You. Your Cigarettes. Radiation Worse Than Chernobyl. What Corporation’s DON’T want you to know.

reply to post by GypsK


Hey, I'm in Belgium too and we can still consider ourselfs pretty lucky compared to certain places in the US where there is almost no bar left you can smoke anymore.
In Chicago I had to walk several feet away from a restaurant.
In San Francisco I had to go for a long walk, out of the complete appartment complex where you were NOT aloud to smoke even outside.
That's ok....I respect that but the general feeling I get is that some people look at you as you are junk and would like to erase you from earth.


But as usual, Europe will follow the US. I don't know if you have seen the documentary on ARTE one of the last "independant" TV channels that tried not to judge whether cigarettes are good or bad for your health but just related and reminded how Propaganda indeed works on your minds.

One of the first ones to start an ANTI- SMOKING campaign were the NAZIS...and we all know what they ended up doing.

Someone here called us smokers to be "sheep". Well, I don't know I feel more like a resistant to all this mind-blogging propaganda.

What kind of helpless idiots here think radiation and smoking is healthy and get 10's of stars for their BS posted?AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DENY IGRNORANCE? HAHAHAHA!

reply to post by ziggy1706


Hey Ziggy,

First of all I'm very sorry to what happened to your parents. But let me tell you something: Many people managed to quit smoking. So if you really think that the cigarette is your worst enemy than there are ways to quit.

I really believe that the bad energy you get from accusing the world for what is happening to you is going to cause you more harm then if you'd take charge for yourself....

Have you ever noticed how if you are in a fight with someone, trying to make your point, or arguing in any way causes stress and it makes you feel tired, angry, aggressive or depressed and you can get a headache from it ?

On the other side achieving something makes you feel proud, boosts your ego and you feel so much better about yourself.

It's a little like being with the wrong partner....if you feel addicted but think the other causes you all the harm that you are going through it might be difficult to quit (cause you need to be honest with yourself - addiction also means there are things you like about what the "other" does to you) but if the harm exceeds the pleasure....

Quit.

And anyone can do it....you can do it.......it's not easy but there are a lot of organisations, groups and so fort that are helping.

Originally posted by wildtimes

What really irritates me is the arrogance of non-smokers, especially former smokers. In my experience, smokers are general happier, more friendly, and more laid back about their lives. They (we) are becoming a tightly knit minority, with our "bad behavior" as the glue that holds us together; it transcends race, age, occupation, gender, orientation, all of it.

smokers are happier and more accepting of the world than non-smokers.
...................................................................................................................................................... ...........

I love your post as that seems very true to me for a majority of cases ! I just hope for myself that if I should ever decide to quit smoking I will not become a "smokers'hater".

radioactive cigerettes? o'well.

with the nuclear power plant in meltdown in japan, does that mean that non smokers are basically breathing in/or may well be breathing in sometime in the future, what would amount to second hand smoke?

Originally posted by cushycrux
What kind of helpless idiots here think radiation and smoking is healthy and get 10's of stars for their BS posted?AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DENY IGRNORANCE? HAHAHAHA!

Look, I dont know what your problem is, but I am smoking since fifty years now, and I enjoyd it all those fifty years and I have no health problem from it whatsoever, nor do I have any other problems from it. So why are you trying to give me one? Cant you just go thru your life without smoking and let me be? Do I run around calling you and idiot or an ignorant fool because you live your life the way you wish to live it? The world is filled with fascists. Do we realy need Anti-Smoker ones?

And, by the way, my Belgium friend, in Germany we already have smoking prohibition in all bars and restaurants. The fascists have already won. And while they fearfully run from "secondary tobaco smoke", they joyfully inhale a mouthfull of ceasium 137. May they glow in the dark!

I lived in Amsterdam for a while, where they have coffee Shops in which people can buy and consume Cannabis products. Since the tobaco prohibition, the people are being forced to smoke their Cannabis PURE, because it is forbidden to smoke tobaco inside the coffee Shop. What do you think of that lunacy? Whereever the state forces people to do something that they would want to do different or not at all, you will get problems. This lunacy is one of them...

