Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The politics of smoking and the politically correct cigarete.

Posted 1 year ago on Jan. 27, 2013, 9:27 p.m. EST by WuWei (34) from New York, NY
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The same team that discovered the link between smoking and lung cancer went back 30 years later to the same Hospital-The Middlesex General in London-to have another look and they came to the conclusion that The risk of getting cancer from cigarette smoking was directly linked to the tar levels. People who smoke 10 low tars a day are less likely to get cancer than those who smoke 80 high tars a day. So maybe we should be taxing low tar cigarettes less than high tars. There are some brands on the market which contain only 1/20th of the tar content of a standard Marlborough for instance. Then there's the Ultra thins. Lots of people who smoke those will tell you that they only a few more than normal cigarettes and some even claim that they smoke the same number. So shouldn't they be sold at at half the price of normal cigarettes? Then there's the papers. A lot of the harmful tars in cigarettes come from the paper. So all ready made cigarettes should be made with ultra thin paper. Cigarette manufactorers should be stopped from adding chemicals to cigarette paper to keep them burning. This practise is just done to encourage people to puff more but it is a danger to public health- fires, cigarette burns, cigarette holes etc; etc. So the politically cigarette should be very thin, made with low tar tobacco and ultra thin paper and taxed accordingly.

29 Comments

29 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by elf3 (2240) 1 year ago

Why are people still allowed to smoke in apartments? Always talking about inner city asthma rates and learning disabilities....gee could it be all the second hand smoke in their homes coming in from other units through the vents and cracks during their entire critical developmental stages? People need to sue their asshead neighbors for poisoning their kids and unborn children maybe that will stop them.

[-] 0 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Why not sue the cigarette companies? You are just a cowardly bully.

[-] 2 points by elf3 (2240) 1 year ago

You disgust me you're willing to shift all your responsibility off and blame someone else because you're willing to hurt innocent victims because you don't give a shit as long as you get to do what you want to do....you sound like a minion dick willing to hurt other people because someone allows you to...lazy piece of Jerry Springer shit waste of human flesh...when you're neighbors children get lung cancer or are born with birth defects because you can't step outside due to your lazy arrogance you'll probably try to sue someone else and get rich off their tragedy.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Thank you for revealing your true character with your filthy language. No doubt you look on every kind of addict like that. Hey but have the guts now to go out and confront real people. It doesnt take any courage to do behind the saftey of a computer screen. Go and have it out with the drug dealers on your street corner. We all know who side you're on. You won't be going on any black list will you?

[-] 2 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The very least I would expect is agreement that cigarette manufactorers were forced to stop rolling their cigarettes in perpetually burning paper. That would benefit everyone. Funnily enough cigarette manufacturers are against the idea of taxing cigarettes according to their tar content. I wonder why? They also agree that cigarette smoking leads to lung cancer but they think people should be free to kill themselves if they want to. I tell young people ( well actually it was just one young person who disnt actually ask for my opinion on the matter) that if you only smoke a few low tar cigarettes every day it won't them any harm. 20 ultra lowtar extra slim cigarettes rolled in extra thin paper are the aquibalent

[-] 2 points by Narley (525) 1 year ago

All cigarettes should be taxed out of existence. Smoking cigarettes is one of the dumbest things people do. Not to mention John Boehner is a smoker. That by itself should be enough to get people to quit.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

If your goal is to shut down cigarettes, go after the corporations, not the people's money.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 1 year ago

Starting next year, Obamacare will force high tax on people depending on their age for smoking, whether cigarette or marijuana. A 60 year old will pay approx. $5900 per year over their premium and other taxes. 55 year old will pay $5100/year. Obesity will be taxed similarly according to the new law. Fasten your seatbelt. Now that they can control your behavior, they can tax/penalize you for anything. If you have a cancer gene in your dna, can they tax you for it? If you like to snowboard, can they tax you for that? The behavior police are on it. Kiss your freedom goodbye. It's all about control, not healthcare.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

yes well really the cigarette comapnies should make a comtribution there. Also they should pay something for all the fires they cause.

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 1 year ago

The congress, both dems and reps are in bed with large corps so there will be no changes there. What should happen is not what is happening. These penalties are already law in the healthcare bill and will go into effect next January.

This is about power and the gov't wants more of it. The ordinary citizen will be punished for whatever the gov't decides is bad behavior. The penalties on smoking and obesity are already law and will go into effect next January and these penalties are huge for ordinary citizens to pay over what they are already going to have to pay as a premium. This opens the door to the gov't punishing any behavior they deem bad with a penalty/tax. If I snowboard, can I be penalized for a dangerous activity. If one of my parents died of cancer, can I be penalized for being more likely to have the gene. Is drinking alcohol another penalty. This opens the door up for the gov't to know everything about your personal family history, your personal activities and what you do in your own home. This is the gov't taking over your liberties because they don't think you are capable of thinking and acting for yourself.

This is gov't control over every citizen's life. Hello, tyranny. This is the first step to more loss of freedom in favor of gov't control. People need to understand that the more the gov't controls, the less freedom the individual has.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

there's no limit on premiums.

Single payer system is about health care. Insurance companies are bogus theft from the health care system.

They have no problem printing money for banks. But health care....

[-] 1 points by SingleVoice (158) 1 year ago

You are correct. The gov't will keep adding penalties/extra tax to your premium depending on your behavior. This is about power and the gov't wants more of it.

