Started from the thread, 'while you wait'. I am not opposed to fact, if you show me fact. If you give me proof that what I'm doing is dangerous, give it here. Show me a report of someone who has died or gotte nseriosuly screwed up by smoking regular pipe tobacco in a pipe. A link or whatever. Not a guy who smokes pipes and cigarettes. Strictly pipes. bring it people.

:rolleyes:

*Sighs*

Moved to the senate, because I KNOW what direction THIS thread is heading in....

Ah! You beat me to it by like, 2 minutes Groovy!:D

yeah, I saw that coming. better now then having to change 2 pages in.

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/88/99703.htm?lastselectedguid=)

http://www.meerschaumstore.com/health.htm)

Just like any other activity on earth, pipe-smoking, when done moderately and intelligently, is fine for human beings and many times will bring great benefits for them. However, keep in mind the word moderation.

Originally posted by wassup

Just like any other activity on earth, pipe-smoking, when done moderately and intelligently, is fine for human beings and many times will bring great benefits for them. However, keep in mind the word moderation. exactly. :)

Originally posted by ET Warrior
Ah! You beat me to it by like, 2 minutes Groovy!:D

That's why i'm still the man (http://www.themanipulation.com/images/theman.jpg) !

:cool:

It's not the vector of nicotine delivery that has been demonstrated to cause health problems, its the nicotine. Pipe tobacco is largely unfiltered and more concentrated than cigarette tobacco. While the cigarette smoker will, on average, smoke more tobacco than the pipe smoker, the pipe smoker smokes a more concentrated form and has an increased risk (Consumer Reports, 1999) of coronary disease. And while pipe smokers are usually less likely to inhale the smoke, nicotine is readily absorbed through the lining of the mouth. Pipe smoking promotes cancer of the mouth, tongue, and throat.

Henley, et al (2004), found that in a study of 15,000 male pipe smokers, that pipe smoking carried a similar risk of cancer and other disease as cigar smoking. Compared to non-tobacco users, pipe smokers had five times the risk of lung cancer; nearly four times the risk of throat cancer and more than double the risk of esophageal cancer. Colon cancer risk increased by forty percent, pancreatic cancer by sixty percent and cancer of the larynx by thirteen percent. The study also found pipe smokers were at greater risk of other tobacco-related diseases. They had a thirty percent risk of heart disease and nearly three times the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

I'd say the evidence is conclusive enough to indicate that any form of nictotine consumption is a serious health risk.


References:

Consumer Reports (Jul 99) On Your Mind. Consumer Reports on Health Vol. 11 Issue 7, p12

Henley, et al (2004). Pipe Smoking and Mortality From Cancer and Other Diseases. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 96 (11): 853-861

Bah! Smoking of all sorts is perfectly healthy! Do it as much as you want! Ask anyone. It's great. It makes you feel great too! And don't let people tell you it's bad for your health, because it's also a safety measure. I think you should always place a flaming, smoking barrier between yourself and the outside world. Can't have just anyone getting all in yer grill. If someone gets too close, pull a big ol' plume of the stuff into your pefrectly healthy lungs, and blow it right in their face. See if they stick around long. I recomend doing this in ALL department stores, resteraunts, and ESPECIALLY churches. They'll love it. And it's nice to share. Can I get you a light?

Originally posted by CapNColostomy
Bah! Smoking of all sorts is perfectly healthy! Do it as much as you want! Ask anyone. It's great. It makes you feel great too! And don't let people tell you it's bad for your health, because it's also a safety measure. I think you should always place a flaming, smoking barrier between yourself and the outside world. Can't have just anyone getting all in yer grill. If someone gets too close, pull a big ol' plume of the stuff into your pefrectly healthy lungs, and blow it right in their face. See if they stick around long. I recomend doing this in ALL department stores, resteraunts, and ESPECIALLY churches. They'll love it. And it's nice to share. Can I get you a light?

:eyeraise:

I agree with the guy who said it was ok if you be careful about it. all your links sya 'have th risk of getting...' show me some actual happenings please. I ogtta go, so I cant dwell on every1s elses points. I'll be back myabe around noon.

