Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
hardcore_gamer

Why is smoking in moderation worse than drinking in moderation?

Recommended Posts

We are fed all of this anti-smoking propaganda that smoking causes this or that condition and is bad for us, but what kind of smoker are anti-smokers even talking about? Doesn't the same thing apply to smoking as alcohol, in that moderation is the key? Why should a person that smokes a cigar once or twice a month be more likely to suffer serious problems as somebody that goes out partying that same amount of times? I don't see anybody claiming that all drinkers are just as likely to get liver cancer merely by the merit of drinking any amount of alcohol. Why is it then that smokers are just all lumped into one single group?

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

We are fed all of this anti-smoking propaganda

Who's "we", smokerguy?

Share this post


Link to post

Anti-smoking propaganda is good because smoking is bad and everybody knows that smoking is bad including the smokers themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

The general public. Anti-smoking propaganda is everywhere. And most of it is bullshit.


Is it now? Which bit's false, the impotency, cataracts, low birth weight, putrid breath or lung cancer?

I feel like you would benefit from sharing Goatlord's blunt.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

We are fed all of this anti-smoking propaganda that smoking causes this or that condition and is bad for us, but what kind of smoker are anti-smokers even talking about? Doesn't the same thing apply to smoking as alcohol, in that moderation is the key? Why should a person that smokes a cigar once or twice a month be more likely to suffer serious problems as somebody that goes out partying that same amount of times? I don't see anybody claiming that all drinkers are just as likely to get liver cancer merely by the merit of drinking any amount of alcohol. Why is it then that smokers are just all lumped into one single group?


Will you feel fun because cancer? I bet you not.

Share this post


Link to post

Well i confess that i've smoked paper when i was 14 as far i remember, but that was just an experment, even through i already knew the effects of smoking, as for drinking, never, although i don't regret smoking paper, because it felt relaxing.
As for cigarretes and those other things, never tried and will never will.
Although if there's a smoker standing to me in a closed area, i have trouble breathing.

Share this post


Link to post

From a biological point of view, drinking in moderation is stressing your liver, which has the best regeneration rate of all bodily organs. Smoking damages bronchial tissue and mouth, which don't regenerate anywhere near as easily. Statistics also document more smokers dead per year than drinkers. So there, watch and learn:

Share this post


Link to post
SFoZ911 said:

smoking is bad and everybody knows that smoking is bad including the smokers themselves.


So? KFC is bad and everybody knows it including the people that eat it. So is alcohol. So is not going to the gym. Stop trying to take away other people's liberties.

j4rio said:

Statistics also document more smokers dead per year than drinkers.


I would argue that this is more because many smokers are ignorant of what moderation actually means. For some reason smoking everyday isn't a taboo like drinking everyday is. There are way more smoking addicts that alcohol addicts because very few people call smoking addicts out on their addiction even though they smoke whole packs everyday like they would if they were drinking everyday.

This however, does not discredit the idea that smoking isn't likely to harm you in moderation. It is also worth pointing out that not all smokes are consumed in the same way. Your aren't suppose to inhale the smoke from cigars for example, like is expected of you when you smoke normal smokes.

Share this post


Link to post

OP: You remember the 'Carnage in Paris' thread? Specifically, do you remember when I made this post, in order to address why some people here seem to dislike you?

Caffeine Freak said:

Honestly, I wouldn't say I have a 'negative' view of you per se, but I can understand why others do---and I think it has less to do with your politics and more to do with the fact that you often seem to pop off and say stupid shit without really evaluating it first. All of us do from time to time, but I think you're especially prone to it. You start threads that pose either loaded questions or questions that are silly and/or easily answerable with a bit of research.


...Yeah. This thread is a pretty good example of that.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

I would argue that this is more because many smokers are ignorant of what moderation actually means.


The problem is people don't smoke in moderation. Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances available. Willpower usually isn't sufficient enough to fully control it.

If you want my personal point of view, I find cigarettes to be horrible form of nicotine application. If I want a nicotine buzz, I just take a nicotine gum, a single piece has about four times more nicotine as a single cigarette and it's free of the harmful tar.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

For some reason smoking everyday isn't a taboo like drinking everyday is.

Drinking every day (in amounts that make the word "taboo" appropriate) will quickly fuck you up in such ways that you won't be very different from a drug addict. Smoking won't. At least it won't affect your personality in such a drastic way. So not really a surprise.

Share this post


Link to post

Why is smoking in moderation worse than drinking in moderation?


Because your body is capable of dealing with moderate amounts of alcohol. It breaks alcohol down into other products, as part of its normal digestive system. It's only when consumption reaches high levels that these derivative products start damaging organs and your liver enlarges those regions dealing with alcohol breakdown so much, that it starts to (literally) scar.

Smoke does neither have natural nor moderate amounts. Every gulp contains carcinogens and is damaging from the very start. A single glass of beer will 'vanish', along with all its effects with no permanent harm done; a single cigarette is damaging and will leave effects.

I've seen my fair share of bodies and you can always tell with just a cursory glance at their lungs if this person had lived in a city or the countryside... let alone if this was a smoker.