The ordinary citizen will be punished for whatever the gov't decides is bad behavior. The penalties on smoking and obesity are already law and will go into effect next January and these penalties are huge for ordinary citizens to pay over what they are already going to have to pay as a premium. This opens the door to the gov't punishing any behavior they deem bad with a penalty/tax. If I snowboard, will I be penalized for a dangerous activity. If one of my parents died of cancer, can I be penalized for being more likely to have the gene. Is drinking alcohol another penalty. This opens the door up for the gov't to know everything about your personal family history, your personal activities and what you do in your own home. This is the gov't taking over your liberties because they don't think you are capable of thinking and acting for yourself.

This is gov't control over every citizen's life. Hello, tyranny. This is the first step to more loss of freedom in favor of gov't control. People need to understand that the more the gov't controls, the less freedom the individual has.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Yes This is a topic close to my heart and I've written a long reply but it's suddenly just disappeared after spending an hour on it. I will have to leave it now but I just want to mention that an unemployed guy in Scotland was fined £75 for letting a £10 note fall out of his pocket. Two cops saw it fall as he was stuffing his change into his back pocket after making a purchase in a charity shop. They told him about it, he thanked them profusely and then they prosecuted him for littering. Another woman was fined for dropping cigarette ash at a bus stop. You've got to laugh haven't you?

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 1 year ago

it's not the government. It's the corporate takeover of government.

Shhh!! You're not supposed to be talking about public healthcare. We're supposed to praise mandatory insurance from private corporations that were the problem in the first place!

Also the first step started a long time ago.

[-] 1 points by inclusionman (7064) 1 year ago

Single payer health care system is the answer. We should consider what Vt is doing in that regard.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81267.html

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Why do people do like it so much then? Smoke a packet and you're hooked. If it doesnt do you any harm, then where's the harm?

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It's easy to remember to spell cigarette by breaking it down.

Try thinking of it as cigar + ette.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Come-on now that was pretty technical - lol

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Well, I sure as hell am not 14 AND my inner child is a mean little bitch. I'm just telling the dimwitted obvious troll is obvious how to keep from sounding ............oh, never mind. It can't be avoided.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

LOL - OMG - that was awesome - ahahahahahahaha - I love the way you cut through the BS and just tell it as it is.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Same Problem Solver shit.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh the troll hiding behind the curtain - shayneh - sure I should have seen it? No wait a sec - nope - it is January - and the molasses is moving slow - thanks for the midwinter slapdown - - ummmm - - - identification.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

Is it midwinter or early spring?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (27542) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

midwinter

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Yep.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

The least I have the right to expect is agreement that cigarette manufacturers should use slow burning paper that needs constant relighting, which would save lives, damage to property and lead to a fall in cigarette sales.

"Two years later, as director of the Imperial Cancer Research Fund Epidemiology Unit at Oxford, Doll reported that smoking cigarettes was responsible for 30 per cent of deaths from cancer of all kinds; but he argued that smokers who changed to low tar cigarettes could halve their chances of getting lung cancer (though not of getting heart disease) - a finding which has since been called into question, following evidence that smokers who switch to low tar products tend to smoke more cigarettes.He also suggested that the carcinogenic effects of smoking could be affected by diet; smokers who consumed above average levels of beta carotene - a vitamin present in carrots - could lower their risk of lung cancer by an estimated 40 per cent."

The opinions of Professor Doll R.I.P; deserve to be listened to with repsect. Not only did he esablishment the link between tobacco and lung cancer but also discovered the link between pnuenoncosis and abestos, the dangers of nuclear radiation and the benficial value of a daily dose of aspirin for heart patients. The dangerous affects of too much vitamin A, which besides cancer, can also lead to osteoporosis, even among healthy young people is now well proven. On the subject of vitamin A, irresponsible individuals and organisations, including my own GP in the early 2000's, were advising the copious consumption of oily fish for it's omega acids which also contain large amounts of Vitamin A!

Undoubtedly cigarette smoking is harmful and highly addictive but there is probably a safe level -1/2ve a standard cigarette or about 5 mg of tar a day. It is possible to gradually cut down as a prelude to giving smoking up completely no matter what the what the anti-smoking organisations say.

You can gradually cut down your nicotine intake without too much discomfort. In my opinion the carbon monoxide in cigarettes must also be addictive because, deprived of it, there is an oxygen rush which can be unpleasent but as far as I am aware no reasearch has been done on that subject.

I feel that taxing cigarettes by size and tar levels would assist smokers who which to choose the route of gradual withdrawal.

I am 64 and hopelessly addicted to smoking. 4 years ago I was coughing up blood for three days in a row due to large lesions on my lungs and even after my Doctor put me a regime of anti-depressants I still couldn't kick the habit. I saw one old guy on TV who had just had an operation to remove his remaining leg because of smoking ( he'd lost the first one for the same reason) and the first thing he wanted after the operation was a cigarette.

Smokers need all the help they can get to beat this vicious addiction but it all comes down to politics in the end.

[-] 0 points by Shayneh (-482) 1 year ago

Have you tried the "electronic cigarettes? They seem to work for quite a few people who smoked - and now they have switched.

[-] 1 points by WuWei (34) from New York, NY 1 year ago

yes I have one. They do satisfy but I havn't got quite into the habit yet.

[Removed]

[Removed]