These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Smoking while Playing Eve - PSA

First post
Author
Snagletooth Johnson
Snagle Material Services
CAStabouts
#61 - 2013-12-18 20:56:03 UTC
Recent studies have shown that biggest killer is living. if you are living, there is a 99.9999% that you are going to die. The longer you live, the more likely that you are going to die. Thses statistics, verified by science, clealry outstrip death by smoking, or anything elese for that matter.

So, please, for God's sake, EVERYONE please stop living, before you all die!
NightCrawler 85
Phoibe Enterprises
#62 - 2013-12-18 22:00:51 UTC
VegasMirage wrote:

Research that proved how bad smokers where and why smokers are all naughty people that can be blamed for(by the sounds of the OP) every single death.


Lets look at what causes the most deaths shall we?
Granted, these numbers seems to be older, but doubt it has changed that much (please note how far down on the list lung cancer is).

Now lets look at the top one on said list, Cardiovascular disease.
And now just for fun, tell me why you are not upset about the fact that a lot of other things causes this except smoking, and if your going to make a thread to address those as well?
Since i cant trust that you actually will read said post the causes here.

Evidence suggests a number of risk factors for heart disease: age, gender, high blood pressure, high serum cholesterol levels, tobacco smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, sugar consumption,[9][10] family history, obesity, lack of physical activity, psychosocial factors, diabetes mellitus, air pollution.

Now also note that age (yes that thing you cant prevent unless your a bad bad smoker) plays a big factor in this as well.

Age is by far the most important risk factor in developing cardiovascular diseases, with approximately a tripling of risk with each decade of life.[6] It is estimated that 82 percent of people who die of coronary heart disease are 65 and older.[12] At the same time, the risk of stroke doubles every decade after age 55.

But oh my! There is even more dangerous acts you can do that increases the risk for this!
Sex

Men are at greater risk of heart disease than pre-menopausal women.[6][16] Once past menopause, it has been argued that a woman's risk is similar to a man's[16] although more recent data from the WHO and UN disputes this.
Among middle-aged people, coronary heart disease is 2 to 5 times more common in men than in women.[14] In a study done by the World Health Organization, sex contributes to approximately 40% of the variation in the sex ratios of coronary heart disease mortality.


Yes, you parents (and im sure your self) where very very naughty and put them selfes at risk!

So yea...Sorry while there is a lot of truth in how bad smoking is, that does not give you or anyone else the right to lecture smokers or non smokers on how "bad" they are unless you are willing to look at all the other things out there that causes MORE deaths then smoking, and then trash down on them equally to smokers.

Now for why people still smoke... Apparently you have decided to not read any replies where people say why they smoke, and your convinced that everyone smokes for the "cool factor" (which is a stage that passes once your 16 btw), but im sure that if you actually read peoples post you might see that smokers are often more considerate with who they smoke around, where they smoke, when they smoke, and WHY they choose to smoke even if people like you insist that you have any say in what they do in their own homes or designated smoking areas Blink

(Hint, if there is an ashtray around, it means people are allowed to smoke, stay away from the ashtray if it bothers you, and if you work in a casino that allows indoor smoking..well its not the smokers fault that some places still allows indoor smoking while more and more places have been outdoor smoking only for the past 10+ years, take it up with your boss, not smokers who has nothing to do with you, or your work place)

Way to late for this..smoke then bed time for me Lol

Something Random
Byddin Un
#63 - 2013-12-18 22:59:05 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Spark up some skunk, thats green and apparently doesnt contain 'NICOTEEN'

*Snip* Please refrain from using profanity. ISD Ezwal

"caught on fire a little bit, just a little."

"Delinquents, check, weirdos, check, hippies, check, pillheads, check, freaks, check, potheads, check .....gangs all here!"

I love Science, it gives me a Hadron.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2013-12-18 23:54:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
VegasMirage wrote:
Everything is calculated risks, so why take on so much risk with absolutely no benefit? You've been brainwashed to think cigarettes are "cool", make you look "cool" or go well with things like coffee or alcohol. Your self perception is bent.

