Do smokers cost society money?

[johnnie]

By Erica Werner, Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Smoking takes years off your life and adds dollars to the cost of health care. Yet nonsmokers cost society money, too — by living longer.

It's an element of the debate over tobacco that some economists and officials find distasteful.

<snip>

"However, smokers die some 10 years earlier than nonsmokers, according to the CDC, and those premature deaths provide a savings to Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs."


<snip>

"A Dutch study published last year in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal said that health care costs for smokers were about $326,000 from age 20 on, compared to about $417,000 for thin and healthy people.

The reason: The thin, healthy people lived much longer.

Willard Manning, a professor of health economics and policy at the University of Chicago's Harris School of Public Policy Studies, was lead author on a paper published two decades ago in the Journal of the American Medical Association that found that, taking into account tobacco taxes in effect at the time, smokers were not a financial burden to society.

"We were actually quite surprised by the finding because we were pretty sure that smokers were getting cross-subsidized by everybody else," said Manning, who suspects the findings would be similar today. "But it was only when we put all the pieces together that we found it was pretty much a wash."


http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-tobacco-costs_N.htm?csp=34

That's it! I'm sick of paying for healthy people x(

[county worker]

1. Who has the butter and salt?

:popcorn:

[ixion]

2. we should tax them for not smoking

since they seem to derive so much pleasure from taxing smokers.

[Flabbergasted]

119. You're brilliant. nt

[kiva]

3. I have a hard time believing these people are

surprised at this result--the amount of taxes paid by smokers is enormous, and anyone who hasn't grasped this fact hasn't been paying attention.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

4. Smokers are the only reason social security is solvent

[Donnachaidh]

and now Schip programs n/t

[lxlxlxl]

5. i wouldnt mind paying more tobacco taxes if i didnt know it was going to private health care

if i knew i was helping to pay for single payer i might even smoke more =)

[Uben]

6. Then the basis for raising taxes on cigarettes is bogus

Those taxes need to be repealed immediately! The damned healthy people are costing us 20% more! I like the idea of taxing non-smokers, after all, they are a bigger burden on the system!

[Mari333]

7. ooohhh

:popcorn: :smoke:

[Winterblues]

8. Not to even mention the number one cause of litter is cigarette butts.

It costs society much much much more than just money..

[Donnachaidh]

15. oh really? That floating island of garbage in the pacific is made up entirely of cigarette butts?

Yeah, butts are the *number one* cause of litter. :sarcasm: Buy any bottled water lately?


Give me a f*cking break :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :eyes:

[Winterblues]

23. You obviously need some education

Cigarette Litter
"It is estimated that 40% of the litter in the Borough is smoking related, be it wrappers, cartons or cigarette ends."
--
"Each year more than 1 billion pieces of litter will accumulate on Texas highways. Of those, 13 percent are cigarette butts. That means 130 million butts will be tossed out in Texas alone this year."
--Texas Department of Transportation

Check out our new public service announcement!
It is estimated that several trillion cigarette butts are littered worldwide every year. That's billions of cigarettes flicked, one at a time, on our sidewalks, beaches, nature trails, gardens, and other public places every single day. In fact, cigarettes are the most littered item in America and the world. Cigarette filters are made of cellulose acetate tow, NOT COTTON, and they can take decades to degrade. Not only does cigarette litter ruin even the most picturesque setting, but the toxic residue in cigarette filters is damaging to the environment, and littered butts cause numerous fires every year, some of them fatal.
http://www.cigarettelitter.org/

[LooseWilly]

31. Butts don't even compare to that "island" of plastic bags in the Pacific.

Decades to degrade is better than "forever". Most recyclers won't take those bits of plastic that most of our food comes packaged in. That stuff lasts forever.

So, I think litter is really not a valid argument.
And, if it were, it's just an argument against filters. Not cigarettes or smoking. (I personally smoke rolling tobacco).
Go after the cigarette companies and make them use bio-degradable filters...

[Kalyke]

48. You obviously need to learn that the entire world is not Texas.

And, while it may be the most littered item, it's small and not nearly as bulky as wrappers, water bottles and the like.

How about we put ashtrays back in cars and provide them at beaches instead of assuming that if we don't provide them, people won't smoke (yeah, right)? Then some of this litter would STOP!

[proud2BlibKansan]

57. So which is number one? 40% or 13%

:)

[proud2BlibKansan]

56. Seriously

I guess all those fast food wrappers and cans and plastic 6 pack holders were once cigarette butts. LOL

[Hannah Bell]

46. You believe that? Exhibit A: How one's prejudices can override one's reason.

[joshcryer]

95. The number one cause of litter is plastic.

Just so we're clear cigarette butts degrade, animals eat them, and are generally nothing compared to that plastic coke bottle the guy in front of you threw out the window.

[rucky]

9. It's really hard for me to not be obnoxious about this...

after all the self-righteousness on this board.

But I'm holding my tongue.

[Uben]

12. Not me....

...I'm ready to shove it back down their throats. I think we should eliminate all smoking bans and taxes immediately and charge non-smokers extra for "clean-air rooms" at restaurants and bars. After all, they are the biggest burden on society, not smokers! he he!

If they want clean air, let them go stand outside for a change! Yeah, that's the ticket! "Hey, is it cold out there? Good!"

[roguevalley]

28. the surgeon general has concluded there is a 0% level of safety for second

hand smoke. smoking needs to go like a lot of other awful things and in the end it will.

[Hannah Bell]

44. ever burned leaves, stood by a campfire, idled in traffic, grilled a steak?

those have "0% safety" too.

smoking is banned in most public venues in 35 states, & under partial ban in the rest.

the obsessive fear that one is endangered by the errant cigarette smoke from the occasional outdoor smoking shelter is some kind of mental illness.

it ain't going away anymore than any other illegal drugs are. the yuppie moral panic is just turning it into a profit center for criminals.