Compared to non-tobacco users, pipe smokers had five times the risk of lung cancer

From Henley, et al (2004) above. That was a study with a large sample size (15,000 male pipe smokers + a comparable number of non-smokers).

But, if you are looking for justifications that will allow you to continue doing the inappropriate thing, whether it be in regards to health ideological decisions, you'll always be able to find it. Hell, I work with kids that can justify in their minds using marijuana, several forms of cocaine and alcohol to the point of gross intoxication.

Btw, nicotine is a drug. And an illicit one if you're under 18.

Originally posted by SkinWalker
Btw, nicotine is a drug. And an illicit one if you're under 18.

Isn't it only if you buy it? I thought kids were allowed to smoke, just not allowed to buy them.



And yaebginn, if you read what SkinWalker posted, you would see that he doesn't need to give specific person examples. What he posted should be enough to convince you that it is a dangerous thing to do.

Originally posted by yaebginn
I agree with the guy who said it was ok if you be careful about it. all your links sya 'have th risk of getting...' show me some actual happenings please.

For them to get those numbers and percentages in the studies, it means that the people they were studying (The people smoking pipes) had to actually get those cancers, and then they had to be compared to the control group (Those that did NOT smoke pipes). Ergo, even if you're "Careful" about it you are still increasing your risks of lung cancer 5 fold, among the other cancers you're endangering yourself to.

Now, you're not GUARANTEED to get cancer from it, but you're a WHOLE lot more likely to than if you didn't smoke at all.

In Lost World (just started that) The guy who builds vehicles for the expedition hates theories. I am in agreement with him. Theories are often wrong. and I thought nicotine was the thing that makes it addictive, cause pipe smoke isnt addictive. and all you guys are showing me is theories, speculation. No actual proof. The only study I've actual seen about pipe smoke was a whiel ago and that said that pipe smokers have a longer life expectantcy. and why would it need justification? Because its not illegal? Because it looks awesome and hobbits do it? No need to justify that. When I get mouth cancer, I'll let you know. and its only illegal to buy, not smoke if under 18. and the kids you say you work with, skinwalker, have convincedin their minds that its ok. Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind. What mind-altering does pipe smoke do exactly? My oddness comes straight from me noggin'. comparing the two is like comparing apples and a wooden rocking chair. they are both came from a living thing. they were/are plants. but in reality, they are very little alike.

These aren't just THEORIES Yaeb, they're actual documented tests that have been conducted by professionals. It has been shown that smoking of any kind is in fact dangerous to your health. You are ignoring scientific evidence that is being shown to you.

Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind.
Nicotine is a drug. :dozey:

weed > tobacco.
Tobacco is pointless, atleast marijuana gets you high. Tobacco just messes up your lungs.

Originally posted by yaebginn
In Lost World (just started that) The guy who builds vehicles for the expedition hates theories. I am in agreement with him. Theories are often wrong. and I thought nicotine was the thing that makes it addictive, cause pipe smoke isnt addictive. and all you guys are showing me is theories, speculation. No actual proof. The only study I've actual seen about pipe smoke was a whiel ago and that said that pipe smokers have a longer life expectantcy. and why would it need justification? Because its not illegal? Because it looks awesome and hobbits do it? No need to justify that. When I get mouth cancer, I'll let you know. and its only illegal to buy, not smoke if under 18. and the kids you say you work with, skinwalker, have convincedin their minds that its ok. Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind. What mind-altering does pipe smoke do exactly? My oddness comes straight from me noggin'. comparing the two is like comparing apples and a wooden rocking chair. they are both came from a living thing. they were/are plants. but in reality, they are very little alike. I see you asking why it needs to be justified, but your the one making a post just to try and say "no one can prove its not healthy"... Anyone with any scientific knowladge knows that the human body was not designed to take smoke into the lungs.

Im not anti pipe smoking, infact I like the smell of a pipe and a cigar, and the tast, on a rare occasion. But I think YOU are the only one here trying to justify anything. If you like smoking pipes, then do it, but know anything that was not designed for somthing, over times, breaks it down.