Share this post


Link to post

^ Cancer is a different category and is usually much more random, lots of people diagnosed with lung cancer have not been smokers and lots of smokers have never developed cancer. The carcinogenity of smoking isn't the main problem, the obstruction of airways from auto-inflammatory response is. Also known as COPD.

Share this post


Link to post

The only thing I disagree with in the Anti-Smoking PSAs is how some of them absolutely demonizes anyone who may have smoked or who is smoking.

Share this post


Link to post
j4rio said:

Cancer is a different category and is usually much more random, lots of people diagnosed with lung cancer have not been smokers and lots of smokers have never developed cancer.


indeed.

Also , There are a lot of people who reach the age of 80 and higher while having been smokers since their 14, a lot of examples would be those whom where Kids at the end of world war 2... It is a gamble against the odds and a severe gamble around the strength of your body. So...

The most important thing i could think off surrounding cigarettes would be to enforce the 18+ age rating on them to greater extremes, while leaving the 18+ age group in peace with their choice to smoke. Enforce a gigantic inhumane fine on the sale of cigarettes to minors in the same way that selling cocaine to adults would be highly illegal... problem solved.

If that is to extreme in the eyes of the "haters" then they need to stop acting like they do now about smokers.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's just like anything else with health risks: We all know doing less is better, and doing none is better still, however some of us enjoy unhealthy things in moderate amounts. Nothing wrong with that, and if someone thinks there is, well.. That's their problem :)

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

The general public. Anti-smoking propaganda is everywhere. And most of it is bullshit.


General public my ass.
It's the general public that wants to see smoking reduced.

Funny that you always assume that your own pitiful opinion is the absolute truth. Nearly symptomatic for a right wing conservative.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

I would argue that this is more because many smokers are ignorant of what moderation actually means.

Given that there's probably no known safe level of exposure to the carcinogens in cigarettes, what would you consider a moderate consumption level to be?

Your aren't suppose to inhale the smoke from cigars for example, like is expected of you when you smoke normal smokes.

So you end up with mouth cancer instead of lung cancer.

Share this post


Link to post

A lot of things are bad. But some things are more bad than others.

Beer in moderation isn't too bad. Cigarettes in moderation are a bit worse. Bullets in moderation is really bad.

Share this post


Link to post
hardcore_gamer said:

We are fed all of this anti-smoking propaganda that smoking causes this or that condition and is bad for us, but what kind of smoker are anti-smokers even talking about? Doesn't the same thing apply to smoking as alcohol, in that moderation is the key? Why should a person that smokes a cigar once or twice a month be more likely to suffer serious problems as somebody that goes out partying that same amount of times? I don't see anybody claiming that all drinkers are just as likely to get liver cancer merely by the merit of drinking any amount of alcohol. Why is it then that smokers are just all lumped into one single group?

I think most people and doctors would agree that just a couple of cigars a month or 4-5 cigarettes a month can't be considered a health hazard.

I think so at least. Most recommend not smoking at all because it's a slippery slope and it becomes a routine.

Share this post


Link to post

Drinking does puts more strain on your liver since alcohol takes hours to seperate from the blood (depending on the amout). But our livers are strong enough to handle, but its not a machine. It has a limit. Too much drinking for too long can cause cancer or any other life threatening disease. Usually when its too much. But a new liver can be transplanted and the organ also regenerates over time (doesn't mean you should drink a lot and think its ok). Smoking has a larger effect, as the tar produced stays in the lungs, and over time, difficulty in breathing and gas exchange. And the lungs are not regenerative nor are they transplanted. Smoking should be stopped.

Share this post


Link to post
VGA said:

I think most people and doctors would agree that just a couple of cigars a month or 4-5 cigarettes a month can't be considered a health hazard.

I think so at least. Most recommend not smoking at all because it's a slippery slope and it becomes a routine.


I'd be hard-pressed to say that 4-5 cigarettes a month would REALLY hurt you long term. I've smoked off and on for 5 years, and the problem, as any smoker could tell you, is just how easy it is to do 4-5 cigarettes a day, let alone a month. Hell, I was probably doing 12-15 a day at my peak. I buy cigarettes maybe 1-3 times a year now, and the rest of the time, I usually only smoke if I'm at a party and can bum one off someone else. So effectively, I've reduced my consumption to maybe 1/200 (very rough estimate) of what it was at its peak.

Share this post


Link to post

Or you could just not drink or smoke. If you have this many fucks to give about either, maybe you should reevaluate your priorities. I used to drink and smoke, don't anymore, and feel great. Nor do I feel I'm missing out. Personally, I believe both are social crutches, but that's another topic altogether. Anyway, if you're of legal age neither is entirely banned (at least in the US), so stop trying to convince some anonymous internet audience and enjoy a nip or a fag.

Share this post


Link to post

Just want to clarify though, that my drinking of a few beers a week after work has nothing to do with a social crutch. It helps calm my nerves after a stressful day and I love the taste. I know there's many ways to achieve a state of calmness, but this is one way I get there. I haven't smoked tobacco for ages now because it tastes bad, smells bad and costs more than weed (!) in this country.

Share this post


Link to post

Because the damage that alcohol causes is less permanent as opposed to the damage caused by smoking.

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×