nowlin@ihu1e.UUCP (Jerry Nowlin) (06/11/84)
I've always been opposed to the practice of smoking. Whether a pipe,
cigar, cigarette, or some other variation on the theme. I've heard and
repeated various arguments against it. Personal health, public health, cost
to taxpayers, sin to most religions, fire hazard, and on and on. If you work
around computers you've probably heard a couple others like the real aversion
some disk drives have for smoke particles.
I have yet to hear a valid reason *for* smoking. I've read the arguments
about the loss of income to individuals and tax revenue to governments, but
maintaining the economic base that rests on the tobacco industry isn't a valid
reason for an individual to start or continue to smoke. It's just an excuse
used by legislators to justify getting their campaign contributions from
Reynolds etal. I won't even give credence to the "I'll start to gain weight"
type of response. That's just defending one lack of will power with another.
This isn't tongue in cheek. I'm trying to solicit tangible reasons for
smoking. I want to try and understand what motivates people to start or keep
smoking in spite of the overwhelming evidence that they are seriously harming
the health of themselves and the people they associate with. I've got 3 kids
that are going to have to make the decision to smoke or not some day and I
want to be able to understand both sides of the issue so I can explain it to
them. Experience tells me that dad saying no isn't going to cut it, and I've
got enough respect for my kids not to try it.
If you smoke you must have a reason. Let me hear it. I'll be glad to
hear from non-smokers too. I realize this is an issue akin to religion in
that logic doesn't always prevail. I stayed of my soap box (as much as
possible) so please don't get too carried away. If you know of a better group
or other forum to carry on this discussion please let me know.
Jerry Nowlin
ihnp4!ihu1e!nowlinjlh@loral.UUCP (06/12/84)
Well, when I have lots of fireworks to shoot off I tend to light up a cigarrette because the punk sticks designed for that job don't work well at all. Other than that, I too see no reason to smoke. Of course, I assume you are talking about tobacco. Jim The opinions expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and probably have nothing to do with reality.
plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (Scott Plunkett) (06/12/84)
"..dad saying no isn't going to cut it.." ... it depends on *how*
you say no. I know a chap, of Polish extraction, who once told
me how his father convinced him never to smoke. Understand that
his father had the strength of several bulldozers, was the size of
a house, and had hands the size of shovels. Father once said to
son slowly with unflinching eye contact: "Son, if I ever catch
you smoking," he said, "I will break both your legs." To
reassure his son that this was not infact an act of mercy, he
continued, "..and if that doesn't make you stop, I'll kill you."
Son never smoked, never particularly wanted to, after that heart-
to-heart.
--
..{allegra,seismo}!rlgvax!plunkettlabelle@hplabsc.UUCP (06/12/84)
I used to smoke 2 packs a day, I have quit for 3yrs now. I originally
started because "everyone else did". Later I continued (until about
31 yrs old) because 1) I was hooked and 2) I enjoyed it (probably due to
1)!! Honestly, if you're a smoker, there's nothing like sitting back after
doing something and having a smoke. If it didn't bother others so much
and didn't carry such a health risk, I WOULD STILL SMOKE!
I respect the rights of others to smoke (or anything else they may wish
to do for that matter) so long as it dosen't infringe on someone elses
right.
I have two teenage kids. One smoke lightly probably for the same reason
I started. She is 17 and old enough to know what she is doing to her own
body. There is a point beyond which you no longer have control over your
children and they reach that individual status. All you can do is advise!
She is not allowed to smoke in or around the house because we as her
parents feel an obligation to her as a child (until 18 or moved out of the
house) to protect her health. At this point example and education are the
only tools we have to work with!!
My advise to you is 1) If at all possible, educate your children as to
the health risks, bother to others, and expense of smoking such that
THEY DON'T START IN THE FIRST PLACE!! 2) Do not condone smoking even
if you know that they are smoking anyway. I started smoking at about
14 and heavily smoking at 16 WHEN MY MOTHER DISCOVERED I WAS SMOKING
AND GAVE UP TRYING TO DISCOURAGE ME!!
I must reiterate however smoking was pleasurable and I respect other
adults right to indulge.
P.S. I like cheap wine
GEORGEheahd@tellab1.UUCP (Dan Wood) (06/12/84)
See reply in net.misc.
--
/\ /\
/ /~~~~~~\ \
( ( \ / ) )
Yrs. in Fear and Loathing, \ [~] [~] /
The Blue Buffalo \ / || \ /
Haunted by the - \ /||\ / ~~~
G \(^^)/ ) o
h `--'\ ( z
o \) n
s o
t of G
...!ihnp4!tellab1!heahd heahd@tellab1.UUCP (Dan Wood) (06/12/84)
I've been smoking since I was fifteen (about 14 years now) and I cannot
give a valid reason for my habit. The only excuse I have is that when I
started smoking it still had an aura of masculinity about it; the Marlboro man
was still riding across the TV screen several times an hour, all of my
father's favorite TV westerns were sponsored by tobacco companys, and the
Surgeon General had only just started putting *mild* warnings on cigarette
packages (smoking *may* be hazardous). And then the monster of Peer Pressure
reared its ugly head. My younger brother started smoking before I did and all
the tough guys that hung around at the park smoked. I remember the day I
decided to learn to smoke (and it is something you have to learn). I was at
the above mentioned park and some of the guys were smoking. I tried a puff off
of a proffered cigarette and just about coughed my lungs out. At this one of
the younger kids (maybe 12 or 13), who was puffing away like an old pro, began
laughing like a hyena. The implication was that I was a sissy if I couldn't
handle a smoke. I acquired a pack of cigarettes, went home, and practised
smoking until I could puff away with the best of them.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to excuse myself for doing something very
stupid. Nor am I trying to blame someone else, I'm the only one responsible
for anything I do. It's just that peer pressure has a big effect on teenagers.
I'm sure that even life long nonsmokers have done something stupid in their
youth because of a dare or for fear of being labeled a chicken.
Something I think nonsmokers over look is that smoking involves a physical
addiction to nicotine; it's not just a lack of will power, it's a matter of
over comming a chemical dependency. That's why it irks me to hear a nonsmoker
say something like "Well why don't you just quit?". It's just not that simple,
and unless you've been there there's just no way for you to understand what's
going on. You say "But other people have quit, why can't you?". Sure other
people have quit, a lot of alcoholics have kicked their habit too, but that
doesn't make it any easier for other alcoholics to kick. I have accepted on an
intellectual level that smoking is bad for me and that I should quit, but
ingraining this realization on a level that would make an attempt to quit
successful is a whole different matter.
As for the matter of interaction with nonsmokers, I try to avoid making
other people get involved in my habit. If a nonsmoker informs me *politely*
that my smoke is bothering him, then I will either move out of his area or put
my cigarette out. If some jerk *tells* me to put my cigarette out because
it makes him want to puke, then I'll put it out all right, right in his eye. If
people get nasty with me, I get nasty right back.
I can sympathize with the author of the original article's concern about his
children's decision to smoke or not, I have a daughter myself and I hope
she'll be smarter than her Dad. She will have the advantage that the dangers
of smoking are well known and publicized these days (as mentioned above, when
I started the dangers of smoking were only beginning to be hinted at). I can
offer some hope in that if a child's parents don't smoke, it is less likely
that the child will (both my parents smoke).
In closing, I admit that I have a problem but I feel that I will benefit
much more from understanding, sympathy, and encouragement than I will from
condemnation. I can only speak for myself, but I believe that it's a trait of
human nature that people who condemn others for their habits or attitudes
defeat their own purpose by making the condemned even more intransigent and
less open to hearing the other side of the story. In other words, talking and
trying to understand will get you further than yelling and self righteousness
will.
