Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Can smoking be good for you?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HadleyH

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,811
Location
Top of the Hill
This is one of the good things it does ... among other things.


It calms the nerves..... when you know you are going to be blown up the next second



soldier-smoking.jpg


soldier-smoking-022908.jpg


images-3.jpg


US-soldiers-in-Afghanista-002.jpg


artsoldiersmokegi.jpg
 

Tomasso

Incurably Addicted
Messages
13,719
Location
USA
HadleyH said:
It calms the nerves..... when you know you are going to be blown up the next second
Personally,that would be the time that I would reach for drink.....but then I'm half Irish....[huh]
 

Vintage lover

A-List Customer
Messages
359
Location
In times past
HadleyH said:
This is one of the good things it does ... among other things.


It calms the nerves..... when you know you are going to be blown up the next second



soldier-smoking.jpg


soldier-smoking-022908.jpg


images-3.jpg


US-soldiers-in-Afghanista-002.jpg


artsoldiersmokegi.jpg
Leave it to heros to make something look good. My understanding is that for a long time soldiers were given free packs of cigarettes with their rations.
 

Queue

Familiar Face
Messages
89
Location
Washington, DC, Earth-616
Vintage lover said:
Leave it to heros to make something look good. My understanding is that for a long time soldiers were given free packs of cigarettes with their rations.

I would expect that no small part of that is because when our boys got out of the military, many of them kept smoking what they were given for free during the wars. Or maybe I'm remembering this from a half-watched episode of Mad Men a while back...
 

Vintage lover

A-List Customer
Messages
359
Location
In times past
Queue said:
I would expect that no small part of that is because when our boys got out of the military, many of them kept smoking what they were given for free during the wars. Or maybe I'm remembering this from a half-watched episode of Mad Men a while back...
Actually, I think it was in the first episode that Don Draper was talking to a waiter who smoked Old Gold because that was what he was given in the service.
 

Miss sofia

One Too Many
Messages
1,675
Location
East sussex, England
Queue said:
I would expect that no small part of that is because when our boys got out of the military, many of them kept smoking what they were given for free during the wars. Or maybe I'm remembering this from a half-watched episode of Mad Men a while back...
I would agree, my great uncle Harry survived the trenches and always had a tot of rum and smoked right up until he died, because he said they were given rum and cigarettes rations to steady the nerves. He said it kept him going through the next world war as well as sixty years of marriage!
 

Chainsaw

Suspended
Messages
392
Location
Toronto
When I was more in the prime of my training, I was doing push ups on two fingers, had close to zero percent body fat and could literally run 5 clicks. I was still smoking half a packs of cigs a day.

My mother said to me your ruining your health, I said "whoa, I'll put my health up against any of these non smokers. Look at their diets, look at their lack of exercise, maybe I should start preaching to them how their lethargic lifestyles are a form of passive aggressive suicide!"

At least I care about my body, even if I am a smoker!
 

Niven1932

New in Town
Messages
5
Location
United Kingdom
The snap as the cigarette case is closed, the whiff of petrol from the Zippo - all part of what I wear and who I am...

Despite all the bans on smoking, it still remains a social norm in my circles.

Need to stop though. Really do. If only to stop contracting hypothermia every Winter whilst shivering out the back of the pub with a film of ice forming on my beer. And my chest is starting to hurt (at long last).

Can it be good for you? No. But then, watching so much 40's/50's film noir is not acting as a deterrent.
 

KittyT

I'll Lock Up
Messages
4,463
Location
Boston, MA
I quit smoking a year ago after smoking 1/2 a pack to a pack a day for almonst 20 years. I have never regretted it and feel great. Obviously, everyone has different reactions to it and while you can smoke and be incredibly physically fit, that still doesn't mean that you aren't doing your body damage.

It's funny how so many people smoke to relax or steady their nerves, since nicotine is a stimulant.

Chainsaw said:
I was still doing 10 to 12 hours of concrete, two hours of Marshall arts, jogging 2 to 5 clicks/kms. And sleeping in the truck on the way to work. I never had a problem with my breathing.

I never had a problem with it either. It's only after you quit that you realize the effect it was having that you didn't actually notice because it had been the norm.

Chainsaw said:
Do you think if we measure the years of happiness of a smoker, in comparison to that of a non smoker, we will find that on average smokers live happier lives? And is it because they blow their smoke in the faces of the non smokers?

