My Obnoxious Please Quit Smoking Thread.

[IrishLax]

wooly I'm sure you appreciate this but I'm just going to state the obvious for a second:

1. Automobiles are a necessity for modern life. Cigarettes are not. That's why people accept the inherent risk of driving. I'm also fairly confident that your per capita odds of fatality per driver vs. per smoker heavily leans towards the smoker. Raw numbers are garbage.

2. Eating food is a necessity to survive. Cigarettes are not. Of course, a cheeseburger is not your healthiest food choice. But if you banned/taxed cheeseburgers, those people would just move on to something else unhealthy like fried chicken. And then if you banned fried chicken, they'd just move on to pizza. And so on and so forth. The cheeseburger is not the problem, it's generally eating unhealthy and not exercising that is the problem. We already have initiatives and laws in place that attempt to discourage unhealthy behavior, but because it's a more complex problem than banning/campaigning against one singular manufactured item it isn't attacked with the same fervor as cigarettes. And obviously, if you wanted to ban/tax ALL "unhealthy" food... you'd run into a whole myriad of issues and face such steep, widespread public opposition it would never happen.

 

[Fbolt]

interesting convo here. as a smoker, i'm waiting for the day a fatass tells me to quit smoking. ha-i'm not one to shy away and would certainly give them a piece of my mind. hasn't happened yet.

re: the beard-that's all mine man-thx.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

This isn't directed towards BobD, his heart is in the right place and is a good dude, BUT......

I'm sick and tired of being told what to do. Society rams shit down our throats non-stop, and we're at a point where you are an evil person if you don't pay $18 for an organic head of lettuce. Fuck it all, live your life. Smoke if you got 'em!!!!!!!

 

[Irish Insanity]

I don't see this as a shity thread at all. Seems BobD is using a slow time on this site (the offseason) to express his caring about humanity and using his experiences to express why he feels that way.

I myself have never really smoked. Both my parents did, and much of my family. I can remember at the age of 18 months, yes 18 months, picking up a lit cigarette out of an ash tray at the house and taking a puff. I can remember chocking for what seemed like forever. It was basically a thats what you get moment. Both of my parents smoked until I was about 10. Then they both quit. It definitely wan't easy for them. Now they are both in their early to mid 50s and one has started it all over again. My grandfather died from cancer linked to his smoking and tar inhalation as a roofer. My mom, uncle, and other grandfather have all defeated cancer. My mother in law, less than a month ago, defeated cancer that was directly linked to her smoking. She went into the emergency room with a non related issue. They found an issue in one of her lungs. She was very very lucky. It hadn't reached any of her lymph nodes. It was the early stage possible. Surgical removal and no further treatment. The surgery wasn't easy, but not needing chemo or radiation afterwards was definitely a blessing. Not all cancers are linked to smoking, but it definitely greatly increases your risk.

While I see the argument about cars and cheeseburgers, travel of some form as well as food, are necessities for us. Cheeseburgers and cars are just a form chosen to do so. Smoking on the other hand isn't a necessity at all.

EDIT: Apparently LAX beat me to the cheeseburger and car part while my slow ass was trying to type

 

[IrishLax]

This isn't directed towards BobD, his heart is in the right place and is a good dude, BUT......

I'm sick and tired of being told what to do. Society rams shit down our throats non-stop, and we're at a point where you are an evil person if you don't pay $18 for an organic head of lettuce. Fuck it all, live your life. Smoke if you got 'em!!!!!!!

This is basically how I feel.

I do not care if someone smokes.
I do not care if someone gambles.
I do not care if someone is fat.
I do not care who someone marries.
etc. etc. etc.

And accordingly, I also don't want to pay for the healthcare of people who are unhealthy because of choices they make of their own volition. If we end up moving towards a full socialized medical system then as a society you almost have to start putting regulations on unhealthy behavior. I'd love to know how much $$ obesity costs to treat each year. It's probably absurd. Smoking, because there is probably such a smaller demographic that participates these days, probably pales in comparison.

 

[woolybug25]

wooly I'm sure you appreciate this but I'm just going to state the obvious for a second:

1. Automobiles are a necessity for modern life. Cigarettes are not. That's why people accept the inherent risk of driving. I'm also fairly confident that your per capita odds of fatality per driver vs. per smoker heavily leans towards the smoker. Raw numbers are garbage.

