Rath said:
No smoking is still toxic in moderation. Your body can't deal with some of the poisons in tobacco smoke at all, so unlike cannabis or alcohol it can't process it. Thats why even light smokers suffer from lung damage. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/14/5/315
|
So? Light lung damage isn't going to kill you... and even if it will... who cares. People should be able to do whatever they want with their bodies.
| mrstickball said: Mafoo - It's because people want to control others. We've been doing it for centuries. |
I hope one day a country will start that keeps government from controlling us. Oh yea, we used to be that. To bad mans desire to control others destroyed it.
At least it took a few hundred years. Let’s hope the next country that tries it succeeds longer.
Kasz216 said:
So? Light lung damage isn't going to kill you... and even if it will... who cares. People should be able to do whatever they want with their bodies.
|
But it's not only their bodies that are always harmed by smoking, hence the problem.
This is also the reason that many states have banned smoking in restaurants, public places, university campuses, and the like.
Words Of Wisdom said:
But it's not only their bodies that are always harmed by smoking, hence the problem. This is also the reason that many states have banned smoking in restaurants, public places, university campuses, and the like. |
So ban smoking in restruants, public places and universities. Problem solved.
All I care about is that smoking costs the healthcare system billions of dollars a year. It causes far more long-term health problems than alcohol.
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
| akuma587 said: All I care about is that smoking costs the healthcare system billions of dollars a year. It causes far more long-term health problems than alcohol. |
I bet it brings in more billions in extra taxes then it costs in billions.
Also a lot of those billions lost from the "healtchare system" are private dollars. Not the governments.
So i'm not seeing your logic.
Bob Johnson is losing thousands of dollars in healtcare costs because he smokes. Lets tax him more! High Five!
Also it should be noted that the "Cigarettes cause ____ amount of healthcare costs" is on poor ground.
Since they take a piracy like stance to it.... because
A) Everyone who smokes and remotley gets something cigarrete related is counted as if it came from smoking.
B) Everyone who gets such a disease is treated as if they would be perfectly healthy for the rest of their lives. Never mind the fact that most of these people would just get sick later on in life and incur similar charges, and also that these people will incur later charges just for getting routine healthcare checkups.
| Kasz216 said: Also it should be noted that the "Cigarettes cause ____ amount of healthcare costs" is on poor ground. Since they take a piracy like stance to it.... because A) Everyone who smokes and remotley gets something cigarrete related is counted as if it came from smoking. B) Everyone who gets such a disease is treated as if they would be perfectly healthy for the rest of their lives. Never mind the fact that most of these people would just get sick later on in life and incur similar charges, and also that these people will incur later charges just for getting routine healthcare checkups. |
Actually I'm pretty damned sure that the studies done on the costs of smoking to the healthcare system did take those two factors into account.
Rath said:
Actually I'm pretty damned sure that the studies done on the costs of smoking to the healthcare system did take those two factors into account.
|
Not true.
The studies that do take that into account actually show that costs would be higher in a nonsmoking population then a population that does smoke.
Like this one for the sweedish
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/337/15/1052
Which only produces favorable overall results if you include discounting.
Which is very important when you consider the fact that the people writing the paper are for smoking taxes to discourage people from doing such.
And another interestingly from sweeden... here. Though in this case it's obesity and not smoking.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18711498
Being healthy costs the healthcare system more then any negative effect like smoking or eating fast food. Maybe we should put a giant tax on vitamins!
How much does a pack of cigarettes cost in the US?
A pack of 20, of let's say Marlboro.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
