U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:02 AM
 
2,222 posts, read 9,149,748 times
Reputation: 3225

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gimme3steps View Post
Someone actually does 'get it'.^^

 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,274 posts, read 49,833,895 times
Reputation: 67131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
The first sentence above is a fact. No argument. But the conclusion in the second sentence does not follow from the first. As fewer and fewer people smoke, then the number of deaths caused by smoking gradually declines. And as more and more people become obese, then the number of deaths caused by obesity gradually rises. This does not prove anything about donuts versus cigs as far as how dangerous each is to our health. It just proves how many people are partaking of each danger.
While the number of habitual smokers has decreased, the number of light smokers has actually increased.

No smoking is good smoking; however, when you weigh 3 cigs vs 3 donuts, the conclusion is hard to debate.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:07 AM
 
Location: Las Flores, Orange County, CA
26,346 posts, read 80,819,690 times
Reputation: 17413
comments in red

Quote:
Originally Posted by Escort Rider View Post
As fewer and fewer people smoke, then the number of deaths caused by smoking gradually declines.

True but irrelevant.

as more and more people become obese, then the number of deaths caused by obesity gradually rises.

True but irrelevant.

This [these statements above] does not prove anything about donuts versus cigs as far as how dangerous each is to our health. It just proves how many people are partaking of each danger.

True, so why did you write it?
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:10 AM
 
Location: First Hill, Seattle
5,476 posts, read 5,788,461 times
Reputation: 7191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
That's what I think. I'm amazed at the intense stance people have taken in this thread which has them convinced otherwise. My guess is they just didn't read the question. They automatically assume cigarette - no matter the quantity ingested is worse than anything else - no matter the quantity ingested.

Glad you posted to validate this.
Exactly. To be fair, OP was less than clear regarding her premises because not all donuts (and I suppose cigarettes, but less so) are created equal. My grandpa has smoked exactly 1 marlboro red every day for about the past 40 years. He rips off the filter before he smokes it. He is 76 years old and doctor says he is in perfect health. He chops wood and gardens on a regular basis. I would put money on the argument that if he had eaten one chocolate coconut cake donut from Dunkin Donuts every day for the last 40 years, in addition to what he was already eating, he'd have been six feet under years ago.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Las Flores, Orange County, CA
26,346 posts, read 80,819,690 times
Reputation: 17413
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
when you weigh 3 cigs vs 3 donuts, the conclusion is hard to debate.

Exactly.

I don't people are analyzing this. Think about it. Eating 1000 or 1100 extra (not balanced by extra exercise) calories with 117 grams of fat every day versus three cigarettes every day. After a couple weeks you will gain several pounds and the effects on your cholesterol would be measurable.

Three cigarettes (not a pack, just three) isn't great but it is only three. The damage done to your body in most cases is negligible compared to the damage done by the donuts, regardless of what happened to your Uncle Bob who smoked two packs a day but never ate donuts.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Las Flores, Orange County, CA
26,346 posts, read 80,819,690 times
Reputation: 17413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefoxwarrior View Post
Exactly. To be fair, OP was less than clear regarding her premises because not all donuts (and I suppose cigarettes, but less so) are created equal. My grandpa has smoked exactly 1 marlboro red every day for about the past 40 years. He rips off the filter before he smokes it. He is 76 years old and doctor says he is in perfect health. He chops wood and gardens on a regular basis. I would put money on the argument that if he had eaten one chocolate coconut cake donut from Dunkin Donuts every day for the last 40 years, in addition to what he was already eating, he'd have been six feet under years ago.
The original poster did assume that the three donuts had 1000 calories. She wrote that in her post(s). Not sure what wasn't clear.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Buxton, England
7,032 posts, read 8,388,363 times
Reputation: 3529
Too much of anything is dangerous. But cigarettes are inherently/intrinsically dangerous whereas donuts are not.

You would not compare an entire donut with one cigarette. The comparison "one cigarette vs one donut" is not a fair comparison with regards to hwo much is entering your body anyway. If you were to compare the amount of particles going into your body, a few crumbs of a donut would be equivalent to the amount of particles entering your body from a cigarette. So, not as dangerous.

I'm a person with a good metabolism who used to eat many donuts every day, never gained weight, never had high cholesterol and always had low blood pressure. Still do. But, if I had smoked even as many cigs a day as I ate donuts (3-4) I know there would be irrepairable damage to my lungs. Not clever, really is it.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:19 AM
 
Location: Las Flores, Orange County, CA
26,346 posts, read 80,819,690 times
Reputation: 17413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weatherfan2 View Post
Too much of anything is dangerous. But cigarettes are inherently/intrinsically dangerous whereas donuts are not.

You would not compare an entire donut with one cigarette. If you were to compare the amount of particles going into your body, a few crumbs of a donut would be equivalent to the amount of particles entering your body from a cigarette. So, not as dangerous.
They sure are. Excess calories, saturated fat. I think what you might be thinking is there isn't much of a way to compensate for the dangers of cigarettes but at least a person can do extra exercise to burn off the calories.

But again, this is unrelated to the original post which assumes everything else is equal.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:19 AM
 
Location: First Hill, Seattle
5,476 posts, read 5,788,461 times
Reputation: 7191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles View Post
The original poster did assume that the three donuts had 1000 calories. She wrote that in her post(s). Not sure what wasn't clear.
The vague part was that she assumed 3 donuts equaled 1000 calories, so some posters used 3 donuts as a premise (which could be anywhere from 570 calories to 1600 calories) while others used 1000 calories of donuts as a premise. That results in a wide variation of fat, saturated fat, and sugar, which could lead people to come to different conclusions. I don't think it matters on any measurement myself. The donuts are worse. But the strength of the argument varies based on how bad the donut is.
 
Old 01-31-2011, 09:21 AM
 
Location: Texas
42,274 posts, read 49,833,895 times
Reputation: 67131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weatherfan2 View Post
Too much of anything is dangerous. But cigarettes are inherently/intrinsically dangerous whereas donuts are not.

You would not compare an entire donut with one cigarette. The comparison "one cigarette vs one donut" is not a fair comparison with regards to hwo much is entering your body anyway. If you were to compare the amount of particles going into your body, a few crumbs of a donut would be equivalent to the amount of particles entering your body from a cigarette. So, not as dangerous.

I'm a person with a good metabolism who used to eat many donuts every day, never gained weight, never had high cholesterol and always had low blood pressure. But, if I had smoked even as many cigs a day as I ate donuts (3-4) I know there would be irreparable damage to my lungs. Not clever, really is it.
Nope. This is where I think people don't understand. The highlighted statement is just completely wrong.

No donut is a good donut. When you smoke a cig, all sorts of things start happening in your body. Same thing when you eat something as vile as a donut, insulin spikes, metabolic redistribution, etc.

Both are reversible. The key is not to do too much of either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top