The reason a pipe smoker has less of a chance of getting cancer or somthing than a cigarett smoker is the simple fact that *most* pipe/cigar smokers, smoke about 1/50 the amount of someone who smokes cigaretts.

Originally posted by InsaneSith
weed > tobacco.
Tobacco is pointless, atleast marijuana gets you high. Tobacco just messes up your lungs.

indeed.

That stuff Skin gave seemed pretty conclusive to me. (and it wasn't a "theory" it was hard scientific facts - based on 5000 individual pipe smokers with hard disease if my maths is right).

But hey, I have no problem with you smoking if you want, it is up to you to decide the risks to your own body and which are worth taking. By not smoking i reduce the risk of death by 90%, therefore i can go off and go snowboarding and whatever and still be more likely to survive than a smoker. Heh heh.

I just don't like coming home smelling like an ashtray when i go out in the evenings, and i wouldn't want the first thing everyone noticed about me to be the smell and my teeth... but then maybe i'm picky.

You did ask for facts, so:

Smoking is the main cause of death from fire in the home.

Fires caused by smoking make up 10% of accidental dwelling-fires. They killed more than 2,000 people, equivalent to a third of all fire fatalities, and caused 20,000 injuries over the last 10 years.

In 1998 alone, smokers’ materials started 5,500 fires, causing one in every five injuries from fire in the home. Smokers’ materials (cigarettes, pipes) cause 75% of all smoking-related fires. Matches and lighters start the rest.
Lots more stats: fire brigade (http://www.merseyfire.gov.uk/pages/smoking/smoking.htm)

Lung cancer was rare until tobacco hit the scene.

This is the most common type of cancer in men, with over 100 new cases per 100,000 men diagnosed each year in the UK. 31% of all deaths from any cancer are from lung cancer. 30,000 men develop it each year, compared to 14,000 women, but women are catching up. More women than men smoke, most of them young women.
-The peak age for lung cancer is between 65 and 75. It is relatively rare below the age of 40.
-Only 8% of people survive lung cancer.
-Tobacco smoking in its various forms is the single biggest cause
-The more cigarettes smoked and the younger the age at which smoking started, the greater the risk.
-Cigar and pipe smokers have a lower chance of developing lung cancer, but their risk is still higher than for non-smokers.
-Inhalation of tobacco smoke by non-smokers - known as passive smoking - has also been shown to be a risk factor for lung cancer. from the NHS

and you wanted an individual:

One of West Michigan's -- perhaps America's -- most unsung heroes from World War II died Wednesday at his Muskegon Township home at age 79.

While a Marine in World War II, Donald J. Glover almost single-handedly stopped a massive Japanese counterattack on Iwo Jima in March 1945 and saved his decimated battalion.
"He was one fearless person who would always protect this country and the freedoms that we have with his life," said Chuck Carlson, Glover's closest friend since boyhood and a fellow veteran. "God followed him all through the battles for our freedoms."

Glover had been ill with throat cancer, finally succumbing to the disease after a long fight. He was a pipe smoker, even to the point of clenching his old briarwood in his teeth while swimming to meet the Marines' requirements as a recruit. He always maintained that God had spoken to him in a foxhole.
mlive.com (http://www.mlive.com/news/muchronicle/index.ssf?/base/news-5/1092932227188030.xml)
and that is only this week. (click on outside US if you get a form and don't want to fill it in)

So, less addictive than ciggarettes, comparable dangers (lower lung, higher mouth), may or may not lead to a shorter life.

