Would Smoking Rates Skyrocket if It Wasn't Harmful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Richard87
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the hypothetical scenario of smoking not being harmful and whether this would lead to increased smoking rates. Participants explore various aspects of smoking, including historical perceptions, personal experiences, and societal attitudes towards tobacco use.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that if smoking were not harmful, it might lead to increased smoking rates, but others question the appeal of smoking regardless of health risks, citing factors like smell, cost, and addiction.
  • Historical perspectives are shared, with some recalling that many adults smoked in the past when the health risks were not well understood, while others argue that there was a general awareness that smoking was not good for health.
  • Participants discuss the role of tobacco companies in promoting smoking and the historical denial of health risks associated with tobacco use.
  • Personal anecdotes highlight the negative experiences related to smoking, with some expressing strong aversion to the smell and consequences of smoking.
  • There is a debate about the historical terminology used to describe cigarettes, with references to "coffin nails" and discussions about the timeline of cigarette invention and public perception.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no clear consensus on whether smoking rates would increase if smoking were not harmful. Some agree that societal attitudes towards smoking have changed, while others maintain that the negative aspects of smoking would still deter many individuals.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference historical knowledge and personal experiences, which may be influenced by individual perceptions and societal changes over time. There are unresolved claims regarding the historical understanding of smoking's health effects and the terminology used to describe cigarettes.

  • #31
Smoking is harmless as long as you don't inhale.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Chronos said:
Smoking is harmless as long as you don't inhale.

I'm not so sure about that - you're still increasing the risk of several types of oral cancer.
 
  • #33
Latest report by doctors say that life is the leading cause of death.
 
  • #34
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #35
After more than fourty years of smoking I gave it up.I'm now on day 28 and feeling good.Sorry,I just popped into boast.:wink::biggrin::biggrin:
 
  • #36
Dadface said:
After more than fourty years of smoking I gave it up.I'm now on day 28 and feeling good.Sorry,I just popped into boast.:wink::biggrin::biggrin:
Good for you!
 

Similar threads

Smoke, smoke, smoke that cigarette
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Medical Carbon monoxide and Passive Smoking
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
"The Federal Reserve is raising interest rates to reduce inflation"
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
696
High School How high does a wall need to be to block smoke?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Airflow Restriction in Tobacco Smoking Pipe
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
News Should smoking in all the public places (indoors and outdoors) be banned?
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
12K
How Effective Are Smoking Bans in Your Country?
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Velocity of wind based on the shape of a smoke trail
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Mounting fire / smoke alarms with magnets
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
Odd question - what is the most staining gas/smoke you've worked with?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K