Tell that to someone that lives in NYC, where cigarette taxes are the highest in the world. Driving is not necessary, but for the sake of argument, lets say it is. Then shouldn't it be more important to hedge the inherent danger it causes? Not only that, its a danger that is shared by non users that could be hit by them. There are more non driving auto deaths in this country than there are deaths caused by second hand smoke. My point isn't that smoking is good for you, its that its unfairly taxed and looked at more harshly than its deserves.

2. Eating food is a necessity to survive. Cigarettes are not. Of course, a cheeseburger is not your healthiest food choice. But if you banned/taxed cheeseburgers, those people would just move on to something else unhealthy like fried chicken. And then if you banned fried chicken, they'd just move on to pizza. And so on and so forth. The cheeseburger is not the problem, it's generally eating unhealthy and not exercising that is the problem. We already have initiatives and laws in place that attempt to discourage unhealthy behavior, but because it's a more complex problem than banning/campaigning against one singular manufactured item it isn't attacked with the same fervor as cigarettes. And obviously, if you wanted to ban/tax ALL "unhealthy" food... you'd run into a whole myriad of issues and face such steep, widespread public opposition it would never happen.

Eating bad food is not a necessity to live. Eating poor food is a worse choice than choosing to smoke. Yet, in this country (its not like this in other countries), we spend WAAY more money and effort/money fighting something that kills 1/10th of the people. I'm not saying that you ban either, i'm saying that why do we spend significantly less effort on heart disease than smoking when smoking is far less of a problem? The bigger the problem, the bigger the effort should be, right?

There are hardly any taxes on bad foods. But yet, over half of the cost of cigarettes is taxes, a lot of which aren't even used for programs related to tobacco or lung cancer. Its a facade for the government to steal people's money, and they have the majority of Americans duped.

Also, from a business standpoint, big tobacco spends more on negative advertising than any industry in the world. More of a percentage than alcohol, motorcycles and prescription drugs combined. All non essential choices people make that are more likely to kill you. Prescription drugs not only do not pay for prevention advertisement, they are subsidized by the government.

It's simply illogical.

 

[IrishLax]

Also, down the stupid cars + food vs. cigarettes train a little further... as a society, we've long regulated "luxuries" and "vices."

Drinking alcohol, gambling, smoking cigarettes, etc. are all part of the same category of subjectively determined "vices" that have been regulated throughout the history of this country. None are necessary for survival, all are partaken for enjoyment by the person who chooses to do them.

Getting from Point A to Point B in an efficient and expedient manner is one of the backbones of the modern economy. Eating food is literally necessary for survival. It truly makes no sense to compare these to smoking.

 

[Pachuco]

This thread seems pretty straightforward.

Former smoker kicking a habit that had him crushed for a good minute.

Testifying that a habit of detriment CAN BE overcome.

It could be expanded to include junk food, but for all we know, BobD is a vegan.

He spoke on a struggle he identifies with.

I perceived his post as an offering as much for self as for anyone else, an energetic plea to not go back down old roads as much as to start on new ones.

BobD used aggressive and unequivocal terms.

It's a method that works for some.

 

[woolybug25]

Also, down the stupid cars + food vs. cigarettes train a little further... as a society, we've long regulated "luxuries" and "vices."

Drinking alcohol, gambling, smoking cigarettes, etc. are all part of the same category of subjectively determined "vices" that have been regulated throughout the history of this country. None are necessary for survival, all are partaken for enjoyment by the person who chooses to do them.

Getting from Point A to Point B in an efficient and expedient manner is one of the backbones of the modern economy. Eating food is literally necessary for survival. It truly makes no sense to compare these to smoking.

Drinking is a necessity in life. One could get by with only drinking water. But we CHOOSE to drink wine, beer and liquor. Does it serve a sustenance purpose, no… but neither does taffy taffy or cherry coke. Saying that they are separate is completely inaccurate.

Again, there are literally billions of people worldwide that don't drive cars. They are also not always the most direct or expedient manner of travel. They too, are a choice. In fact, you are choosing to partake in an activity that has a 1 in 303 chance of killing you.

But lets go back to alcohol. That is clearly a choice one makes to use or not use. Why is it that Philip Morris has to pay for 10x the amount for public advertisement for anti smoking ads than the entire alcohol industry does for drinking and driving?