for starters, you are a real moron if you start a fire with a pipe. Unlike cigs, they go out if you dont smoke them after a few seconds. Unless you are smoking it while unattending it, it wont start a fire. That only applies to cigs. and I'm not even sure nicotine is in pipe weed. from what I heard, thats the thing that makes cigs addictive, and I am not addictive to pipe smoking, I dont do it except for some occasions. the only thing that was even valid to this thread was the thing about pipe smokers having a higher risk than non pipe smokers. the rest was mainly about cigs. and they have a higher risk, but havent been proven to get it at all. and I know the lungs are designed to take in smoke, thats why you dont inhale it into your lungs. and InsaneSith, weed isnt etter than pipe smoking, it gets u schitzo, leads to other, more harmful drugs, and can get you landed in jail. I dont need that kind of stuff, my heads messed up enough as it is. I'm gonna need to see a little more than that. He was 79 years old for one. for two, he was a Marine, possibly got wounded. Ill check out the story myself to check it out. and if hes been smoking since before he was in the war, and it took all those years for him to die, by what mya or may not have been from smoking a pipe, that sounds good to me. Now to check out ur links.

tar, anyone? (http://www.presmark.com/htmlfile/pictures.htm)

make sure you take a look at the "Smoker's Lung Pathology Photo Essay" (http://www.medicinenet.com/smokers_lung_pathology_photo_essay/page1.htm), too..

err.. and remember you do this not only to your lung and body, other people do inhale "your" smoke too (http://www.cancer.ca/ccs/internet/standard/0,3182,3172_13127_262972_langId-en,00.html)..

and that could be murder then..

and why are you asking if you completely reject what we say, anyways??
also, it is generally known that people die of lung cancer because they smoked, why should we post "examples"? google for it. and there are other deseases caused by smoking not only cancer.

Originally posted by yaebginn
and InsaneSith, weed isnt etter than pipe smoking, it gets u schitzo, leads to other, more harmful drugs, and can get you landed in jail. not really, I've been smoking pot for 3 and a half years, I tried ecstacy it sucked, decided to just stick with weed. ;)
people who go from weed to harder drugs have already made that decision before they even started with marijuana. whether they know it or not. I have chosen to refrain from harder drugs, as they aren't worth the risk they pose. Ecstacy has a nice high, but not a good enough one for me to risk a long drawn out death from dehydration and lockjaw suffering. Cocaine has a horrible high that doesn't last very long when taking in to consideration the risks that it poses.

Weed has actually made me more mellowed out and calmed down. I'm more rational about my thoughts and decisions, less termpermental.
All commercial tobacco contains nicotine, it's what makes it addictive and dangerous, it's not just the smoke that messes you up. Pipes are unfiltered smoke, this is much more dangerous than a cigarette, but if you smoke as much tobacco from a pipe as you do from a cig, you will be worse off than if you just kept smoking those cigs.

that said, I dont' care if you smoke your tobacco, I just don't see the point, I find weed to be a much more purposeful smoke, also you don't even need to inhale it, you can digest it, still get a high and avoid all the health risks.
Marijuana has many possitive attributes to it. Tobacco has nothing but negative (ignoring "it tastes good" statements).

RayJones- When I do smoke, I smoke only with others who are currently smoking, if there is any danger, I am posing it to no one.

InsaneSith- What are the attributes exactly? It isnt the best for the job, and when the doctors offered to use it for patients, but take outthe THC, the peopel said ,'No, No' provingthe only reason they wanted it was to get high, not for any medical reason. And it doesnt reduce all the risks. It still makes u nuts. and I read somewhere that it does something to your boys. I'm talking downtown. and pipe smoke does have good attributes. People who smoke pipes have a longer life expectantcy. booyah!

Originally posted by yaebginn
People who smoke pipes have a longer life expectantcy. booyah!
I'm sure you can give us an statistic or study underlying that?

also, if you smoke, where do you smoke? only in the cellar?

uhmm... THC isn't taken out of prescription marijuana, it is why they are given in the first place.

Who cares if my sperm count is lower, I'm at a point where I'm debating if I ever want kids or not. So I could care less.

it is a very well founded anti-psychotic.
it has proven good for cases in glaucoma.



Professor Donald Abrams, MD, who has conducted U.S. Government approved research at U.C. San Francisco into the effects of smoked marijuana and AIDS patients, noted in a lecture on May 17, 1999:

"When we look at the pharmaecopia, when taken by mouth, delta-9 THC [Marinol] has a very low 6 to 20 percent absorption, and it's very variable from one person to another.