--
/\ /\
/ /~~~~~~\ \
( ( \ / ) )
Yrs. in Fear and Loathing, \ [~] [~] /
The Blue Buffalo \ / || \ /
Haunted by the - \ /||\ / ~~~
G \(^^)/ ) o
h `--'\ ( z
o \) n
s o
t of G
...!ihnp4!tellab1!heahd wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (06/12/84)
Let's hear it for Dan. I too am a smoker and dislike it to no end. Quitting is harder than non-smokers can imagine. Getting the support and encouragement to stop is probably easier for a Heroin addict. People just do not realize how much support a smoker needs (at least some of us) to quit. T. C. Wheeler
john@plx.UUCP (john butler) (06/12/84)
<Here's a rolled-up line for the line-smoking bug!> This is in response to Jerry Nowlin's request for information on why people smoke. I feel particularly qualified and interested in responding to the subject for the following reasons: 1. I smoked a pipe for 3 years. 2. I smoked cigarettes after that for 5 more years. 3. My wife smoked cigarettes for 10 years. 4. I had a 1-1/2 pack-a-day habit. 5. My wife had a 3-pack-a-day habit. 6. We quit smoking together last summer (July 1983). I am going to present two sets of reasons for smoking: 1. Why do people start? 2. Why, in the face of such overwhelming evidence, do they continue? (In other words, why don't they just quit?) Before I begin, I want to clear up a misconception in the original article. Nowlin states that he won't give credence to the excuse that "I'll gain weight if I quit." He calls this substituting one lack of willpower for another. There is now physiological evidence for weight gain in people who quit smoking. A certain enzyme has been isolated, the amount of which can predict how much the quitter will gain. The national average weight gain for people who quit smoking is 15 pounds. The higher the level of this enzyme *before* the subject quits smoking, (I don't remember the name of it--it just came out in a medical journal a month ago) the more weight the person will gain. The lower the level, the less the gain. Let's stop beating people over their body chemistry. Now to the subject: Why do people start smoking? One barrier to this answer is that until medical professionals acknowledged the seriousness and strength of tobacco, nobody gave a rat's ass and therefore never researched it. Research is just now beginning to surface. 1. It's a drug. Nobody seems willing to admit this, but when you first start smoking, it makes you high after a fashion. It gives you a "hit". When you first start smoking, and suck burning nicotene into your lungs, it jolts your system to constrict the blood vessels, raise the blood pressure, and speed up the heartbeat. When I first started smoking, I couldn't believe it was legal to smoke and drive. I damn near blacked out a couple times when I took a hit from a non-filter Camel. Later on, the effects are nowhere near as pronounced, but by then you're hooked. 2. A recent study has shown that nicotene desensitizes a person (or a rat) to random sensory input. I can vouch for this. As a writer, I found it much easier to concentrate in a noisy, open office when I smoked than I do now. This may indicate a cause-effect relationship between the higher incidence of smoking found in urban dwellers and workers. It may also explain the higher rate in non-professionals, since they tend to live in more cramped living conditions and with larger families than the professional, suburban types. 3. Nicotene stimulates the colon somewhat like coffee does. I had a small constipation problem until I started smoking a pipe. After a bowlful at night, however, I was always then ready to "lighten my load" and then go to bed. 4. Cigarettes serve as a mood enhancer. Studies have shown that even though nicotene physiologically speeds up the metabolism, it can have the opposite effect under certain circumstances. As I noted in item 3, above, it helped me calm down and go to sleep. 5. Although this is diminishing rapidly, smoking has several social aspects: Lighting someone else's cigarette, offering a light or match, offering a cigarette, sharing a pack, etc. all denote familiarity, courtesy, generosity, or intimacy, depending on the context. Smoking makes extra opportunities to be generous or grateful. No such phenomenon occurs among non-smokers (Hey, can I offer you a pair of Adidas shoelaces?). 6. Cigarettes are a boon to self-conscious people. It gives them an outlet for venting random anxieties, allowing them to speak more directly and forcefully in situations wherein they might otherwise be intimidated. I speak from experience. You may call this a "crutch", but it enables self-conscious people to function in circumstances they would otherwise avoid altogether. 7. One of the strongest reasons to start smoking is pre-addiction. My wife's mother smoked 2 packs of unfiltered Pall Malls while pregnant with Renee, who is now my wife. Thereafter, for the next 20 years, Renee shared 988 square feet with her mother and step-father who each smoked at least two packs of cigarettes per day. When Renee took up smoking at about age 17, she was simply following a craving she'd had all her life. It's like craving eggs if you have a protein/cholesterol deficiency. When my wife took up smoking, it also desensitized her to the asthma, allergies, and other respiratory irritations she'd suffered all her life (from secondary smoke). Now, here are the barriers we encountered when we quit smoking. 1. Couldn't wake up all day. We had come to depend on nicotene to wake us up in the morning and regulate our metabolism throughout the day. We doubled our coffee intake, and still felt sleepy all day. In fact, after a month of total body shock we felt like we had defective voltage regulators: we'd alternate periods of hyperactivity with lethargy. There was no normal pace for the first 3-4 months. 2. Weight gain. We each gained 15-20 pounds within the first 2-3 weeks after quitting! That is nearly impossible through simple overeating. So two weeks after we quit, NONE of our clothes fit. We both had to buy new tops, bottoms, and underwear. The only thing we could keep was our shoes. This cost at least $500 just to get some lightweight, low-budget stuff, as we didn't want to buy nice clothes for our F-A-T selves. So if quitting smoking is going to save money, don't count on it for at least a year. Our top weights, Me: 5'9", 200 lbs (normally 165-170). Renee: 5'2", 147 lbs (normally 115-120). If you don't think this would alter one's self-esteem and send most people back to their cigarettes, guess again. 3. Anxiety-induced ailments. We had major intestinal gas problems. Sometimes I nearly knocked myself off my own chair. Renee had it so bad she got a spastic colon and went to the doctor. He prescribed Tranxene, which cleared it up. Stress produces illness. Quitting smoking creates much stress on the body. (Nicotene is the most addictive substance known to man, both in terms of the quantity required to addict, and the persistence of the addiction after quitting.) We both got sick and had to stay home more last summer than we had had to in the previous five years. The stamina just wasn't there--for AT LEAST SIX MONTHS!!! 4. The irritability factor is phenomenal. I almost punched out a co-worker because he knocked over some of my papers. Nearly every weekend my wife and I fought over something really stupid, to the point where we began to doubt the soundness of our marriage (that is, until we got the Tranxene). 5. We were unable to make rational decisions for at least six months. We hired a landscaper to put ground cover on our yard. He hosed us for $3000 which came up weeds. It would not have happened under any other circumstances in my life. 6. For all the above reasons, it jeopardized my job. Who wants an employee who doesn't wake up all day, who is distracted very easily, who doesn't have the stamina to work a full day, whose attendance record is suspect, who is surly and irritable? One final note: to add insult to injury, the medical insurance company disallowed our claims (a total of eight-five piddling dollars) for the doctor's visit for the spastic colon, the diagnosis (nicotene withdrawal), and the treatment (Tranxene, a mild tranquilizer) even though they cover illness (spastic colon?), drug treatment (but nicotene's not a drug??), and anxiety and nervous disorders (but since it was just cigarettes, it couldn't have been too bad???). Would the insurance company have paid for a coronary bypass or lung removal? You Betcha! So quitting smoking is possible, but not easy. I lost a year of my life to quit smoking. I wasted $4000 from buying clothes to fit, making irrational decisions, and experiencing medical problems. There is no immediate reward in spite of the BULLSHIT the American Cancer Society spews out. I lost wind and stamina for six months. I lost my sense of health and well-being. I continued to refrain from smoking because I knew I'd be better off in the long run. And now, nearly 12 months after I quit, I am finally beginning to feel the benefits.
adm@cbneb.UUCP (06/13/84)
#R:druxm:-86900:cbneb:16400001:000:426 cbneb!gdt Jun 13 07:00:00 1984 A neighbor lady of ours is a chain smoker and is pregnant with child. She has tried everything under the sun to kick the habit; however, nothing has worked. The doctor finally told her to forget it because the anxiety of trying to stop was raising her blood pressure and putting too much stress on her baby. He said that the smoking was less harmful than the hyperness being experienced trying to kick the habit. Thurman
wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (06/13/84)
An excellent and frightening article on smoking! My respects to the author. One point he made, excerpted below, is quite important: > One of the strongest reasons to start smoking is pre-addiction. > My wife's mother smoked 2 packs of unfiltered Pall Malls > while pregnant with Renee, who is now my wife. > Thereafter, for the next 20 > years, Renee shared 988 square feet with her mother and step-father > who each smoked at least two packs of cigarettes per day. > When Renee took up smoking at about age 17, she was simply > following a craving she'd had all her life. It's like craving > eggs if you have a protein/cholesterol deficiency. This is further evidence for a contention I have stated for years. Simply put, for a parent/stepparent/guardian to smoke is child abuse. If you care about your or other children, for whatever reason, it is inexcusable for them to be exposed to smoke or smokers, whether in the womb or out of it. There is no reason to treat this child abuse any differently than that involving physical beating or imprisonment or any of the other forms for which parents/guardians are criminally charged. A movement to add "smoking while pregnant or in the presence of or in the same domicile as a child" to the legal definition of child abuse in the various states may well be the most effective anti-smoking tactic for the effective reduction of smoking. I wonder why the Surgeon General has not adopted this tactic instead of emphasizing the dangers to current adult smokers. Why waste time on them; if the next generation can be weaned away from smoking, the problem will vanish as the preceeding one dies off. Will
barnett@ut-sally.UUCP (Lewis Barnett) (06/13/84)
>A movement to add "smoking while pregnant or in the presence of or in the >same domicile as a child" to the legal definition of child abuse >in the various states may well be the most effective anti-smoking >tactic for the effective reduction of smoking. I wonder why the >Surgeon General has not adopted this tactic instead of emphasizing >the dangers to current adult smokers. >Will I suspect that the tobacco lobby is simply too strong for this idea to be politically feasible, however sensible it seems. I'm certain that the smoking public would also raise merry hell if any legislator brought such a bill before the congress. Lewis Barnett,CS Dept, Painter Hall 3.28, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 -- barnett@ut-sally.ARPA, barnett@ut-sally.UUCP, {ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!barnett
wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (06/13/84)
Nationally, and in many states, the tobacco lobby WOULD be too strong, as it is currently. However, it might be possible to get it through one or two states, if it was simultaneously introduced in all, and the tobacco lobby had to fight it everywhere at once. So it might be possible to get a toehold that way and work on others gradually. The tobacco lobby will inevitably weaken as fewer people smoke; they'll own some states forever (or thereabouts) and therefore some congresscritters, but elsewhere the power will diminish and such efforts as these will have a better chance. Will
fish@ihu1g.UUCP (Bob Fishell) (06/13/84)
(oo) <- a healthy set of lungs....
Nice horror story, John, but you've made the mistake of projecting
your own experiences on others. Just because you had a horrible
time kicking, there's no reason to assume everybody does. I'll
try to relate my own experiences:
I started smoking at age 17 for the usual stupid reasons. At the time,
it seemed like something I was supposed to do, just part of becoming
a man. Why not? Both my parents smoked, as did many of my friends. I
really got hooked when I went away to college and discovered that
smoking is a way to relieve tension. It gives you something to do when
you don't know what to do next, a real boon to the activity addict.
Needless to say, there're a lot of times when I don't know what to
do next, so I smoked a lot, as much as three packs a day, with a mode
of 1.5 packs. It probably averaged out to 2 packs per day, and this
went on for 13 years.
My decision to quit came about as part of the traumatic process of
turning 30. I realized that I was not really going to live forever
and that my health was nothing to screw around with. Now, I couldn't
climb two flights of steps without getting dizzy, and couldn't swim
a length of the pool underwater. What really did it for me, though,
was realizing just how offensive my habit was to others. My breath
and clothes stunk, I had a yellow sheen all over everything I lived
with, and I polluted the air around me for several yards every time
I lit up. I used to think that it wouldn't bother anybody as long
as I didn't exhale in their direction. What put the cap on it was
my non-smoking office mate's remark that his wife could smell my
cigarette smoke on his clothes when he got home from work. He was
never nasty about my smoking, either, just civil as could be.
I quit cold turkey in late February, 1980. The experience was very
uncomfortable, but not unbearable, and the worst of it was over after
three days. For a period of about three weeks, my sleep and bowel
habits were disrupted, but that, too, was not unbearable, and it passed
altogether after a few months. I did gain about 15 pounds, but I lost
all of it and more thanks to watching what I ate and riding a 10-speed
bicycle.
I have not had a cigarette in over four years now, and I feel better for
it by several orders of magnitude. Nowadays, cigarette smoke offends
me just as much as the most vehement, never-smoked, anti-smoker, thanks
to the quick return of my sense of smell after stubbing out that last
butt. In short, it's the biggest favor I ever did myself.
