Obama urges Americans to quit smoking

[LEFT]The White House on Thursday released a video of President Obama congratulating Americans who are participating in the Great American Smokeout, saying it underscores “our administration’s commitment to fighting tobacco use.”
“The fact is, quitting smoking is hard,” Obama says in the video. “Believe me, I know.” [/LEFT]

[LEFT]Obama has in the past acknowledged his struggles to kick the habit, although in October, a medical report released by the White House declared the president “tobacco-free.” [/LEFT]

[LEFT]The president also used the opportunity to tout a portion of his Affordable Care Act, which will be challenged in the Supreme Court next year. [/LEFT]


I find the government’s efforts to curb smoking to be quite interesting. On one hand they are telling people to quit. On the flip side they heavily tax cigarette purchases as a source of revenue. State governments budget and assume that they will make X dollars from cigarette taxes. It just seems like government at work spending money they don’t have but assuming they will while at the same time running compaigns that cut off that revenue stream.

It’s all about “Crisis”. Never let a Crisis go to waste. This is how the government gets more and more of your money.

I have always stated that there is “No Scientific Proof” that smoking causes all that stuff that they say it does. It is all government propaganda to collect more money.

For instance: The latest commercial on the radio says that “just one cigarrette takes 11 minutes of your life”. Okay, think about this statement. No scientific proof to back this up, just a wild emotional statement, to scare you into accepting, yet another huge tax increase.

Think about it. 11 minutes off your life, presumes that they know the exact hour and minute your going to die. And because you smoked one cigarrette, your going to die on July 7, 2040, at 1:00 pm, when you would have lived till 1:11 pm, had you not smoked that one cigarrette.

And most of all, if Obama is touting it, then this becomes “Scientific Proof”, in and of itself, that smoking is not bad for you.

It’s all this wild, wild, crisis creation, to take away our money.:eek:

And before anyone goes posting any opposing “PROOF”, please research the difference between “Scientific Proof” and “Epidemiological Studies”, these are not the same thing.

I admire that the President is willing to encourage this, and try to stop himself. I am skeptical that even a month, or several, means one has quit smoking. I have known too many people that quit over and over again. But on this, I would never judge him. I am sure it is a hard habit to quit.

Americans urge Obama to quit governing.

Does this mean he will act to immediately terminate subsidies to tobacco growers? Somehow, I doubt it. There’s Virginia and N.C. to worry about in the 2012 election.

I saw that message from the President and it’s a positive move. It sets a good example. But oddly, at the same time he urged less smoking from Americans, part of his administration made it more difficult to quite.

Kind of reminded me of the Keystone oil pipeline mentioned often this week. The President first approves its construction, but then the administration finds a way to have the pipeline’s building delayed conveniently till after the election.

“The FDA Kills Smokers”

Snippet from John Stossel’s article:

In The New York Times this week, John Tierney identifies a new way government regulation kills.
Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been shown to be unusually successful in helping smokers quit. The cigarette substitutes are basically nicontine-delivery devices, and the Royal College of Physicians found:
nicotine itself is not especially hazardous, and that if nicotine could be provided in a form that is acceptable and effective as a cigarette substitute, millions of lives could be saved.
A new study from Italy found that after 24 weeks half of all smokers using the electronic cigarettes reduced their consumption of cigarettes by 50 percent. A quarter gave up smoking altogether.
E-cigarettes may pose some risk, but after reviewing the scientific literature, the Harm Reduction Journal concluded that they are much safer:
e-cigarette users are not exposed to the thousands of toxic agents formed when tobacco is burned.
The American Association of Public Health Physicians wrote that E-cigarettes might “save the lives of four million of the eight million current adult American smokers.”
Millions of lives saved! Who would want to stop that?
The FDA. They say that e-cigarettes “may” contain toxic ingredients…

Read more: foxbusiness.com/on-air/stossel/blog/2011/11/10/fda-kills-smokers#ixzz1e4iQ34dl

It’s just like the tobacco lawsuit. The states sued because they were on the hook for treating smokers health problems. The question that begs to be answered is, why did the states pay for the smokers medical bills in the first place? The second question is was it cheaper to pay the medical bills of a 50 year old that smokes or the medical bills of a person that is aged 65 to 90 that doesn’t smoke?

Wouldn’t he have to start governing first? I’m not sure he knows he won the election because he’s still out campaigning. :shrug:

Back to the topic - “Don’t smoke” wink wink nudge nudge. If the government was truly concerned about smoking, they would quit supporting it with tax dollars or outright ban it. Instead they so busy telling people not to do it, all while shoving cigarettes in people mouths.

It also costs the economy lots of money when people are off sick with bronchitis or Buerger’s Disease. People sick = less productivity = less tax revenue and fewer exports.

I have always stated that there is “No Scientific Proof” that smoking causes all that stuff that they say it does. It is all government propaganda to collect more money.

Unfortunately there is scientific proof. Maybe the 11 minutes thing is ridiculous, but there is proof that toxins found in cigarette smoke are carcinogens, increase inflammation, stimulate platelet clumping, damage walls of blood vessels, etc. These effects lead to heart attacks, strokes, premature death and cancer. Lung cancer is rare in non-smokers for instance. It’s the same with Cervical Cancer in women, nuns just don’t get Cervical Cancer.

Buerger’s Disease? I read numerous medical records and have for years, and I have only seen one person with Buerger’s Disease. I’ll grant that if a person with Buerger’s stops smoking, Buerger’s almost instantly goes away. Symptoms will even abate between cigarettes if the person gives it a few hours.

