Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Alcohol is as bad as tobacco

  1. May 16, 2008 #1
    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/320/5878/862.pdf


    Finally someone is calling out alcohol when tobacco has been pretty much getting all of the heat.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 16, 2008 #2

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Yes, but you chaps tried prohibiting alcohol and it caused all sorts of problems. So we are limiting it to prohibiting drugs to avoid all that organised crime.
     
  4. May 16, 2008 #3

    NoTime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    :rofl: What color is the sky on your planet.
     
  5. May 16, 2008 #4
    :rofl: I won't get into my "drugs should be regulated, not criminalized" speech again. but I'm always baffled at the fact that nobody seems to notice or bring up that obvious pattern... or is it one of them elephants in the room type thing.
     
  6. May 16, 2008 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    What makes alcohol different is that there is such a thing as a safe dose. The same is not true for cigarettes. Yes, it's true, lots of people abuse alcohol. But a few beers at a bar once a week is not unsafe - a few cigarettes while drinking those beers is.
     
  7. May 16, 2008 #6
    True, however, there is much much less stigma attached to drinking than smoking. Why? Clearly millions and millions of people in the world don't drink a safe amount.
     
  8. May 16, 2008 #7

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    In fact quite the opposite - it looks like a glass of wine a day is BETTER for you than nothing. So you have an unsafe minimum dose as well as an unsafe maximum!
     
  9. May 16, 2008 #8

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We've had this discussion a million times before. The only reason people really get upset about smoking is that it isn't confined to just the person who chooses to indulge in it. Smoke is inhaled by everyone around the smoker, alcohol isn't. For example, I went out after work for a drink. One member of our group doesn't drink, so had a soda. He was not going to get second-hand alcohol from any of us drinking around him. If one of us had decided to smoke, however, everyone at the table would have been inhaling it, even if we didn't want to.

    There are also studies that suggest the occasional drink of alcohol may be beneficial. There is no such beneficial low dose of cigarette smoke. Even low doses are harmful, and it's a cumulative effect.
     
  10. May 16, 2008 #9
    after two heart attacks my family doctor told me dad to drink three glasses of red wine a night!! :bugeye:
     
  11. May 16, 2008 #10
    My grandfather started drinking beer to help his heart problems. I had never seen the man drink a drop before then one day I found him sipping a budweiser and acting alot happier than usual.
     
  12. May 16, 2008 #11
    If you can regulate your dosage, then you should be fine. I don't really drink alcohol myself however.
     
  13. May 16, 2008 #12
    I don't believe that's true. All those studies showing how bad smoking is for you assume that someone is a pack-a-day smoker for years on end. I've never seen any scientific evidence that having a few cigarettes a week has a significant health impact. In fact, a prof back in college told our class very explicitly that such behavior was not particularly unhealthy.
     
  14. May 16, 2008 #13
    The difference with cigarettes though is that in small-dosages compared to beer, it has a much worse effect on you.

    A glass of wine for example, is good for you. Smoking 1-2 cigarettes won't do any long term damage to your body, or severe short-term damage, but it sure isn't healthy at all in any way.
     
  15. May 17, 2008 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    There is no such thing as a safe dose of alcohol for people prone to alcoholism. And even then it is still basically poison, just like cigarettes. And like alcohol, it seems that cigarettes do have benefits - recently there was a report showing that certain disease occur less in smokers than non-smokers. The most obvious benefit is reduced weight. It is common for smokers who quit to gain ten or twenty pounds.

    And if you want to talk about effecting others, at least smokers won't drive on the wrong side of the road or puke on my shoes.

    I've known two people who died from smoking related diseases, but I've known probably a dozen families that were tortured by alcohol abuse.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2008
  16. May 17, 2008 #15
    I think Russ addressed this in his earlier post. Alcohol in moderation has no negative effects on the body. There's no such thing as moderate smoking of tobacco-based cigarettes. Yes, millions of people in the world abuse alcohol. But millions also abuse firearms, drugs (the kinds with legitimate medical purposes), food, etc., and none of these things are viewed as intrinsically bad for you. The point here is that alcohol can be used safely. Cigarettes cannot. It is possible to consume alcohol regularly without developing any physical addiction. Cigarettes, on the other hand, will always result in physical addiction when smoked regularly. This, I think, is one reason that there is a stigma attached to cigarettes.