Originally posted by cushycrux
What kind of helpless idiots here think radiation and smoking is healthy and get 10's of stars for their BS posted?AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DENY IGRNORANCE? HAHAHAHA!

which post stated that smoking and radiation is healthy?

the talking here is that the human body might adapt in a certain way

have you ever heard that the Sun is actually good for you and the creams they sell to you to put on yourself and family actually do the harm?

deny ignorance?..start with reading other's posts first before answering..thats pure ignorance

Originally posted by heineken

Originally posted by cushycrux
What kind of helpless idiots here think radiation and smoking is healthy and get 10's of stars for their BS posted?AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT DENY IGRNORANCE? HAHAHAHA!

which post stated that smoking and radiation is healthy?

the talking here is that the human body might adapt in a certain way

have you ever heard that the Sun is actually good for you and the creams they sell to you to put on yourself and family actually do the harm?

deny ignorance?..start with reading other's posts first before answering..thats pure ignorance

edit on 4-4-2011 by heineken because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Caji316
I should have told my uncle this. He died at age 96 after smoking 2 packs of either Camel, Chesterfield, or Pall Mall every day since he was 14 yrs. old living on the family's tobacco farm....I guess what the paid media says is true after all...Radiation will not hurt you......Be Happy, Don't Worry....

Originally posted by gatewaywithin
I have been smoking 2 packs a day for the last 23 years. I look 10 years younger than my current age and rarely ever get sick.Perhaps Ann Coulter was right.

Originally posted by jonnywhite

Originally posted by bismarcksea

Originally posted by wiredamerican

There is a conspiracy that the radiation in cigarette smoke is actually beneficial to the human body and prevents many diseases that non smokers get normally .

Government health organizations say smoking is bad because the big business owners and think-tanks figured out that smokers need far less health care than non smokers.

I think there is something to this. My wife (a non smoker) has said many times that NONE of the smokers she knows get sick while all the non-smokers take turns passing the plague.

I smoke from 1/2 to a pack a day and had the flue....10 years ago. Not so much as a sniffle in the time passing.

I wonder if there have been any studies done to see if smoking limits the growth or spread of viruses and/or bacteria in the respiratory pathways? Seems possible.

I'm against smoking, but there's always gray in this world. That's why I'm not anti-smoking. Anytime you take sides no matter what the issue is you cloud your mind. I'm open to smoking being good sometimes and possibly even good for some people. Never know for sure.

If you're not smoking now, please don't. I don't go out in hte world telling people not to smoke. I just stick to facts and keep an open mind. Smoking tobacco is the most addictive thing you can do, even more so than crack coc aine. That's why the tobacco companies sell it: it makes them profit. This knowledge has made me mindful of predatory business practices. All of us on this planet exploit something. Sometimes we exploit too much. We need a government to keep an eye on things. But if the government stops serving us and starts to serve itself then it's no longer of the people and then it becomes a problem. That's off-topic, of course. I was just saying, in a roundabout way, that my knowledge about tobacco has led me to learn about other things.

edit on 3-4-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

As opposed to you I read the whole stupid thread. But thanks for calling me ignorant, because I'm not stupid. I am smoker, okey? But this makes me not that idiotic to say it's healthy what I do. SO WHO IS IGNORANT HERE?

Instead of ridiculing what people say, you might consider if there `could be some truth in what they are saying, instead of throwing it aside right away, just because it doesnt fit your programed world view. Tell me, do your bones cover your skin already, or aint it that bad yet?

Radiation and smoking aside, did you know that it is common knowledge between people who regularely use heroin without ever lacking any, and between doctors and scientists who have to do with those people, that the regular use of heroin makes them apear younger then they actually are? Now thats a bummer, isnt it? Can you digest that one without leaving life?

Crushycrux

The problem here is one of communication and language.

You are using the word "healthy" and saying that it is ignorant to say that smoking is "healthy"

Now please define what the word healthy means to you!

Smoking alleviates depression. So do anti-depressants. Both have side-effects that ultimately may cause diseases and death. Are you saying that a person who chooses to smoke to alleviate depression is unhealthy but a person who chooses to take anti-depressants is healthy?

Isn't that really just an opinion and a repetition of the propaganda that there is nothing good about smoking?

For eons, mankind burned organic material (wood, coal, # and whatever else was available) to cook their foods and heat their homes. As a result, the respiratory systems of mankind evolved in the presence of smoke. Our respiratory systems are particularly well developed to deal with smoke.

Now the smoke is gone. Since the 1960s, the population has demanded ever more "smoke-less" environments. Yet the incidence of asthma as increased by 800 % in the last 50 years.

