The adverse health effects from cigarette smoking account for more than 440,000 deaths, or nearly one of every five deaths, each year in the United States.
More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined.
If nobody smoked, one of every three cancer deaths in the United States would not happen.
Smoking causes an estimated 90% of all lung cancer deaths in men and 80% of all lung cancer deaths in women.
An estimated 90% of all deaths from chronic obstructive lung disease are caused by smoking.
Smoking and Increased Health Risks
Compared with nonsmokers, smoking is estimated to increase the risk of—
Coronary heart disease by 2 to 4 times
Stroke by 2 to 4 times
Men developing lung cancer by 23 times
Women developing lung cancer by 13 times and
Dying from chronic obstructive lung diseases (such as chronic bronchitis and emphysema) by 12 to 13 times
So yes > 37% edgier and up to 23% cooler and sicker and deader sooner but doctors more better richer and construction of more n more hospitals
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#454,477
@previous (Syntax)
I don't know what we would do without your strong dedication to copy/paste factoids.
Syntax replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#454,478
@previous (D)
I'll let ya in on a little known secrete. Often when I do my look ups on Google I quickly click an ad. Cause that puts money in Googles wallet which then puts money in my wallet.
Also honestly I am still shocked by how bad the numbers are.
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 33 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#454,484
@previous (Syntax)
It's basically a weighted sum of deaths for most types of cancer, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, stroke, reproductive complications, infant mortality, and probably a couple other things I'm leaving out. The weight is an estimate of how many of those deaths could be linked to smoking within each disease category. (Oh, they also factor in people who died in fires!) The actual report those numbers came from is here and has a detailed discussion of estimating the health impacts of smoking. The report does not mention benefits like coolness or edginess at all though. :(
(Edited 6 minutes later.)
Syntax replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^][v]#454,485
@previous (D) > The report does not mention benefits like coolness or edginess at all though.
LOL
Thank ya for that. And in fact I did use the CDC website for my copypasta. Page 10 & 29 of your link - Horrid just Horrid list of terrible stuff smokers end up getting.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#454,500
the kids here are weird about it
Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,635
A converation regarding absolutely anything should always be reserved for those who wish to participate in the conversation, once one has decided to dismiss the conversation, or simply not take part, he/she may not then attempt to criticize the conversation from afar.
It isn't much of anyone's concern, why I, or anyone else smokes, and we should be allowed our chit-chats without onlookers rudely, and shamelessly speculating about our motivations.
Not to mention, by which of course I mean mention heavy handidly, the posting of information regarding the harms of smoking, is impolite, and an insult to our intelligence, however well intentioned it may be.
squeegee !first/o5zA joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,647
@previous (Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk)
your smoking is a public nuisance and a health hazard that will cause you the kinds of illnesses in life that drive up the cost of insurance for everyone else. so yes it is very much the concern of the public whether or not you smoke. like it or not.
squeegee !first/o5zA double-posted this 13 years ago, 38 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,648
@454,635 (Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk)
also i bet you litter cigarette butts all over the place.
Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk replied with this 13 years ago, 8 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,690
@454,647 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
The only people really effected by second hand smoke are those who live with people who smoke indoors, and regular patrons, and staff of smoking establishments. And in those cases, simply don't date smokers, or go to smoking environments. The guy on the street smoking a cigarette has pretty much no effect on your health.
Plenty of things drive up the cost of insurance, overreating for example, I don't see a lot of genuine dislike towards people who over indulge themselves on icecream, the fact is, it's simply fashionable to hate on smoking, and you're just being part of a trend. Cigarette sales pay for plenty of things, by the way, they are taxed highly for a reason. So, if you want to get into economics, come at me, fucker.
I do that, but that's because I'm a shitty person, I also litter soda cans, and such.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,693
@454,455 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
If you don't give up your lettuce smoking habit soon you will die. :(
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,694
@454,690 (Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk)
I'm actually going to side with you here, bud.
The effects of catching the scent of cigarette smoke occasionally outdoors in open air isn't hurting you anymore than your neighbor having a BBQ, going to a bonfire, or walking on the street for a few minutes. In terms of hydrocarbon combustion products and carbon monoxide, you might as well be standing around watching your friend roast a hot dog. Backyard BBQs and lighter fluid and cars are spewing far more crazy shit into the air than you care to imagine. If you are forced to be in an enclosed room with someone who is chain smoking, then you are at a higher risk. (especially if you are an infant) Otherwise, if you are a healthy adult, your risk from people smoking around you occasionally (provided they aren't blowing the smoke in your face because you walk up to them and complain like a douchebag) is utterly fucking minimal..
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,700
It's no worse than having a pet skunk that sprays random people all the time.
!KNs1o0VDv6 replied with this 13 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,701
@previous (J)
Perhaps if skunk spray were carcinogenic and you could control where and when your pet skunk sprayed people. So... no. That comparison is crap.
(Edited 4 minutes later.)
Anonymous D double-posted this 13 years ago, 54 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,702
@previous (!KNs1o0VDv6)
WTF?! Why am I suddenly posting with a trip? weirditude.
Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,703
@previous (D)
Calling me "Bud" was close enough to a trip.
@454,700 (J)
I'm not going to entertain your comment with an actual rebuttal, but I will ask, do you think people should be allowed to own skunks?
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,704
@previous (Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk) > I'm not going to entertain your comment with an actual rebuttal, but I will ask, do you think people should be allowed to own skunks?
For skunks not fixed so they can't spray: As much as they should be allowed to smoke.
Can you imagine a world where most people owned pet skunks and let them spray everywhere and they said it smelled good, and then they persecuted people who didn't like it saying something's wrong with them? That's been much of the world for the last 400 years but with tobacco.
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Anonymous D replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,707
@454,703 (Postmortem !!FVJOHfXUk)
When you can figure out who is posting by text voice, then you have truly joined the club... bud. Only then have you transcended such things as tripcodes and other plebeian means of identification.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 37 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,710
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^][v]#454,730
@454,647 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Observe how liberal do this. First they create a 'system' that's going to 'benefit everybody' then they twist in in to obligations for people to 'better for the system'.
Meta joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 50 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#454,734
@454,647 (squeegee !first/o5zA)
Serious question: if Postmortem, as an adult, decides to smoke why can't he? You're free to avoid him (and other smokers IRL), you're free to exclude them from your property, you're free to not do business with any establishment that permits smoking. In fact, most places can't allow smoking due to government bans.
Everyone knows smoking causes a panoply of diseases and is really bad for you, etc, but health insurance companies have factored that into their calculations and smokers are charged a higher premium, even under Obamacare. Not to mention smokers have reduced life expectancy and so presumably won't collect as much in Social Security and Medicare.
Meta double-posted this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#454,735
Also tobacco products are heavily taxed, partially to offset the increased healthcare costs of smoking.
Anonymous J replied with this 13 years ago, 14 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^][v]#454,794