Interesting. Thank you for reminding me of Buerger’s, odd as that may sound.

I’ve seen several. :slight_smile: Thromboangiitis obliterans is the other name.

I was at a store yesterday and walked past people that REEKED of smoke. The very smell of cigarettes makes me SICK and sometimes I can’t breathe.

Encouraging those who are addicted to smoking, to quit is a good idea. I have several relatives that smoke and one that had quit at least 10 years ago…and now is smoking again…even her oldest grandchild has picked the habit up!

You don’t have your sense of smell as good as those who don’t, you get wrinkles faster, your bones do not heal as fast after breaks…and your clothes reek…plus, if you give up smoking you can SAVE $…and in this recession…what’s more important…eating a meal or smoking a cigarette?

And no, I am not a liberal…just someone who has too many relatives that are addicted to this filthy habit.

Smoking is bad for you. No question about it. However, I take a slightly more sanguine view of those who smoke. Possibly mine is the only office left on earth where people are allowed to smoke (certain rooms only, that have strong exhaust fans). I can smell smoke on people, but I think its repulsiveness is somewhat in the nose of the beholder. Actually, I’ll have to confess that a whiff of somebody’s smoke outside has a smell that registers in my nose as very sweet and pleasant. Perhaps that’s part of the reason some start smoking. I remember reading that in WWII, the Germans could always tell when Americans were nearby, even if they couldn’t see them, because American cigarettes had that sweet smell. I guess it’s peculiar to American tobacco.

And, of course, like everyone else, I know smokers whose lifespans were or are, much longer than the expectable life span. Also shorter.

I remember too, how ubiquitous smoking was when I was a child. They even had ashtrays in doctors’ offices back then, and somehow people stood it. One wonders whether sometimes now, it isn’t so much the smell that offends as it is the idea. To me, smoke on a person reminds me of carpentry, because I used to like watching carpenters when I was a kid, and it seemed like they all smoked.

So, I guess I’m retrograde in my sense of offense at smoking, like I seem to be in almost everything else. :shrug:

What are the harmful chemicals found in marijuana?

BBC said that Great Britain wants to ban all smoking in private cars. I think that’s a ridiculous assault on personal liberties but then the European approach to liberty has been different to the American one. Smoking is even banned outdoors which IMO is silly in most instances, the smoke dissipates and unless you’re within inches of a non-smoker or there are hundreds of smokers in a small, enclosed, outdoor area with no wind, they’re not inhaling the fumes.

Take a look around you. Most people I know don’t smoke. Yet a large portion of them have Bronchitis. My daughter gets it on occasion, and has never smoked. My old boss had it, he never smoked. Some of my collegues get it, and they have never smoked. I smoke, and I don’t come down with it. Most of my relatives who smoke, don’t get it either.!!

Just saying so, doesn’t mean it’s true!!

Epidemiology is not scientific proof.

In fact NOT.

My sister is a nurse who worked in the pulmonary ward in Ohio. A two years there, the ward being full, she never met one person who ever smoked.!!

If you find the valid studies you will find the rate of non-smokers vs smokers coming down with lung cancer is, really not that much different.

There are a lot of shocking medical condition anomalies. Lung cancer among non-smokers is just one. Breast cancer in men. The incidence of schizophrenia among blond men. Certain diseases seem to be more prevalent among certain cultures and races and age cohorts.

Nothing to do with smoking or diet, although when some “nationalities” migrate, they sometimes take on the disease patterns of local people.

For fun, look up “radiation hormesis” … some radiation is good for you.

Look at the radiation uptake of the tobacco plant … [from memory]: Polonium 220.

Perhaps some smoking of tobacco is good for you, but a lot is bad for you.

During World War II, some cultures were deprived of “well-balanced diets”, so they ate all local meat or NO local meat … or lots of local dairy products. And there were curious health impacts.

Native populations up around the Arctic Circle, eat mostly high-fat diets. They do fine,

The war on cholesterol was based on a 1950’s study of autopsy results on teenaged soldiers killed in battle in the Korean war. The immediate conclusion was poor diet and no exercise, but overlooked was the impact of stress … and who is highest in stress? … soldiers who are about to die in battle … stress causes “fight or flight” responses … high blood pressure spikes … microscopic tears in arterial walls … repaired by plastering with plaques of cholesterol, which are dissolved after the battle as the body heals. But if the soldiers die, then the high cholesterol deposits remain for autopsy.

Overall good post!:thumbsup:

Actually, when I start defending the lack of Scientific Proof, for all these diseases attributed to smoking, the first thing that the “Believers” ask is, “So then smoking is good for you”?

I am just saying that there is no scientific proof that it causes all these listed dieseases. I am not saying it is “Health Food”.

But, there are studies, as you say, that smoking does seem to provide some benefits, for instance it delays the onset of Altzheimers.

They have also reacently found a Cancer fighting drug, which grows in the tobacco plant.
I don’t remember which form of Cancer.

Yes, that’s pretty ridiculous. However, when I visited Europe I found the attitudes towards smoking much more linient than in the US. This is especially true in Japan as well. There was smoking in all restaurants and bars.

As an aside, I am a non-smoker who approves of states banning smoking in workplaces and businesses.

My mother is also dying from years of smoking and I have breathing problems from growing up in a home where smoking was ubiquitous.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.