Peak plasma concentrations of delta-9 THC [Marinol] occur within one to six hours and may remain elevated for several hours with a half-life of 20-30 hours. So it sticks around for a long time, and it takes a long time to reach a peak concentration.

Then the delta-9 THC is broken down into the liver to a by-product of 11 hydroxyl THC, which has potent psychoactive effects. You get less of this when you smoke it.

Smoking THC, the THC is rapidly absorbed into the blood stream and redistributed with a considerable amount of it destroyed by combustion. Peak plasma levels are achieved at the very end of smoking and decline rapidly over 30 minutes, as if it were given intravenously, whereas, if taken by mouth, it's a slow and doesn't reach very high peaks and takes a long time to disappear.

The amount of THC one is exposed to might be the same, but certainly the effects are much different. In patients who say, "I can control the onset and the duration much easier if I smoke than if I swallow it" are telling us just what we know from the pharmaecopia."
(5/17/99) DA



Joycelyn Elders, M.D. wrote in a 3/26/04 editorial published in the Providence Journal in Rhode Island:

"The evidence is overwhelming that marijuana can relieve certain types of pain, nausea, vomiting and other symptoms caused by such illnesses as multiple sclerosis, cancer and AIDS -- or by the harsh drugs sometimes used to treat them. And it can do so with remarkable safety. Indeed, marijuana is less toxic than many of the drugs that physicians prescribe every day."
(3/24/04) J. Elders



New England Journal of Medicine Editor, Jerome Kassirer, MD, wrote about marijuana's medical value in the magazine's January 1997 editorial:

"I believe that a federal policy that prohibits physicians from alleviating suffering by prescribing marijuana for seriously ill patients is misguided, heavy-handed, and inhumane. Marijuana may have long-term adverse effects and its use may presage serious addictions, but neither long-term side effects nor addiction is a relevant issue in such patients.

It is also hypocritical to forbid physicians to prescribe marijuana while permitting them to use morphine and meperidine to relieve extreme dyspnea and pain. With both these drugs the difference between the dose that relieves symptoms and the dose that hastens death is very narrow; by contrast, there is no risk of death from smoking marijuana. To demand evidence of therapeutic efficacy is equally hypocritical. The noxious sensations that patients experience are extremely difficult to quantify in controlled experiments.

What really counts for a therapy with this kind of safety margin is whether a seriously ill patient feels relief as a result of the intervention, not whether a controlled trial "proves" its efficacy."
(1-30-97) JPK


I'll just give you a link, let you see some pro's and cons for yourself. :)

clicky (http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org/bin/procon/procon.cgi?database=5%2dB%2dSubs%2edb&command=viewone&id=1&op=t)

in some cases, it was going ot be but all the potheads wouldnt allow it and started a rucus. and its not by far, the best drug for the job. its said to be a wonder drug only as an excuse to use it legally.

and rayjones, on the porch.

I find it funny how you refuse to accept overly studied facts.

I resign from this debate, as I have pointed out fallacies in your statements yet you keep coming back with your unproven speeches.

Roll This Up and Smoke It (http://www.meerschaumstore.com/health.htm)

Originally posted by yaebginn
InsaneSith- What are the attributes exactly? It isnt the best for the job, and when the doctors offered to use it for patients, but take outthe THC, the peopel said ,'No, No' provingthe only reason they wanted it was to get high, not for any medical reason. And it doesnt reduce all the risks. It still makes u nuts. and I read somewhere that it does something to your boys. I'm talking downtown. and pipe smoke does have good attributes. People who smoke pipes have a longer life expectantcy. booyah!

What kind of 5th grade argument is that? "Booyah"?

Pipe tobacco contains exactly the same stuff as cigarette tobacco, the only difference is in the delivery system. Carcinogens, tar, nicotine, you name it. It is a drug, there is zero nutritional content in tobacco, it does not make you live till you're 105.

If it's such a casual thing for you, I suggest you stop smoking anyway.