I've actually been a lot happier since I quit. Why? Because I have a LOT more spending cash in my pocket and less stress due to my finances. At 5-7 packs a week, once cigs hit over $7/pack, I decided that was enough. You do the math.
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
KittyT said:
It's funny how so many people smoke to relax or steady their nerves, since nicotine is a stimulant.

See post #28 on stimulants--maybe the situations are similar.

My chain-smoking sister used to say how fit she was (even though she couldn't keep up with me on a walk). Her first major sign that smoking was bad for her was a massive stroke at age 54.
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
KittyT said:
Obviously, everyone has different reactions to it and while you can smoke and be incredibly physically fit, that still doesn't mean that you aren't doing your body damage.

Good point--fitness isn't the same as health.

My Uncle Gene quit smoking when he saw that he couldn't keep up with his little brother (my dad).
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
Chainsaw said:
I've smoked half my life. Now at 32 have kicked the habit, and become a second hand, and occasional smoker. I have found now that my hay-fever has returned with avengence, as well as my allergies.

Possibly my mental endurance has been affected negatively as well.

Is there anything possitive health wise, emotionaly, et-cetera that we can take away from smoking?

Looking up "allergies after quitting smoking" on Google, it looks like you have a lot of company. (I'm having a slow day at work.)

I'm not sure if you're still interested in being a non-smoker or occasional smoker. If you wish to control your allergies via smoking, you can skip the rest of this post.

I've never quit smoking (since I never started), but I used to be constantly congested and my allergies were bad enough when I was a kid to require shots. Back in January, I stopped eating wheat, and in February, cut way back on all the carbs. I've had no allergies and no hay fever this year. I can't remember the last time I needed a Sudafed--and I used to take it almost every day. Several people who eat a paleo diet mentioned that their allergies are better since changing their diet, too:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/seasonal-allergies-treatment/

When you give up grains, this tends to work out to be a low-carb diet (as long as you go easy on the fruit and honey), which will help even out blood sugar peaks and valleys that can make you hungry, tired and mentally foggy.

Giving up grains and legumes (and for some people, dairy) is a big change for most people. I don't know if this would work for you, but it really helped me with a lot of health problems, and I'm happy I made the change.
 

Chainsaw

Suspended
Messages
392
Location
Toronto
Gee's Paisley, I feel like I'm being courted by a born again or something, no offence intended.

By the same token, I could put you on a simple exercise plan that cure all the woes you don't have.

Giving up grains, is almost sacrilege for Europeans, and hopefully Americans alike. The core of our soul, life being, culture, comes from grains, and the hard work that goes into getting them to our table.

I don't know If I'm ready to mary a Geisha girl, and start eating soy beans. I'm sure my grandmother would shoot me, in fact I know she would. And I thank her for that.

We are just trying to have a little fun here, but thank greatly for raining on our parade, I think my cigarette went out.
 

Paisley

I'll Lock Up
Messages
5,439
Location
Indianapolis
Since you announced you'd "kicked the habit" (sort of), and complained about allergies, I hope you'll pardon my confusion.

So, enjoy your smoking, or not smoking, whichever is the case.
 

Lexybeast

A-List Customer
Messages
353
Location
Ireland
Did you quit recently?

The first time my girlfriend quit smoking, her body reacted very badly- it was basically like she had a really bad sinus infection for 6 months, lots of mucus and sneezing and whatnot. A doctor told her it was because smoking destroys natural mucus and your body gets used to producing a lot more of it to compensate. For some people, when they quit, it keeps on doing that for up to a year. It was basically six months of hell for her.

However she's since quit again (permanently it seems), and this time has had no issue whatsoever. Her diet is a lot different now though- a lot more greens, a lot less meat and grains.
 

Chainsaw

Suspended
Messages
392
Location
Toronto
Thanks Lexy, that's very informative, and not preachy, self righteous, or judgemental at all. Maybe that's how smoking helps to prevent allergies too. Cheers man!
 
