It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Smoking isn't bad for your health at all ?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in


posted on May, 3 2010 @ 08:11 PM
industrial grade tobacco is far from "real" tobacco, the additives alone cause you to get ill / sick, and the "high" you get is more related to asphyxiation then to a nicotine buzz,

and as with all things, moderation in doing "it" is a key element, but i guess that is now self explanatory and a general rule of life.

the hypocrisy in the "smoking is bad for you" group is that sure it might be bad for you but it sure wont make things easier/healthier when the product in it self is made "bad for you" and marketed as something it isnt.
its the equalient of aspartame vs sugar or leaded gasoline vs biodiesel or as some would say apples and oranges.

as for the indoor smoking bann, next time your sitting in a cafee,bar,restaurant in E.U remember that the law/bann was not passed for your needs/health issues as a consumer of a venue or service but for the workers and the enviroment they work in , so as you might have figured out its not about health but about control over what you may or may not do, i mean they didnt bann putting 1000 inscent stick on fire in the same venues but tobacco,

i for one would like to buy my ciggaret packs without the warning text , is that possible , do i even have a right to demand ?`

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 05:18 PM

Forgive me if someone covered this already (BTW - I personally don't smoke),

Smoking is good for you?

Why do governments want to ban smoking?

‘Political Ponerology’ by Andrew Lobaczewski, considers how wicked, power hungry people gradually take control over society. And he points out, that the last organised attempt to stifle smoking on the scale now under way in Europe and the United States was in pre-war Germany, under the Nazis. (P.156)

You see, what Nazi scientists discovered very soon into their research, was that carbon-monoxide, a central component of tobacco smoke, creates resistance to pathocratic influence: i.e. imbibers are more likely to question and less likely to blindly follow orders from psychopathic leadership (perhaps we could think of it as ‘attitude’, as symbolised by ’50s icons like James Dean and Marlon Brando). What is more, research also suggests ‘second-hand smoke’, as breathed by children of smokers, may in fact immunise them against the influence of psychopaths. Hardly useful, one would suggest, if the objective is filling heads with supremacist beliefs and obtaining undivided loyalty.

To Nazi leadership, with their early, unsophisticated attempts at propaganda, reducing peoples’ critical thinking and increasing their susceptibility to messages of hate and fear and identification were central to their objective. So while the government made supply of tobacco increasingly difficult, and smoking areas increasingly limited, the Nazi propaganda machine set about pushing the party line, vilifying and condemning “red-man’s weed” and persecuting those who would smoke it. It was a campaign begun in the mid 1930s and continued and intensified until they were finally overthrown. (The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis – )

Today, when one considers the enormous advances in psychological warfare, be it for product sales, national/religious/corporate identity or fear of the other, and the increasingly sophisticated delivery techniques, the need for smoking to be eradicated becomes blazingly obvious. What government or corporation (or religion) in their right mind, whose primary goals are submission and association, cannot see the benefit of losing a few million in taxes, pensions, operations… for the benefit of a compliant, malleable ready made workforce, and market. From such a perspective, considering our current political and corporate leadership, it is clear, smoking never stood a chance.

What a good job we have a free and independent news media to stand up for the citizen, expose authoritarian lies and ensure governments and corporations cannot cynically manipulate and frighten people into servicing their nefarious goals… oh, err… looks like we’re in big trouble. Better get puffing guys!

Comment by Alicia on September 24, 2008 - There are NO DIRECT LINKS connecting smoking TOBACCO to lung cancer and emphazema. In fact, native americans have been smoking tobacco, mind you NATURAL tobacco, no additives, no sugars, no yeast, and live past 100 years old with no health problems. It is the additives that all non natural cigarettes contain that directly cause cancers.

The following is from DO YOUR RESEARCH GUYS.

More evidence that smoking fights Parkinson – “A new study adds to the previously reported evidence that cigarette smoking protects against Parkinson’s disease. Specifically, the new research shows a temporal relationship between smoking and reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease. That is, the protective effect wanes after smokers quit.”