Brainwashed by 'The Marlboro Man' and killer logos like Camel "Turkish Blend"... and you accept this by making excuses for the product and their advertised perceived "benefits".

You're a product of a mediated reality. You are not free, you are a slave to somebody else's profits.


Yep, this is all true. Many smokers will throw studies at you that basically all say the same thing: "it's not that bad", or "it's not as bad as [insert something deadly here]", or "my [elderly family member] lived until eleventy-hundred!", but the truth is, they're not trying to convince you, they're trying to convince themselves. Most of those studies still say that smoking will kill you, but they like to ignore that part for the excuses the studies offer them, most of which can be easily traced to corporate tobacco 'research' endeavours.

I am a smoker. I got into the habit working in a high-stress environment, where the high-stress beat down on my self-esteem enough to allow peer pressure to get to me. As a result, I've been smoking for eleven years now, and it's my fault, because I'm the one that made that choice to start.

There is a problem though: at the same time as loving the calming effect a cigarette seems to have on me, I am nervous about the threat to my physical health, and would love to be able to quit. I explore options occasionally, but my life does not allow for much opportunity to start. I have made many attempts in the past, all aborted, because it is highly addictive as well, and incredibly difficult to quit.

Thing is, the studies have been done, for decades now, and they all reach the same conclusion: smoking kills. Not everyone, but usually when it does kill, it kills people before their time. I'm only 30, I'd like to live at least another 30 years and I'll be honest... I don't think I will, and that scares me, but I'm gonna try anyway.

But while I'm still smoking, while I'm making excuses to keep doing it but secretly, on the inside, I want to quit, like every other smoker, I'd rather not be made to feel guilty about it. See, when you make a smoker feel guilty about what they do, that's when the backfire effect kicks in, and suddenly, they want to smoke more, and even blow it in your face for being a right judgemental prick. Here I am, thinking to myself, "man, I really need to quit," and some obnoxious so-and-so that doesn't know the first thing about me comes along and tells me what I already know, worse, tells me I'm a bad person for it? Yep, they're gonna get smoke in their face.

Here's the thing, unless you've been addicted to smoking before, or even better, been in the exact same circumstances as the person you're judging (ie any mental illness they might have, workplace conditions, home life, etc, and I mean the EXACT IDENTICAL circumstances), then you do not know what you're talking about. No matter what studies you've read, you do not know anything about that person's habit and/or addiction.

That's the bottom line, Mirage.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#65 - 2013-12-19 00:33:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Slade Trillgon
Let's be real here, and to be clear, I have a Master's Degree in Exercise Science and Wellness Education, the real problem with smoking is that most smokers do it in absolute and extreme excess, with cigarettes laden with non naturally occurring chemicals added to the tobacco to make it burn faster.

If one was to smoke say less than 3-4 natural cigarettes a day, exercised vigorously for at least 45 minutes a day and ate a healthy diet, smoking would not be that 'bad' for you as you would be able to get rid of most of the carbon monoxide that one inhales. When we get down to it the above mentioned is one of the biggest issues with smoking, decreases in oxygen delivery to all of the body's tissues basically suffocates the tissues slowly.

Carbon monoxide takes @ 3 times as much energy to break the bond on a hemoglobin molecule than it takes to break off carbon dioxide.

The real issue that plagues the people of the industrialized world and their behavior patterns is that most do everything in extreme excess instead of moderation. Exercise in excess can kill you faster than smoking two packs of cigarettes a day....if the genetics are there.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2013-12-19 02:17:48 UTC
Slade Trillgon wrote:
Let's be real here, and to be clear, I have a Master's Degree in Exercise Science and Wellness Education, the real problem with smoking is that most smokers do it in absolute and extreme excess, with cigarettes laden with non naturally occurring chemicals added to the tobacco to make it burn faster.

If one was to smoke say less than 3-4 natural cigarettes a day, exercised vigorously for at least 45 minutes a day and ate a healthy diet, smoking would not be that 'bad' for you as you would be able to get rid of most of the carbon monoxide that one inhales. When we get down to it the above mentioned is one of the biggest issues with smoking, decreases in oxygen delivery to all of the body's tissues basically suffocates the tissues slowly.

