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.
Are you aware of how many carcinogens you ingest/inhale daily and don't even know it, and can't smell it? Yea smokers smell, but I doubt it will hurt you.
Yes, I made that very point. Be glad you can smell it and move away, the majority of the chemicals and toxins that affect us are odorless and invisible.
I'm loving me some GuyNTexas. One of the few in this thread that makes any sense at all. Alot of you guys are truely unhinged. I only wish someone on the street would come up to me spouting some of this....
I'm clean, considerate and doing as I choose. There's no way you'll make me feel bad with your neurotic bs. You really should check yourselves. The thoughtless vitriol flying around here passing as legitimate debate is very depressing. Your really quite ugly - I'm glad that I don't know you.
VERY well stated. I cannot believe the amount of hate some of these posters feel unashamed about making public. Wish I could rep this post more than once!
Everybody in my office that smokes converted to electronic cigs and can now smoke at their desks. From what they say they taste just like a cig, have nicotine in them and satisfy the urge. A couple of the people have quit smoking regular cigs entirely. I was talking to a woman that uses one and she pays about 20 dollars every two months for her juice as opposed to 40 dollars a week for a carton of cigs.
I live in Tennessee where cigs are about 4 bucks a pack, I don't know why people aren't using the electronic cigs more here but I can't imagine why people in New York city paying 15 bucks a pack aren't switching..
BTW- I understand the OP's complaint. You can smell smoke on people and some people are more sensitive to it than others.
And some people think they have a right to control others breathing around them, being near them or walking by. That is just stupid. Personal space taken to the extreme.
I have a question for the pro cigarette crowd in here:
Would you be ok if people in your office shot heroin throughout the day (inside or outside)?
First of all, that's illegal, but assuming they carry their load of work, it's none of my business what they do in the closet. They aren't hurting anybody.
I am not sure that is a good example, but I bet most of them would freak out if somone with a legitimate medical MJ script exposed them or their families to MJ smoke.
Nicotine is a "mood altering" chemical. Why do you think people smoke?
It is more difficult to quit smoking than heroin and meth.
The addictive element, nicotine, is indeed said to be more addictive than heroin, though I have abstained from smoking several times for extended periods, without the classic withdrawal symptoms experienced by all narcotic addicts. So I often wonder about this claim, not to diminish the difficulty most people have in quitting smoking, or the intense urges that nicotine generates.
But I am of the mindset that something is amiss in this whole anti-smoking agenda, since I totally reject the delusion that government really cares about my health with all of the contrary evidence that they really couldn't care less, nor even such an idea that the medical community, whose profits rely on disease, not good health, are so concerned.
The dangers of cigarette smoking, in my opinion, are more based on an embeded false perceptions, created in the minds of the public by intense repetition and pure propaganda. Not that inhaling smoke of any kind should be considered a healthy practice, the dangers I think are extremely exaggerated, while the benefits of nicotine ignored. Benefits? BENEFITS? Surely I'm crazy, right? Well, maybe I am crazy, but that's another matter, as smokers nonetheless enjoy lower risks in many diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, and other neurological diseases for which some scientists believe to be nicotine as the protective agent. Of course, mainstream science is loath to entertain any quality in a behavior they've spent decades demonizing.
Excerpt: After years of quiet discussion among scientists, hints that cigarettes can protect against some diseases or improve the outcome of others have led to growing interest in finding out why. This has focused attention on nicotine, tobacco's most active ingredient, as a potential treatment for several major health problems, including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases.
Without question, researchers say, cigarette smoking does far more harm than any potential good and should be strongly discouraged. Smoking is a major cause of cancer and a host of cardiovascular and other diseases thatcause millions of deaths each year, they say, while draining the world's health care systems of billions of dollars.
But some researchers say efforts to stop smoking have discouraged research into the possible benefits of nicotine and related compounds in treating conditions like attention deficit disorders, an inflammatory bowel disease and a neurological condition called Tourette's syndrome.
There is a lot of information that one can find hiding between the lines here, while the statements themselves are based more on accepted propaganda than actual hard evidence, while some claims are patently absurd.
The first point is, even in the light of scientific evidence that smoking can help lower the risk of many diseases, even the suggestion of this cannot be made without the obligatory inclusion of the propaganda and the insistence that whatever potential benefit is far outweighed by the harm (which is vastly exaggerated and unproven). "Millions of deaths" .... "without question" ..."major cause of cancer, and a host of other diseases" ..... which is nothing more than a lot of unproven propagandist hyperbole, and baseless claims which have simply been accepted as the undeniable truth through repeating this message over and over, for decades. Yet, even common sense and novice analysis would question much of these claims.
Fact is, just as many non-smokers get lung cancer as do smokers ... so this itself shows that there must be another cause other than smoking, and if this is true, and it is without question, why could that not also be the cause of cancer in smokers too? This rather basic logic is confronted with the grossly illogical nonsense about the dangers of second hand smoke, with some actually claiming that second hand smoke is more harmful than first hand smoke. There seems to be no shortage of people lacking the basic levels of common sense necessary to recognize this as pure nonsensical thinking. It's like a cultish belief system that responds violently and irrationally at the mere suggestion that smoking is not public enemy number 1, so don't even dare suggest that smoking could possibly offer even one single benefit. To the indoctrinated, that is pure blasphemy. This response itself shows that there is no real, legitimate discussion taking place.
Nicotine is a "mood altering" chemical. Why do you think people smoke?
It is more difficult to quit smoking than heroin and meth.