[sam sarrha]

61. BUT CAMPFIRE SMOKE DOESNT KILL 1200 PEOPLE A DAY.. what a dunb ass

[Hannah Bell]

70. neither does exposure to second-hand smoke.

the "dumb-ass" is the person who doesn't understand the implications of the declaration: "there is no safe exposure to second-hand smoke"

[sam sarrha]

79. ..but it does kill 50,000 aear and cost taxpayers $10 billion..so that makes it ok?

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/17/news/economy/secondhand_smoke/index.htm
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Second-hand tobacco smoke is costing the U.S. economy more than $10 billion a year, according to a study released Wednesday, although those costs are significantly lower than they were before programs initiated to limit smoking in workplaces and other public facilities.

the PDF article, first one on the list
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cost+of+second+hand+smoke&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=

[Hannah Bell]

81. I encourage you to go to the original studies & data, then cross-check the cost estimates with cost

estimates for the population as a whole.

I think you'll find some inexplicable discrepancies.

[sam sarrha]

117. yes..because it is statistical and easily bent to hide the truth, which it Corporations pay handsome...

to hide. if you want the big assed checks come'n in you do what they want. if do any test or any math they don't like you lose your grant immediately and never get another one.. they, Shell Research Development Corp, actually called me at 6am the next day and said my program was canceled.

there are discrepancies side is trying to hide their murderous Business model of addicting children and killing them as adults.. 90% of the 1200 they kill daily, ..1060 were under 18 when addicted. average age was 13, a mean average, half were younger than 13 half were older 13-17. the number killed daily is definitely higher. one side is hiding it and the other is underestimating to prevent being accused what you are accusing me of.

there are mathematical models that are extremely accurate, proven over and over. like the civilian dead in iraq, we said it was like 8000, the english used one of the math models and said 680,000. we said.. that is so off that proves its wrong..propaganda.. the number was higher, the scientific people that do that always under estimate to guarantee credibility. the corporations have no credibility.. they just flood the literature with bogus data from cronie labs till no one can figure anything out.. they have an UNLIMITED budget to do that.

they don't put Tobacco on death certificates.. the scientific data comes from finding how many people died from..say.. cancer of the esophagus/brain/lung etc, then how many of them smoked..how much/what kind/etc. because cancer often has multiple causes. early the data didn't take into consideration several variables, like side stream smoke..at home/at work/at restaurants/did parents smoke..did they drink,etc/exersize../also exposed to other hazardous materials.??

the pure science studies refined their methods, they often work on grants, politicians frequently take bribes to reduce, eliminate these grants. makes it hard to do anything.

the tobacco industry is still pumping out the corporate studies.. a surgeon general said that there is no cafe level of exposure to tobacco... so unless you are an addicted smoker in denial, or an ardent supporter of big tobacco.. you have to sorta lean to the left here, consider the source. the deviation is a given..nothind unusual there.

if one side of a deviation is trying to hide their murderous Business model of addicting children and killing them as adults.. 90% of the 1200 they kill daily or 1060. were under 18 when addicted. average age was 13, a mean average, half were younger than 13 half were older 13-17...and the other side is dedicated professional scientists seeking the truth... i will lean toward their data .. i consider results, if they are off the bell curve i question it.. if they are and they explain the spike reasonably i can accept.. by accepting i don't mean i carve it on a stone wall. science flows, its ever changing to new data.. but what we are talking about is real consistent. and it is based on a shitload of dead people EVERY FUCK'n DAY..!!

the next time you hear some company pulled and destroyed 100 tons of hamburger, $180,000,000 of tomatoes cause 3 people died 20 got sick.. you should wonder why not one cigarette has ever been recalled after killing 440,000 a yr, the population of Kansas City...

[Hannah Bell]

124. as i said, tobacco corps profits are *up*. that's an inconsistency in your storyline

of evil corps trying to prevent you from learning the "truth" by suppressing research.

as is the plethora of tobacco-negative research & the play it gets in the media.

you don't get it; corps & the ptb have many ways of making money, & some are very devious.

[sam sarrha]

125. well get this ..

[LooseWilly]

109. If there were government agencies working as hard to prove that they did as...

they are working to prove that smoking/second hand smoke kills, then I bet they would.

I bet the evidence could be as easily marshalled, if anyone tried. After all, the "symptoms" are the same... so in fact, maybe half of all smoking deaths are really the result of excessive exposure to campfires by people who happen to be smokers... but the statisticians, because of modern bias against smoking cigarettes, just assume that the campfires are irrelevant and the cigarettes are the cause, rather than taking the time to investigate the possibility that, in fact, the campfires might've been the real cause. Until the campfires are scientifically "proven" to not be relevant... I'll harbor some doubts.

[sam sarrha]

60. there is NO SAFE LEVEL OF EXPOSURE

[Hannah Bell]

82. If there is "no safe level of exposure," then why does the gov't routinely establish

"safe levels of exposure" for exposures to radon, pesticides, etc.?

You're telling me the second-hand smoke from cigarettes is uniquely toxic?


Burning solid fuel yields particulate pollution - solid particles smaller than a red blood cell which have been implicated in 30,000 deaths in the US and 2.1 million deaths world wide per year. . "Particulate pollution is the most important contaminant in our air. ...we know that when particle levels go up, people die1. " Indeed, wood smoke is chemically active in the body 40 times longer than tobacco2.

1. Joel Schwartz, Ph.D., Harvard School of Public Health, E Magazine, Sept./Oct. 2002

2. Wm. A Pryor, Persistent Free Radicals in Woodsmoke: An ESR Spin Trapping Study, Free Radical Biology and Medicine 1989, 7(1): 17-21


That's woodsmoke, buddy.