The study you linked us to didn't actually link to the study, it just made a REFERENCE to a study that came out in 1979, but doesn't even say who did the study or what kind of cross-section of the population was taken, how many subjects, and what the control group was, did it take into account chance deviation, etc. In essence, you've given one example that may or may not be correct, while being shown many examples of you NOT being correct.

Originally posted by yaebginn
Unless you are smoking it while unattending it, it wont start a fire.

No offense, but I couldn't gather anything that made a shred of sense from that statement. It's like saying you can't crash a car unless you're driving it while it's unattended. Or something.

yeabginn i think your link gives more of a how to than an exact, proveable study from which one can actually draw conclusions..

btw.. ET blahblah blah (damnit i need a shortkey for that) blahblahquently does. *cough* :)

et, it gavce just as much proof as you peoples links. and capn, the guy posted somethign about it causing fires. only cigs can do that. pipes dont stay lit unless you are constantly puffing it. and cjais, I dont throw a party everytime I smoke, but I dont do it regularly.

Are you trying to justify yourself somehow? Are you insecure in your pipe-smoking ways? Every single shread of proof that has been given to you has been followed by a rant about how pot is bad, which is not even relevant to what you were asking, as InsaneSith made a casual joke about it and you blew up on him. Leave the pot arguement alone man, that's not what you made this thread about.

I don't see why you made this thread, because you are completely ignoring whatever facts (not theories, facts) that are thrown your way.

Researchers analyzed 705 individuals ranging in age from 21 to 92 years old, and found that 17.6 percent of current or former cigar or pipe smokers had moderate to severe periodontitis - nearly three times the percent of non-smokers. In addition, they averaged four missing teeth. For each given tobacco product, current smokers were defined as individuals who smoke daily.

Link (http://www.perio.org/consumer/cigars.htm)

Nicotine, one of more than 4,000 chemicals found in the smoke from tobacco products such as cigarettes, cigars, and pipes, is the primary component in tobacco that acts on the brain...

Cigar and pipe smokers, on the other hand, typically do not inhale the smoke, so nicotine is absorbed more slowly through the mucosal membranes of their mouths. Nicotine from smokeless tobacco also is absorbed through the mucosal membranes...

Most smokers use tobacco regularly because they are addicted to nicotine. Addiction is characterized by compulsive drug-seeking and use, even in the face of negative health consequences, and tobacco use certainly fits the description. It is well documented that most smokers identify tobacco as harmful and express a desire to reduce or stop using it, and nearly 35 million of them make a serious attempt to quit each year. Unfortunately, less than 7 percent of those who try to quit on their own achieve more than 1 year of abstinence; most relapse within a few days of attempting to quit.

Link (http://www.drugabuse.gov/researchreports/nicotine/nicotine2.html)

So, yes pipes have nicotine, and yes it is addictive. And even though it gets absorbed more slowly, IT STILL HAS NICOTINE.

it snot addictive, I ahvent smoked in two months.

Originally posted by RayJones
btw.. ET blahblah blah (damnit i need a shortkey for that) blahblahquently does. *cough* :)

It should me made into one of the LF emoticons, then you could just type :ET: and it would insert that statement :D

Originally posted by yaebginn
In Lost World (just started that) The guy who builds vehicles for the expedition hates theories.

Ahh.. a fictional character. They're nice.

Originally posted by yaebginn
I am in agreement with him. Theories are often wrong.

But always supported by testable hypotheses. And more often than not, "theories" are merely updated as technology and research improves. In other words, they aren't necessarily "wrong" so much as they are incomplete. Newton's theory of gravity for instance. Einstein came along and greatly expounded upon Newton's work, but that doesn't negate the importance of gravity nor Newton's observations.


Originally posted by yaebginn
and I thought nicotine was the thing that makes it addictive, cause pipe smoke isnt addictive.

Actually, when speaking of "addiction," there are many factors other than the chemicals in the substance. Chemicals created in the brain also create addictions to outside influences. Think Gamblers Anonymous (http://www.gamblersanonymous.org/). Seratonin is nature's crack. But nicotine is probably the principle addictive agent in Nicotiana tobacum, otherwise known as tobacco. The reason why pipe and cigar smokers don't get as addicted as cigarette smokers is because they inhale less frequently.