Carbon monoxide takes @ 3 times as much energy to break the bond on a hemoglobin molecule than it takes to break off carbon dioxide.

The real issue that plagues the people of the industrialized world and their behavior patterns is that most do everything in extreme excess instead of moderation. Exercise in excess can kill you faster than smoking two packs of cigarettes a day....if the genetics are there.


"I have a degree and that makes me right" is called an argument from authority. Let's say, for argument's sake, that this is the internet and no one has any reason to believe your qualifications, even if 'wellness education' was a degree one could take seriously, where is your evidence that the naturally-occurring nicotine in tobacco has nothing to do with the addiction that people get to smoking it, even without adding anything to it, thereby causing them to increase their intake until it becomes an excess, and that inhaling anything other than the native air our bodies evolved to breathe can in any way be beneficial to the point of outweighing the risks?

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Malaclypse Muscaria
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#67 - 2013-12-19 04:00:07 UTC
Slade Trillgon wrote:
If one was to smoke say less than 3-4 natural cigarettes a day, exercised vigorously for at least 45 minutes a day and ate a healthy diet, smoking would not be that 'bad' for you as you would be able to get rid of most of the carbon monoxide that one inhales. When we get down to it the above mentioned is one of the biggest issues with smoking, decreases in oxygen delivery to all of the body's tissues basically suffocates the tissues slowly.

Carbon monoxide takes @ 3 times as much energy to break the bond on a hemoglobin molecule than it takes to break off carbon dioxide..


Smoking tobacco has harmful effects that go far beyond those of inhaling carbon monoxide. Tobacco has substances that have even been shown - as of a study of last year - that may damage DNA and cause genetic mutations.

Aside from that, nicotine is a highly addictive substance that messes up with your brain's dopamine circuitry, just as heroin and cocaine do, and some studies have shown that it can be as addictive as those. While everyone's different and YMMV, to most people the idea that one can simply smoke casually less than 3-4 cigarettes a day on the long run, is simply wishful thinking.

Everyone is free to choose whether to smoke or not and assume the risks and consequences regardless of all this, but do take the choice on a properly informed basis.


Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#68 - 2013-12-19 14:33:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Slade Trillgon
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Slade Trillgon wrote:
Let's be real here, and to be clear, I have a Master's Degree in Exercise Science and Wellness Education, the real problem with smoking is that most smokers do it in absolute and extreme excess, with cigarettes laden with non naturally occurring chemicals added to the tobacco to make it burn faster.

If one was to smoke say less than 3-4 natural cigarettes a day, exercised vigorously for at least 45 minutes a day and ate a healthy diet, smoking would not be that 'bad' for you as you would be able to get rid of most of the carbon monoxide that one inhales. When we get down to it the above mentioned is one of the biggest issues with smoking, decreases in oxygen delivery to all of the body's tissues basically suffocates the tissues slowly.

Carbon monoxide takes @ 3 times as much energy to break the bond on a hemoglobin molecule than it takes to break off carbon dioxide.

The real issue that plagues the people of the industrialized world and their behavior patterns is that most do everything in extreme excess instead of moderation. Exercise in excess can kill you faster than smoking two packs of cigarettes a day....if the genetics are there.


"I have a degree and that makes me right" is called an argument from authority. Let's say, for argument's sake, that this is the internet and no one has any reason to believe your qualifications, even if 'wellness education' was a degree one could take seriously, where is your evidence that the naturally-occurring nicotine in tobacco has nothing to do with the addiction that people get to smoking it, even without adding anything to it, thereby causing them to increase their intake until it becomes an excess, and that inhaling anything other than the native air our bodies evolved to breathe can in any way be beneficial to the point of outweighing the risks?


First off, I never said that nicotine was not addictive. Secondly, I never said that smoking was not harmful, actually the direct opposite. I listed my qualifications so as to let people know that my extremely controversial opinion was coming from someone with 'qualifications'. The fact that I used Argumentum ab auctoritate does not bother me as I do not care whether or not people believe my qualifications; my ethics state that I let people know them, whether or not they accept them is up to them.

