smoking and public image

[Gadzooks]

Smoking's got a bad image alright. Normally when I go for a smoke I go somewhere that no one else is, to smoke in peace and not get accusing stares.

I can only laugh when people hint that I only smoke to look cool. Laugh I tell ya, because smoking gets about 90% negative comments, it really doesn't help anything in that department.

 

[Sweep117]

You want to smoke your life away, that's fine with me. Just keep away from me. Second hand smoke kills just as easily as first hand. Have the decency to step away from the doors to the mall/restaurant.

Here in Canada, we're on the right track. You can't smoke within 100ft(or something) of doors to a mall/store/restaurant and it's illegal to smoke in a car with children inside. Cigarette companies must also print photos of cancer-infected lungs and such on their packages. The latest law put into effect makes stores cover up all cigarette products. Customers can't view the products. That one I don't understand.

I can't understand why people keep smoking despite the fact that they know what it does to you. But like I said, just keep away from me and we won't have a problem.

 

[Glerken]

It seems to me that lately (in the US atleast), that smoking has recieved a terrible public image. I've seen more and more advertizements claiming tobacco companies are making their products more addictive, but do we blame Coke or Pepsi for putting caffine in our drinks? Making a substance people want to buy is just part of business. And by now everyone knows smoking can cause cancer, and all these anti smoking groups attempt to portray the tobacco companies as plotting to kill people, which is clearly not in their best interest, as dead people can't buy cigarettes. Anyone else thinks tobacco companies are getting a bum rap or are they getting what they deserve?

Well. Caffeine in Coke doesn't kill people.
And it might not be tobacco companies main goal, but death comes in after a while.

 

[Sark]

I honestly don't care if you smoke, if you aren't near me. Cigarette smoke is one of the few compounds I know of that triggers my asthma. I have no beef with smokers, but it should also be treated as a hygiene issue. Openly smelling like smoke is disgusting, similar to people farting constantly or sweating like a fire hydrant.

 

[Gadzooks]

Cigarettes provide no high nor buzz, unlike alcohol and weed for example, and are packed with toxic additives. Basically then, tobacco companies keep making and selling a product the only objective effect of which is slow death. Tobacco companies should thus cease to exist and in averting this deserve whatever shit comes their way.

Uhhh.... Whenever I have a cigarette I get about 5 minutes of absolute calmness, I can feel the nicotine affecting me. This is fantastic for just after stressful situations.

My friend who doesn't normally smoke, nearly passes out when he has a cigarette after drinking - it must have some effect, and in fact has been proven to.

 

[Gadzooks]

Cigarettes provide no high nor buzz, unlike alcohol and weed for example, and are packed with toxic additives. Basically then, tobacco companies keep making and selling a product the only objective effect of which is slow death. Tobacco companies should thus cease to exist and in averting this deserve whatever shit comes their way.

Uhhh.... Whenever I have a cigarette I get about 5 minutes of absolute calmness, I can feel the nicotine affecting me. This is fantastic for just after stressful situations.

My friend who doesn't normally smoke, nearly passes out when he has a cigarette after drinking - it must have some effect, and in fact has been proven to.

I know it has some effect, but it's different for everyone and not nearly as strong as other drugs, which is why I said "only objective effect". Also, inhaling hot air and/or breathing deep (which smoking makes you do) alone has a calming effect, so how much of it does the cigarette itself actually do?

According to what I read from you, you are doing a complete turn around. Now you are saying they do have an effect? Well of course they fucking do.

Yes, I'm sure inhaling hot air calms the nerves more than a dose of nicotine. God some people are retarded.

 

[Gadzooks]

Cigarettes provide no high nor buzz, unlike alcohol and weed for example, and are packed with toxic additives. Basically then, tobacco companies keep making and selling a product the only objective effect of which is slow death. Tobacco companies should thus cease to exist and in averting this deserve whatever shit comes their way.

Uhhh.... Whenever I have a cigarette I get about 5 minutes of absolute calmness, I can feel the nicotine affecting me. This is fantastic for just after stressful situations.

My friend who doesn't normally smoke, nearly passes out when he has a cigarette after drinking - it must have some effect, and in fact has been proven to.

I know it has some effect, but it's different for everyone and not nearly as strong as other drugs, which is why I said "only objective effect". Also, inhaling hot air and/or breathing deep (which smoking makes you do) alone has a calming effect, so how much of it does the cigarette itself actually do?

According to what I read from you, you are doing a complete turn around. Now you are saying they do have an effect? Well of course they fucking do.