Asthma is a life-long crippling diseases characterized by an airway that is hyper-sensitive to air-borne pollutants such as pollen, fungi, molds etc.

Would you say that we, as a population, are "healthier" for having created these smoke-free spaces and changing what has been a constant for eons.

Anti-smokers tell us that if smoking was eradicated, then so would lung cancer be virtually eradicated. This hasn't happened yet even though the prevalence of smoking in the general population has been decreasing for over 40 years now but....any day now right?

Are we trading the decrease of incidence of lung cancer in our old for the increase of asthma in our young? Is that what you mean by healthier?

What exactly do you mean by "healthy"?

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Crushycrux

The problem here is one of communication and language.

You are using the word "healthy" and saying that it is ignorant to say that smoking is "healthy"

Now please define what the word healthy means to you!

Smoking alleviates depression. So do anti-depressants. Both have side-effects that ultimately may cause diseases and death. Are you saying that a person who chooses to smoke to alleviate depression is unhealthy but a person who chooses to take anti-depressants is healthy?

Isn't that really just an opinion and a repetition of the propaganda that there is nothing good about smoking?

For eons, mankind burned organic material (wood, coal, # and whatever else was available) to cook their foods and heat their homes. As a result, the respiratory systems of mankind evolved in the presence of smoke. Our respiratory systems are particularly well developed to deal with smoke.

Now the smoke is gone. Since the 1960s, the population has demanded ever more "smoke-less" environments. Yet the incidence of asthma as increased by 800 % in the last 50 years.

Asthma is a life-long crippling diseases characterized by an airway that is hyper-sensitive to air-borne pollutants such as pollen, fungi, molds etc.

Would you say that we, as a population, are "healthier" for having created these smoke-free spaces and changing what has been a constant for eons.

Anti-smokers tell us that if smoking was eradicated, then so would lung cancer be virtually eradicated. This hasn't happened yet even though the prevalence of smoking in the general population has been decreasing for over 40 years now but....any day now right?

Are we trading the decrease of incidence of lung cancer in our old for the increase of asthma in our young? Is that what you mean by healthier?

What exactly do you mean by "healthy"?

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

Healthy means heathly as I wrote it. A Cigarette has about 600 very poisonous substances in it. One guy worte he looks 10 years younger because of smoking, maybe he would look 20 years younger without smoking.

My problem are people who defend their own stupidity because of lack of the ability to be self critical. It's the same with 1000 other things. And this is, what I call Ignorance, sorry. They know exactly what they are doing, this is why the pro smoke defenders here get stars like wild. Pure logic. Thanks you get my posts serious.

My problem are people who defend their own stupidity because of lack of the ability to be self critical. It's the same with 1000 other things. And this is, what I call Ignorance, sorry. They know exactly what they are doing, this is why the pro smoke defenders here get stars like wild. Pure logic.

The pro-smoke defenders are getting stars like wild most probably from other smokers...
that is odd... considering that smokers are a minority that becomes smaller each year...
Does that mean that non-smokers aren't staring threads at all? not even the anti-smoke posts? Hmmm...

Speaking of a minority, you are a smoker, you know you belong to this minority. How often are you targeted because you smoke? How often are you targetted by the media, advertising and non smokers?
A couple of years ago, when smoking wasn't banned in most places yet... not many people would give you strange looks if you lighted a sigarette. And then the media got involved and now all of a sudden we are "social paria's"? We are not the ones acting different then before.
You must have seen the looks on bypassers when your standing outside a restaurant in the rain with a soaked sigarette between your fingers and I bet it didn't make you feel wonderful....

that's why all the pro-smoke posts get the stars, nothing to do with health.

reply to post by scaredlady


Awesome link, scaredlady. And thanks for reading all the way through my post. I'm a bit verbose...for everyone else, I'm including some of the text from the link she posted...

For centuries everyone has known smoking isn’t a healthy habit… but for many an enjoyable and relaxing habit. While it wouldn't be advisable for anyone to pick up the habit because of the cancer risk, it is only a risk... although a greater risk for some than others. Without taking some risks however, life wouldn't be worth living... just ask a skydiver, bull rider or mountain climber. Further, in the opinion of many lifelong smokers, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to quit… going to die from something anyway. Death would more likely occur from a dependence on pharmaceuticals... of benefits entirely over-sold.