So, for any of you out there who are contemplating quitting, DO IT!
It's well worth whatever temporary discomfort you might experience,
and not as bad as some people would have you believe.
--
Bob Fishell
ihnp4!ihu1g!fishdgary@ecsvax.UUCP (06/13/84)
<> >From: plunkett@rlgvax.UUCP (Scott Plunkett) Tue Jun 12 09:38:23 1984 >... "Son, if I ever catch >you smoking," he said, "I will break both your legs." To >reassure his son that this was not infact an act of mercy, he >continued, "..and if that doesn't make you stop, I'll kill you." >Son never smoked, never particularly wanted to, after that heart- >to-heart. Who says health warnings aren't effective in discouraging smoking! By golly, those packs ought to say WARNING: The Surgeon General has determined that he will kill your ass if you smoke. Thank you. Call this Damned Assured Distruction (DAD). :-) (if you need help) D Gary Grady Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC 27706 (919) 684-4146 USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary
briand@tekig1.UUCP (06/14/84)
{}
I am a non-smoker - just to set the record straight. Several years ago
I heard of a study done in New York City on people who had quit both cigarettes
and heroin. These individuals came mostly from the prison system, I believe,
but could have been just out of heroin de-tox centers. Anyway, when asked by
the researchers which was harder to kick, the UNIVERSAL reply was cigarettes!
Now, this is all in the back of my consciousness, and I don't have any
references. If anyone knows about this, or has just heard of it, or best of
all can cite references, let us know.
Brian Diehm
Tektronixbarry@ames-lm.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (06/15/84)
[*************=8>:) (snort)] > There is no reason to treat this child abuse any differently than > that involving physical beating or imprisonment or any of the other > forms for which parents/guardians are criminally charged. > A movement to add "smoking while pregnant or in the presence of or in the > same domicile as a child" to the legal definition of child abuse > in the various states may well be the most effective anti-smoking > tactic for the effective reduction of smoking. I wonder why the > Surgeon General has not adopted this tactic instead of emphasizing > the dangers to current adult smokers. Why waste time on them; if > the next generation can be weaned away from smoking, the problem will > vanish as the preceeding one dies off. Did I really read this? C'mon, Will, you're kidding, right? You can tell me, I won't give your secret away. If you're serious, though, congratulations! You have just won the Kenn Barry "Fascist-of-the-Year" Award, 2nd-class (for 1st class you would have had to propose death camps for smokers, not merely prison). But why limit this new law to parents and guardians? Surely anyone at all who smokes around children is likewise abusing them, and should also be punished. With proper enforcement we could soon have every smoker in the country behind bars, thus saving you non-smoking adults as well as your children from damnation (oops, I mean cancer). Enforcement could be a problem, though. Maybe, as a first step, we should repeal a few amendments to the Constitution; might be too hard to get evidence, otherwise. Also, how about a Surgeon-General's Youth Corps? These children could be trained to report anyone they caught smoking (if they saw 'em, it was 'in the presence', right?) to the police. And let's not forget the fringe benefits! Suppose you have a neighbor that you know is nothing but un-American commie filth, and a smoker, besides. No longer would they be able to hide behind the 1st Amendment, for we could turn them in to the Smoke Police. This is almost identical to what we did with some political radicals in the '60's, only it wasn't tobacco they were smoking. It's sure nice to know that there are still people who understand that the best solution for any problem is to throw somebody in jail. Send me flames, I need a light. Kenn Barry NASA-Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Electric Avenue: {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames-lm!barry
barry@ames-lm.UUCP (Kenn Barry) (06/15/84)
"write in haste, repent in leisure" Just reread my last submission - "Fascist-of-the-Year" should read "Fascist-Idea-of-the-Year". No personal attack was intended on the author of the posting I quoted, only on the idea expressed in his posting. Apologies tendered for any misimpressions caused by my sad lack of care in phrasing. Kenn Barry
porges@inmet.UUCP (06/17/84)
#R:tellab1:-25100:inmet:6400113:000:1423 inmet!porges Jun 16 13:40:00 1984 I was also shocked by the idea to extend the child-abuse laws to cover parents smoking around their children. (I am not a smoker, by the way.) A previous correspondent brought up the enforcability problems, but that's not what I wanted to address. I am worried about a minor trend towards solving problems by changing definitions. 1) Parents smoking around children? Let's call that "child abuse." Sure they aren't hitting their children at all, but it's bad for them, so let's just expand that legal definition... 2) People call up your computer and mess things up? Let's call that "breaking and entering." Sure they aren't actually breaking anything physical or entering anything, but it's like that in a metaphorical way, so what the hey. (Not that I'm against some sort of laws against it, but you see my point.) 3) This one not from the net: Offended by hard-core pornography? Let's call that "denial of civil rights" -- you know, my First Amendment right of freedom from others' offensive speech. No problem. My favorite Abraham Lincoln story: He posed the following question: If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Answer: Four...calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. I guess this has been a flame. Sorry. Anyone for net.legal? -- Don Porges ...harpo!inmet!porges ...hplabs!sri-unix!cca!ima!inmet!porges ...yale-comix!ima!inmet!porges
steve@ea.UUCP (06/18/84)
#R:tellab1:-25100:ea:8200005:000:1986 ea!steve Jun 17 18:24:00 1984 I am another misguided individual who started the habit at only 12. Both of my parents were smokers. My Father had lost a lung by the time I was in the third grade. I do not however feel importantly threatened by the 'dangers of smoking' since I quit several years ago. I can vouch for several significant advantages to smoking. First, it offers a small measure of protection from freezing in extreme cold weather. Nicotine has varied effects depending upon the quantity ingested. In larger quantities it acts a peripheral vessel constrictor. To be specific it induces the involuntary contraction of muscles surrounding the blood vessels in the peripheral parts of the body, forcing most of the blood volume and body heat to the more sensitive internal organs. A deep puff of a strong cigarette can quite literally keep one warm in the winter. Second, in smaller quantities the converse effect occurs. The relaxation of muscles surrounding peripheral vessels results in increased heat transfer near the body surface. A light puff of a cigarette can cool the body in summer. These are physiologically documented facts. I cannot make any defence of a vice to which I fell victim. Hence I will state also that it is still an offensive habit that is uncomplimentary of its proponents. During the later part of the 19th century the habit of oral tobacco consumption became a problem of such magnitude many states passed laws against 'public spitting' to protect the public from the menace. Many states have not bothered to remove these laws even though much of the menace is now gone. It was not so long ago that smoking was restricted to 'smoking lounges' in public transportation. Steve Blasingame convex!ctvax!uokvax!ea!steve (begin flame) If you do not quit please spare the good people around you the disgusting odor and eye-burning haze and please,please don't impose on others by asking "mind if I smoke?". Many will be to polite to say yes but are still offended. (end flame)
wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (06/19/84)
An amusingly defensive response. Yes, it was serious. And what makes you think that adding "smoking in the presence" (we need a good abbreviation here) will result in all smokers ending up in jail? All current child abusers are not in jail; practically none of them are. To enlarge the definition of "child abuse" as I suggested would merely add another category (smoking) to the lists of actions considered to be "abuse". Enforcement, conviction, etc. would be as haphazardly and unfairly applied in this case as it is now in all other cases, and most "offenders" would not be punished at all, just as it is now. What it would be is an EXTREMELY visible attack on smoking. It would have much more of a psychological effect than an actual legal effect. Interesting that your reaction did not address the issue at all. I contend that if you care about children, and that if you consider "abusing" them a bad thing, you cannot differentiate between direct physical actions against them, such as beatings, and direct psychological actions against them, such as imprisonment and "mental cruelty", and indirect physical/psychological actions against them, such as sensitizing them with a prediliction to nicotine addiction. Counter that argument if you can. Don't waste time on flailing about. Will
fish@ihu1g.UUCP (Bob Fishell) (06/20/84)
Anti-smoking legislation has less chance of passage than just increasing
the taxes on it even more. I'd favor a $2.00/pack Federal nuisance tax
on cigarettes, in addition to the already exhorbitant taxes on them now.
The tax would be collected by the manufacturer, and would only filter
(pun unintentional) down to the consumer through the usual chain of
middlemen. This would reduce black-marketeering.
The money collected could be used to fund cancer research and go toward
anti-smoking information campaigns. The large price of cigarettes would
induce more people to stop, discourage young people from starting (when
I was a kid, I had to be frugal with my allowance. Unfortunately, cigs
were $0.35 a pack then, and I smoked 'em), and put the burden of public
expense for smoking on the people who cause the problem.
--
Bob Fishell
ihnp4!ihu1g!fishkeith@seismo.UUCP (Keith Bostic) (06/20/84)
Steve, the only problem that I have is with your flame. If I say, "Say
there, big fella, mind if I smoke" and she says "No", what am I supposed
to do? Some persons' inability to stand up for their rights is *not*
my problem. I agree that I shouldn't smoke in elevators/anywhere
legislation has decreed as clean ground; I feel that it is MY right to
smoke in my house etc. and I agree that there should be some give and take
on both sides... but that leaves a lot of places that I theoretically *could*
offend someone, but in which I would like to smoke if noone minds. The best
that I can do is ask... if they choose to lie to me, hey, you know what
happens when you can't take a joke.