Since I smoke cigars infrequently, I come across some information that can be interesting. This is a bit of it when it comes to tobacco:

"1998: The National Cancer Institute Monograph on cigars:
Tobacco critics will insist that tobacco users are poisoning themselves, yet statistics from the American Chemical Society note that only 25% of (overwhelmingly cigarette) smokers develop lung cancer. Moreover, in the National Cancer Institute’s Monograph 9: Cigars – Health Effects and Trends (1998) – which is a review of other studies – shows just how “deadly” cigars are . . .and aren’t:
The NCI Monograph in Chapter 4 includes Table 3, which compares the rate of death between smokers and non-smokers. Non-smokers are presumed to have a rate of 1.0. Cigar smokers who smoked an average of 1-2 cigars per day had an overall death-due-to smoking rate of just 1.02 or 2% more than non-smokers. With a likely error rate of 5%(known in the medical statistics community as the “confidence interval”), this means that – statistically speaking – there’s essentially no difference in risk between cigars smokers of 1-2 cigars per day and non-smokers.
< Even cigar smokers who consumed an average of 3-4 cigars per day had a death rate of just 1.08, or 8% higher than non-smokers and for those who smoked five or more per day (has to be machine-mades, don’t you think?), the rate was only 1.17 or 17% higher.
< These rates can be compared for impact to cigarette smokers to show how low the death rate for cigar smokers is.
Cigarette users who smoked 20 cigarettes a day – that’s a pack a day – had an overall death ratio of 1.69, or 69% higher than non-smokers. The death rate was higher at younger ages: 2.45 or 145% higher for those aged 35-49 and 2.15 or 115% higher for those aged 50-64. After that, the death rate drops off.
So, what’s the actual risk for cigar and cigarette smokers? To understand this, we need to know the overall probability of dying of cancer. This is provided by the Statistical Research and Applications Branch of the National Cancer Institute through its Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) program’s DevCan database.
The SEER chart for the overall probability of dying from cancer in the U.S. for registries reporting from 2001-2003 showed that:
< From age 35-50, the probability of dying from cancer was 0.18% to 0.94%; not very high.
< From age 50-65, the probability ranged from 0.94% to 4.70%, still not much.
< From age 65-80, the probability rose from 4.70% to 13.97% and
< Above age 80, the probability of dying from cancer rose from 13.97% to 21.40% for those over age 95.
Now these figures include both smokers (than about 22% of the population) and non-smokers (about 78% of the population), so the figures are a little too high for non-smokers and a little too low for smokers. But given the 8-to-2 ratio of non-smokers to smokers, the overall difference is not very great.
If we apply the death ratios from the NCI’s Monograph, Chapter 4, Table 3 we used above, check out these actual probabilities for dying from cancer:

< For those aged 35-50, the overall average was 0.18 to 0.94%, but for cigar smokers consuming 1-2 cigars a day, it’s less at about 0.13 to 0.68%! According to the statistics, you’re better off smoking!
For pack-a-day cigarette smokers aged 35-50, the probability of dying is about 0.44 to 2.30% That’s not 44%, that’s less than one-half of one percent, up to 2.3% in this age group. Not very high, is it?
< For those aged 50-64, the overall probability of dying from cancer is 0.94 to 4.7%. For cigar smokers consuming 1-2 cigars a day, the death probability is 1.03% to 5.17%, a little higher, but hardly an epidemic.
For pack-a-day cigarette smokers aged 50-64, the probability of death is 2.02to 10.1%, a little more than twice as high. But if “Smoking Kills” as the British “warning” labels suggest, how come only 2-10% will die in this mid-age range when non-smokers die at a rate of about 1-4.7%?
< For those aged 65-80, the overall probability of dying from cancer gets serious, at 4.7% to 13.97% overall. For the cigar smoker of 1-2 cigars a day, there’s essentially no difference as the death ratio is within the margin of error. Cigar enthusiasts like George Burns and Winston Churchill are the most famous examples of smokers who, as Burns liked to joke, outlived their doctors.
For pack-a-day cigarette users, the probability of death from 65-80 ranges from 7.99% at age 65 up to 23.75% or almost a quarter of the population. However, note that at age 80, about 14% of non-smokers are dying as well! This is hardly the mass death rate we would expect, especially considering that the average lifespan in the U.S. reached 77.5 years as of 2003.
< Past age 80, the relative risks of smoking decline as the chances of contracting cancer among the general population increases markedly. The probability of death via cancer among nonsmokers starts at 13.97% at age 80 and over 95, the probability is 21.40%. For cigar smokers of 1-2 cigars a day, the figures are the same or less, and are less for smokers of 3-4 cigars as day as well!
For pack-a-day cigarette smokers, the probability of dying from cancer is still greater than for cigar smokers or non-smokers, at 18.02 to 27.61%, again hardly an epidemic.
What does all this tell us? It says that there are risks in everyday life and there are risks in using tobacco. But they are hardly the Plague, which infects people in 2-6 days and if left untreated, will kill an infected person within a couple of weeks."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
109,677
Messages
3,086,462
Members
54,480
Latest member
PISoftware
Top