one group to restrict the freedom of practice of qualified members of another profession, thus attempting to create a monopoly.

At first glance, this credo may seem "democratic" and somehow related to unfair business competition. What NHF really means, however, is that government should not help scientifically based health care to drive unproven methods out of the marketplace. NHF wants anyone who merely claims to have an effective treatment or product to be allowed to market it without scientific proof that it works.

NHF promotes questionable health methods and has little interest in scientifically recognized methods. Health Freedom News contains ads for questionable treatments and products that are being marketed illegally. Nutritional fads, myths, and gimmicks are mentioned favorably by NHF publications and convention speakers. Worthless cancer treatments, particularly laetrile, have been promoted in the same ways. Articles in NHF publications have looked with disfavor on such proven public health measures as pasteurization of milk, immunization, water fluoridation, and food irradiation. Use of nutritional supplements is encouraged by claims that modern food processing depletes our food supply of its nutrients. "Natural" and "organic" products have been promoted with suggestions that our food supply is "poisoned." Chiropractic, naturopathy, and homeopathy are regarded favorably. Books that promote questionable health concepts are given favorable reviews. Antiquackery legislation is condemned. Underlying all these messages is the idea that anyone who opposes NHF's ideas is part of a "conspiracy" of government, organized medicine, and big business against the little consumer.

'Nuff Said...
Smokem if you gottem

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Loam - obviously you don't wish to debate.

I don't do exercises in futility well.

Moreover, you seem the 'flat-earther' type, so I'm not really sure what the upside would be to further discussion.

But on the off chance I'm wrong about you, I'll try one more volley....

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
The information you provided shows that there is bacteria in tobacco. Hip hip hurrah! Not surprising considering that there is bacteria in anything growing in soil.

So that just proves my point - What was the purpose of the study and why do press release to provide the absolutely astounding information that there is bacteria in anything that grows in soil.

From the study, which I presume you still haven't read.

We explored the bacterial metagenome of commercially-available cigarettes and revealed for the first time that these widely-used products are characterized by a broad array of bacterial diversity. Regardless of brand, tested cigarettes harbored numerous gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial types, ranging from soil microorganisms and commensals, to potential human pathogens, including Acinetobacter, Bacillus, Burkholderia, Clostridium, Klebsiella and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Table 2). Many of
the detected organisms are capable of causing pneumonia, bacteremias, foodborne illnesses, meningitis, endocarditis and urinary tract infections, to name a few. For example, P. aeruginosa—a bacterium detected in 100% of all cigarette samples tested in this study—alone causes 10% of all hospital-acquired infections in the United States and is the leading cause of nosocomial pneumonia in both Europe and the United States
(Bergogne-Berezin 1995).

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Ho HUM - as I suspected - not a credible scientific enquiry - just another commercial from Big Pharma. Ending with "we need more money to do more studies just like this one"

Dude. You need to brush up on your conspiracy theories... What does big pharma have to do with this study?

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
It also matches with what people know from their own general observations - who is the one always whining about allergies and asthma - why non-smokers of course.

Let me guess, you really do think the earth is flat.

I will say this much about personal experience. I had to learn about smoking the hard way. That, more than any study, was good enough for me.

I don't really care if you don't believe that smoking is harmful. Smoke all you want. Let darwinist principles run their course.

I've been there...done that.

Knock yourself out.



[edit on 26-11-2009 by loam]

your worried about the Bacteria in tobacco.
there are many better things to worry about.
en.wikipedia.org...

The number of bacteria living within the body of the average healthy adult human are estimated to outnumber human cells 10 to 1.
www.sciencedaily.com...

That means only 10% of your body is human.
The rest is alien bacteria.

It also means that if you are overweight you can now claim you weight 90% less the rest is not you, its alien bacteria hitching a ride.

Originally posted by loam


From the study, which I presume you still haven't read.

We explored the bacterial metagenome of commercially-available cigarettes and revealed for the first time that these widely-used products are characterized by a broad array of bacterial diversity. Regardless of brand, tested cigarettes harbored numerous gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial types, ranging from soil microorganisms and commensals, to potential human pathogens, including Acinetobacter, Bacillus, Burkholderia, Clostridium, Klebsiella and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Table 2). Many of
the detected organisms are capable of causing pneumonia, bacteremias, foodborne illnesses, meningitis, endocarditis and urinary tract infections, to name a few. For example, P. aeruginosa—a bacterium detected in 100% of all cigarette samples tested in this study—alone causes 10% of all hospital-acquired infections in the United States and is the leading cause of nosocomial pneumonia in both Europe and the United States
(Bergogne-Berezin 1995).

[edit on 26-11-2009 by loam]

Let's look at our P. aeruginosa fellow listed in the article...

From wikipedia

Because it thrives on most surfaces, this bacterium is also found on and in medical equipment including catheters, causing cross infections in hospitals and clinics.

The study is just so much BS. As I said earlier in the thread, bacteria are all over the place.

well don't they get burned alive then as soon as you light it!?!

You know, that red glowing heat that causes the smoke to be there in the first place???? BURNNNNN babay BURNNNNN!

My dear dear Loam

Are we discussing whether smoking is good or bad for you? Or are we discussing the study that found bacteria existing in tobacco??

I still have been unable to open the link but let us discuss the part you have copied...shall we

We explored the bacterial metagenome of commercially-available cigarettes and revealed for the first time that these widely-used products are characterized by a broad array of bacterial diversity.

First sentence - I read this to mean that a broad range of species of bacteria were found to be living on tobacco. This makes perfect sense to me. Tobacco is grown in soil and like all things grown in dirt-it is covered in bacteria. Further, the tobacco is handled by human hands. So it has bacteria on it.

How does this information contribute to science? Is it already not well known that things growing in soil are contaminated in bacteria???? What is the value of this information???

"Regardless of brand, tested cigarettes harbored numerous gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial types, ranging from soil microorganisms and commensals, to potential human pathogens, including Acinetobacter, Bacillus, Burkholderia, Clostridium, Klebsiella and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Table 2)."

Second sentence - confirms the types and variety of bacteria found in tobacco.



Many of the detected organisms are capable of causing pneumonia, bacteremias, foodborne illnesses, meningitis, endocarditis and urinary tract infections, to name a few. For example, P. aeruginosa—a bacterium detected in 100% of all cigarette samples tested in this study—alone causes 10% of all hospital-acquired infections in the United States and is the leading cause of nosocomial pneumonia in both Europe and the United States (Bergogne-Berezin 1995).


Third sentence - states that the bacteria can cause disease. Does science not already know that these bacteria can cause disease. How does this contribute in any way to the knowledge base. Do you know what the meaning of the word nosecomial is? That means the infectious agent that caused the pneumonia originated in a hospital. When was the last time you saw tobacco anywhere near a hospital???

Are you possibly thinking that tobacco is the source of these bacteria??? Not at all. Tobacco is just one of the things that can become contaminated with these bacteria which exist and thrive in all soils.

What are you interpreting this paragraph to mean? Why are you talking about flat-earth? I keep asking you to explain why you think this study is meaningful. Don't provide me with quotes - provide me with what you think the quote means so that we can properly communicate our thoughts

Ps - the reason I mention Big Pharma is because Big Pharma is a direct competitor of Big Tobacco in the provision of nicotene (nicotene patches and inhalors which account for over a billion dollars in sales. They fund many many universities through the RW Woods Foundation which is the philothrampic arm of Johnson and Johnson.

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by Dagar
I wish people would stop worrying so much about living longer and just LIVE.

It seems that modern life, for many people, is all about constantly fretting about what might kill you. For heaven's sake, the second you're conceived you are on the road to dying. It's how much you enjoy yourself in the meantime that counts.

I'm sick and tired of the doom and gloom merchants and all their studies... Live people, LIVE!!!

I agree! I am going out to karaoke to smoke cigarettes and drink gin and cranberry while talking really close to people and sharing a microphone with them ALL night long!!!.....been doing it for YEARS and I am fine!

And let us not forget those dizzying long slow kisses that last about 3 days accompanied by the suitable swapping of spit!!!!!



Wait - don't we need a study to determine that there is bacteria in saliva that is capable of causing disease?? Who can we get to fund that! Maybe the sex toy industry can come up with some kind of rubber kissing thingy and would be willing to fund such a study to convince everyone to stop kissing each other!!!

For pity's sake here folks -we are talking about health and should be willing to sacrifice a little pleasure for the opportunity to spend a decade or two drooling into our diapers in some nursing home!

I may be a flat-earther but I think I am willing to trade a few years of drooling for pleasure now!

Tired of Control Freaks

And let us not forget those dizzying long slow kisses that last about 3 days accompanied by the suitable swapping of spit!!!!!



Wait - don't we need a study to determine that there is bacteria in saliva that is capable of causing disease?? Who can we get to fund that! Maybe the sex toy industry can come up with some kind of rubber kissing thingy and would be willing to fund such a study to convince everyone to stop kissing each other!!!

For pity's sake here folks -we are talking about health and should be willing to sacrifice a little pleasure for the opportunity to spend a decade or two drooling into our diapers in some nursing home!

I may be a flat-earther but I think I am willing to trade a few years of drooling for pleasure now!

Tired of Control Freaks

OMG, I couldn't even read through the last page of posts at the risk of decreasing my IQ.

I supose that I shouldn't expect more from people that chose to smoke anyways. Of course you aren't concerned about the bacteria, you already know you are killing yourselves so why worry? As to the comments from some about blowing your smoke on those of us that DO care...well, guess what? I don't want to suck the bacteria into MY lungs and I don't want my taxes to pay for the COPD you are going to develop from it, or the lung cancer, or any other number of ailments that I see in our ER ALL THE TIME.

Yes, it is your choice to smoke, but doing so takes away MY choice to stay away from the affects of it and to not pay for the burden your addiction puts on our healthcare.

I think this article is an amazing find ( S & F ), and I think the ridiculous responses are a great testament to the ecxuses smokers make for themselves on a daily basis.

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


yes, too much karaoke...or, erm, gin, has led to that as well, lol.

reply to post by loam


Loam...I applaud you for standing by your comments in this 'twilight zone'...

I don't think it matters HOW much sense you make though. Smokers know exactly what they are doing to themselves and they will go to great lengths to defend it no matter how ridiculous they sound.

To compare any bacteria we touch or eat, to one that is inhaled into the lungs makes no sense. You know this, I know this, anyone with common sense knows this.

I see people in their forties that can't even live without a hose in their nose and their little canister of O2 pulled behind them, yet they STILL smoke. I see children losing thier parents to lung cancer and young families destroyed by the health problems smoking causes. To say you want to 'enjoy life now' instead of drooling in your diapers later is not a very accurate estimate. You could be dead in a few months after a lung cancer diagnosis (it takes you FAST) at a very young age, or if you are 'lucky', you might actually see your 60's and end up a with COPD, unable to breath which means your quality of life is going to SUCK and you will lose years and years that could have been spent ENJOYING life.

So yes....the finding that not only are you inhaling toxins into your lungs (you already know that), but also LIVE BACTERIA that could cause lung disease IS big news. Perhaps this will be the little extra push someone needs to make a change and save their life.

reply to post by westcoast

Originally posted by westcoast
...I think the ridiculous responses are a great testament to the ecxuses smokers make for themselves on a daily basis.

I played that game myself for a very long time. So in a sense, I understand it.

Smoking is an extreme addiction.

reply to post by loam


I also smoked for awhile when I was a teenager. I had always been very athletic and I will never forget the day I went to run the mile at the end of the school year to pass PE and I couldn't make it without stopping and coughing. It scared the H@ll out of me and I thank God it did. I lost my Grandpa to lung cancer and I see so many people affected by it that I am very opinionated. When I read some of these comments.....

Originally posted by westcoast
OMG, I couldn't even read through the last page of posts at the risk of decreasing my IQ.

I supose that I shouldn't expect more from people that chose to smoke anyways. Of course you aren't concerned about the bacteria, you already know you are killing yourselves so why worry? As to the comments from some about blowing your smoke on those of us that DO care...well, guess what? I don't want to suck the bacteria into MY lungs and I don't want my taxes to pay for the COPD you are going to develop from it, or the lung cancer, or any other number of ailments that I see in our ER ALL THE TIME.

Yes, it is your choice to smoke, but doing so takes away MY choice to stay away from the affects of it and to not pay for the burden your addiction puts on our healthcare.

I think this article is an amazing find ( S & F ), and I think the ridiculous responses are a great testament to the ecxuses smokers make for themselves on a daily basis.

Some could say the same about certain individuals who insist upon saturating themselves with perfume that the wafe as they walk by makes you ill for days. Much Much worse, IMHO

reply to post by CoffinFeeder


I like tofu, I don't smoke.. I look like an ugly biker, and when people blow smoke on me they tend to regret it.