I'd walk a mile for a camel, two for a hump,
Keith
keith@seismo.ARPA or seismo!keith
p.s. Of course, I could always deny myself the pleasure (and it *is* a
pleasure, in case that is still in doubt) thus supplying myself with
another more subtle pleasure (Aaaaaah... I'm such a wonderful person,
letting this poor misguided creature breath fresh air another second).
p.p.s Incidentally, I don't smoke (quitting is easy, I've done it so many
times now...) but I figure that I'll take it back up when I hit
sixty, so I'd better protect the genre now. I'm no "commie-come-lately"
y'know (for you Doonesbury fans)!!!!toml@druxm.UUCP (TurnbowGV) (06/26/84)
I don't understand why anyone is looking for a rational reason for smoking. I can't imagine that there is one. The reasons for smoking are all irrational (and, as such, much harder to combat). If any smoker thinks he has a rational reason for smoking, I must consider him insane. The trouble is that smoking (like other habits and addictions) is begun because of peer pressure or some other equally powerfull emotional reason, and is continued because of emotional reasons or physical reactions. As a nonsmoker, I have two reactions to smoking: when I think only of myself, I am grossed out by smokers, and wish for all kinds of rules and laws to isolate me from the smoke (I'm especially grossed out by people who smoke in restaurants); when I think of the smoker, I wish I knew a way to motivate him to stop doing something that hurts himself more than it hurts me. As I understand it, there is no way to kick the smoking habit through logical reasoning. The only way to do it is to find an emotional impetus against smoking that is stronger than the emotional impetus to continue. Although I'm no expert, I understand that a common emotional argument against smoking is visualizing what it might be doing to a person you love (like the woman who quit smoking because she became disgusted by the fact that she only saw her grandson through a haze of smoke, and thought about what that smoke must be doing to him). Tom Laidig AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver ...!ihnp4!druxm!toml
steve@zinfandel.UUCP (06/26/84)
#R:tellab1:-25100:zinfandel:8200075:000:938
zinfandel!steve Jun 14 16:01:00 1984
tellab1!heahd says:
"As for the matter of interaction with nonsmokers, I try to avoid making
other people get involved in my habit. If a nonsmoker informs me *politely*
that my smoke is bothering him, then I will either move out of his area
or put my cigarette out."
Why don't you just assume as a default that smoke bothers most people,
and not subject them to have to request that you not smoke near them?
I would suspect that a small minority of the people whom you offend would
feel comfortable asking you to not smoke. Most people prefer not to be put in
that position, especially when smokers are often not as receptive as
you claim to be.
Performing a known offensive act with the intent of continuing
until someone asks you to please not do it is a poor excuse for
civility. Perhaps you should wait until everybody around you explicitly
asks you to smoke before you light up.
zehntel!zinfandel!steve nelsonkeith@seismo.UUCP (Keith Bostic) (06/30/84)
>> "As for the matter of interaction with nonsmokers, I try to avoid making >> other people get involved in my habit. If a nonsmoker informs me *politely* >> that my smoke is bothering him, then I will either move out of his area >> or put my cigarette out." > Why don't you just assume as a default that smoke bothers most people, > and not subject them to have to request that you not smoke near them? > Performing a known offensive act with the intent of continuing > until someone asks you to please not do it is a poor excuse for > civility. Perhaps you should wait until everybody around you explicitly > asks you to smoke before you light up. I don't like either approach. Number one, yes, people feel uncomfortable saying "Put that out!" especially since you just blew how ever much money it cost and some time etc. not to mention you were *really* getting into a nicotine high. On the other hand, assuming that by default people don't want you to smoke (by the way, known offensive act, known to whom? certainly not me!) is denying yourself something you want for no reason. Why not just say, "Pardon me, would it bother you if I smoke?" and if the answer is "No" or "Go right ahead" then fire that Camel up. Other answers may lead to you leaving to find a place or not lighting up for the moment. If the respondent is too lily-livered to admit that it bothers them, well, since the smoke is damaging to their lungs too, you've just done your bit for evolution. (Remember, the meek inherit the earth, but it's usually small sections, about 6 by 3.) Anyway, by asking, you've been fair. Forcing it on someone is obnoxious. Assuming it will bother them may mean the loss of a pleasure in what is already a short life. (And getting shorter, the more you smoke.) Puff the magic dragon was in an elevator next to me, Keith ARPA: keith@seismo UUCP: seismo!keith
nowlin@ihu1e.UUCP (Jerry Nowlin) (07/02/84)
.
The following are the text portions of the messages I got in response to
my posting "Why Smoke?". All the replys that actually dealt with the smoking
question are included. Even the ones that didn't take it seriously. The only
messages I omitted were the ones telling me that net.general was or wasn't a
good place for it. I got lots of requests to have this list posted and only
one person ask me not to. It was also requested that it go to net.followup
since some don't get net.misc. Read and think. Some of these are very good.
45 messages
==============================================================================
Simple - nicotine is physically and psychologically addicting.
People smoke for the same reason that some people shoot heroin
or OD on barbiturates. The only difference is that one is legal
and the other is not.
If you come up with any ideas, particularly ones to use against
people who currently smoke, let me know. I have some friends who
still insist on smoking despite their having lost a close friend to lung
cancer a few months ago.
==============================================================================
cigarettes are medicine. if i don't smoke for a few hours, i get jumpy,
irritable and abusive. a few puffs off a coffin nail and i'm back to
my old self (jumpy, irritable and abusive, but less so). instant cure
for nicotine starvation.
==============================================================================
The main reason for smoking is addiction.
The main reason for starting smoking, as a teenager, is peer pressure.
This is at an age when there is a natural rebellion against authority
in general and parents in particular. Their friends smoke and it's a
way to be accepted.
The solution is education. While they are young, make sure (over and
over) you explain to them why smoking is terrible. If you can visit
a cancer ward or someone with a stoma in their throat it may help make
an impression. Do it again as they near the age.
==============================================================================
Why start smoking? Peer pressure and adolescent ignorance
of the real issue:
To wit, that nicotine is PHYSICALLY ADDICTIVE. Some users
have reported that they found it easier to quit heroin than
cigarettes. This is undoubtedly the main reason that many,
if not most, adults continue to smoke in the face of much
pressure to quit.
For an excellent discussion of the issues, read Licit and
Illicit Drugs, published by Consumers Union.
==============================================================================
I am a very adament non-smoker. I wish to point out perhaps
the main reason that people smoke, although you are probably
aware of it. Niccotine is a very effective drug, and as
with most drugs an equally effective poison. Some recent
studies have shown (and I'm sorry but I don't have the
sources with me at my terminal), that quiting cigarretes can
be as difficult for some individuals as quiting 'hard' drugs
like heroine. Because of this, once someone has started on
the path to addiction, it is obviously difficult to stop;
excuses for the non-harmfulness of tobacco eoriginate by
people who need a psychological cushion for their own
weaknesses.
A prime example of the effectivenes of this drug is the
spreading use of chewing tobacco. ( I know a little something
about this as chewing tobacco was allowed where at went to highschool).
Chewing tobacco is a very nasty and yucky thing to do. I
really don't think that the people who do it will disagree.
they do it because it provides a significantly greater nicotine
intake than smoking. It is an 'effective' drug.
The reason for using tobacco products are similar to those
of alcohol in our society. This is probably not what you]
needed to hear, you probably know all this. I hope I haven't
wasted your time. Good luck on your information collection.
==============================================================================
The only reasons I've ever heard *for* smoking are:
1) I like it.
2) It's too hard to give it up.
The latter carries some weight since giving up an addiction is rather
traumatic, especially if you go ``cold turkey''. My grandmother (aged
82) finally gave up smoking last year when her doctor gave her an
ultimatum. She has quite a case of bronchitis.
My father, on the other hand, gave up smoking in the 'sixties, and
has never looked back.
==============================================================================
I don't smoke any longer, but I did for about 27 years.
I was smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day just before I quit.
The reason I smoke and the reason other people smoke is because
smoking is psychologically and physically addictive. The body
becomes used to a certain level of nicotine and becomes very
uncomfortable without it. The act of smoking, of carrying cigarettes
and paraphenalia around, of lighting a cigarette, of having a cigarette
at a certain time - when on the telephone, after meals, etc. becomes
behavior that is hard to break and is tied into your perception of yourself.
It is very difficult for most people to quit smoking because of these
reasons.
The important question is why do people start to smoke.
When I was a child I was told that smoking would stunt my growth.
That's the worse thing I knew about smoking. OK, so I didn't start
until I was all grown up. People I admired smoked, it was an important
part of their lives. Humphrey Bogart smoked, Couples in romantic
movies smoked, oh so romantically. I started smoking in college,
it was a rite of passage.
I don't know why people today start to smoke knowing what we know
now about the effects of smoking. I suspect it still is because
it makes them feel grown up. I think probably the message "smoking
is dumb" "smoking stinks" would be just as effective as "smoking
causes cancer."
==============================================================================
I still remember my dad saying to me. "I can't stop your from smoking
but because you can always smoke behind my back. But I think your
smart enough to realize smoking is stupid." It made me feel that
it was my choice and I wanted to do the right thing.
I was about 12-13 at the time and I chose not to smoke.
In high school most kids that smoked had parents that smoked.
So the fact that you don't smoke is a step in your kids favor.
==============================================================================
This reply will probably miss your point. Certainly there are no logical
or sensible reasons to smoke. I think you won't find a smoker who can
give you one. Nicotine, and maybe other drugs in tobacco, gives a transient
relaxing pleasant high. It is also very addictive. Of course there are
psychological factors too. Smoking involves sucking, like the breast or
bottle. And the image is associated with adulthood and independence.
Those who defend smoking usually say something like "You're not going to
live forever", and there is something to that argument. I smoked at most
four cigarettes/day many years ago when I also played with other drugs.
Now I am somewhat of an anti-drug fanatic. I have been known to insult
people who smoke in public places. Yet my brother and my best friend are
heavy smokers. Random thoughts.
==============================================================================
I have been smoking since I was 12 years old; I am now 37, so that gives me
25 years of experience from which to answer your questions. There are
really two of them: why I started, and why I continue.
At age 12, my younger brother and I started doing it out of a sense of
adventure. Both our parents smoked (My dad Roi-Tan cigars, mom Salems), but
they always told us how terrrible it was to smoke. We never understood their
logic: if its so terrible, why do *you* do it, and all that. Well we didin't
smoke regularly, but we did enjoy the camaraderie and derring-do we were
exhibiting by violating a stated parental rule. When we were caught, we were
punished by being made to smoke one of dad's cigars, and I must say it was
not at all pleasant. We stopped then, and there was no problem doing so
because neither of us were hooked.
At age 17, I began again because all my friends were smoking. It was a simple
matter of wanting to belong to a group I considered sophisticated and grown
up. Besides, we were living in Germany where it is permitted for youths to
purchase liquor and tobacco products, so it was easy to get, unlike in the
States where you would probably get stopped even trying to operatea vending
machine.
The problem the second time was that it first developed into a habit, then
an addiction, then I found it was hard to NOT smoke. I started by having one
on the bus in the morning, and one on the way home at night. Gradually it
worked up to three a day (one at morning break), then four a day (afternoon
break), five a day (lunch) then I just started carrying a pack and having
one whenever I wanted it. By the end of my first year, I was up to half a
pack a day. After two years, I was up to a pack a day, a level I maintained
until about 3 years ago, when I noticed some days I would run out near the
end of the day, and go buy my second pack. Today I smoke about 1 and a half
to two packs daily. I am addicted.