2.5/10 adults smoke. How many adults have fireplaces, woodstoves, pellet stoves?

And - horrors! Let their children sit by the fire!

[ProfessorGAC]

114. Then The SG Didn't Read The CDC Report

Or the EPA report, or the American Cancer Society report.

And, obviously neither have you.
GAC

[LooseWilly]

32. I saw a bumper sticker once...

on a scooter in Bologna Italy: "Thank you for holding your breath while I smoke."

[Mojorabbit]

22. Me too. nt

[TexasObserver]

10. Yes, but those healthy old people don't stink like smokers do.

[Donnachaidh]

16. yeah, they just marinate themselves in cheap perfume or cologne

And then they act so SUPERIOR to smokers and others, while everyone around themselves are holding their breath and wiping away the water from their eyes - due to the STINK.

[TexasObserver]

18. Maybe, but it's still better than the smell of walking ashtrays.

I'd be happy to see perfumes and colognes used less. They stink, too, but it's a different kind of stink than smokers.

[janx]

21. I am personally offended by people who use cheap perfume or

by those who smell like smoke. I am also personally offended by those people who don't use deodorant.

They all stink, and I am offended. It grosses me out, and I will NOT TAKE IT ANYMORE!

:rofl:

Edited to add: Did I mention my dogs' breath?

[sam sarrha]

62. both give me hives

[LooseWilly]

33. No, healthy old people don't stink like smokers do...

... they tend to stink like babies who need to have their diapers changed.

I've often found I had to smoke to withstand the smell of them...

[TexasObserver]

36. I'm happy to have smoked you out.

Another name I can cross off the list of posters I read.

[LooseWilly]

39. Were you one of those old people that smelled like diaper that rode in my taxi?

One of the ones I had to open the windows and smoke a cigarette after they'd left just to cover the smell with a less offensive one?

Well, good riddance to you if you were. More of a hassle than the $4 trip was worth. But at least I didn't, at the time, tell you you stank. I just put up with it and had a cigarette afterward.
Glad to see you're self-righteous enough to tell me that offending me is ok but the reverse not-so-much...

[TexasObserver]

41. You are projecting and fabricating, to fit your delusion.

Smoking cigarettes is what brings you happiness. I get that.

The rest of that nonsense you've been posting is just vile hatred of the elderly, one of whom I am not.

[LooseWilly]

42. There is no projection... I was merely asking if you were someone I'd encountered on the job.

I was recounting one of a number of encounters I have had while driving a taxi. Your previous response led me to suspect that you might perhaps have been one of those that I had encountered on the job.

If you don't believe what I've said about the smell of old people, I invite you to go and spend a few hours in a retirement home. If you stay long enough, you might find someone like the one I mentioned... after whose ride I had to roll down the windows and smoke a cigarette to mask the smell.

As to a discussion of whether one or the other, or some other scent... such as someone's beloved dog's breath... is repellent, that is a matter of taste.

I, personally, prefer the scent of tobacco. If you prefer the smell of old people, more power to you. Likewise, if you like the smell of dog breath... get a puppy.

And, I never said I hate the elderly... I just said they often smell. The two do not equate in my world, though it sounds as if the two do equate in your world.

[LanternWaste]

53. Not all old people stink or wear colognes...

Not all old people stink or wear colognes, but all smokers smell like ashtrays.

I say this as a smoker, honestly and without prejudice who has learned never to defend the indefensible or justify those things without justification...

We don't smoke it because we like it, we do it because we're addicted. We don't defend it out of high, moral honor, we defend it because we're addicted. We don't cry with righteous indignation "Nanny State!" because we believe, we do it because we're addicted.

Every smoker wants to be quit-- but for most of us, we simply don't want to quit hard enough. As an old college prof once told me-- "the absolute truth of math is simple, but you have to actually look for the truth first..."

[laugle]

91. Really....some people here said

to tax cigarettes so that people will quit. Well....let's tax crack, alcohol, heroin, maybe then they will quit too...........

If you are overweight, let's tax you by the pound..........LOL

Who's next???

[LooseWilly]

111. Can we tax the dumb, too?...

[LooseWilly]

104. As a fellow smoker, I will concede your point.

Not all old people stink of cologne or diapers. I am not sure I will stipulate that all smokers smell like ashtrays... unless you are willing to counter-stipulate that not all ashtrays are stanky affairs that are left to mouldre for months at a time without being emptied/cleaned.

I will stipulate that all smokers smell like an ashtray that has been used at least once.

I personally will continue this by saying that, given that an ashtray is emptied &/or cleaned semi-regularly... is not (personally) an offensive smelling object.

Likewise... the elderly who bathe and have their bowel issues well handled also are not particularly offensive.

However, to those who would categorically define any and all ashtrays as being offensive, I'm perfectly willing to define the elderly-olfactory experience as arbitrarily as you... and from a similarly militant point of view declare them equally offensive in every way.
And babies too.

And NO... not all smokers want to quit. I recently quit... and didn't like it. So I started again.

And if there's one thing I most learned in math, it was the lesson of translations in linear algebra... very similar to the lessons of relativity in Einstein's early work. All of which are merely attempts to quantify the qualified philosophical notion of subjectivity... It's all in the point of view.
In fact, if you want to define the Earth as the center of the Universe, that's a viable point of view, mathematically... it's simply a matter of translation of the coordinate grids... the only real difference is that the mathematics of predicting the locations trajectories of other astronomical bodies becomes more complicated with that frame of reference. That doesn't make that frame of reference wrong... it just makes it inconvenient...