 

[IrishLax]

Tell that to someone that lives in NYC, where cigarette taxes are the highest in the world. Driving is not necessary, but for the sake of argument, lets say it is. Then shouldn't it be more important to hedge the inherent danger it causes? Not only that, its a danger that is shared by non users that could be hit by them. There are more non driving auto deaths in this country than there are deaths caused by second hand smoke. My point isn't that smoking is good for you, its that its unfairly taxed and looked at more harshly than its deserves.

Driving isn't necessary? You're not being intellectually honest here at all.

If you banned automobiles, then the entire world economy would grind to a halt. Come onnnnn.............

Three other points:
1. Raw numbers are completely worthless. If you wanted to look at which is actually a "safer" behavior you'd have to cite mortality rates, etc. per participant.
2. Luxuries and vices have always been regulated/banned/taxed at a higher rate. I don't disagree with your premise that it may be... disproportional?... but that's the game that has always been played.
3. FWIW, the tax argument almost doesn't hold water when you consider the massive taxes on gasoline. However, that money is almost always directly used for infrastructure whereas smoking tax money is not all earmarked for healthcare. So that'd be the best pro-smoking argument angle to take.

Eating bad food is not a necessity to live. Eating poor food is a worse choice than choosing to smoke. Yet, in this country (its not like this in other countries), we spend WAAY more money and effort/money fighting something that kills 1/10th of the people. I'm not saying that you ban either, i'm saying that why do we spend significantly less effort on heart disease than smoking when smoking is far less of a problem? The bigger the problem, the bigger the effort should be, right?

But then who decides what is "bad"? All food with a fat content over X? Cholesterol over Y? Or do you want to just ban all red meat/white meat/oils/butter/cheese so that no one anywhere can cook any "bad" food?

You're not wrong in theory, the issue is the complexity of the food argument.

 

[IrishLax]

Drinking is a necessity in life. One could get by with only drinking water. But we CHOOSE to drink wine, beer and liquor. Does it serve a sustenance purpose, no… but neither does taffy taffy or cherry coke. Saying that they are separate is completely inaccurate.

I can't tell if you're serious. Drinking alcohol has literally no role in sustaining life. You literally cannot physically live off of just alcohol.

On the flip side, if you drank nothing but high-sugar juice or soda, it would be bad for you but could keep you alive.

The only thing the two have in common is how the liquids are ingested.

Again, there are literally billions of people worldwide that don't drive cars. They are also not always the most direct or expedient manner of travel. They too, are a choice. In fact, you are choosing to partake in an activity that has a 1 in 303 chance of killing you.

Not the point. You cannot have the modern economy without automobiles. Are you actually going to argue that?

But lets go back to alcohol. That is clearly a choice one makes to use or not use. Why is it that Philip Morris has to pay for 10x the amount for public advertisement for anti smoking ads than the entire alcohol industry does for drinking and driving?

Yes, here is your best argument. At the same time, you should count your blessings that cigarettes have not been completely banned... like how alcohol is in many countries, and was in the United States for a period of time. All optional luxuries/vices are subject to the whims of lawmakers and the public. It's just how society works.

 

[woolybug25]

Driving isn't necessary? You're not being intellectually honest here at all.

If you banned automobiles, then the entire world economy would grind to a halt. Come onnnnn.............

Three other points:
1. Raw numbers are completely worthless. If you wanted to look at which is actually a "safer" behavior you'd have to cite mortality rates, etc. per participant.
2. Luxuries and vices have always been regulated/banned/taxed at a higher rate. I don't disagree with your premise that it may be... disproportional?... but that's the game that has always been played.
3. FWIW, the tax argument almost doesn't hold water when you consider the massive taxes on gasoline. However, that money is almost always directly used for infrastructure whereas smoking tax money is not all earmarked for healthcare. So that'd be the best pro-smoking argument angle to take.

No one is talking about banning smoking or automobiles, so i'm not sure where you are going with your first comment. No one is saying that at all.

The tax argument does hold water, as none of the taxes on auto sales or gasoline go to driver safety programs. In fact, in many states (like NY), more of the money goes to education and healthcare than roads. But that is an entirely different subject.

The entire point is this… All of those things are health dangers, yet cigarettes have significantly more taxes, government programs and general public outcry than drinking and driving, heart disease, etc. How is that point logical?

But then who decides what is "bad"? All food with a fat content over X? Cholesterol over Y? Or do you want to just ban all red meat/white meat/oils/butter/cheese so that no one anywhere can cook any "bad" food?

You're not wrong in theory, the issue is the complexity of the food argument.