Of course, do-gooders who wouldn't know cool from a jackhammer would never tell you that smokers are less likely to develop sepsis which accounts for 9.3% of the deaths in the U.S. annually. See sciencentral.com and nature.com

So, if not to die of lung cancer, can the states guarantee we will die from something less horrid? In light of these tobacco controls, it seems a guarantee should come with the territory. Well, that was just a rhetorical question because tobacco taxes have nothing to do with the government's wish to prolong life... it's all about generating revenue for the state coffers. Thanks to smokers now, general services for non-smokers won't cost so much. While smoking can cause cancer in some people, or otherwise reduce a smoker’s lifespan a few years, there is a myriad of other potentially deadly hazards... most of which are legal. Automobile accidents kill about 50,000 people a year but no one dare say it's better than dying from lung cancer. Nor can one say being burned alive would be better either. One might, of course, be electrocuted... entirely legal.

And to save you the effort of going back to her post, here's the link again, compliments of Scared Lady.
www.matrixbookstore.biz...

And to JR: wow, a little hostile there? Chill, dude. It's only a conversation!

I don't accept your reply Cushycrux.

The same carcinogenic and disease causing organisms are in our food, by your definition, we would all be healthier if we stopped eating real food and just bought our needed nutrition in sanitized pill form.

Words have specific meanings. Meanings that can be twisted and used for propaganda purposes. The UN has a specific meaning for healthy that includes even the thoughts in our head!

To me - healthy means that you can participate fully in the business of life. You can get up in the morning, go to work, work a full day, come home and interact with your loved ones and even enjoy the occasional evening out and participating in activities you enjoy (dancing/sports).

By my definition, even though I am a diabetic, I control my diet, exercise and medication in such way that my blood sugars are well controlled. As a result, I hold a full-time job, maintain a household, go to the gym three times a week, have nights out, go camping with my family and play games with the kids. I am living a healthy life, even though I have a disease. Even though I smoke.

By the UN definition - I am unhealthy and must be hounded to death until I give up all my "bad" habits. I can't smoke, drink or weigh over a certain amount. I must take pharmaceutical products until all traces of unhealthy are removed from my person.

You see Cushycrux - Disease is no longer the interest of the pharmaceutical companies. Health is their business. And they will make medicalized every phase of your life and have a drug for it. Puberty? We have drug for that! Menopause - we have a drug for that! A little sad today? - we have drug for that! A little up today? - we have a drug for that! Feeling irritated today, can't concentrate, legs a little twitchy - we have drugs for that too!

Life used to be comprised of good times, bad times, annoyances, irritations etc. As a population - we coped! Boyfriend dumped you? - eat some chocolate, ice cream and cry with your girlfriends - then go find another one. Can't concentrate - have a smoke and get back to work. Need to relax - have a drink and get a good night's sleep.

But now Big Pharma is in competition with Big Tobacco, Big Food and Big Alcohol and by Big Pharma's definition - we all need to take drugs marketed solely by them.

Smoking has benefits and it has its risks. So does everything else! It used to be sole choice of the individual, now its up to society to judge how we deal with life??? Is that your definition of healthy?

The original poster of this thread tried to compare the Polonium-210 in smoke with the ionizing radiation of Chernobyl in an effort to scare smokers. Without any explanation that everyone on this planet, eats, breaths and lives with Polonium-210 from sources other than tobacco. That is fear-mongering. That is propaganda. That is not "healthy"

We seem to forget Cushycrux - that we are generally very healthy people who only occasionally get sick. And that includes smokers!
TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

reply to post by pazcat


LOL. You just made me wet my pants, I cried from laughter. I salute you

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
I don't accept your reply Cushycrux.

The same carcinogenic and disease causing organisms are in our food, by your definition, we would all be healthier if we stopped eating real food and just bought our needed nutrition in sanitized pill form.

Words have specific meanings. Meanings that can be twisted and used for propaganda purposes. The UN has a specific meaning for healthy that includes even the thoughts in our head!

To me - healthy means that you can participate fully in the business of life. You can get up in the morning, go to work, work a full day, come home and interact with your loved ones and even enjoy the occasional evening out and participating in activities you enjoy (dancing/sports).

By my definition, even though I am a diabetic, I control my diet, exercise and medication in such way that my blood sugars are well controlled. As a result, I hold a full-time job, maintain a household, go to the gym three times a week, have nights out, go camping with my family and play games with the kids. I am living a healthy life, even though I have a disease. Even though I smoke.