This large study shows yet another benefit of smoking. This time the benefit concerns restenosis, that is, the occlusion of coronary arteries. Smokers have much better chances to survive, heal and do well. Where is the press? Nowhere to be found, of course; we are talking about a significant positive about tobacco and smoking, which affects the health of people, don’t we? Well, come on! We are also talking about responsible media, here… people better increase their chances of death from cardiovascular disease then getting the idea that smoking may be good for them – a totally unacceptable paradox.

In the strange world that anti-tobacco has wrought, any research that deviates from the tobacco-is-the-root-of-all-evil template is noteworthy. Here is a study that shows that smokers are actually at lower risk from gum disease. In this page (scroll down) there is more scientific evidence from other sources about oral health and smoking. Honest scientists have always known that smoking has some benefit. From the apparent shielding effect against Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases to the more intangible benefits associated with well-being and tranquility, smoking tobacco in many ways is definitely good for your health.

posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 08:24 PM
Smoking is bad period. Prevent cancer? Nicotine can contribute to trigger cancer. This sounds like out of the 1915s.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 03:40 AM
reply to post by Cassius666


Please provide proof that nicotene CAUSES lung cancer. Not epidimiology, which merely shows correlation. But proof that nicotene CAUSES lung cancer.

Tired of Control Freaks

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 05:21 AM
I stopped smoking cigarettes 18 years ago but I do smoke hamlet size cigars socially (at the pub) I tried a cigarette a while ago and thought it was disgusting. I think the more natural leafed cigar without all those horrible chemicals is less harmful than a filtered cigarette. Now I have bought a rechargeable e cig and fill it up with cigar flavour liquid with a medium strength nicotine. I love it you don't smell can be smoked anywhere and no real health risk in moderation.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 05:35 AM
Absolute total bull#,or shall I dig my dad up who died some 20 years ago from smoking induced lung cancer and tell him to quit fooling around because we thought it was real

When ever this topic comes up,you always get the "my grandad has smoked 8,000,000 fags a day since he was 3 weeks old and lived to be over 7,000 years old" brigade.Something like 1 in 100,000 smokers don't show the symptoms of nicotine poisoning,the others die a painful lingering death that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 08:22 AM
reply to post by Imagewerx


and non-smokers don't die of lung cancer?

Fact - only 10 % of smokers ever get lung cancer. When you say X CAUSES Y, you would expect that Y would follow X in the vast majority of cases. 10 % is hardly the vast majority

Fact: There is a difference between the incidence of lung cancer that occurs in people who live in rural settings versus those who live in urban settings (are you saying that smoking is more toxic in the city than in the country)

Fact: Countries with much higher smoking rates in the population have much lower rates of cancer (Greece and Japan)

Fact: The rate of smoking in the american population began decreasing 37 years ago - there has been NO corresponding decrease in lung cancer. Lung cancer has decreased but only slightly and nowhere near the incident rate that was present when cigarettes were invented.

Tired of Control Freaks

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 08:56 AM
If a panel of leading Doctors had came up with the theory it may be more plausible, but one doctor against millions of others is not cutting it for me.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 09:56 AM
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

Every male in my family has lived into their 90s (a couple went to over 100) and died of natural causes apart from my dad who died in his early 60s,and if what we know of our family is correct,my dad was the only one who smoked.
In his early 50s he was diagnosed with angina amongst other things and was told by more than one doctor that he HAD to give up smoking completely,needless to say he thought he knew better than the doctors and refused to.When he was about 60 and still smoking he was given a couple of years to live,sadly the doctors were right again.
I'm now at the age where my dad was first diagnosed with this condition and after a recent medical examination,I'm happy to report that I'm as healthy as can be expected for a non smoker of my age and will be around for a good few years yet.

edit on 26-2-2012 by Imagewerx because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 11:25 AM
reply to post by Imagewerx


And your story is proof of what???? Putting smoking aside - was your life lived in exactly the same way that he lived his? Did you work at the same jobs? Were you exposed to the same pollution? Did you suffer the exact same stress? Did you eat the same foods? Take the same medicines? Did you exercise the same way? There are hundreds of known causes of heart disease. Did you have the very same risks?????