I have tried quitting numerous times by many different methods. One method
is in a little self-help book shaped like a pack of cigarrettes, and it
holds promise for me because one of its requirements is to do what you have
done: question the reasons for smoking. Each smoke is ranked 1,2,3, or 4 and
plotted on a chart showing the time and reason. After doing that I found I
smoke for these reasons:
1) Because I crave it, like sometimes I crave a Snickers bar. These are
rar, and are usually the first smokes of the day. Later, I smoke fro the
reasons on the rest of this list.
2) For company as I work. I sit at a terminal all day, and my cigarettes
are as much a part of my work as the coffee (to which I am also
addicted).
3) To alleviate tension. During heated meetings or in times of stress,
my smoke seems to help take the edge off.
4) To cover bad odors. I *never* go to the men's room without a
cigarette. I am extremely susceptible to bad odors, particularly others'
bowel movements, dirty sox, and so on. (In fact, I have a hard time
being in a gymnasium for this reason.)
The real reason of course, is that I am addicted to nicotine, and perhaps
other chemicals in the smoke. I smoke menthol cigarettes, and think I am
addicted to menthol, too, because if I buy a pack of unmentholated smokes,
then I usually get a pack of Halls Mentho-Lyptus to satisfy that craving.
And all tied up with that are th physical habits of reaching for the smoke,
lighting it, drinking some coffee, all that.
I realize that you were sincere in your request for this, so I have been
sincere in answering it. I truly want to be drug-free, but so far all my
efforts have been unsuccessful. I will not try hypnotism, acupuncture, or
therapy. It is not a question of will-power, as you have insinuated. I have
a great deal of that, and am not a weak person in most regards. When I have
tried to quit, I have had the most success in totally changing my surroundings:
going camping to a remote area, for example. What happens is that as long as
I keep my mind off cigarettes, I do OK, but as soon as the thought is there,
it is imbedded in my consciousness, and I can't get rid of it. I become
nervous, fretful, can't concentrate, pace around, and my body feels
incomplete and itchy until I get a smoke. I realize if I could get beyond
that, I would be over the worst of it, but there you have. As you said, this
whole topic doesn't lend itself to logic always, and when your body is
craving something, no matter how strong your will-power, you don't think
logically: "I'll have one, then pace myself the rest of the trip", knowing
full well that as soon as you buy the pack, you're off and running again.
I hope this has answered your questions, and given you some arguments for
when your kids ask "Why not?". Let them read this. If I had read this at 17,
I would be a happier (and richer) man today. I figure I've spent about
$10,000.00 on smoking in my life.
==============================================================================
I believe that there are two major reasons why people smoke:
(1) peer pressure
(2) addiction
I'm a nonsmoker, and share your views.
==============================================================================
I don't smoke and never did (tho' I've tried it). The "reason" I always
heard was, "It relaxes me" or "It's cheaper than a nervous breakdown."
These were totally serious reasons.
Let me also suggest that tobacco users try "smokeless tobacco". It's
more obviously disgusting. (First time users often get a nicotine "high",
which at its best is pretty good. It's like drinking a little, without the
risk of getting too drunk. I used to do this in math class in high school.
It often causes nausia the first few times.)
==============================================================================
Well, since I was a two-pack-a-day smoker for seven years, I can tell
you that nicotine is one of the most potent drugs around. It is an
extremely unusual drug, in that it is simultaneously a tranquilizer
and a stimulant. I'm not aware of any other drug that has this
combination of properties. Furthermore use of nicotine isn't incapacitating,
the way that use of, for example, alcohol is. Of course use of nicotine
in the form of tobacco causes emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease etc.
I quit smoking about fifteen years ago, and the improvement in my health
was well worth the effort. It was HARD! for me to quit, although I know
some smokers who were able to quit with less effort.
I suggest you get your kids "addicted" to sports that require healthy
lungs, like running, swimming, bicycling etc. It's almost impossible to
do this type of thing and smoke cigarettes.
==============================================================================
The answer is simple: nicotine, especially in the form in which it exists in
cigarettes, is psychologically (and, to a lesser extent, physically) addictive,
and is taken in in a way that gives a jolt (like the "rush" just after the
injection of heroin, on a smaller scale). That's why people \\continue//
smoking ("will power" is seriously overrated, since there's never a measurement
of what the will is contesting---like any physiological reaction, nicotine
addiction varies widely among individuals). Why they start is that they're
taken in by image (and to some extent by peer pressure, which is something
parents are well advised to handle with the lightest of touches). There's
also the outright lie, of course; HARVARD Magazine published detailed
explanation of much of the above a year or so ago, and got a nasty letter from
a graduate who now runs R. J. Reynolds, saying -"Evolution/////////smoking
carcinogenesis is just a theory"-.
==============================================================================
I think that many smokers continue to smoke because they are physically
addicted to nicotine, not due to lack of willpower. which doesn't
answer your question of why anyone would start smoking.
==============================================================================
Being an ex smoker who stopped several years ago for health reasons, and
because of the pressure brought on me by my wife, colleagues,..etc I may
suggest the following reasons why people smoke:
1- To start with, people start smoking usually because they associate
the act of smoking with some psychological value conveyed to them by
their peers, role models or society in general (ads!). These values range
from virility, macho for males to liberation and sexism for females.
2- Once they are hooked, it is too difficult for them to quit, even
when they realize the health hazards of smoking.
3- Strangely enough, they do not consider quitting as a challenge
to their free will.
==============================================================================
Isn't it obvious? Because it is fun, natch. Just like being self-righteous
is fun for you, smoking is fun for others.
==============================================================================
Hi! I just read your piece on "Why Smoke?" I've been wondering
the same thing. I've been trying to figure out a way to ask the
same question, but I was afraid I'd receive more flames than
answers.
I won't bore you with my feeling on smoking. Suffice it to say
that NONE of my friends smoke; and I tend to avoid most of the
relatives who do. When I ask my brother or my mother why they
smoke I get useless answers. I'm sure you've heard them all.
In all sincerity I, too, would be interested in the responses you
receive. In fact, I wouldn't be too suprised if other readers of
net.misc would be interested in your responses, too. If you
don't plan to post the relies you receive, and if it isn't asking
too much, would you please let me know what kinds of answer you
get?
==============================================================================
It's an interesting question you ask, one that smokers are forced to
answer almost every day of their lives, to themselves as well as others.
I can't speak for everyone, but I can say that I honestly enjoy
the taste of tobacco. A cigarette after a good meal, or while making
conversation over drinks is a very satisfying thing. Very relaxing.
As for the health risks, that is also a personal thing. Eubie Blake,
one of America's premier jazz pianists, smoked from his early teens,
and lived to be 100. So who's to say....?
As I say, I can't speak for anyone else.
==============================================================================
I used to get back at people who smoked (at a party, say) by bumming a
cigarette from them and blowing smoke back at them. I discovered that
one can get HIGH on tobacco. At one party I was heard to exclaim,
"Wow, this is better than pot!" However, I am told that as one gets
addicted to nicotine, the high goes away and one is left with just an
annoying, unhealthy bad habit.
Another reason for smoking is that in some cliques, it is the "in"
thing to do.
Incidently, at that same party (about 13 years ago) I discovered a
good reason not to smoke--I got very sick to my stomach--and I have
not had a cigarette since.
==============================================================================
I think the reason should be obvious - the inhalation of certain substances
gives certain species (not only man) a tangible sensory pleasure.
I used to smoke, first cigarettes in my adolescence, then a pipe throughout
my twenties. When I married, my wife objected to it (I smoked a stiff
Latakia and Yenidja mixture - rather tarry and verrry strong) and also,
my insurance agent made me an offer that was hard to turn down - a non-
smokers discount for my home owners insurance.
There is a certain intoxication pleasure which also comes from smoking.
I understand that one of the combustion by-products is carbon monoxide,
especially when discussing cigarette smoke.
I do not enjoy having smoke blown in my face (particularly cigarette and
cigar smoke), and I generally regard smoking in enclosed public (and
private) places to be unhealthy, inconsiderate, and just plain foul.
But, there is definitely an olfactory and taste pleasure to be gotten
from smoking, depending upon the quality of tobacco - and on your
particular tastes. Many people do not enjoy the odour of tobacco or
its smoke, some are even highly allergic to it.
I do not rate smoking as healthy, but I (used to) enjoy it.
I am no friend of the tobacco industry - especially the scum who are
busy trying to use psychological tricks on kids to get them to smoke
("Smoking is for grown-ups only"). However, where no elses health
is threatened, i.e. where the smoker is alone, or in the company of
similarly afflicted creatures, I view the practice as a pursuit of
pleasure and do not condemn it.
==============================================================================
Yes, I smoke. No there is no valid reason.
==============================================================================
I am a non-smoker. I have smoked about 100 cigars, 10-20 cigarettes.
The cigars I smoked for the taste. I really enjoyed it, at least for
a while. Then I got sick of the smoke, and the awful taste left in my
mouth afterwards.
Most people start smoking at a very young age. The tobacco
tries very hard to encourage this. Young people are led to believe
that smoking is ``cool'' or something. Also, there is peer pressure.
Perhaps some smoke because it makes them feel older, since so many
adults do. I smoked cigarettes for a different reason: I wanted to get
the drug effect of the nicotine. Pretty silly, I know, but there was a
time when I was into that sort of thing, and would try *almost*
anything for a kick.(I did get an effect, but mainly got dizzy and
sick).
I know many children whom I don't believe will be smokers, because
their parents smoke. They try (and I used to, and still do) to get
their parents to not smoke, for the sake of the parents' health, and
for their own health and comfort.
Why do people keep smoking? I don't think most honestly want to,
addiction is too strong. Look at all the devices and programs
developed to help people quit. Most (if not all) smokers I know say
that they wish they could quit, and do try from time to time. It may
be an easier addiction to break than, say, alcohol or heroin, but it
is not so obviously bad, so the pressure to quit is not so great.