The problem is not substance abuse or unhealthy behavioral patterns, but why people get stuck in unhealthy cyclical behavioral patterns to begin with. Unless we are able to start teaching our children that the substances are not the evil thing and that the problem is how humans deal with stress and abuse most anything, we will never truly begin to solve the problem that faces many in our world.

I never said tobacco was not unhealthy and I qualified my stance with a statement about something that is touted to be the best thing for you and how it can actually kill you as well. The health and wellness fields are convoluted at best and rely on extremely varied research arenas with varied levels of vetting. The real question is not whether or not tobacco is unhealthy but why people abuse something so blatantly unhealthy so excessively.


In finale, I do believe, that if someone lives a life with a properly balanced diet and exercise routine, they can enjoy the usage of 'dangerous' substances and enjoy stress relief from the 'high', while minimizing the risk of chosen substance's usage through extreme moderation.
Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#69 - 2013-12-20 00:34:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Slade Trillgon
P.S. The fact that you scoff at the Title of my degree shows how little you know of the fields of discussion yourself Blink

Malaclypse Muscaria wrote:
Slade Trillgon wrote:
If one was to smoke say less than 3-4 natural cigarettes a day, exercised vigorously for at least 45 minutes a day and ate a healthy diet, smoking would not be that 'bad' for you as you would be able to get rid of most of the carbon monoxide that one inhales. When we get down to it the above mentioned is one of the biggest issues with smoking, decreases in oxygen delivery to all of the body's tissues basically suffocates the tissues slowly.

Carbon monoxide takes @ 3 times as much energy to break the bond on a hemoglobin molecule than it takes to break off carbon dioxide..


Smoking tobacco has harmful effects that go far beyond those of inhaling carbon monoxide. Tobacco has substances that have even been shown - as of a study of last year - that may damage DNA and cause genetic mutations.

Aside from that, nicotine is a highly addictive substance that messes up with your brain's dopamine circuitry, just as heroin and cocaine do, and some studies have shown that it can be as addictive as those. While everyone's different and YMMV, to most people the idea that one can simply smoke casually less than 3-4 cigarettes a day on the long run, is simply wishful thinking.

Everyone is free to choose whether to smoke or not and assume the risks and consequences regardless of all this, but do take the choice on a properly informed basis.




I said that carbon monoxide inhalation was 'one' of the worst aspects. I also hypothesize that one would be hard pressed to not be able to find a link between CO inhalation and most of the other side effects of smoking tobacco....that is how research works lol

If you read above I am whole heartedly aware that the problem is systemic in nature, but I have a feeling that my comments have been misconstrued. Once someone is addicted the behavior change process is a long and hard road and rarely includes moderate usage after said change has entered the maintenance phase. But if we do not start teaching our children to deal with stress properly...whatever way that is.... the problem of substance/behavioral abuse patters will never be diminished.

Most of my comments about moderate usage of 'substances' or 'unhealthy' behavioral practices was aimed at people that are not currently addicted to something and/or do not have addictive personalities.

I am the latter. I have had little to no trouble ceasing usage of any substance I have partook in and the list of non tried substances is much much shorter than the tried list. Why am I different than others? I have been dealing with Crohn's disease since I was 13. Why was I able to not let the depression and social anxiety that came with that struggle over power me and bury me in an addictive gerbil wheel when I did try some of the worlds most addictive substances? We may never know, but the sure fire way to fail is to demonize the substance and delve into the arena of prohibition....not that that is where this discussion was going
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2013-12-20 00:59:48 UTC
Slade Trillgon wrote:


I listed my qualifications so as to let people know that my extremely controversial opinion was coming from someone with 'qualifications'.


Well as long as it's just an opinion, then qualifications are irrelevant, aren't they.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#71 - 2013-12-20 02:59:22 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Slade Trillgon wrote:


I listed my qualifications so as to let people know that my extremely controversial opinion was coming from someone with 'qualifications'.


Well as long as it's just an opinion, then qualifications are irrelevant, aren't they.