[Heidi]

68. You're out of line and flat wrong. Old does not necessarily equal incontinent.

I don't care how many taxis full of shitty-pants elderly you claim to have driven. Your post says more about you than it says about the elderly.

[laugle]

94. Your funny.....yeah, and how about all those

babies with shitty-pants.............woooooo........LOL

[LooseWilly]

106. You are right.

I was merely being as asinine as the post to which I was responding.
I have actually driven quite a number of elderly in my taxi that were wonderful human beings.
Co-incidentally, about half of the wonderful elderly I came in contact with still smoked.
I think 2/3 drank hard liquor (so many vodka bottles in their groceries... and more power to them!!).

And many many many used serious amounts of cologne.
And many were very generous, while many were absurdly cheap.

They are people, after all... and there's a great variety to them. Unfortunately, the poster I was responding to decided to to them on a pedestal, to attack smokers. He put them into the crossfire... I merely returned fire... to use a metaphor.
Please, accept my apologies if you or someone you care for is elderly and don't/doesn't smell. And, even if you/someone you care for does. Lord knows my hygiene also often is wanting... and, as Jesus is reputed to have said "let he who is without sin cast the first stone". Well, that won't be me.
So, as you and/or your elderly loved ones accept my cigarette smelling self, so shall I accept you/your loved ones and whatever perfumes &/or other odors they may share with those nearby.

Kumbaya.

[Heidi]

108. I'm a smoker and I _know_

I sometimes smell of smoke, although I don't _ever_ smoke indoors or in cars. We who smoke _do_ smell like smoke, and I don't generally take offense at such observations because I realize the smell of smoke does genuinely make some folks physically ill -- just as the smell of meatpacking plants and some perfumes trigger my gag reflex. :hi:

[joshcryer]

101. Thankfully it looks like e-cigarettes are growing ground quite readily.

Which tend to avoid any tobacco bans.

But I bet it gets regulated to fuck and back in due course.

[evolve45]

11. Let em smoke

I only quit when the costs exceeded my budget. Sometimes I still miss smoking. Quit over 10 years ago.

[Taitertots]

13. You do better for the earth to drive your car and be a fat ass

It does less damage to the earth if you drive a car, smoke, and have a poor animal based diet. Obviously the vehicle would need to have decent emissions and you would have to use modern agricultural techniques to grow the plants and raise the animals.

[gratuitous]

14. I'd be interested in the report's methodology

Measured strictly from a health care cost standpoint, as this study seems to, the numbers might be supportable. But it's leaving out significant costs if it doesn't measure, for example, lost productivity from sick time or extra days off for smokers that have to be made up by companies.

[LooseWilly]

34. Ahh, force them to smoke outside in the winter...

... then blame the ensuing sick time on the cigarettes- rather than the time they're forced to stand outside in the winter!

Brilliant!!

[proud2BlibKansan]

59. And don't forget to not give them ashtrays and then get mad at the butts on the ground!

[sam sarrha]

63. i hear in the south you cant graduate 4th grade without smoking 2 years

:rofl: i live there.. it is really sad here, i used to think it was something in the water, now i think its in the second hand smoke

[LooseWilly]

105. Are you sure it's not the third hand smoke? (n/t)

[Viking12]

65. Study available here...

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

The USAToday article is crappy reporting. It misrepresents the study's limited conclusions. The study is narrowly focused on health care costs and ignores other economic factors, i.e. loss of productivity, opportunity costs, etc...

[gratuitous]

77. Thank you

I'll mark this for later consumption. The article sounded just a mite too pat for such a facile conclusion. I had no doubt the "news" would come as great comfort to nicotine-addicted folks who've been lied to by tobacco companies for so long they can no longer formulate a coherent thought on the subject.

[Mari333]

17. ah hahahaha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Calment

She gave up smoking at the age of 117, only five years before her death<10> . Though she relapsed for a year she finally gave up smoking at the age of 119 years (blindness made it difficult for her to light a cigarette, and she was reluctant to ask others for help). When asked on one occasion for her prescription for a long life, she mentioned garlic, vegetables, cigarettes, red wine, and avoiding brawls. On another occasion, she ascribed her longevity and relatively youthful appearance for her age to olive oil, which she said she poured on all her food and rubbed onto her skin, as well as a diet of port wine, and nearly 2 pounds of chocolate eaten every week.<7>

[pleah]

19. Or this guy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3636941


:evilgrin: :smoke:

[ProgrezivIndie]

20. I'm tired of all these BS statistics, aren't you?

For those who can never get enough "statistics" ... here are some more to chew on, from my own life: :crazy:

I've smoked since I was 13 yrs old, and that was almost 46 years ago. Over the course of that time, I've averaged about 1.5 packs (30 cigarettes) per day. If each cigarette takes 11 minutes off my life, I've already lost the 10+ years which some studies claim I am supposed to lose.

I simply DO NOT go to doctors. I am in reasonably good health (acceptable level of aches & pains associated with arthritis). I have NEVER taken a sick-day, and in fact have never really been sick (other than a few minor colds). I retired nearly 20 years ago (by choice, at age 39) but I keep busy around the house, yard, garden, and also with helping friends & neighbors.

I do not smoke around others (except when there are fellow SMOKERS to pass some time with). A very long time ago, I stopped going to any place which prohibits "smoking" (eateries, movies, what-have-ye)... and the MONEY I've saved has more than paid for my cigarette habit (so I reckon I must THANK the anti-smokers for my modest wealth).

