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.
Because there may have been some other factor that caused those people to die--you can't simply attribute to smoking if it is not universal.
If I sever the jugular vein of a person, and they bleed out and die, every single time, we could say that severing the jugular vein causes death. Otherwise, it must be some other cause.
The only truth is--thus far--every person eventually dies, no matter what they do or don't do.
you must understand the absolute absurdity of what you are saying.
expanding on your absurd example, you are really saying that if you take 99 people who die from bleeding out from a severed jugular vein, just because one person out of 100 doesn't die from it, then that wasn't the cause of death in the other 99?
seriously, you are beyond help. and certainly beyond the point of having any kind of reasoned debate. i would feel sorry for you, but you are stuck in an intractable way of thinking entirely of your own making and volition.
Because there may have been some other factor that caused those people to die--you can't simply attribute to smoking if it is not universal.
If I sever the jugular vein of a person, and they bleed out and die, every single time, we could say that severing the jugular vein causes death. Otherwise, it must be some other cause.
The only truth is--thus far--every person eventually dies, no matter what they do or don't do.
As kronenberg already pointed out your "reasoning" is absolute nonsense.
Smoking causes lung cancer.....that point is irrefutable.
The fact that not EVERYONE that is exposed to tobacco smoke develops lung cancer does not change that fact.
Not everyone that survived the the bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki developed cancers of some sort but MANY did...should we similarly assume that radiation exposure doesn't cause cancer?
Not everyone exposed to asbestos develops lung cancer, but we know for a fact asbestos causes lung cancer...
The list goes on.
If you truly believe what you write then you are an absolute moron
if what you were saying was even remotely true, do you not think that the people shouting loudest about it would be the companies who make american spirit cigarettes, and the like, who are pedalling "natural", "pure" tobacco...and yet even they state "no additives in our tobacco does NOT mean a safer cigarette".
Yes. Cigar smoke, like cigarette smoke, contains toxic and cancer-causing chemicals that are harmful to both smokers and nonsmokers. Cigar smoke is possibly more toxic than cigarette smoke (3). Cigar smoke has:
A higher level of cancer-causing substances: During the fermentation process for cigar tobacco, high concentrations of cancer-causing nitrosamines are produced. These compounds are released when a cigar is smoked. Nitrosamines are found at higher levels in cigar smoke than in cigarette smoke.
More tar: For every gram of tobacco smoked, there is more cancer-causing tar in cigars than in cigarettes.
A higher level of toxins: Cigar wrappers are less porous than cigarette wrappers. The nonporous cigar wrapper makes the burning of cigar tobacco less complete than the burning of cigarette tobacco. As a result, cigar smoke has higher concentrations of toxins than cigarette smoke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar
I don't smoke. George Burns did, and he lived to be a hundred.
All the folk's here that parrot the anti-tobacco dogma never have a word to say about folk's like George Burns , and many many others like him, that smoke all their lives and still live a good long time.
I wonder why not? Oh wait, I know! These folks don't have prepared script to follow from the anti-tobacco crowd.
i'm afraid your thoughtless posts betray you - your inability for critical analysis and rebuttal puts you squarely within the category of those you attempt to insult.
george burns lived for a long time because he was very lucky. no more, no less.
All the folk's here that parrot the anti-tobacco dogma never have a word to say about folk's like George Burns , and many many others like him, that smoke all their lives and still live a good long time.
I wonder why not? Oh wait, I know! These folks don't have prepared script to follow from the anti-tobacco crowd.
And what about the legion of famous and not so famous who HAVE DIED and DIED YOUNG from tobacco???
What about them???
What an assinine post...
You PRO Tobacco types can't think for yourself you've bought into the lies and deceit that BIG tobacco has been shoveling for decades and have lost any ability to think for yourselves...
You can only follow the PRO tobacco script and dogma
When will you ever learn that anecdotal stories about George Burns or your Aunt Edith who smoked all her life and lived to 105 DON'T MEAN SQUAT!!!!
NONE of that changes the fact that ANYONE who CHOOSES to smoke tobacco is playing a game of Russian Roulette with their lives....
Put a single bullet in the chamber of a revolver and pass it around the table...not everyone that puts the gun to their forehead and pulls the trigger will die but SOMEONE WILL.....does that make it a good idea to play Russian Roulette??
i'm afraid your thoughtless posts betray you - your inability for critical analysis and rebuttal puts you squarely within the category of those you attempt to insult.
george burns lived for a long time because he was very lucky. no more, no less.
Why in the world should I engage in a discussion with people so brain washed with anti-tobacco dogma that they will only see one point of view?
I never said that tobacco is "good" for you. What I have said it that in moderation tobacco poses no greater risk than anything in life.
And what about the legion of famous and not so famous who HAVE DIED and DIED YOUNG from tobacco???
What about them???
What an assinine post...
You PRO Tobacco types can't think for yourself you've bought into the lies and deceit that BIG tobacco has been shoveling for decades and have lost any ability to think for yourselves...
You can only follow the PRO tobacco script and dogma
When will you ever learn that anecdotal stories about George Burns or your Aunt Edith who smoked all her life and lived to 105 DON'T MEAN SQUAT!!!!
NONE of that changes the fact that ANYONE who CHOOSES to smoke tobacco is playing a game of Russian Roulette with their lives....
Put a single bullet in the chamber of a revolver and pass it around the table...not everyone that puts the gun to their forehead and pulls the trigger will die but SOMEONE WILL.....does that make it a good idea to play Russian Roulette??
Does it???
Get a real argument or get lost....
Hmmmmm.......so to make your point now you degenerated to a insulting whiner following my every post on this topic.
You might as whistle into the wind 'cause I can't hear you.......
i see both "sides" of this discussion, but anyone with even a modicum of intellect can appreciate that smoking is harmful to health. if, per your definition, that makes me brainwashed, then sobeit.
it doesnt surprise me that, when all else fails, you resort to "refusing to engage". that suits me just fine. for the record, i've not seen any evidence that you even possess the ability to engage, should you ever wish to.
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.
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.