==============================================================================
I've thought about the motivation behind smoking quite a bit since
my Dad died from cancer a year ago. He always said he smoked his
Lucky Strikes because he liked to. My dad's death caused my elder
brother to quit smoking, but he maintains that its unethical to
try to force anyone to stop smoking. I feel that there is
something wrong with this argument, but haven't been able to come
up with a cogent counter-argument. I found a review of a book
called *Smoke Ring: The Politics of Tobacco*, by Peter Taylor, in
the April 5, 1984 issue of "New Scientist", that I found
interesting, and that I will quote without permission here.
It's worth noting that *New Scientist* is a British magazine.
Governments like to say as little as possible about smoking
and health. After all, tobacco taxes earn the British
government $(read this as a pound sign)4 billion a year.
Smoking may kill 100, 000 of its citizens a little
prematurely each year, but their health care costs only a
measly $165 million.
The medical view is clear, superficially at least; smokers
die younger, anyone who believes otherwise is a chump. Yet,
doctors monitor the agreement between government and
manufacturers to encourage smokers to shift to lower-tar
brands. Implicit in the agreement is that tobacco promotion
must go on.
It is debatable at the moment whether a ban on promotion or
vastly increased taxation would be most successful in
reducing significantly the number of premature deaths, and
uncountable working days lost, due to smoking. Some
Scandinavian countries have had complete or partial bans for
some years. The result has been a drop in the number of
smokers, particularly among younger people. To take the tax
route to preventative medicine sould cost the [British]
government a lot of money.
As Taylor says: "Consumers cannot be weaned form cigarettes
unless governments lead the way...To do so requires an act of
rare political courage."
I realize that this isn't a direct response to your question about
why people smoke, but I thought I would like to use the opening as
an opportunity to take to the soapbox about an issue I feel strongly
about, but haven't taken any direct action about before, except to
speak to the occasional young person I see lighting up a cigarette.
I would welcome further debate on what is essentially a question of
free choice versus government control.
Feel free to post this article in part or in whole as you see fit.
==============================================================================
I smoke. The subject is a lot more complex than it is generally represented
on both the positive and negative sides. I will do my best to respond to your
query in a useful manner.
1. Why people start: for me personally, a number of factors were involved. I
started when I was 17. The proximate impulse was a miserable season of swimming
which I felt (not totally unreasonably) was at least partly the coach's fault.
In short, I was pissed at the SOB and wanted to stick it in his eye, so to
speak. Not too bright? You bet! I kept doing it for the first couple of years
because it helped me feel more grown up. Additional influences at the initial
stage were the fact that my father smoked and I associated the smell with
cuddling with him. In other words I associate the smell with feeling safe and
secure. In addition there was some peer influence, but I think that in my case
that effect was quite limited.
2. Why people continue: the most basic reason for smoking is its influence on
brain function. (Surprise?) A lot of people have a strong tendency to a brain
malfunction that is corrected by nicotine. A lot of people discribe it as
'noise' in the head. My own analogy is of runaway processing, as though I kept
getting caught in non-terminating processing loops. It also has some similarity
with out of synch clock rates, as though the processor function had jumped
itself to a faster clock rate without corresponding changes in the memory buss
or peripheral controllers. The upshot is that one sits there with one's
head running around in circles and nothing useful is coming out. A couple of
puffs on a cigarette and the system settles down and starts functioning.
A number of smoking friends have described the same effects.
(I did try to stop smoking once while I was in college. I was completely fed
up with the whole nonsense. The main irritation then, and now, was in allowing
myself to be dependant on something that stupid. So I chucked the whole lot
out at the start of a spring break. Felt great! Continued to feel great for a
week and a half. Came the first day of classes. No sweat until I got a home-
work assignment in measure theory. I sat and stared at the assignment all
afternoon and most of the evening. Next morning, the same problem. I couldn't
even start it. Went out and bought a pack and whipped it off in 45 minutes.)
So there is a definate useful biochemical effect from nicotine. Most smokers
also develop some dependance on the rituals that they built around the act.
When my sister stopped, she said that her biggest problem was what to do with
her hands. A female cousin made similar comments.
Research on the effects of smoking, nicotine, etc. has mostly been pretty
shoddy. A study, done in the mid-60s and studiously ignored since, found that
nicotine, by itself, has a normalizing effect on the cardiovascular system.
It tends to raise blood preasure when it is subnormal and it tends to reduce
blood preasure when it is supernormal. It is also worth noting that nicotine/
tobacco is the most widely used drug on the planet. It is the only drug that
people in a marginal food situation will actually give up food producing
land to grow.
Anyhow, the best thing that has come along since the discovery of tobacco is
the nicotine chewing gum. The FDA fooled around about releasing it for 10 years,
but it clearly eliminates the problems with the combustion byproducts. I plan
to shift to it shortly.
Hope that this has been of some use to you.
==============================================================================
I could say "Don't be a fool", but I'll restrain myself.
There IS no valid reason for smoking, except that tobacco (especially
cigarettes) is one of the most addictive substances known to man.
Once you start smoking, you will ***never*** be free of the habit,
because permanent changes will take place in your body chemistry.
Sure, people can quit, but so can junkies and alcoholics.
Not without scars. It's not really a matter of will power,
as some people so glibly assume. Do YOU have the will power to
hold your breath until you pass out? It's not very different.
If you have the good fortune not to be addicted to cigarettes,
consider yourself lucky, but don't polish your halo in front
of those poor bastards who are less fortunate.
P.S. The more honest you are about it, the more chance you have
of convincing your kids not to get hooked. I don't think
anyone CHOOSES to start smoking, after about the age of 20,
when they can make informed decisions on the matter.
==============================================================================
Lets first start by saying that I do not smoke and never have. I have
found a fairly common motivation for smoking from some of my peer
however. Most people I know that smoke currently started in High
School. They wish they could stop but cannot. The reason they started
smoking in HS was because they had a low self confidence level or
felt displaced (ie recently had moved into the area). Smokers in
HS are a definable Group, which anyone can become a part of simply
by lighting up. For some who feel isolated this provides a measure
of security to know that they "belong" to some group, this is
ESSENTIAL to the adolescent ego. I had Band and felt no other needs
for a social tribe. The other group is the Drug Users. They are even
more select and thus one needs a much lower self image or greater
isolation from ones family or friends to commit to this group.
Bottom line, it is a social issue from the start. Tobacco manufacturers
know it, who throughs more money into Rock Concerts and Teen age activities.
Yup, the cigarette and beer manufacturers. Won't be to long before the
coffee companies catch up. "Start 'em young." that is the motto it seems
of many corporations. Take a survey of teenagers in your area, ask
them the following three questions :
1.) Do you spend a lot of time with your Family ?
2.) Are you a member of any clubs or organizations ?
3.) Do you smoke ?
Answers seem to polarize into Y,Y,N and N,N,Y. It will certainly get
you some statistically interesting numbers.
==============================================================================
You have touched indirectly on a question that has always bothered
me. I am myself a smoker, but I have no really good answer to your question.
The simple answer is that tobacco is extremely habit-forming (addictive,
really), so I guess that smokers smoke because they lack the willpower
to stop smoking. Also, don't forget: the death rate is the same as it's
always been - one death per person. Life is inevitably fatal, and some
of us suspect that, if we always did what was most likely to give us
the longest lifespan, we'd have few choices, and no fun at all. And probably
get run over by a truck, to boot [:-)].
But the question that bothers me, is: why hasn't there been more
research into finding out people's reasons for smoking? The Surgeon General's
office has been engaged in an anti-smoking campaign since at least 1961,
but all they've had to say on the subject is that smoking isn't good
for you. It seems to me that a campaign to discourage smoking could be
a lot more effective if someone studied why people smoke in the first
place. If we knew that, we might be better able to discover safe alternatives
to tobacco that would satisfy those mysterious cravings that lead to
smoking. Perhaps a 'methadone for nicotine' could be discovered, or better
methods of deconditioning people to tobacco.
==============================================================================
Many people start smoking in their early teens (myself included) due to peer
pressure as well as the "grown-up" look and illusion of sophistication
associated with smoking. Most of the hazards of smoking are disregarded
because of the apparent lack of harm to the peers that smoke and to the
individual that tries it and experiences only a few coughs that are offset
by the attention received from the peers and from the "high", or
light-headed feeling from the nicotine.
Later, after the initial novelty wears off, the stimulation from the
nicotine becomes the reward, much as cafeine to the coffee drinker.
Abstaining from smoking makes one feel uncomfortable from the lack of
stimulation (depression, lethargy from suddenly not having the periodic
stimulation) and from the nicotine craving that feels much like intense
hunger, only sightly higher in the heart and lung area.
The intensity of the discomfort grows; the dregree varying with individuals,
the length of time smoking, the amount of nicotine they are accustomed to,
and other, emotional factors. A non-smoker can hardly imagine the comfort
and pleasure derived from pausing from, or finishing an intense activity and
"relaxing" with a smoke. Doing so intensifies the relaxation. These are
the "fun" years of smoking.
Years of hearing, and perhaps, seeing the dangers of smoking finally start
sinking in. The morning cough becomes a nuisance and concern. Perhaps the
slight sensation of being short-of-breath becomes a concern. The nicotine
stains on the fingers and on the car's windshield become annoying. To some
(myself) the withdrawal experienced whenever one runs out of cigarettes
becomes a fear, resulting in purchases by the carton, not the pack, becomes
a major nuisance. Getting out of bed, getting dressed and going to 7-11 at
10:30 at night, just for cigarettes, is a sign of real slavery to tobacco.
At this point, many individuals finally decide to quit. They are convinced
of most of the negative aspects of smoking. SURPRISE!!! Its not as easy as
one would think. After several hours, maybe a day or two, of suffering the
nicotine withdrawal, the mind forgets most of the reasons for quitting and
finds a way to justify *POSTPONING* it. They believe they'll quit AFTER the
dinner party, or AFTER final exams, or AFTER the job interview, etc etc etc.
This scenario repeats itself many (Mark Twain: 1000's) of times. Some
people never quit, just continue the procrastination, all the time getting
more addicted. A few, quit trying to stop. An increasing number do finally
manage to quit, some easier than others. Some of those, start again after a
significant period of time, something I never could really understand.
Quitting was such a hassle & discomfort to me that I'll NEVER smoke again.
I won't even have a puff for fear that it may rekindle the urge to smoke,
which I still occasionally get after almost 8 years without cigarettes. (I
smoked 2+ packs a day for 11 years).