To all those who say - my parents, grandparents died of -----???? and they smoked. I say - find me just one disease that is suffered solely by smokers and no one else.

I also say - who are you to decide what makes a person's life worth living. Is that what we were born for? To compete in a race to see who can deliver the best-preserved corpse to the undertaker? To extend longevity to the point where all your friends have died, your family doesn't visit, and the highlight of your day is to see if you can avoid drooling in your diapers.

Who are you to judge the lives of others? Everyone has to have some pleasure in life. And what that pleasure will be is up to the individual. I for one, refuse to live my life as a grim march, seeking to implement the latest health advice?

Get up at a certain hour, sleep X amount of hours, avoid this food, eat more of that food, don't drink, don't smoke, avoid the sun, avoid sex except with a committed partner, eat only X calories per day, eat butter (no, wait make that margarine), no bacon, no preserved meats, take vitamins (no wait, don't take vitamins), jog (no wait, don't jog, lift wieghts, do cardio) for X amount of minutes per day, avoid sunshine, wear sunscreen (wait, no, everybody is short on Vitamin D - get X minutes of sunshine per day), eat organic, avoid GMO, (wait, doesn't matter the soil is exhausted anyway), eat olive oil (wait its contaminated), avoid air pollution, wash your hands (wait, the world is too clean)

You may live longer than your father - just don't be so sure that you have lived better than your father!

Remember - baby boomers were the generation most exposed to cigarette smoke. Our parents smoked (men 75 % and woman 35 %), in cars, in the house, while breast feeding us. We are the longest lived, healthiest generation that the world has ever known. We didn't have asthma (increase of 800 % in the incidence of childhood asthma in lock step with the decrease of smoking since the 1960s) or life-threatening allergies (also increased in lock step with the decrease of smoking since the 1960s.

Tired of Control Freaks

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 12:02 PM
reply to post by Imagewerx

I am constantly amazed at the number of people who think smoking is an evil to be avoided at all costs. That is causes death! Death by lung cancer, death by heart disease and death by copd. And apparantly, every smoker dies in agony while every never-smoker is sung quietly into their graves by a choir of angels.

Listen up - even according to the most biased studies every concocted on the face of the earth, smokers live to the average age of 72 years old.

Imagine that you just had a baby. Imagine that someone told you that the baby would grow up, graduate high school, maybe go to university, get married, have children, raise those children to adult, see their grandchildren, retire from their chosen professions and then die at the age of 72.

Would you immediately call a psychiatrist to help you deal with your grief or would you simply nod and say "yeah, my son or daughter is going to have a good long life"?

Tired of Control Freaks

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 12:58 PM
Oh I've been waiting on this one here thanks OP, I was just talking to my aunt about it too. So to those the remember the thread about the Scout Snipers who stood in front of an SS flag. While the Nazis where feverishly against anti-smoking. The Nazis where the ones who started it all. So anti-smokers when someone calls you a anti-smoking Nazi just remember it isn't to far form the truth

OT: Okay for reals? I thinking smoking is bad for you. Its also smelly so I've been told. I do think its been way overblown. I think smoking is a personal choice, and smokers need to respect non-smokers and vice-versa. Were all human beings here and yada yada. So thats my opinion on it, I don't think smoking is healthy. I know I've heard nicotine itself is a pretty amazing drug that scientist would like to study more if it weren't so taboo.

Off topic anecdote skip if you like: For those who don't smoke or don't have a addiction, Its impossible to explain an addiction to you, or for you to even understand it till you go through withdraw. Being an addict myself, with a family history of addiction, oral fixation, and raised by a family of smokers. I didn't have a chance. I went two days one time. During that time it felt like my skin was crawling the whole time, my mind just blanked and I couldn't focus on anything. I got jitter and you just feel pain. Its so easy to get too, just a walk down to the gas station.

Its funny too, I was an anti-smoking nazi all the way up till 16, always in my parents ears telling them you'll get cancer and how they were killing me also. Coughing loudly to annoy them. I was at a youth group that a friend dragged me along too, 17 at the time just a few months shy of being 18.