By the UN definition - I am unhealthy and must be hounded to death until I give up all my "bad" habits. I can't smoke, drink or weigh over a certain amount. I must take pharmaceutical products until all traces of unhealthy are removed from my person.

You see Cushycrux - Disease is no longer the interest of the pharmaceutical companies. Health is their business. And they will make medicalized every phase of your life and have a drug for it. Puberty? We have drug for that! Menopause - we have a drug for that! A little sad today? - we have drug for that! A little up today? - we have a drug for that! Feeling irritated today, can't concentrate, legs a little twitchy - we have drugs for that too!

Life used to be comprised of good times, bad times, annoyances, irritations etc. As a population - we coped! Boyfriend dumped you? - eat some chocolate, ice cream and cry with your girlfriends - then go find another one. Can't concentrate - have a smoke and get back to work. Need to relax - have a drink and get a good night's sleep.

But now Big Pharma is in competition with Big Tobacco, Big Food and Big Alcohol and by Big Pharma's definition - we all need to take drugs marketed solely by them.

Smoking has benefits and it has its risks. So does everything else! It used to be sole choice of the individual, now its up to society to judge how we deal with life??? Is that your definition of healthy?

The original poster of this thread tried to compare the Polonium-210 in smoke with the ionizing radiation of Chernobyl in an effort to scare smokers. Without any explanation that everyone on this planet, eats, breaths and lives with Polonium-210 from sources other than tobacco. That is fear-mongering. That is propaganda. That is not "healthy"

We seem to forget Cushycrux - that we are generally very healthy people who only occasionally get sick. And that includes smokers!
TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

¨

It's not necessary you accept my answer. LOL

But it is necessary that you at least know what you are talking about? Go on - think about it! What does the word "healthy" mean to you?

You have called people "ignorant" for saying that smoking may be healthy - now you need to take responsibility for your statement. Explain yourself...does the word "healthy" mean that you live and act the way you are told to by Big Pharma? That you get your drugs from the "right" source?

Are you sure that it isn't "healthy" to adapt your body to your surroundings instead of trying to insulate yourself from carcinogens that are ubiquitous to the environment. Isn't that the very meaning of the word "healthy" that your body can protect itself even from things that might harm you? That your body is strong enough to withstand assault by carcinogens, bacteria, viruses etc.

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

reply to post by odd1out


Hey, odd1out - Wildtimes here....

um, you posted this bit as though I wrote it....what you quoted was JRCrowley responding to ME...

I agree with you totally, and THANKS to everyone for pointing out that....well, JR kinda made my case!

Cheers!!

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
But it is necessary that you at least know what you are talking about? Go on - think about it! What does the word "healthy" mean to you?

You have called people "ignorant" for saying that smoking may be healthy - now you need to take responsibility for your statement. Explain yourself...does the word "healthy" mean that you live and act the way you are told to by Big Pharma? That you get your drugs from the "right" source?

Are you sure that it isn't "healthy" to adapt your body to your surroundings instead of trying to insulate yourself from carcinogens that are ubiquitous to the environment. Isn't that the very meaning of the word "healthy" that your body can protect itself even from things that might harm you? That your body is strong enough to withstand assault by carcinogens, bacteria, viruses etc.

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

Souce: captionx.com...

One thing is believe, one thing is facts. Believe what you want or know what is given. I have a very short answer for you, and it's my last post (call me ignorant). CA

SIMPLE LOGIC LIKE 1+1

reply to post by cushycrux


Cushycrux

LOL - the truth of the matter here is that you responded calling people "ignorant" who have at least put some thought into what is going on in the world and when challenged, you simply could not defend yourself.

The fact that you had so many posters on hand to show the old advertisements from the tobacco companies tells me that you are a professional or volunteer anti-smoker yourself and are on this site to post dis-information.

If you really want to see lies in advertising - try reading the anti-smoking websites sometimes.

I love the one where smokers supposedly accumulate so much tar in their lungs that their lungs are black and goopy - but still acceptable for transplant!

I love the one where smokers are supposedly responsible for asthma, emphesema etc. but notice how all of these diseases have increased as the smoking rate decreased.

You never did respond to the post I put up showing the there is less lung cancer in the countries where there is the most smokers.

We all are supposed to swallow whole that smoking causes cervical and naso-pharangeal cancers - until someone discovered it was really HPV.

I will accept that you yield the field to those who know more about the subject then you do!

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS