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.

 

Bacteria in tobacco

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 02:13 AM
link   
Ah yes - and now we come to the real purpose of the study!

Now there are people who actually think that there is bacteria that will make them sick if they breathe in second hand smoke.

Never mind that I already posted a study showing that tobacco smoke has anti-microbial properties. Never mind that tobacco is burned at high temperatures during the process of smoking.

Never mind common sense. Somebody did a STUDY. Put your brains on hold folks while the good scientist tells you what to think!

Is the smoke created when meat is grilled capable of transmitting bacteria that cause pneumonia?

Is the smoke created when wood is burned capable of transmitting bacteria that cause pneumonia?

People are actually thinking that smoke will cause pneumonia and that is one more reason for violence against a smoker BUT your very breath and every sneeze is laden with disease causing organisms. So I guess smokers have the right to take action against anyone who coughs or sneezes in public now.

Tired of Control Freaks

Why not - those products are also covered in bacteria.




posted on Nov, 27 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
People are actually thinking that smoke will cause pneumonia and that is one more reason for violence against a smoker


Look at me, I'm hysterical!! Waarrghhh!!!

oO

I'm pretty sure a study has never caused someone bodily harm, leaving me to wonder where that notion came from.

Can't have been my reply to coffinfeeder's promise to blow smoke on tofu eating hippies... But just incase -

Don't blow smoke on me and I won't have to hit my fists with your nose!


lmao



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   
LOL


This thread reminds me of an episode of The X-Files:



The episode where Mulder is hospitalized is called 'Brand X' and is in the 7th series of the show, a couple of episodes from the end of that season. Tobin Bell stars in the episode as a heavy smoker asked to become part of a 'focus group' to test a new type of cigarette which has been genetically designed to stop tobacco beetles from destroying the crop. It inadvertently causes anyone who inhales the smoke to breathe beetle larvae into their lungs, which hatch, and well, you know what happens next



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

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.

I totally believe you. The denial that a smoker must face every day is beyond most non-smoker's comprehension. The first thing that happens when someone is told that flesh eating maggots will burrow through their brain is an increase in stress. As the smoker sees the nicotine as a relaxant (while its actually a stimulant), the first thing they want to do is light up another. Its no secret that you'll find more cigarettes outside of cancer hospitals than regular hospitals.


" oh it's bad for you, you should quit." shut. the. hell. up.


To an extent I agree, because again the stresses of being told this only exacerbate the issue.


stop acting like you care.

I do care, as a previous smoker myself nothing saddens me more than watching a smoker purposely continue doing something that deep down they know they shouldn't be doing, yet continue to do because they don't remember what its like to not smoke and be happy.


just stay away from us, nobody asked you to stand there.

I like being around my friends, don't you?

----

And this is the sum of the problem. There really is no reason any longer to do a whole lot of research into the horrible things that nicotine products do, because if the fact that it's one of the number one killers in the country doesn't stop a smoker already, there is nothing that a little bacteria can do that would affect them either.

Though the researcher does state that the high heat of a burning cigarette may not kill the bacteria in the smoke, it is really a moot point. You are still putting your mouth on the filter, and any smoker will know that there are bits of tobacco inside the pack that will make their way to touch the filter at some point before you smoke it.

Great article, loam! Starred, Flagged, and linked to all my facebook peeps.



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks Never mind that I already posted a study showing that tobacco smoke has anti-microbial properties.

So because tobacco has potentially anti-microbial properties, we should ignore cancer, emphysema, and birth defects and just say "go for it!"?


Is the smoke created when meat is grilled capable of transmitting bacteria that cause pneumonia?

Is the smoke created when wood is burned capable of transmitting bacteria that cause pneumonia?

People burn wood to keep warm or cook food. People smoke because they are addicted to nicotine.


Why not - those products are also covered in bacteria.


Sneezing and coughing is a natural process where the body expels mucus. It is a completely natural process. However our bodies are not adapted to filter smoke and process tar (a completely unnatural process.)



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Ah this is silly. Any bacteria that is inhaled won't be doing much damage stuck down in those lungs in all that tar. I read a report many years ago that said smokers actually had a higher overall resistance to inhaled bacteria because most bacteria couldn't survive in smoker lungs.



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
There have been some problems with fungal spore contamination in that cheap, illegal "roll-your-own" tobacco ("chop chop").

It has produced some nasty problems.



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
The cigarette is on fire, it burns the bacteria away. You can't inhale bacteria from a lit cigarette it is impossible.



We performed a series of experiments in order to determine the actual temperature of the lit cigarette. Here are the results for the temperature at different locations and under different conditions:

Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)

Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)

Source



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by the_denv
 


Of course, I don't suppose reading the actual study in question occurred to you, huh?


Or the previous posts in this thread.

Really, this thread makes me laugh at how simpleton people on the whole seem when it comes to their sacred cows.


[edit on 19-12-2009 by loam]



posted on Dec, 19 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by the_denv
The cigarette is on fire, it burns the bacteria away. You can't inhale bacteria from a lit cigarette it is impossible.



We performed a series of experiments in order to determine the actual temperature of the lit cigarette. Here are the results for the temperature at different locations and under different conditions:

Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)

Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)

Source



Those temperature readings apply to the part of the cigarette that is actually burning.

I think the problem might be that you can inhale the bacterial / fungal spores back from the part of the cigarrette that has not yet burnt.

I also note that bacterial spores can exhibit extreme resistance to means of destruction that would easily deactivate bacteria in a non-spore state.



posted on Dec, 20 2009 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam
reply to post by the_denv
 


Of course, I don't suppose reading the actual study in question occurred to you, huh?


Or the previous posts in this thread.

Really, this thread makes me laugh at how simpleton people on the whole seem when it comes to their sacred cows.


[edit on 19-12-2009 by loam]


What? That link that you provided with no source?
All it does it argue against the information I provided, only difference is, with my info I provided a link and my information is not based on a study in 1995, but more recent.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join