    If I may ask, what was this professor's research area? I'm rather surprised he would say this. Technically he's not incorrect; smoking a few cigarettes a week would not be "particularly" unhealthy. To first order we could probably say that the health risk posed by cigarette smoking goes linearly with the frequency of smoking. As such, a very small frequency of smoking would result in a very small health risk. Alcohol, on the other hand, is perhaps best modelled by a step function. The point is that there is some maximum amount of alcohol that can be consumed without any health risk, whereas cigarette smoking is always accompanied by a proportional health risk. It seems to me that it is very irresponsible to liken moderate alcohol consumption to "moderate" smoking.
     
  17. May 17, 2008 #16
    Link to that disease that is helped by smoking.

    I agree. Yes smoking is bad, but at least it's not a link to one of the highest killers (in the US at least) - drunk driving.

    Of course there is no "safe-dosage" though if you're talking about a person who is prone to substance abuse.
     
  18. May 17, 2008 #17

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There is no such thing as a safe dose of peanuts for a person who is allergic to peanuts.

    [edit] Actually, peanuts aren't really a good analogy because it is actually true that one peanut can kill a person with a peanut allergy. I know what you meant (one beer can lead to more beers for a person addicted to alcohol), but the way you said it is just plain not true. It isn't the one beer (followed by driving) that constitutes drunk driving, it is the 11 beers that follow the first one. It isn't the one beer that destroys your liver, it is the 11 that follow (and the 12 the next day and the 12 the next day...).

    A better, but still tougher analogy to the way you put it would be a food addiction. For someone addicted to food, there is no safe dose of food (again, only insofar as you can't eat just one Dorito). That makes a food addiction tougher to deal with because a person addicted to food can't simply quit completely. They have to face their addiction head-on, every day.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2008
  19. May 17, 2008 #18

    vanesch

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    That depends of course on the quantities drunk by the others. From the moment that the air they exhale contains more than 5% ethanol, this might not be true anymore :rofl:
     
  20. May 17, 2008 #19
    I decided to put this thing to a simple test. I started smoking and drinking to see which is worse. First, I had to decide what to drink. Sometimes I like to have a beer, but other times wine is better. I figured what the heck, six of one, half a dozen of the other. This clearly was a mistake because I had forgotten to buy the materials for the other half of the test. When I realized what the situation was, I staggered out the car to drive over to the tobacconist. There were two tobacco shops now where there used to be one, a sign of the improving economy. I grabbed onto the one while entering the other. Now another problem faced me. Should I get cigars, cigarettes, or cigarillos. I went for the cigarettes since I can more of them in my mouth at one time that way. The clerk gave me a pack of matches and I was set for the second part of the experiment. The next part is a little fuzzy in my memory, but somehow, I got back home and started lighting up. The way cigarettes are designed, it is quite difficult to light them with one hand while trying to steady the room with the other. As a result, I missed the cigarettes entirely and instead set fire to the drapes. As you might expect, my wife and kids came out to complain about all the second hand smoke. And to make things worse, the fire detectors started to go off at this most inconvenient time. You know as well as I do that when your house is burning, you're not supposed to try and save your possessions, just get out. For example my wife, fool that she is, went to the kitchen to get her precious rolling pin, which had tragic consequences.

    Conclusion: Inconclusive. However, an angry wife is more dangerous than either tobacco or liquor.
     
  21. May 17, 2008 #20

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    You can suffer second-hand alcohol effects from alcohol even if you haven't come within miles of the bar the drinker had his drinks in. Eventually, a problem drinker can wind up on the same road as you. The only way to avoid the risk is to avoid driving at the times when drunk drivers are most likely to be on the road.

    The real reason for the difference is that it's more unpleasant for a non-smoker to be around cigarette smoke. A valid enough reason to not want to be around cigarette smoke, and the health reasons are even true. I just wouldn't consider smoking bans to rate a very high priority.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Alcohol is as bad as tobacco
  1. Alcohol (Replies: 11)

  2. Is it bad (Replies: 13)

  3. Tobacco Legislation (Replies: 33)

  4. Is it bad? (Replies: 3)

Loading...