Are we reading the same thing? I said I don't consider "calming" an effect of cigarettes because it's only so for some people and that smoking makes you breathe actively, which is something that helps calm oneself even when not inhaling anything besides air.

Yes, I'm sure inhaling hot air calms the nerves more than a dose of nicotine. God some people are retarded.

And that's not even what I said, way to go for insulting me so quickly. Have a smoke and
relax.

Normally, I'd make a long post explaining why you are so wrong. Instead, I'll just give you a link explaining why nicotine should have an effect on everyone, since it is a drug that affects the body systems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine

Please, have a read before you go making a fool out of yourself again.

 

[darch_chylde]

Mr. Tea, I don't understand what your issue is; but logic dictates that when you have to defend every statement, perhaps your argument lacks merit.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

99% of smokers knows that it kills them and have known that since they started.

 

[Frankydee]

I don't think it really matters to be honest and least of all with the tobacco companies. Their major complain from what I've seen and read is the increase in tax hikes on tobacco products.

 

[TheFacelessOne]

Yeah, well, the major difference is

Soda DOESN'T cause lung cancer.

 

[darch_chylde]

Yeah, well, the major difference is

Soda DOESN'T cause lung cancer.

Here?s what?s in Soda Pop:

Phosphoric Acid: May interfere with the body's ability to use calcium, which can lead to osteoporosis or softening of the teeth and bones. Phosphoric acid also neutralizes the hydrochloric acid in your stomach, which can interfere with digestion, making it difficult to utilize nutrients.

Sugar: Soft drink manufacturers are the largest single user of refined sugar in the United States. It is a proven fact that sugar increases insulin levels, which can lead to high blood pressure, high cholesterol, heart disease, diabetes, weight gain, premature aging and many more negative side effects. Most sodas include over 100 percent of the RDA of sugar.

Aspartame: This chemical is used as a sugar substitute in diet soda. There are over 92 different health side effects associated with aspartame consumption including brain tumors, birth defects, diabetes, emotional disorders and epilepsy/seizures. Further, when aspartame is stored for long periods of time or kept in warm areas it changes to methanol, an alcohol that converts to formaldehyde and formic acid, which are known carcinogens.

Caffeine: Caffeinated drinks can cause jitters, insomnia, high blood pressure, irregular heartbeat, elevated blood cholesterol levels, vitamin and mineral depletion, breast lumps, birth defects, and perhaps some forms of cancer.

http://www.oleda.com/oleda_tips/tips.asp?dept=48

 

[joystickjunki3]

They sell things that kill people, thats all they do, kill you. They target adds and products at kids, because when your product kills those who use it you need new users.

They derserve the bad image they have, would it be ok to sell a soda that is made from arsenic and sold in a lead can?

Can you help me out by giving some sort of example where they have advertised to children. At least nowadays.

[edit] I'm not saying that tobacco is good for you, but those Truth commercials have a shit load of propaganda in them nowadays. Numbers aren't hard to manipulate, and people who choose not to verify information are no better than the people who claim that smoking won't contribute to causing cancer.

I am afraid that my information cromes from books and the like, so I cannot link you to anything, apart from a TV show about commercials but that won't give you what you ask for. I don't know what "Truth commercials" are that might be because I live in Asutralia.

Cigarette companies flavor cigarettes in the same way beer companies do(which is a bad way), what kind of flavor is mint or chocolate? *Some anti-smkoing campains are followed by a rise in cigarette sales, which is convenent considering they are funded by cigarette companies* (this is the only thing I am having trouble confirming, take from that what you will).

People make their own decisions and if you start smoking its going to be partly or entirely your fault when you get ill, but that doesn't excuse or remove the guilt belonging to cigarette companies.

or shoved cigarettes down someone's throat?

I never said they did, don't put words in my mouth.

If I'm wrong call me out on it, I wouldn't like to go around saying things that are wrong.

You're absolutely right, you didn't say that. Please excuse my rudeness there.

But still, cigarettes being flavored isn't good enough. Maybe some adults want flavored smokes. Just because a company produces an item that may or may not cause harm does not mean they deserve any guilt. And to place guilt on them simply for that is wrong.

I'm not sure what the laws are in Australia, but here in America, we have propaganda that has become more of a lie than most anything a tobacco company told us. On top of that, tobacco cannot be advertised on TV (or radio) and it's very rarely seen on billboards. The only place I really see adverts for smokes anymore is in magazines. Not children's magazines either. Guitar and auto mags, and what little experience I've had w/ Playboy; stuff like that. Kids aren't supposed to get their hands on those. If they do, it's not anyone's fault but the store and/or the parents.