To summarize why people smoke, imagine quitting eating, with the intensity
of the hunger continuing to build for a week or so, then gradually
subsiding. That is why many people want to, but can't quit. The "hunger"
feeling is similar when abstaining from nicotine, not to mention the
psychological aspects of it.
By the way, I've talked mainly about the PHYSICAL addition to nicotine. For
me, the psychological aspects were not as severe because few people smoked
around me. I've heard other smokers say the opposite, though. The two
addictions are definitely different and apparently differ considerably
between individuals. For what its worth, I quit cafeine with few problems.
I went from 10-20 cups of coffee a day, to 0 with nothing more that a couple
of days of feeling tired & sleepy. I stayed completely off it for several
months, now I drink it on random ocassions & get more of a "kick" from it.
The point I'm trying to make is that I don't believe I have an especially
"addictive psychology". I did, however, have MUCH trouble quitting smoking
and am amazed at my mind's ability to rationalize reasons for not quitting
at the time.
I'm getting repetative. I hope this answers your question. Addiction to
anything is a real drag. DON'T GET ADDICTED!
==============================================================================
I suspect that the main reasons most people begin smoking are:
1) They've been told not to.
2) Peer pressure.
3) Emulation of idols.
I don't have children, but if I did, I would tell them something
like this:
I would rather you didn't smoke; however, if you wish to, I
won't stop you. I know lots of good reasons not to, and no
good reason to. Personally, I don't even see how anyone can
stand inhaling the stuff.
(Not in so many words, though.)
In case it matters: both of my parents smoked. My father had a
pipe long ago, but gave it up. My mother smoked cigarettes (and
died of a metastasized lung cancer). I tried one cigarette once,
to see what it was like. One mouthful of smoke was enough to
convince me I didn't like the stuff from the filter end either.
My parents held an attitude similar to mine (that is, the part
that says ``I would rather you didn't, but it *is* your life'').
==============================================================================
The issue seems to me to be more why start than why continue. That's
just an observation. My mother has what I've considered an interesting
reason for having started smoking. While she was in X-ray training,
they had a break area when they were putting in their hours in the
department at the hospital. Whenever she was on shift and in the break
area, the supervisor would come in looking for someone to do some work,
and since everyone else had a cigarette, she got tagged. I don't know
how much of this was her perception of the situation. The supervisor
may just one time have said, "You go, you don't have a cigarette."
It could also be rationalization for what she knows is a bad habit.
I was occasionally tempted to start smoking in the Army in basic
training. We had 3 minute breaks a lot, which gave me time to stand
around or maybe sit down. I sometimes looked enviously at those folks
who had something to do with their hands.
For what it's worth, my intuitive feeling is that most smokers start
from peer pressure or (inclusive or) a desire to appear older.
If you don't post a copy of the responses you get to the net, I'd
appreciate a copy by mail.
==============================================================================
I VERY occasionally smoke a pipe. About 1 bowel a week, on average, so I am
clearly not 'addicted'. Why do I do it?
At one point I smoked cigaretts to LOSE weight -- about 5 years ago, but
I just didn't like cigaretts. I ENJOY smoking my pipe. I LIKE the flavor.
And frankly, I don't give a damn about the gov or religions - it (like
everything else) should be my own choice.
Caveat:
I do this in the privacy of my own home, while reading, usually. I do NOT
allow my smoke to invade on the rights of others to breath unpolluted air.
I ALSO get annoyed when I am forced to breath someone's stale cigarette
smoke.
==============================================================================
Smoking is an oral compulsion, and most people have one or two.
Fortunately for their health, a lot of people "suck" books;
yes, compulsive reading is actually an oral compulsion!
Heavy smoking sure as hell beats heavy drinking!
I am a moderate smoker, but for a long time; I can't think of
one good reason to smoke. You shouldn't have that problem with
your kids if they encounter the right propaganda;
mine , when younger, were always after me to stop smoking.
I don't know why I replied; I almost never do.
==============================================================================
I started smoking when I was eighteen when I started working
in the computer business. I was real cool! Rites of passage to
manhood, etc etc. It didn't take long to become ADDICTED.
I quit once for nine months and went back to them.
I last smoked a cigarette on January 6th, 1975. I STILL miss
them on occaison (e.g. the three good things in life, the drink before
and the smoke afterwards 8-)). My wife smokes and I dare not even
light one up for her.
Nicotine is a powerful drug. Tell your kids, that if they don't get
hooked, it'll be one less thing to worry about. One thing that
helped me quit was my constant obsession that I had enough cigarettes
with me or where I could stop and get some if I ran out. At the time
I last quit, I was working in a non-smoking computer room where I had
to go outside every time I wanted a smoke. They were ruling
a significant part of my life!
And that's the reason most people smoke, however they rationalise it,
they're ADDICTS.
Hope this helps,
An ex-junkie,
==============================================================================
I am a non-smoker, I always will be. However, people in my
family have been smokers, but quit.
Among the reasons people start smoking is the social stigma. People
generally start smoking around Jr High to High School -- a time of
extreme rebelliousness. There are plenty more that I won't describe
because it'll take too much space.
People continue to smoke because 1) nicotine is about as addicting
as heroin, 2) nicotine has pleasant effects on the nervous system
3) it is a mindless little task that can keep one amused when they
have nothing else to do. Once again, I could go on, but for the
sake of terseness, I think this is enough.
==============================================================================
I started smoking in college when I had already been smoking pot for 5 mos.
I was getting used to smoking a joint five times a day, and was too stoned
to do my quantum mechanics assignments. A friend turned me on to my first
Marlboro, and *bingo*. That's all she wrought!
==============================================================================
Since I was eighteen (about 14 years ago) I had been smoking about one
or two cigarettes a day until last November. I haven't had one since.
Up until that time what little smoking I did, I enjoyed. I had a heavier
rate of smoking once (about a half a pack a day) for a period of a few
months when I was 20. I found that at rates greater than one or two
a day I lost the enjoyment, and my body visibly suffered (coughing,
yellow stained teeth, etc.).
I didn't decide to quite until my doctor told me that nicotine stimulates
stomach acids. Since I was battling an ulcer at the time it seemed like
a good idea to stop.
My point is that until I had some form of evidence that I was physically
suffering I had no inclination to stop. Why? Because I honestly and truely
ENJOYED IT!!!
Of course I realize that I am in a minority. Most of the people that I
know who smoke, can't hold themselves to one or two cigarettes a day.
For me it was very natural and easy. I mean I kept it up consistantly for
over 12 years. Another behaviour that defined me as a minority member, by
the way, is that I refused to smoke in the presence of other people unless
they were also smoking.
I hope you find these comments helpfull even if they are from an atypical
former smoker. Incidently I intend remain a non-smoker since what enjoyment
got doesn't seem worth the overall price anymore.
==============================================================================
I started smoking when I was 15. There were several contributing
circumstances. First, I had permission. Both my parents smoked and
thus were not in a viable position to tell us we couldn't smoke. The
only stipulation, was that we bought our own, we could not grub from
our parents. The second and third reasons had to do with peer pressure.
I had a girlfriend who smoked, and she wanted company. Since I had
permission, she put a lot of pressure on me to start. Then I had a
boyfriend (I use the word loosely) who thought I was immature because I
didn't carry a purse, or smoke. I took up both behaviors. Smoking
made me feel more sophisticated, and eased awkward social situations.
When I felt uncomfortable and didn't know what to do, I could pull
out my cigarettes and light up. Thus, I wasn't sitting on a sofa at
a party simply twiddling my thumbs and looking lonely -- I was sitting
on a sofa at a party, smoking and looking cool.
In retrospect, this all sounds silly -- but these were potent inducements
to smoke as an adolescent. Now, for why smokers don't quit when they
outgrow adolescent reasons. Smoking is addicting!
The nicotine is a central nervous stimulant that produces drug dependence
when used on a regular basis. When users do not get their dose of
nicotine, they become nervous (I'll explain the paradox), irritable,
and are subject to headaches. The paradox is nicotine is a stimulant and
thus stimulates the nervous system -- produces nervousness. However,
someone who has developed drug dependence to nicotine often ends up in
a viscious cycle. When under stress (nervous system is stimulated) the
body metabolizes nicotine at a faster rate. This reduction in blood
levels of nicotine for some obscure reason (a scientist might remember
the specifics) increases the excitability of the nervous system.
Other than the addictive properties, smokers don't quit because they
don't realize how offensive their habit is to other people. No matter
how many people express revulsion to smoke, the smoker believes they
are wimps. It just is not that bad. It's not the greatest smell, but
then lots of things don't smell great.
At the age of 25, I finally quit. I had tried many times before, but
smoking is so addictive, I had been unable to do it. I don't think
a nonsmoker can appreciate how hard it is to quit -- nearly impossible.
It was only several years after I successfully quit that I began to
appreciate how offensive cigarette smoke is. However, even though
cigarette smoke stinks now, I still feel the urge to smoke. I quit
seven years ago but am still addicted even though I find the habit
nauseating.
I hope your kids pass through adolescense without picking up the habit.
==============================================================================
I smoked for @ 12 years and stopped two years ago. So much for my
qualifications. The reason for smoking is it 1) Gave me something
to occupy my hands. and 2) tasted wonderful.
Hardly a week goes by that I do not crave a cigarette after an especially
good meal. In addition I gained 30 pounds after quitting and that is a
tempting reason to start again, (assuming I would take the extra weight off).
Hopefully I have given you some insight into an ex-smokers motivations.
==============================================================================
As a non-smoker (but not a religious fanatic about it), let
me state that most of my friends who smoke started as
teen-agers. The reason was peer pressure to be "sophisticated."
That sort of motivation is not easily put off by parental logic.
Why do they keep smoking? Most don't want to! However, tobacco
IS physically addictive. That suggests the need for some
serious treatment, as for other addictions. I suspect that those
who stop by themselves are simply less sensitive than most to
the addictive effects. (Last is my own speculation.)