There are clear items like soda, candy, fast food that could clearly be targeted. But i'm not saying we should do that either. My argument isn't that we "level the playing field", its just that the taxes on tobacco are unfair.

 

[woolybug25]

I can't tell if you're serious. Drinking alcohol has literally no role in sustaining life. You literally cannot physically live off of just alcohol.

On the flip side, if you drank nothing but high-sugar juice or soda, it would be bad for you but could keep you alive.

The only thing the two have in common is how the liquids are ingested.



Not the point. You cannot have the modern economy without automobiles. Are you actually going to argue that?



Yes, here is your best argument. At the same time, you should count your blessings that cigarettes have not been completely banned... like how alcohol is in many countries, and was in the United States for a period of time. All optional luxuries/vices are subject to the whims of lawmakers and the public. It's just how society works.

We can agree to disagree. Your comment on alcohol not being needed clearly shows that you didn't even read my post. Of course I don't believe you can live off of alcohol. I literally state that in my comment that you quoted. So you obviously aren't reading what I write. Makes zero sense for me to continue this debate.

 

[BeauBenken]

You kind of already did… The Fatass thread? lol


I agree that smoking is terrible and not good for people, i'm not a smoker myself. But can you imagine if people treated fat people like they did smokers? Instead of constantly telling smokers "those are going to kill you" or "smoking is so gross", they started telling fat people "that cheeseburger is going to lead to heart disease" or "your overweight appearance is gross". How would that go?

Its just strange to me that there is a universal hatred for smoking and that its became completely acceptable to openly attack smokers for their personal choice whenever they light up. Meanwhile, the #1 killer of humans both in the USA and worldwide is widely ignored. In fact, it's considered rude in most circles to comment on one's eating habits.

Am I the only person who wouldn't have a problem with this? Being severely out of shape is gross. And it is a serious problem in our country.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

This is basically how I feel.

I do not care if someone smokes.
I do not care if someone gambles.
I do not care if someone is fat.
I do not care who someone marries.
etc. etc. etc.

And accordingly, I also don't want to pay for the healthcare of people who are unhealthy because of choices they make of their own volition. If we end up moving towards a full socialized medical system then as a society you almost have to start putting regulations on unhealthy behavior. I'd love to know how much $$ obesity costs to treat each year. It's probably absurd. Smoking, because there is probably such a smaller demographic that participates these days, probably pales in comparison.

Here is my exercise.

Do I care if my loved ones, my children smoke?

Do I care if someone lives an unhealthy lifestyle, smoking, drinking to excess, being overweight? Yes.

Didn't mean to hijack a thread. But this is the part above water on a deep and substantial issue.

Why? Beyond applying the love I have for my own to all those in society, which was a point of Jesus'. (Which I don't want to get carried away over.) The cost of unhealthy in a modern society is ginormous. We currently pay more for the healthcare of others who cause their own ill health than we would with any other system. With our current system, certain providers get paid fixed fees or higher for services. They always get paid for their pills, equipment, and services. And those that pay get hit with the double whammy of paying 100 % of all development costs. Neither the uninsured poor or the profiteers pay for any of that.

Those who cannot pay, or those whose services cost more, get transferred directly to increased premiums or decreased services available. This ripples through the system to decreased worker productivity and other losses. With our current system, or lack thereof, there is no incentive for concerted efforts, for any issues from mental health, to hunger, to stopping abuse to drug addiction, let alone smoking, or obesity. Take a look at the number of people who engage in risky behavior that cost you more on your healthcare or other insurance premiums, and check the number that were victims of abuse. There is a huge cause and effect running through all of this that is being ignored. And I cannot understand why, if not for more than the fact that it is so expensive.

I have a case in point. A family member of a good acquaintance, a family member of someone I would almost consider a close friend, has been hospitalized off and on for the last decade. A former drug addict, alcoholic, and smoker, this female, around 50 I would guess, was definitely a victim of serious sexual abuse as a child, and apparently did not get the help she needed.

She now is morbidly obese, and has a compendium of issues which require hospital stays, followed by residence at extended care facilities. I saw a five year slice at the cost of this. This person has been certified totally disabled. It has totally exhausted her family. Now before you go on, all their personal financial resources were exhausted, as was much of the families, and so they became trapped into a life of further dependence on government programs. Short of a bullet in the head, this is the course. I am not attempting to argue politics, healthcare, or anything.