When I finally do CROAK (as every single one of us will do) someday... ya'll anti-smoking NUTZ can kiss my ass (before they cremate me). That's all I have to say on the subject... carry on! :smoke:

[Uben]

24. How dare you?

Ha! Just kidding. Your story sounds like mine. I'm 54, in excellent physical condition and health, yet I've been retired nine years, smoked for 35+ yrs. My lung capacity (had it checked) is at or beyond most non-smokers (per the nurse giving the exam), and I have low-blood pressure, a healthy low, not a dangerous one. I'd still like to quit, and I'll probably keep trying. Who knows, maybe it'll take the next time.

What really cooks my goose is that smokers are unfairly taxed. The premise that smoking costs society more than non-smokers has been debunked, so the basis for extraordinary taxation is unfounded.

[laugle]

96. You retired at 45?

[LooseWilly]

35. Cheers !!

I personally just laugh at the threat of cigarettes killing me. I'm certain the whiskey will get me long before the cigarettes... and I'm betting the brain cancer from the cell phone ear pieces will get the anti-smoking nuts long before the second hand smoke does.

[Hissyspit]

43. I buried my smoker dad who died of lung cancer in January.

It was not an easy thing to witness.

But I'm just a nut, I guess. (I don't use cell phone ear pieces, by the way.)

[LooseWilly]

107. My grandma died of lung cancer when I was... too young to remember clearly.

... and I saw my father bloated and yellow from the jaundice from his drinking shortly before he died at the age of 40. When I was 10.

I'm going to refrain from using profanity to tell you that I really don't care about your story because I have my own. It's not easy though, because I don't appreciate the implications of high moral ground that you're projecting...
You can feel free to react to your tale of woe as you like... but if you say another word to me about how I'm supposed to react... I'm liable to lose my shit. I will react to my own family woe as I see fit... and I'm goddaamned sick and tired of people with stories thinking that those stories give them the right to legislate how I fucking live... as if my own fucking story isn't as fucking relevant...

Ok... I'm going to let this go now, go have a cigarette so I don't offend everyone reading this page... and have a shot before I smoke said cigarette.

There you go... cigarettes doing the community some good.

[Kalyke]

49. I have acute sinutitus and have been to the doctor for that numerous time.

I kept telling my GP about my cough - and told him it was a tickle trickling down from my sinus cavities and not coming up from my lungs. He did an X-Ray of my lungs and came back in and said, "You don't smoke, right?" Well, yeah - I do. Couldn't tell it from the X-rays, apparently.

Oh - and fwiw, I finally went to an ENT. I have a severe deviated septum, which is causing sleep apnea and weight-gain as a result (no sleep = low, low, low metabolism) and acute sinusitis. Nothing wrong with my lungs. I'm having surgery on my nose at the end of the month.

[sam sarrha]

66. The average age of starting is 13, so half start before that, /thats a true stat and 1200 die a day

of that 1200 were 1080 people addicted as children who at the time did not have the cognitive area of their brain developed enough to make an appropriate decision to start smoking..

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_age_do_people_start_smoking_at
As teens or preteens. The average age of starting is 13, so half start before that, half after. 90% start by age 18.

denile is a bitch.. makes you look really stupid. just shut up an smoke

[Orsino]

67. Don't dismiss anecdotes completely.

I can well believe that some people don't feel major effects until relatively late in their smoking careers, and these people are right to complain about infringement on their individual liberty. We never hear from smokers after the habit kills them, after all.

I don't know about the cost of smoking in dollars, but we've lost a lot of people, and that's a high cost, in my reckoning.

[sam sarrha]

71. they have no right to expose me or others to carcinogenic products which have NO safe level exposure

1200 people die from tobacco every year.. its rude and dangerous, i have asthma, my wife has chronic acute asthma due to exposure to tobacco in the womb that also killed her twin.. the stupid sons of bitches have no rights exposing anyone.. get over it

since 90% of users started as children, average age 13, one half of users treated younger... there should be no advertising of any kind, no one should be allowed to smoke sight of anyone younger than 18. there should be intense tobacco and alcohol education in the schools. the industry is dependant on addicting children ..10800 people die every day who were addicted as children.. what is wrong with that F'n picture..!!!

tobacco farmers could probably make a better living growing Ag hemp. considering the chemicals and intensive methods required for tobacco..

[Orsino]

80. Get over what, exactly? n/t

[Hannah Bell]

88. Poor thing, smokers chasing you, blowing smoke in your face everywhere - it's so *unfair*!

How is it that all the rabid anti-smokers are constantly being subjected to second-hand smoke?

I myself almost never encounter second-hand smoke in my daily life unless I *deliberately* seek to encounter it.


I think you like to be offended.

[sam sarrha]

123. do you live in the south.. you are really getting desperate with the baby talk

yea i have to run a gauntlet of smokers every day to get thru the door to work, out during brakes.. in resturaunts..but we rarely go..

...i know you don't care and relish the thought of others suffering, but i have Asthma, it takes only a whiff, i have to hold my breath to get thru the smokers.. my wife has acute asthma, and 3 inhalers, and ends up in the emergency ward every year. her lung problems come from her mother smoking during pregnancy, premature twins, poorly developed lungs, one dies..mom exposes her to tobacco as an infant and child. oh, that got a smile from you.

quit putting your mental illness on others, you live to offend others.. your only delight in life is ugliness

[Hannah Bell]

102. auto accidents: leading cause of death ages 4-34; children, teens, young adults.

add in costs of disability, pollution, manufacture, scrap, oil industry...

considering we fight wars over oil, lets tote up the lost lives...

[Hannah Bell]

83. Obsession is a bitch, too. Tends to make common sense fly out the window.

[joshcryer]

100. Japan. Your biases are clouding the reality. It's not cigarettes that are the significant...

...contributing factor. It is either pollution from vehicles, alcohol consumption, or obesity, three things which Japan doesn't have as much of, yet it has a massive smoking rate (one in two males smokes in Japan).