==============================================================================
There is one and only one reason people smoke: drug addiction. I don't know
how much you know about drug addiction, but that is what is going on here. The
body gets so used to the presence of this drug (in this case, nicotine) that
the metabolism, digestive and excretory systems, etc. actually (in a sense)
re-tune themselves. If the body is suddenly deprived of this drug, all systems
are suddenly out of whack. The body realizes this, and creates a strong
craving for the drug that is very difficult for the addict to resist. There is
an order of magnitude difference between the amount of will power required to
overcome an addiction and that required to, say, cut down on food intake (unless
the food cutdown is quite extreme), so it really isn't fair to compare the
two. The only way to quit smoking is to endure the craving long enough for
the body systems to re-tune themselves, which they never really completely
do, so there is always this craving in the back of the addict's mind. People
do not ever recover from addiction. They simply stop doing the drug. This
accounts for the old saying that there is no such thing as a former alcoholic
(or junkie, or smoker, ...), just alcoholics who don't drink. Hope this is what
you were looking for.
P.S. For the record, I do not smoke and am a fairly radical anti-smoker. While
I realize that it is difficult or impossible (in some cases) for the smoker
to quit, I do not feel that their weakness gives them the right to pollute
*my* air.
==============================================================================
I actually like the taste of cigarette, cigar and pipe smoke.
I enjoy the rituals involved with smoking and sharing smoke.
I would rather smoke a cigarette than stop what I'm doing and go
try to find something to eat and smoking does suppress hunger,
if only termporarily.
I am addicted to nicotine.
I have listed the above reasons in descending order of importance.
Note that I don't suggest for a moment that anyone begin smoking based
on any of the above reasons. Rather, I heartily recommend that people
who don't smoke should not start. Nicotine is a HIGHLY addictive drug.
Some people think it is THE MOST ADDICTIVE drug known. It is not the
kind of thing to take up as a pastime. Nicotine addiction is a way of
life. However, even if I didn't have to, I would still smoke.
==============================================================================
The only anthropological thought experiment that does any good to satisfying
me as to why people smoke goes like this:
People feel comfort or security in the process of enhaling smoke because
the human animal as it now exists evolved through many thousands of years
of finding that a nearby fire enhanced it's survival. Those proto-humans
that used fire as a tool survived longer and reproduced more than their
peers out in the cold. The fire is a good thing in that it produces heat;
it also is a bad thing in that it produces smoke. In evolution the
advantages of the heat where greater than the disadvantages of the smoke.
In fact the evolutionary process started to adapt the proto-human and human
to a smoky environment, such that these people became somewhat fond of the
comfort and security feelings found in the presence of smoke and the
biological mechanisms of coping with smoky air were somewhat evolved.
The idea could be adapted further, use your imagination.
The bottom line is that humans (as a statistical phenomena) can more or
less tolerate smoke and it also more or less can produce positive feelings.
Other animals as a rule did not use fire as a constant environmental
element.
If a behavior of any sort is found universally spread around to a significant
percentage of a species, that behavior has a genetic component. This
observation can lead to interesting insights into several controversial
human behaviors.
It's all statistical of course. Unfortunately the English language likes to
speak in absolutes, so we get easily confused when trying to think or speak
about statistical processes.
Good luck with your efforts to figure out this puzzle. Let me know how it
goes.
==============================================================================
In response to your question of how a nonsmoker can help a
smoker quit, I can tell you how a friend helped me.
One day Polly brought me a baggie and a story
about how her photographer boyfriend was putting together an
ad and needed a bunch of cigarette butts for the picture.
Since neither she nor he smoked, would I help out and
save all my butts for her? I thought this was rather
strange, especially since one visit to a bar would yield all
the butts he could want, but I did as she asked.
Well, as this bag of butts in my purse filled up, it got
more and more disgusting. It stank. Yeggh. I didn't
quit immediately, but within a month I made the big
decision. That was five years ago.
Polly never did ask me for that bag of butts.
==============================================================================
My input: I started smoking almost 20 yrs. ago...quite twice cold
turkey when I was pregnant, then started after having my babies.
I have just tried to quit again...my husband and I spent 2 weeks
in Hawaii (glorious Maui & Kauai), and I didn't have one cigarette.
Theoretically, I was unhooked physically. The first day I did
little but think about cigarettes & bitch at everyone. Let me tell
you...there is a REAL withdrawal. It got better & better, but
I still wanted a cigarette, esp. after dinner.
When we returned home & I went back to work, I started again...just
one, then just another, then another. I'm ashamed to admit to my
husband that I've "fallen off the wagon"...as well as admit to my
coworkers the same, as I'd declared my office non-smoking on Monday.
So I sneak, even at work.
As for what a non-smoker can do.....my husband is very allergic to
smoke. We're both very athletic, & I know my stamina would be so
much better if I quit for good. But this doesn't seem to matter
when I want a cigarette.
Another drawback to quiting (at least for me): weight gain. It's
not that I'm eating more...I'm not...and I'm exercising more than
ever...but I've gained 7 lbs. in 3 weeks. Luckily, I've always
been thin (I'm now just 2 lbs. underweight), so disaster has not
yet struck...except most of my pants won't fit. My best friend,
who is a nurse, told me that your metabolism really does change
when you quit smoking...you WILL gain weight.
When I wasn't smoking at all (this time & in the past), I was
a smoker who wasn't smoking at the time. I doubt this ever
goes away.
I drifted away from the thought of what a non-smoker can do that
really helps: nothing
I feel guilty when I smoke behind my husband's back...and when I
smoked in front of him...always OUTSIDE the house, by the way.
I NEVER smoke in the house or in my car...he has been very supportive,
but the guilt I feel negates his support.
==============================================================================laura@utzoo.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (07/03/84)
Will, There are at least 2 problems with your scheme. The first is that (unless the facts have been updated in the last 6 months, while I wasn't looking) the evidence that smoking harms people not actively smoking is, to say the least, equivocal. So it depends on who you decide to believe -- those who say it harms or those who don't. (I don't know what the current evidence about the effect of smoking on fetuses is. The last time I checked it seemed to be going in favour of those who said it was harmful, though.) So we have a situation where it is conceivable that somebody is lying and faking results, but more likely that smoking only effects certain people in such a way. This is reasonable, given that the effect of smoking on smokers is not quite the direct ``Smoking causes Cancer'' that many people believe. I think (but this too could be out of date) that the best theory on the relatedness of smoking to cancer goes like this: most people have a ``weakness'' for cancer. If they smoke, they are likely to get cancer. Some people do not have this ``weakness''. They can smoke all they like and won't get cancer. Of course, it is actually a lot more complicated than that. But it seems to indicate that certain people can smoke all they like and not harm themselves and members of their immediate families, while other people may find that smoking (and other people's smoke) is dangerous for them. Okay. There are several issues here. 1. Should the people who *can* smoke be forced to suffer for the sake of those that can't? Why or why not? 2. Should the government really be in the safety business at all? (This, of course, is a subset of the great question ``What is a government for?'' ) 3. Is danger good for you? I think that the third question is not raised enough. Here is a theory that can get hashed over if people are interested. it goes like this: People do not think enough. They do not think because it is possible to survive for a long time within society while doing a minimal amount of thinking. It is possible to view these people as parasites on the people who actually do the thinking. The more you do to ``protect these people from others'' and, worse still, ``to protect them from themselves'' the more you further the idea that ``everything is safe -- if it were dangerous then it would be illegal''. Sooner or later these protected people will come up against a dangerous situation where they have to think, and being totally unfamiliar with the whole idea, they will fail miserably. I catch people expounding this ``if it weren't safe, it would be illegal'' philosophy all to frequently. I am seriously worried that we may be so badly off that we would find it very difficult to go back to living in a more dangerous fashion. I also wonder if the current demand for ``hooting-and-waving-sickly-user-friendly'' programs that come close to verifying every keystroke are in demand because many people have grown up expecting this high level of protection and security. But back to the smoking parents... There are 2 cases. Either they think that they are harming their children, or they do not. If they think that they are harming their children, but don't care, should you confiscate their children? What if they think that they are harming their children and are trying to do something about it (like quitting) but are unsuccessful? If you decide that they should be confiscated, then where are you going to put them? What about children who don't want to be confiscated? And who is going to pay for all of this? The other case is probably more likely. The parents do not think that they are harming their children. Assuming that you disagree with them, then what? While it is rather easy to show that a broken arm is damage, these things are a lot harder to prove. Remember that we are not dealing with sadists whjo are looking for every loophole to allow them to mistreat their children, but rather people who believe that their smoking is not damaging their children. Since they have a real reason for wanting to believe this, they are likely to be tough to convince. *And they might even be correct!* Should you start confiscating children in this case? Or fining parents? If you do you have opened a tremendous can of worms. What will you do with the people who think that Christianity is harmful to young people and that teaching Christianity amounts to psychological damage? Or the people that think that *not* raising children as Christians is damaging? I could mention at least 10 similarily touchy subjects right now... Think of any controversial subject in child raising.... There is just too much opinion, and no way to get real evidence without conducting experiments on generations of children, something that I, at least, am opposed to on principle. I don't think that it is possible to know ``the proper way to raise a child'' at this time -- and to start legislating that certain things are correct would be a terrible mistake. I think that the day that smoking is considered assault (and there had better be more evidence before that happens) is a very good day for smoking to be considered child abuse. But on that day, all people should be protected from smoking, not just children, because it is proven to be very harmful. Before then, it seems rather wrong to me to make a ``special category'' for parents. After all, is a beating wrong because a parent should not beat a child, or because a person should not beat any other person? Wow. A long article. Goes to show what no netnews for a month will do to you... Laura Creighton utzoo!laura
dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) (07/27/84)
> Why not just > say, "Pardon me, would it bother you if I smoke?" and if the answer is "No" > or "Go right ahead" then fire that Camel up. For a short while several years ago, many smokers *were* asking other people if they minded. I don't know what suddenly possessed them to do this after years of just presuming nobody minded. For a little while I could easily let them know I *did* mind. It didn't take long for the majority of smokers to stop asking. Any behaviourist could explain what happened. When they asked, the answer was often "yes". When they went ahead without asking nonsmokers seldom objected. They were punished for being considerate and rewarded for being inconsiderate. If nonsmokers were to object when smokers light up without asking, then those smokers who didn't ask first would be inconvenienced by having to put out a partly burned cigarette, while those who did ask would be spared this annoyance. So smokers would have a reason to be considerate. But most nonsmokers are afraid to object unless the smoker asks them if they mind. In fact some are afraid to object even then. Why are nonsmokers such wimps?