Yes it lifts the spirit, calms the nerves, and kills the appetite. I've never tried to quit, but those drugs that people take to help them quit are very scary and dangerous. Have you read the side effects of Chantrix? Suicide? To hell with that, I'd rather enjoy my smoke and die a few years sooner than later.
Yes, I made that very point. Be glad you can smell it and move away, the majority of the chemicals and toxins that affect us are odorless and invisible.
As the nuisance, it is incumbent upon the smoker to insure their hazard doesn't affect others, not others to avoid the nuisance. Your right to spew your filth ends at the other person's nose.
I understand this is a hard pill to swallow, but the world doesn't revolve around you and your drug addiction, evenn though your life does.
Imagine I wanted to spray paint, say, an old football helmet. I am in a crowded area where other people are living and breathing, and have a right to be there and do what they are doing.
Knowing that by spraying my helmet I will cause fumes and overspray, i.e. a nuisance, and fire hazard,
is it.
A) My responsbility to move and spray my paint away from others to avoid adversely impacting them with my overspray
or
B) Their obligation to leave to avoid my overspray in the odd case or two that people don't really enjoy having spray pain and fumes impacting them.
Think rreal hard, and then give me your answer. I'll give you a clue, It rhyms with "spray".
The addictive element, nicotine, is indeed said to be more addictive than heroin, though I have abstained from smoking several times for extended periods, without the classic withdrawal symptoms experienced by all narcotic addicts. So I often wonder about this claim, not to diminish the difficulty most people have in quitting smoking, or the intense urges that nicotine generates.
But I am of the mindset that something is amiss in this whole anti-smoking agenda, since I totally reject the delusion that government really cares about my health with all of the contrary evidence that they really couldn't care less, nor even such an idea that the medical community, whose profits rely on disease, not good health, are so concerned.
The dangers of cigarette smoking, in my opinion, are more based on an embeded false perceptions, created in the minds of the public by intense repetition and pure propaganda. Not that inhaling smoke of any kind should be considered a healthy practice, the dangers I think are extremely exaggerated, while the benefits of nicotine ignored. Benefits? BENEFITS? Surely I'm crazy, right? Well, maybe I am crazy, but that's another matter, as smokers nonetheless enjoy lower risks in many diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, and other neurological diseases for which some scientists believe to be nicotine as the protective agent. Of course, mainstream science is loath to entertain any quality in a behavior they've spent decades demonizing.
Excerpt: After years of quiet discussion among scientists, hints that cigarettes can protect against some diseases or improve the outcome of others have led to growing interest in finding out why. This has focused attention on nicotine, tobacco's most active ingredient, as a potential treatment for several major health problems, including Parkinson's and Alzheimer's diseases.
Without question, researchers say, cigarette smoking does far more harm than any potential good and should be strongly discouraged. Smoking is a major cause of cancer and a host of cardiovascular and other diseases thatcause millions of deaths each year, they say, while draining the world's health care systems of billions of dollars.
But some researchers say efforts to stop smoking have discouraged research into the possible benefits of nicotine and related compounds in treating conditions like attention deficit disorders, an inflammatory bowel disease and a neurological condition called Tourette's syndrome.
There is a lot of information that one can find hiding between the lines here, while the statements themselves are based more on accepted propaganda than actual hard evidence, while some claims are patently absurd.
The first point is, even in the light of scientific evidence that smoking can help lower the risk of many diseases, even the suggestion of this cannot be made without the obligatory inclusion of the propaganda and the insistence that whatever potential benefit is far outweighed by the harm (which is vastly exaggerated and unproven). "Millions of deaths" .... "without question" ..."major cause of cancer, and a host of other diseases" ..... which is nothing more than a lot of unproven propagandist hyperbole, and baseless claims which have simply been accepted as the undeniable truth through repeating this message over and over, for decades. Yet, even common sense and novice analysis would question much of these claims.
Fact is, just as many non-smokers get lung cancer as do smokers ... so this itself shows that there must be another cause other than smoking, and if this is true, and it is without question, why could that not also be the cause of cancer in smokers too? This rather basic logic is confronted with the grossly illogical nonsense about the dangers of second hand smoke, with some actually claiming that second hand smoke is more harmful than first hand smoke. There seems to be no shortage of people lacking the basic levels of common sense necessary to recognize this as pure nonsensical thinking. It's like a cultish belief system that responds violently and irrationally at the mere suggestion that smoking is not public enemy number 1, so don't even dare suggest that smoking could possibly offer even one single benefit. To the indoctrinated, that is pure blasphemy. This response itself shows that there is no real, legitimate discussion taking place.
HOW TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM PESTICIDES IF YOU ARE TO INCONVENIENCED TO BUY ORGANIC.
"10.6. Dopamine and Parkinson’s Disease
Since dopamine is synthesized from tyrosine and its precursor phenylalanine, tyrosine and
phenylalanine depletion by glyphosate in both plants and microbes would be expected to reduce their
bioavailability in the diet. It has been demonstrated that dietary reductions of phenylalanine and
tyrosine induce reduced dopamine concentrations in the brain [237]. Impaired dopaminergic signaling
in the substantia nigra is a key feature of Parkinson’s disease, and Parkinson’s risk has been associated
with exposure to various pesticides, . . . "
SAN FRANCISCO, March 27 -- For the first time, scientists have identified a chemical in tobacco that may explain why smokers are statistically less vulnerable to Parkinson's disease. The compound has been shown to slow the breakdown of key brain chemicals, including dopamine, which is typically depleted in the brains of patients with Parkinson's disease, according to researchers at Virginia Tech. The association between smoking and Parkinson's disease has been known for more than 20 years, but until now could not be scientifically explained.
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.