We are a society of obese, alcohol consuming, petrol burners, cigarettes as a root cause are just the various lobbys trying to place blame where it doesn't belong.

[LooseWilly]

110. Where do you get that 1200 a day stat?

I did a google search on smoking deaths recently, and found an article that describes the methodology that the poster had found for determining that number. It basically consisted of a number generated according to a formula which calculated projected proportions of deaths of various sorts being smoking related, and then just spewed out a number each year.
No one the poster contacted in CDC or anywhere else could tell him anything about the algorithm that made the calculations.
No agency actually tabulates "smoking deaths". People don't die of "smoking". Smoking contributes to a number of causes of death, but it doesn't actually kill. Of course... innumerable other things contribute to the same causes of death... and the exact numbers can't really be calculated.
So I dispute your arbitrary number of 1200 a day. I say it's bullshit. I say that loads of those that you're tabulating as dying of smoking are people that worked around asbestos during WWII. I say that loads of them worked around all sorts of other carcinogens and lung pathogens. I say that there are opportunistic statisticians who are biased against smoking who will take any death that they can label as smoking related, and will label it as smoking-caused.

I say your statistic is probably largely bullshit.

I saw a study done over 30 years by the University of California that suggested that there was no statistical link between second hand smoke and illness (it was done over 30 years, with spouses... with one, the other, both, or neither as smokers... and it actually found that a statistically insignificant proportion of the non-smokers contracted smoking-related illnesses at a higher rate than those with one or both spouses smoking... but since it was a statistically insignificant difference, they weren't willing to say that non-smokers were more likely to suffer a greater chance of smoking-related illnesses than smokers).

Denial may be a bitch... but cooking the statistics sure seems to be in fashion...

[Zodiak]

25. Everyone dies once

Sudden deaths tend to cost less than prolonged deaths, but everyone gets one. Doesn't matter whether you are 20 or 80, your death will probably cost money. and you can't avoid it....you will die.

Smokers die just like healthy people do. You get one death, either soon or later.

So yeah, logic dictates that smokers do not cost anyone any extra money from the diseases. Dying earlier means far less bouts with chronic diseases and far less long-term prescription medication.

The whole "costing us money" argument was bunk from the beginning, but it doesn't stop people from saying it. People love to couch their derision of other subgroups in a dollar and cents manner, but to me it is a heartless argument as well as factually incorrect.

[eppur_se_muova]

26. A coward dies a thousand times, a hero dies but once.

Just 'cause I was feeling contrarian. :P

[sam sarrha]

27. that is bullshit.. tired Tired TIRED of hearing this.. it isnt true, 1200 die daily from Tobacco and

not one Cigarette has ever been recalled.. they are not factoring in all the costs, like life long serious asthma for children.. productivity losses..etc this is Rethuglican bullshit, and the thought of killing 1200 a day gives them a hard-on.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/HighCostOfSmoking.aspx
"snip...An additional $96.7 billion is spent on public and private health care combined, according to the
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, and each American household spends $630 a year in federal and state taxes
due to smoking..snip"

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5114a2.htm

Reported annual medical and productivity losses are larger than previous estimates of $53 billion (7) and $43 billion (2), respectively. Among adults, the medical costs of smoking represented approximately 8% of personal health-care expenditures in 1998, which is consistent with the 6%--14% SAFs in previous studies (2). The larger productivity-loss figure reflects increases in the number of smoking-attributable deaths and in average earnings since the mid-1980s.

dead children
http://www.sickkids.ca/AboutSickKids/News-Room/Past-News/2002/Biochemical-tests-show-relationship-between-environmental-tobacco-smoke-and-the-risk-of-SIDS.html

tobacco companies and the politicians who take bribes from them to stop legislation and MURDERERS. AND nicotine is much more addictive than Crack, Meth or Heroin. once addicted the users have little to no chance of quiting.. only 7% ever quit, and then usually after about 15-20 years

big tobacco must addict children in order to stay in business, few people start smoking as adults, by then all their money is allocated to overhead and getting layed.

[jberryhill]

29. The point is

Dead people do not incur much in the way of health care costs.

What makes dead smokers more "expensive" to society than all of the healthy dead people?

[sam sarrha]

51. wages they didnt make , taxes they didnt pay, children they didnt kiss.. the article didnt factor in

a lot of costs that offset their Posit.

you didnt read the links or you wouldnt have made your lazy statement.. you believe what is easy and convenient, probably what you want to hear.. which isn't the truth.

1200 people, the vast majority addicted as children die every day, leaving widows, husbands children.. most will be reduced to poverty after losing the bread winner.. children wont go to college, they face homelessness.. what does all that cost 1200 times a day, 8,400 times a week.. 33,600 times a month.. they aren't BETTER OFF DEAD..!!

that article is ReThuglican propaganda.. it is SICK.

my father died in my arms of tobacco related cancer, it ate into his Aorta when it ruptured his heart pumped all his blood out his mouth all over me while the whole family screamed and cryed an prayed.. i don't think he is better off dead. i didn't finish college, my mother lived in poverty in my brothers garage.. on $680 a month SSI

start thinking for yourself.. not how the ReThugs want you to, tobacco related costs to the common wealth is nearly $200,000 a year. that article was meant to distract from the truth

[obiwan]

115. Smokers rack up substantially higher health care costs while they are still alive.

I smoked a pack a day for 30 years and I quit cold turkey seven years ago.

No preaching here (it's a free country after all) but it's nice not coughing when I wake up, and I feel great!

[Hannah Bell]

45. children's asthma? sorry, rates have gone up while the % of smokers in the population has gone down

it isn't smokers giving children asthma.

and "big tobacco" is making more profit than ever, thanks to the anti-smoking brigadistas.