Unless they are cigarette smokers who are trying to quit. Unfortunately, these smokers have a habit of inhaling and usually continue it to the pipe or cigar. I have a preference for fine cigars, myself, and have since 1986. My trick to avoid addiction: only smoke the most expensive brands. Well... nothing under $7 / cigar that is. Box cut CAO's are my current favorites.

But I don't kid myself that these are healthy and I typically use copious amounts of Lysterine and toothpaste on the days I choose to smoke one, which is about once or twice every month or two.

Originally posted by yaebginn
and all you guys are showing me is theories, speculation. No actual proof. The only study I've actual seen about pipe smoke was a whiel ago and that said that pipe smokers have a longer life expectantcy.

First, I offered you a set of empirical data that are very conclusive. A five-fold increase in the risk of oral cancer is a serious risk. I wouldn't drive on a street that demonstrated a five-fold increase in traffic accident deaths. Nor would I swim at a beach with a five-fold increase in shark attacks.

Originally posted by yaebginn
and its only illegal to buy, not smoke if under 18.

In most states, it's also illegal for any adult over 18 who isn't a parent to provide tobacco to children. Florida, however (Florida Statutes, 2004) makes it a criminal offense not only to sell tobacco products to children, but for children to posses tobacco products.

Originally posted by yaebginn
and the kids you say you work with, skinwalker, have convinced in their minds that its ok. Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind. What mind-altering does pipe smoke do exactly?

I'm thinking that you don't smoke it in a desolate field somewhere, but rather among peers to whom you desire to present an image you have of yourself. Whether that's the same image that perceive is another matter entirely and beside the point, but the mind is altered, albeit through its own devices and not directly from the tobacco. The same is true for most teens that use various drugs. They wish to present an image of manhood and "being down." The high they get is the secondary alteration since the former had to occur first. Afterall, it often takes repeated use of a drug to become addicted.

Originally posted by yaebginn
My oddness comes straight from me noggin'.

Then we are in agreement :cool:

Originally posted by yaebginn
comparing the two is like comparing apples and a wooden rocking chair.

Only because you wish it not to be true.

Originally posted by yaebginn
they are both came from a living thing. they were/are plants. but in reality, they are very little alike.

The differences are there to be sure. But the motivations are much the same, at least initially.

I think if you choose to continue smoking a pipe, you must ask yourself a few questions: what does it add to my life really?; did I really want to know if their were actually health concerns, or did I actually want a creative way to let my LucasForums pals know I smoke a pipe? If all I like if for is the taste, wouldn't some sugarfree gum be a better choice? Do I really want to risk a 5-fold increase in oral cancer for the next 6 or 8 decades of my life, or would the risk be more acceptable in the last 3?

But in the end, if you want to smoke... by all means, knock yourself out. The thread you started was asking opinions as to whether pipe tobacco is dangerous or not. Whether or not it's dangerous isn't really a matter of opinion, its one of cited fact. The so-called study you noted is pure pseduoscience. The alleged "Dr. Beale" (the credentials of whom are conveniently absent) quotes an alleged "Sweedish study," yet offers no citation to the peer reviewed or primary source.

The post I offered above is directly from a primary source and the citation to the peer-reviewed article is offered.

In the face of such evidence, those that continue to ignore the warnings and go on believing that any form of tobacco can add to the life expectancy of someone, deserves whatever cancer comes their way. Nay, society deserves whatever cancer comes their way. Because if it can occur early enough in the smoker's life, then perhaps the gene pool can be cleansed.

Please note, I'm referring to "Dr. Beale" in the paragraph above. :cool:

Reference:

Florida Statutes (2004) Title XXXIV Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Chapter 569.11. (http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0569/SEC11.HTM&Title=-%3E2004-%3ECh0569-%3ESection%2011#0569.11)

Originally posted by yaebginn
it snot addictive, I ahvent smoked in two months.