Wrong.
Brujo Loco
Brujeria Teologica
#72 - 2013-12-20 03:15:08 UTC
(I slowly light my cherry wood pipe, fill it with cavendish tobacco, light it, puff, and then drink a sip from my glass filled with "Swing" scotch on the rocks and read this very thoroughly)

Yeah, I don't like cigarettes much, that crap isn't real tobacco anyway, but I fully respect people´s desire to smoke and approve of selected smoking areas, anyone here ever went on a metro ride in Madrid before 2005? I remember going anywhere during the morning, every single time the doors opened SWATHES OF BIG HUGE cigarette smoke waded thru the whole station, man it was really really bad back in the day.

I hardly go to places where smoking is allowed, the smell, unlike pipe tobacco, is quite acrid, same reasons I dont like cheap cigars much unless they are grade A tobacco. You can literally smell the quality of a cigar, not an excuse, but a matter of personal tastes.

Tobacco smoking is a pleasant hobby if done well, but people, for several reasons, take it to such extremes, that I sometimes feel bad for guys that I saw light a new cigarette with an old one in succession smoking 2 to 3 packs on a work day, only to see them get more anxious and collapse, since all they had for breakfast was a coffee and nicotine. That´s just bad habits.

I mean, nothing beats a good old Cuban or Dominican Cigar with a cup of rum after a hearty meal, but from there going to chain smoking them, well, people need to set self-boundaries, but I can respect their habits, and as much I might know what they are doing is bad for their bodies, no one can walk in another´s shoes and tell them what to do or how to live their life.

It´s the same with alcohol and any other stimulant. There´s no moderation, there is just this overwhelming need to dull the senses in whatever substances you have at hand. And usually because you tend to do said action under bad circumstances, stress mostly and then ending up addicted.

I don´t see a problem with smoking like OP sees, I see a problem in people´s habits of just going to extremes, cognitive therapy helps a lot with that, but I don´t see the need to sermon others from a high and mighty pedestal telling them its bad and they like need to stop NAO or ELSE!

EVERYONE these days knows smoking is bad for your health. There is no secret there, no evil lizardlord agenda of destruction hidden from the eyes of the populace.

If you want to get alarmed, get alarmed at the atrocities of trans-fats, the perennial Big Pharma campaign against vitamins, the insane amounts of mercury in edible fish, processed foods labeled as healthy that are just laden with chemicals and how Water treatment plants cant filter out hormones/prescription drugs out of the water.

Those are very interesting topics of discussion that make me wanna don a tinfoil hat and add to the discussion, but smoking really?

What´s next? STD´s?

3/10 for you

Inner Sayings of BrujoLoco: http://eve-files.com/sig/brujoloco

Xuixien
Black Echelon
#73 - 2013-12-20 14:05:01 UTC
Black Panpher wrote:
@ OP not everyone is smoking tobacco...

Xuixien wrote:
Again, it's not the fact the smoking kills you.

It's the way it kills you.

You get a better nicotine profile from snuff.


You should maybe look into the way snuff kills you lol...


Actually as countries in Europe moved from smoking to snuff, their rates of oral cancer declined. Research shows that the risk of oral cancer from smokeless tobacco is barely above the baseline rate.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Xuixien
Black Echelon
#74 - 2013-12-20 14:08:13 UTC
Raven Shyanne wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
Again, it's not the fact the smoking kills you.

It's the way it kills you.

You get a better nicotine profile from snuff.



I'd rather smell like an ashtray than have to carry around a bottle full of spit. But on the plus side at least you can use snuff/dip in airports and on airplanes.


Well snuff ("snus" in Sweden) and dip are two somewhat different things. Snus does not produce spitting. "Dip" often produces spitting in inexperienced users. After a couple of weeks you no longer need to spit - you can control your salivation and you can control how much of the tobacco "juice" gets into your spit. If you dip for more than a month and you're still spitting, you're doing it wrong. Try a top deck.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#75 - 2013-12-20 15:04:12 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
::Walks down the sidewalk, detects a little tobacco smoke rising from this thread. Goes past 10 feet away, then without looking back or making eye contact, does a loud, meaningful *cough cough*.::
I love it when people do that. It makes me feel superior *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
Xuixien
Black Echelon
#76 - 2013-12-20 15:24:11 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
One does not just "do it".


Actually, when you do quite, you in fact "just do it".