[sam sarrha]

52. i am sorry you are so easily deceived by the ReThugs.. but ignorance is bliss, enjoy it

[Hannah Bell]

54. it's you who's enjoying it.

"From an initial investment of about $450 million to buy Lorillard in 1968, Loews has reaped big rewards. “Loews’s overall profit, excluding dividends, approximates $10 billion,” said Erik A. Bloomquist, a financial analyst for JPMorgan Securities."


http://www.tobacco.org/news/222708.html

Big Tobacco's Profits From Youth Smokers Grow, Despite Smaller Numbers of Youth Smokers
Youth Smoking Rates Down, Industry Revenues Up
2006-03-22


Tobacco profits rise
Grocer , July 26, 2008
Tobacco giant Philip Morris International has revealed its 2008 second-quarter profit rose to $1.82bn, from $1.48bn a year earlier. Increased shipping and the weak dollar were contributory factors.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5245/is_7865_231/ai_n29456505/


http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2007/industries/27/2.html

altria (phillip morris) 71 in the global 500, 17% profit margin: not too shabby.



you don't get it, naive one; it's a gov't-business scam.

[sam sarrha]

55. you miss the point, just because youth smokers are down cause of cost, doesnt mean there

there aren't any, and the ones addicted wont become one of the 1200 who die each day,

i was a research biologist.. i know how to twist and spin data to make my side look good, your data proves nothing other the profit margin.. you cant relay that to what i said, the deliberate addiction of children as a business model is live and well, its how they stay in business because they kill so many of their customers.. equivalent to a city the size of Cleveland, Ohio and Sacramento, CA, Kansas City, Omaha, Nebr. 90% all addicted as children


http://www.idph.state.il.us/public/hb/hbsmoke.htm
smoking. Smoking among teenagers, however, has not declined since 1980. Approximately 90 percent of all smokers start before age 18; the average age for a new smoker is 13.

..so. my point was that the tobacco industry is dependant on child abuse to stay in business.. that is a fact.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_age_do_people_start_smoking_at
As teens or preteens. The average age of starting is 13, so half start before that, half after. 90% start by age 18.

did you notice that HALF start before 13..

ATHSMA..

http://www.lungusa.org/site/c.dvLUK9O0E/b.22782/
Secondhand smoke exposure in both adults and children is a risk factor for new asthma cases. Recent studies have suggested that chil¬dren of smok¬ers are twice as likely to develop asthma as the chil¬dren of nonsmok¬ers, and that even appar¬ently healthy babies born to women who smoked during pregnancy have abnor¬mally narrowed airways, which may predis¬pose them to asthma and other respira¬to¬ry disor¬ders. This research was extended by a recent study that reported a child’s risk of being diagnosed with asthma by the age of seven increased 23 percent if their mother smoked even less than 10 cigarettes a day during pregnancy. The chance of developing asthma increased to 35 percent if the mother smoked more than 10 cigarettes a day while pregnant.7

you seem to think cause some statistic is down a very little bit.. there is no problem.. there is a big problem, and it kills 1200 mother/fathers/brothers/sisters every day... that is 1080 people addicted as children who at the time did not have the cognitive area of their brain developed enough to make an appropriate decision to start smoking.. its murder..

i wake up every morning to my wife coughing her guts out cause her mother smoked during pregnancy, her twin died at birth from tobacco related complications.. small head, poor lung development low body weight.. my wifes tobacco related asthma drastically reduces her quality of life. she takes multiple medications that have serious long term complications.

but you don't give a shit about the death and suffering. so this is all a moot point in the discussion, i wasted my time

[Hannah Bell]

69. i made three points. % smokers: down. childhood asthma: up. profits: up.

your rant contradicts none of them, & the personal remarks are out of line.


it isn't smoking causing the rise in childhood asthma, & the taxes on cigarettes don't hurt the corps.

[sam sarrha]

73. use

[sam sarrha]

74. you will use one post, not proven to be true, to to make you feel good about your denial. in spite

a vast collection of data, that makes your stupid posit a moot point..

you are way too myopic and narcissistic to hold an intelligent conversation.

dont bother replying.. you only have 1 apriori questionable source and bad logic supported by it.. you will just repeat it.. you have nothing to add, its meaningless , of no consequence ,its denial.

[Hannah Bell]

90. You seem to think you're a mind-reader, but you're not.

To people like you, "good conversation" = everyone agrees with you.


Oh, & BTW, despite all the personal disparagement, you refuted *not one* of the points I made:

% of smokers down
childhood asthma up
tobacco corp profits up

[sam sarrha]

121. but you seem to think you can actually have a good conversation...

i do come from a long line of Clairvoyants, but i don't have to be one to know what you are

[sam sarrha]

72. so you negate all the suffering and ok that nearly 400,000 people die a year addicted as children,

10600 a day addicted as children..?

of course it is all a Fascist arrangement with the government perpetuated by Campaign Contributions/bribes..

but why are you so in denial about the consequences to 90% of their customers duped as children into smoking, suffering and death. 37,600,000 people today were hopelessly addicted to nicotine because the industry needed children to replace those they kill to stay in business.??

[joshcryer]

97. All that particalized rubber in the air. Japanese people don't have nearly the health problems...

...relating to "smoking" that Americans do.

But then, they don't have a society of highly polluting vehicles either.

[kiva]

122. I also find that interesting.

Not only are there fewer smokers, but smokers are far less likely to smoke around children than they were a generation ago.

[joshcryer]

128. Not only that, the rates have gone up even with the bans taking place. It's a bullshit lie.

[LooseWilly]

112. I started smoking as an adult.

... And I really like it.