I'm not usually one to make note of the grammatical errors of others, but here I cannot resist.

Perhaps there's something other than tobacco in your pipe! :D

Originally posted by SkinWalker
I'm not usually one to make not of the grammatical errors of others, but here I cannot resist.

Oh, the irony! ;)

I was tempted to use the Edit Button on your post as well, making everyone wonder what that was about, but it's 2:00 am and I need to clean my daughter's peanutbutter & jelly from "e" key on my keyboard :D

Originally posted by ET Warrior
It should me made into one of the LF emoticons, then you could just type :ET: and it would insert that statement :D
step 1: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v93/RayJones/lucasforums/ET.gif)
step 2: have sex withfind an admin who's adding the result of step 1 to the emoticons
step 3: keep making *cough*smartass*cough* comments, so people will use it
..
plan b: just add it to the forum banner

plan c: making it interactive so people can dis-/agree

;D

skin, no one has showed me actual results from any of those theories or tests or whatnot. and cigars, ae more dangerous, according to your peoples links, then pipes. and actually, I do do it in a desolate place. Pipes arent like ciggerettes or anything. You dont go down to a back alley, looking all tough, then remove ur pipe and bag of tobacco and go 'Got a light?' They are more dignified. Its common to smoke a pipe alone. I started this thread to get proof that is was bad for me. all your showing is theories. It all depends on how many bowls u smoke a day, how insulated ur enviroment is, how deep you breath in. I dont inhale it. I can suck in air, and hold it in my mouth without it getting into my lungs. Its called holding my breath. I can do it with water, too. Why not with smoke? someone please show me some real evidence. The stats say like,' every 1 in 6 or whatever smoke ciggerettes' I know six people, none of them smoke. stats are often misleading.

You know 6 people, who could be 1 of the 5 out of the 6 for the 36 people in that bunch of numbers, in which case would mean 6 in 36 people smoke.

and yae, you are the 10th person to gank my location O_o

you blow the smoke into the air while smoking. if this happens within 4 walls (err.. a room?) it's very possible you actually inhale it anyways. and this 'cold smoke' is even more 'dangerous' ..

Originally posted by RayJones
you blow the smoke into the air while smoking. if this happens within 4 walls (err.. a room?) it's very possible you actually inhale it anyways. and this 'cold smoke' is even more 'dangerous' ..

pay attention please. I've said at least twice that I do it on a porch. With plenty of insulation. not wthin walls. more of a deck. no walls at all, save for right behind me.


zdog, darnit, I thought it was original, oh well, time to change it. and ok, I know 36 people. none of them smoke. its all based on different people. they state it so loosely, yet its inaccurate. they are misleading. now ot change my location.

Originally posted by yaebginn

zdog, darnit, I thought it was original, oh well, time to change it. and ok, I know 36 people. none of them smoke. its all based on different people. they state it so loosely, yet its inaccurate. they are misleading. now ot change my location.

That's not the point really. I'd hope you would know 36 people that don't smoke. But you need to take more than 36 random people, and then make the conclusion. Doing it more than once also helps.

lets in this case take 72, and say that only 12 of them do... we can keep uping the number untill you get the point yae.

lets go 144, with 24 who smoke... 288, minus 48, which would mean you know 240 people who dont smoke.

is my point clear enough? statisics work, you just view them wrong.

Originally posted by yaebginn
pay attention please. I've said at least twice that I do it on a porch. With plenty of insulation. not wthin walls. more of a deck. no walls at all, save for right behind me.

pay attention for yourself, please. as you may have noticed, i used the little word "if", means: maybe you don't do it always at the same location.. :dozey:

yaeb, 1 in 6. That means if you have 6 billion people, then 1 billion of them are the 1 in 6. Which means you can know 5 billion people, and only a few of them may be the 1 billion that smoke. See what I'm saying?

You're looking at the statistics all wrong. It's not that they're spaced evenly all over the world. There are places where it's more concentrated and places where there might only be one person in an entire town who smokes. It's not all picture perfect spacing like you think it is.

i think he is doing it on purpose.. :p