Get 10% off all American dry snuffs. Limited time only. Finest Quality Indian SnuffsToque Snuffs

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID






Please consider helping to support the Snuffhouse forum.

Get 20% off this exclusive hand crafted snuff. Do not miss out.

Cigarettes are unique

OliverOliver Member
edited September 2015 in Other Forms of Tobacco
Firstly let me say that i'm against smoking and have been trying to quit for years, i now use a filter to block some of the tar.
But, cigars and pipe smoke aren't meant to be inhaled and as far as I see it cigarettes are the only form of tobacco meant for the lungs.
Some people only mouth inhale cigarettes. 

If there was anything as convenient as a cigarette, but less harmful i would prefer it, or at least an honest tobacco company could bring out a healthier option without the extra poisons. I'v seen healthier options for roll up tobacco, and even empty cigarette tubes to make your own.

Any thoughts... 

Comments

  • You could try Herbs to quit. Lobelia, Coltsfoot and Mullein, Make for a good base for an herbal smoke. Lobelia has similar properties as nicotine. So you won't suffer with draw. Coltsfoot makes your mucus loosen and Mullein helps clear the lungs. You can add other herbs for flavor or pleasure. What you want to do is reduce the amount of lobelia until you add none may take several weeks. And with no lobelia you will lose interest in smoking the herbs.

      http://www.anniesremedy.com/chart_remedy_smoking.php I just read this but I use herbs when I quit many years ago. I still smoke a pipe but focus on not inhaling. sometimes it happens. Pobody's nerfect 
    It's not the having, it's the getting. Elizabeth Taylor

  • Inhaling any burning vegetable matter into ones lungs is not a good idea. When cigs first appeared they were not inhaled. Inhaling was not a thing until mass machine cigarette production came along.Although my personal opinion is, with no scientific back up, the dangerous part of cigs is the paper they are rolled in. Well that and the chemical additives. ;) 

     Even with pipes and cigars you will unintentionally inhale some of the smoke. Moderation in all things is the key. 
  • OliverOliver Member
    edited September 2015 PM
    Interesting fact, you can't tell the difference between a smokers lungs and a non-smoker by looking at an xray. 
    There is actually no build up of tar either. These days I worry less about smoking because of all the traffic fumes, water, coffee, food and chemicals from plastic that we live with daily. I'v read that there are only trace amounts of harmful chemicals in cigarettes, not gambling on it tho, still using a filter.
  • haemonyhaemony Member
    edited September 2015 PM
    True. Cigarette smoker's lungs are used for lung transplants, There seems to be no difference at all between the lungs of the smoker and the non-smoker regarding transplants and outcomes.
    What about small cigars? Cigarillos or minis.

    http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/273203.php

    http://www.medpagetoday.com/Surgery/Transplantation/44628

    http://www.sts.org/news/lungs-heavy-smokers-can-be-safe-double-transplant

    I just posted these because they are interesting. I am not advocating the smoking of cigarettes.

    I am not advocating the smoking of cigarettes. I just thought the information was interesting. I smoke  Excalibur minis which turn out to be much less expensive than cigarettes. They are small and convenient. When I run out, I smoke Tampa Sweets cigarillos, available in almost any grocery shop or gas station down south. Also convenient. These are just tobacco with no added whatsis or chemical soaked flame retardant paper or fiberglass filter. Captain Black and Sparrow also make pipe tobacco "cigarettes" which are convenient and inexpensive if you like pipe tobacco but not carrying a pipe around. They look just like commercial cigs. I do use more snuff and twist bits these days and end up smoking a lot less.


  • Sorry. I don't usually repeat myself. The automatic "save draft" function seems to have a glitch because what I saw when I posted is not what actually posted. It seems to be a cross between the original and the edit. Ah, the futility of editing for clarification on snuffhouse. :)
  • The posted links are interesting. There is almost certainly more to the story about lung damage and tar buildup from inhaling smoke.

    On the other hand, even by purposely avoiding medical documentation we still see anecdotal evidence of it causing issues, even in the otherwise physically fit. Buffalo Bird Woman was interviewed extensively about native American life before Europeans arrived, and her tribe avoided smoking until they were out of the warrior years because it was known that it slowed you down and reduced stamina.

    And then you personally meet a person knocking on 100 years old that smokes cigarettes all the time and has been for like 80 to 90 of those years. The medical community clearly doesn't have a true answer and are merely relying on their own correlation studies. It might be genetic or some other factor.

