131–140 of 259 posts
Trivia: Polonium-210 in tobacco contributes to many of the cases of lung cancer worldwide. Most of this polonium is derived from lead-210 deposited on tobacco leaves from the atmosphere; the lead-210 is a product of radon-222 gas, much of which appears to originate from the decay of radium-226 from fertilizers applied to the tobacco soils. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium#Tobacco
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And surprisingly no mass deaths from cancer of Russians or Irish were detected, with both nations famous for alcohol abuse. Yes, alcohol is harmful, but like Russians joke, it only kills weak brain cells.
Maybe a lot of people die before they get cancer from it? Like organ failure (liver, kidney, heart) way before they develop cancer (symptoms)? Or get into accidents (car, freezing to death) etc. It is like people saying smoking can prevent Alzheimer as statistically people who smoke a lot have less instances of it. Because they die from that habit before the Alzheimer shows up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there anyone marketing cigaretts able to claim they're unaware? Aren't those also adults?
I smoke (trying to quit) and I don't think cigarette manufacturers are doing anything immoral. I enjoy smoking! Why else would I have ever tried it when I knew all the risks? Nobody is getting tricked, here. People are selling a product that other people want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cooking and eating it won't have the same effect (cancer wise) as smoking it.
Chewing tobacco does bad things.
It'd be interesting if tobacco could be safer, but isn't, because the manufacturers don't want to incur the expense and anti-tobacco folks want to keep people from smoking at all, not make it safer (c.f. vaping, which is — I think — basically harmless and yet is banned as much as smoking is).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Smokers were already and for a long time aware of the risks. They choose to take them. What could they possibly claim? That a product known for causing lung cancer caused lung cancer?
I think that in all other areas it's been on the manufacturer of products to make them safer over time (cars, children's toys, cosmetics etc.) so shouldn't the tobacco companies be trying to make their product safer?
Inhaling the smoke of burning tobacco leaves can cause cancer. I am fairly certain nobody has as strong of an incentive to create cancer-free tobacco as tobacco companies do. That does not mean it is possible, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mutations can be beneficial, benign, or harmful. Smoking obviously only really creates the latter two.
That's definitely not obvious. I would agree that mutations due to smoking could be in majority harmful due to the chemical components and the high temperatures involved. Other than that, a mutation is a mutation, whether due to smoke, nuclear irradiation, high altitude, or chance. In all cases, they can be beneficial or harmful. The evolution process will then cause only the beneficial ones to perdure.
Anyway, by all means, continue smoking if you think it's going to give you some sort of superpowers or immunity that you can pass on to your progeny. Most likely it'll just give you a disease.
Trivia: Polonium-210 in tobacco contributes to many of the cases of lung cancer worldwide. Most of this polonium is derived from lead-210 deposited on tobacco leaves from the atmosphere; the lead-210 is a product of radon-222 gas, much of which appears to originate from the decay of radium-226 from fertilizers applied to the tobacco soils. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium#Tobacco
Would organic tobacco avoid the issue of Polonium then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that in all other areas it's been on the manufacturer of products to make them safer over time (cars, children's toys, cosmetics etc.) so shouldn't the tobacco companies be trying to make their product safer?
Not all other areas. Some products are inherently unsafe, and that is precisely what the costumers want. Alcoholic beverages are unsafe, even lethal if you drink too much. They could be made safer by removing the alcohol, but that is not what most people want. The same applies to fast food and sugary drinks: could be made much safer, but people want a certain flavor at a certain price (and most know it's not healthy)…
What's the safe, reasonable, recommended smoking amount?
while there are some studies that do not put marijuana smoking as high on the danger list [1] I am really curious that as legalization increases what will we see in the future. Then of course there is the loosely regulated area of vaping and who knows what is in some of those fluids. For the most part I am quite sure they have to be safer than smoking but I would love some hard regulation. 2005 study on marijuana smo…
Trivia: Polonium-210 in tobacco contributes to many of the cases of lung cancer worldwide. Most of this polonium is derived from lead-210 deposited on tobacco leaves from the atmosphere; the lead-210 is a product of radon-222 gas, much of which appears to originate from the decay of radium-226 from fertilizers applied to the tobacco soils. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium#Tobacco
Would organic tobacco avoid the issue of Polonium then?