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Xuixien
Black Echelon
#77 - 2013-12-20 15:34:04 UTC
NightCrawler 85 wrote:
Lets look at what causes the most deaths shall we?
Granted, these numbers seems to be older, but doubt it has changed that much (please note how far down on the list lung cancer is).


Actually you need to look at the table that juxtaposes developing and developed nations. Hint: Developed nations smoke more.

Lung Cancer is number 5. COPD (which is caused almost exclusively by smoking in developed nations) is number 3.

Ishemic heart disease... well that's multifaceted. It's due to narrowing of the arteries in the heart due to plaques. This can be partly dietary. But it can also be caused by smoking - smoking raises the blood pressure, which has been shown to cause irritation and damage to the endothelial lining of the vasculature (in particular the arteries). The carbon monoxide in cigarette smoke has been proven to cause irritation to the endothelial lining as well. These small tears and areas of irritation are where the plaque forms. Thrombosis (clotting) is also another factor involved in a heart attack. Smoking has been shown to increase clotting in the blood. So when you smoke you are literally creating an environment conducive to heart attacks (and strokes - ie, cerebrovascular disease - which is number 2 on that list).

The top three killers in developed nations are all linked to smoking.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Slade Trillgon
Brutor Force Federated
#78 - 2013-12-21 14:55:11 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
NightCrawler 85 wrote:
Lets look at what causes the most deaths shall we?
Granted, these numbers seems to be older, but doubt it has changed that much (please note how far down on the list lung cancer is).


Actually you need to look at the table that juxtaposes developing and developed nations. Hint: Developed nations smoke more.

Lung Cancer is number 5. COPD (which is caused almost exclusively by smoking in developed nations) is number 3.

Ishemic heart disease... well that's multifaceted. It's due to narrowing of the arteries in the heart due to plaques. This can be partly dietary. But it can also be caused by smoking - smoking raises the blood pressure, which has been shown to cause irritation and damage to the endothelial lining of the vasculature (in particular the arteries). The carbon monoxide in cigarette smoke has been proven to cause irritation to the endothelial lining as well. These small tears and areas of irritation are where the plaque forms. Thrombosis (clotting) is also another factor involved in a heart attack. Smoking has been shown to increase clotting in the blood. So when you smoke you are literally creating an environment conducive to heart attacks (and strokes - ie, cerebrovascular disease - which is number 2 on that list).

The top three killers in developed nations are all linked to smoking.



I just want to point out that all the research done on smoking focuses on heavy smoking. Not as bad as, but similar to the research that shows that one can overdose from inhalation of marijuana smoke. They put chimps in a small enclosed boxes and pumped it full of 'marijuana smoke', which caused the chimps to die from asphyxiation, and then concluded that smoking pot can kill you. Well no **** Sherlock, breathing excessive amounts of smoke into your lungs is bad for you. Again, smoking is not the problem. People's inabilities to control their impulses is what kills people early.
Magna Mortem
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2013-12-21 19:04:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Magna Mortem
Here, something positive.

Study finds no link between secondhand smoke and cancer.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/12/12/study-finds-no-link-between-secondhand-smoke-and-cancer/

Anyhow.

Quote:
as you blow smoke in his face could actually be the beginning of a long hard life shortly after.
This is fear mongering and you should be ashamed of yourself.

For those who are unable to follow, he basically says:
"One single blow of smoke into your face has a chance of changing your life for the worse."

This is complete and utter bull. The body doesn't work like that. A single event will not do that.
We are all exposed to much more dirt, smog and carcinogenics every day in your typical first world city.

If your fear mongering was actually true, we'd be all dead already and our kids probably wouldn't surpass their fourth year.

You should rather tell us what the **** is wrong with you, that you have to start such a thread and display that this topic somehow affects you. Nobody comes up with this "just so".



Let it out.
Cesha Xenon
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2013-12-22 00:32:57 UTC
Romeo and Juliet are sitting and smoking the joint.
Juliet gives it a few puffs, then says in a husky, smoky voice:
-I love you so much, Romeo!
Then gives the joint back to Romeo, who smokes it for a bit and replies:
-Same $***!

Russian translation


Blink