Many claim that video games are the cause for violence in youth today. It's a speculation, much the way smoking contributing to cancer was a speculation a long time ago, but let's say, hypothetically, it becomes a fact. Do you think video game companies deserve guilt just for making entertaining products?

I think we should stop shifting blame onto companies. No one ever wants to take responsibility for their actions if something bad happened, but they should do it anyway. Stop blaming companies and fix your own mistakes.

Watch this or don't. Whether people like it or not, South Park is pretty level-headed.

 

[TheFacelessOne]

Yeah, well, the major difference is

Soda DOESN'T cause lung cancer.

-snip-

I am well aware that Soda is still unhealthy, but smoking is still much worse than soda.

 

[Akai Shizuku]

Tobacco is even worse than marijuana, and the former is legal? WTF?

Smoking anything is stupid, and when I see someone doing either I just walk away and think about what an idiot they are.

 

[Naeo]

I think its perfectly deserved, personally.

Tobacco contains Nicotine, one of the more addictive substances used on the not-felony market. It creates an addiction to the substance that's difficult to break. Being addicted, people are kind of trapped into buying more cigarettes. Or at least extremely strongly compelled to.

Tobacco does kill people when it doesn't cause cancer. I grant though that this is still in good part just because people usually smoke it, and habitually inhaling smoke is never a good idea, but chewing tobacco still causes lots of issues like cancer, again.

Tobacco companies market cigarettes as "cool" and "fashionable". The only person I've ever seen with a cigarette that looked super-cool/super-suave was Rod Serling. In reality, almost all smokers have bad health and smell bad (even with multiple showers and toothbrishings) and it seriously damages your health. But they try and want to market it to kids.

If you put nicotine in any other product- sodas, liquor, steaks, chili- you'd probably be fined and sued and thrown in prison for it and demonized. Oh, guess what the tobacco companies do. Put something in their product that creates an addiction and makes it hard to not want/need/get more.

I honestly see tobacco as a more harmful drug in its current incarnations than marijuana. Which I say is really only dangerous if you smoke it, because you're inhaling fucking smoke.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Tobacco is even worse than marijuana, and the former is legal? WTF?

Smoking anything is stupid, and when I see someone doing either I just walk away and think about what an idiot they are.

So what? You don't do anything that could be bad for you?

And last time I checked, marijuana contains roughly four times the amount of tar that cigarettes contain. Natural cigarettes are about the same risk-level as marijuana. I have no proof, just a hypothesis. So Nat Sherman's and American Spirits. You're right, smoking anything can be bad for you, but it seems a bit hypocritical to judge someone just because they choose to smoke if you have done something harmful to your own body as well.. I mean, have you ever had an energy drink or drank alcohol excessively?

Everybody dies, let people choose how their lives play out.

I think its perfectly deserved, personally.

Tobacco contains Nicotine, one of the more addictive substances used on the not-felony market. It creates an addiction to the substance that's difficult to break. Being addicted, people are kind of trapped into buying more cigarettes. Or at least extremely strongly compelled to.

Tobacco does kill people when it doesn't cause cancer. I grant though that this is still in good part just because people usually smoke it, and habitually inhaling smoke is never a good idea, but chewing tobacco still causes lots of issues like cancer, again.

Tobacco companies market cigarettes as "cool" and "fashionable". The only person I've ever seen with a cigarette that looked super-cool/super-suave was Rod Serling. In reality, almost all smokers have bad health and smell bad (even with multiple showers and toothbrishings) and it seriously damages your health. But they try and want to market it to kids.

If you put nicotine in any other product- sodas, liquor, steaks, chili- you'd probably be fined and sued and thrown in prison for it and demonized. Oh, guess what the tobacco companies do. Put something in their product that creates an addiction and makes it hard to not want/need/get more.

I honestly see tobacco as a more harmful drug in its current incarnations than marijuana. Which I say is really only dangerous if you smoke it, because you're inhaling fucking smoke.

You can't say w/ any certainty, unless you're one of the companies trying to do so, that tobacco companies try to market to children anymore. They're not Captain Planet villains. I'm sure many of them have kids, and wouldn't want their kids smoking until they felt the kids had reached an appropriate age. While it is true that many companies put more nicotine into their cigarettes, they're honest about, and not all of them participate in this process (American Spirits, for one).

W/ all the info out there about the harmful side-effects of smoking, it's impossible to really blame tobacco unless you manipulate numbers (much like anti-smoking ads do today).