    That being said, I quit smoking over 15 years ago, because you don't know you are one of the lucky ones or are living the right way until you are 100, or get the associated diseases.

    Honestly, medical science really is still in the dark ages. Compare to another science where things are proven to the Nth degree and definitively shown why something happened then look at medical science and they're still relying on data similar to Buffalo Bird Woman's tribe.
  • MarkMMarkM Member
    @snuffsahoy - Excellent points.  My "common sense" take on it is that inhaling anything other than clean air into your lungs is, in all probability, at least less than ideal.  Sure, you might have a case here and there of someone smoking cigarettes for many decades to no ill effect - no cancer, no COPD, no bronchitis, no cardiovascular consequences, but those are instances where "the exception proves the rule".  Probability theory says that it is entirely possible to flip a coin 50 times and come up with heads each time; that doesn't mean it's likely.  Perhaps more to the point, it's possible to play Russian Roulette 50 times without shooting yourself, but it's certainly not the wisest form of recreation.

    In any case, you're absolutely right that epidemiological studies, or rather the conclusions drawn from them (especially in the media), notoriously conflate correlation with causation, whether in studies of smoking, dietary habits, or anything else.  But there are instances where the correlation is so strong, that it at least implies, though granted does not equal, causation.  Apparently Buffalo Bird Woman understood this.

    A complicating factor is that both provable and non-provable factors are at play at the same time.  For example, nicotine is a clinically provable vasoconstrictor.  This is absolutely undeniable.  But as for the long-term effects of persistent vasoconstriction through long-term use (this applies to caffeine as well), there is no clear-cut data regarding cardiovascular outcomes in real life cases.

    With observational epidemiology, I think the best we can rely on is what the law would call a "preponderance of evidence", without futilely looking for slam-dunk conclusions at the micro-science level, as long as correlative factors are accounted for and variables controlled.  For example, the majority of smokers do not get lung cancer; however, the majority of people with lung cancer, across populations and controlling for lifestyle variations, are smokers.  Therefore, we can reasonably conclude, just through the use of common sense, that smoking in all likelihood has something to do with it.  Absolute proof of causation, in the most restrictive forensic sense, is not necessary to draw reasonable conclusions.
  • Everyone dies. Enjoy life anyway you feel. it's shorter than you think. Smoking cigarettes is a tough addiction to over come. I quit years ago. Mostly because they stink and made me their slave. It don't matter about the tar, it's all the chemical they spray on the crop to produce the tobacco. So the tobacco bugs don't eat the crop.That is all the crap that killing everyone. Money is the real problem. Greedy People want big profits . Hospitals & big Pharma kill more people than cigarettes ever did. but they don't tell you that.They make billions keeping people sick in the name of the all mighty dollar peddling their snake oil.

    Quit smoking and in 90 short days your lung are clear. they rebuild the damaged tissue You can speed it up with spices like raw garlic,hot peppers,green teas,Onions,exercise,relaxing,deep breathing.Herbs like coltsfoot. mullein, lobelia, Oregano,Licorice root,Thyme ,and Plantain leaf (yep that weed that grows in your grass) 
    Most weeds contain the best medicine and stupid people hire other stupid people to spray deadly poisons on their lawns that kill the worms the bird eat then leaches down into the water table and into your bath water. It's like they sprayed you directly. All  for mr jones can have the best looking lawn. You can't avoid getting ill. The cards are stacked against you. Unless of course you live in a remote part of the world far from civilization then you only have nature to kill you. Face it; Life is a terminal disease and it is spread through sex.   
     
    It's not the having, it's the getting. Elizabeth Taylor

  • PsickoPsicko Member
    @basement_shaman I think I'm going to borrow that last line.

    Cigarettes are bad for people, it is what it is. From all the additives that are toxic getting lit on fire and the smoke sent to your lungs. The tobacco does play a part as cigar and pipe smokers get cancers of the tongue, throat, and neck. From my observations in the healthcare and tobacconist world it doesn't seem as prevalent as cigarette smokers getting diseases and cancers associated with smoking cigarettes as pipe and cigar only smokers get.
    How much it affects you probably has more to do with genetics and other lifestyle choices. I've known people who only smoke one cigarette a day and was really healthy otherwise but died to lung cancer associated with smoking. I've also known people who were 90 and smoked like a a coal power plant and out drank sailors and didn't have any issues associated with either of them.
Sign In or Register to comment.