But I got a gander of the cost of these treatments. So I did some checking. Moving from a moral standpoint to a financial one. The cost in the US of treating people with smoking, drinking, and obesity related issues is staggering. In our system that is passed right on the top with your monthly premium. Next time you say you don't care, check out how much you piss right off the top of your monthly premium. It isn't likely to change. Because the people that don't pay for it, (certain parts of the health care system) get their money first, and there is no concerted effort or incentive to provide screening, well care, or prevention programs that work.

And it stems from causes sometimes so powerful and deep that are ignored, that it may never go away. I would like to distinguish between what I would call the casual smoker, whom I think is a dinosaur, in a way, and the slow suicide, that picks smoking, drinking, and eating to effect their end game.

 

[Cackalacky]

I quit smoking after 15 years. I am just going to lead by quiet example.

 

[johnnycando]

I smoke an occasional cigarette while drinking a beer every once in a while. A week ago, I smoked a Marlboro Red.

My lungs are still mad at me.

My mom is a chemo nurse. Surprise surprise. Smokers are her #1 customer.

 

[Sherm Sticky]

Been cigarette free for 53 days! My longest streak. I started smoking at 15 and am 31 now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gkIrish]

If people want to eat/smoke/drink themselves to death it doesn't bother me too much because it's a different outlook on life. They do what makes them happy for 50 years rather than live healthy until 85. That's their choice.

However, what I find ridiculous is the amount of money people spend, especially here in NY. My best friend is 25 and spends $2,000-$3,000 per year on cigarettes. That's 1/15th of his income! That's what i find absurd.

And people with families, how do you justify spending that much money on cigarettes when you could be spending it on your kids or wife? That's what I don't understand.

 

[Sherm Sticky]

My Obnoxious Please Quit Smoking Thread.

If people want to eat/smoke/drink themselves to death it doesn't bother me too much because it's a different outlook on life. They do what makes them happy for 50 years rather than live healthy until 85. That's their choice.



However, what I find ridiculous is the amount of money people spend, especially here in NY. My best friend is 25 and spends $2,000-$3,000 per year on cigarettes. That's 1/15th of his income! That's what i find absurd.



And people with families, how do you justify spending that much money on cigarettes when you could be spending it on your kids or wife? That's what I don't understand.

You are obviously not a smoker, never have been and have never been addicted to nicotine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gkIrish]

You are obviously not a smoker and have never been addicted to nicotine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand that it's difficult. And I don't have kids. But I would think that they would be the ultimate motivator to quit.

 

[Sherm Sticky]

I understand that it's difficult. And I don't have kids. But I would think that they would be the ultimate motivator to quit.

That's my motivation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cody1smith]

I think that anything that a large group of people deem "bad" we should create laws against it.

 

[ACamp1900]

I don't have a problem with a quit smoking thread... I do have a problem with a quit smoking thread being started by someone from San Franciso....

 

[BobD]

I don't have a problem with a quit smoking thread... I do have a problem with a quit smoking thread being started by someone from San Franciso....

I'm in Walnut Creek today. Is that better?

 

[yankeeND]

Been cigarette free for 53 days! My longest streak. I started smoking at 15 and am 31 now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your story is exactly mine, same age same start age only I'm up to six months now. Congrats on your success thus far and keep going. You will feel even better as each day passes without one.

 

[ACamp1900]

No

 

[NDFan4Life]

Let me ask all of you ex-smokers a serious question.

I've been smoking (on and off) for about 40 years. I've quit cold-turkey a couple of times. It sucked... bad. I now want to quit again, but want it to be permanent. My doctor suggested that I try Chantix, but the wife doesn't like some of the side effects. I've never tried the nicotine gum or the patches. IMO, they're too expensive.

What do you all think is the best way to stop?

 

[ThePiombino]

Let me ask all of you ex-smokers a serious question.

I've been smoking (on and off) for about 40 years. I've quit cold-turkey a couple of times. It sucked... bad. I now want to quit again, but want it to be permanent. My doctor suggested that I try Chantix, but the wife doesn't like some of the side effects. I've never tried the nicotine gum or the patches. IMO, they're too expensive.

What do you all think is the best way to stop?

I did cold turkey, but have a couple friends who swear by Chantix.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

If a man is beating his wife in public, that becomes my business.

If a man is drinking too much, eating an unhealthy meal, or smoking a cigarette in public, that's not my fucking business.