Someone handed me a smoke, I know it wasn't peer pressure I could have passed it along and they would have been fine with that. Maybe I was trying to prove a point? Or just my mind was looking to get a fix of something. The seconded I tried it I was hooked, it wasn't the nicotine itself. That made me sick the first time. It was act of smoking, it felt like it was something that was missing in my life the whole time.

edit on 2/26/2012 by Mcupobob because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 01:23 PM
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

Soz bud..I call bull on the article. I smoked for twenty years and my chest hurt bad. I had leukoplakia on my lips. I stopped my lips cleared up. My lungs felt better and I had more energy to do stuff...

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 01:36 PM
I smoked for 11 years, since I was 14. Started chain smoking the last 2 years and could never not smoke 6 or 7 in a row (while reading this website) before going to bed. Coughing up nasty things and smelling horrible got pretty old fast. I'm still addicted to nicotine though, ecigs. Can taste stuff, smell and feel better.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:14 PM
This is silly.

Just look around.

You can spot people that have been smoking for 20 years plus just by looking at their face, or looking at the bulging veins in their necks and arms.

They don't age too well.

And people who say my gran smoked till she was 98

Yep for every one of them there are 100,000 people that didn't live that long.

I know people that have smoked for 30 years and have had a lung removed.

When I was in school we had a nurse.

She smoked for 25 years while she was working in hospital, right up until the point she saw an operation on a smokers lung.

She stopped that day.

I used to work in a tv factory and we had tvs come in from houses for repair.

Open the back and you can spot the ones that come from a smokers house.

The insides of the tv are clogged up with the worse gunk ever.

That's the # that's in your lungs.

I smoked for about 10 years and I still regret it.

And to the person that says I roll my own, the reason it looks brown like that is due to the tobacco company dying the tobacco to make it look better.

That's a fact.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 02:57 PM
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

I have no proof of anything,but I choose to believe that if he'd given up smoking when he was originally diagnosed he'd stand much more chance of being alive today.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 03:05 PM
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

Smoking isn't bad for your health at all ?

I've been a smoker for roughly 40 years now. Over that time, I've quit on a few occasions but then came back to it.

My testimony would be that cigarettes are very enjoyable at times and that I don't smoke for habit as much as that enjoyment. But I do also understand the risks... and the dangers. I can tell you first hand the degradation breathing abilities that come from it.

No, in my opinion and experience, it is a horribly unhealthy and downright nasty pastime... and someday, if I live long enough, I will smoke my last cigarette well before I die.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 04:15 PM
reply to post by Imagewerx


Anti-smoking isn't a religion...beliefs have nothing to do with this!

Listen - if you don't like smoking, then DON'T smoke!

But at the end of the day - you have no right or reason to harass me, tell me I stink, tell me I am disgusting or any of the 101 things that are said about smokers daily.

Further you have no right to impose your "beliefs" on the private property of other people (that is right, restaurants and bars are PRIVATE property) nor the right to impede me from enjoying public property like beaches and parks (don't like the smoke - move away a few feet!)

Tired of Control Freaks.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 04:43 PM
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

I had a nice polite reply written to all the points you raised,but read it back and decided that as you twist everything I say around to make it look as if I'm arguing with you( I'm not),I have nothing more to add to this topic.

posted on Feb, 26 2012 @ 04:54 PM
reply to post by Imagewerx

Sorry if you feel like I am argueing with you. Try to look at it from my point of view. Smokers are attacked on all sides and it really is a civil liberties issue.

Compare the smoking issue today to reefer madness of the 1960s.

How many young people did we send to jail? How many others have been killed? All because the government and the medical community convinced us that smoking marijuana was dangerous and turned people into remorseless killing machines. How many civil rights have we given up in order to protect our children from a non-existant risk (if not non-existant, certainly not the monster we were told it was).

anti-smoking is the same today as reefer madness in the 1960s. Whatever you think you know about smoking - you really really don't know at all.

Tired of Control Freaks

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in