[joshcryer]

127. Same here, but I quit because of the BS tax hike.

I still defend smokers though. People think smokers are the great satan. And I expect it's because of the other various lobbys need a group to exploit (big pharma needs to get smokers who quit on anti-depressants, big oil and rubber needs to keep the eyes off of them with regards to their responsiblity for lung cancer and other illnesses that high smoking countries such as Japan do not have, junk food producers need to place the blame for people dropping dead from heart disease somewhere, "health care" needs to get paid and picking on the "percieved most unhealthy habit" is the easiest way to get it done, the list goes on).

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

30. 10 years of not paying taxes, too.

[eridani]

37. RJ Reynolds made that pitch to Czechoslovakia back in the mid 80s

They were right. Sociopaths, but right.

[dysfunctional press]

38. even though non-smokers may live an average of 10 years longer...

their overall lifetime healthcare costs may often tend to be lower.
the last few years of many smoker's shortened lives can be very expensive and ugly.
and painful.

light up. :hi:

[McCamy Taylor]

40. A bullet in the head of everyone when they turn 50 will save $$$ too.

..and its cheaper than cigarettes.

Jeez, the things that R J Reynolds will do to sell cigarettes.

Smoking causes CAD (coronary artery disease) which is the number one cause of congestive heart failure, which is the number one most expensive diagnosis of people on Medicare in terms of total costs to Medicare every year. Death from congestive heart failure is something I would not wish on my worst enemy. People with normal mental function slowly smother to death. It is a nightmare to watch.

Smoking also causes COPD or chronic bronchitis another expensive costly nasty way to go.

So, if we want to rein in Medicare costs and make people suffer less we need to ban cigarettes.

[LooseWilly]

113. And ban obesity.

While we're at it, let's ban driving too... since so many people get injured in car accidents. We can make everyone jog everywhere they go, so they won't be obese... and then their lungs will be so strong they can smoke with impunity.

Of course, then we'll need to replace more knees and hips... and people will live so long that medicare will become insolvent... but everyone can use the money they save on cars, gas, and insurance to cover those costs, and pay for cigarettes too.
It will be a smoky utopia (though, we won't have the taste of auto exhaust to pep up our cigarettes any more... alas).

[4_TN_TITANS]

47. My health insurance is about to start billing an extra $50 / mo

for the privilege to smoke, not counting the SCHIP tax increase to cigarettes. They are going to have to legalize some alternative, the tobacco tax cow is almost milked dry.

[sam sarrha]

78. due to big tobacco bribing politicians, its the only way to stop it, get people to quit, cant afford

the cost to society.. if you want single payer insurance..

single payer insurance.. without eliminating smoking is just subsidizing the industry to the tune of $190 billion a year.. or more

[Hannah Bell]

85. "Can't afford it" - Right, that's why Japan & France have it - no one smokes in those countries!!!

[sam sarrha]

118. look they have much better economies CEO' only get 20x lowst paid employee, we'r a 3rd world country

1% owns over 80% of the wealth

[ItNerd4life]

50. If you include the extra taxes smoker's pay, more people should smoke.

To help keep paying taxes.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

58. Yep and overweight people cost money and alcoholics cost money

Basically, everyone costs money. Smokers just get singled out.

[sam sarrha]

76. ..i guess tobacco killing half a million people a yr addicted as children is a moot point

[Viking12]

64. As usual, the "Dutch study" is misrepresented

You can read it yourself here:

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

The study takes into account only health care costs and does not consider other economic factors into the analysis, i.e. lost productivity from illness and early death.

[sam sarrha]

75. and the generational costs of surviving spouses children falling into a cycle of poverty after

losing the bread winner and acquiring vast medical debts

[Hannah Bell]

86. When they're fat?

[sam sarrha]

120. you are really an ugly stupid person.. i think you are just evil, nothing good about you at all

obesity raises in developing countries where ever we start selling soft drinks with High fructose corn syrup, and our popular salty snacks.

obesity is also a symptom of poverty, refined carbohydrate is much cheaper than anything else, and all the products to put on ti are extremely high in saturated fat, it is a downward spiral

the only thing i like about you is your Karma..:rofl: you will be born into the lives of all you distort to feed your ugly ego. you will experience it all in repeated cycles of rebirth suffering and hideous death.

and have to put up with people like you telling them they deserve what they have

you are just a troll nothing special, but you are definately worse where you come from..

[Hannah Bell]

130. project much?

[Hannah Bell]

84. Not sure what your point is. The study says obesity is more expensive than smoking up to age 56.

Presumably "lost productivity from illness" would follow that trend up to age 56 too.

[joshcryer]

98. "Lost productivity" on people who die when they stop being productive?

The study shows twice as much health care cost for someone who lives just 15-20 years longer. Why is that? Possibly because those last years they're in and out of the hospital barely kept alive, while smokers die a painful and excruciating death early on putting themselves out of their own misery. :P

[laugle]

87. It would be interesting to see a study on

obesity-related diabetes, it's at an all time epidemic high. Wonder how much that's costing society.......hmmmmmmm

The ones who say just quit smoking....what about just pull away from the table.................gobble....gobble........

It's coming......the TWINKIE TAX!

[Hannah Bell]

89. I think it would be interesting to see a study of the effect of obsessing over other people's

consumption habits.

Judging from DU, I think it must make people's lives less happy, & possibly shorter too.

Obsession & moral panic aren't heart-healthy.

[laugle]

92. Once you vote to tax a certain segment of people, you

have opened a big can of worms. IMO, it's just plain wrong.

Another example: People in my city who own a home were asked to vote to tax homeowners for fire one year, and education the next. Both passed. My city has reaped the rewards of enormous property tax revenue, due to home appreciation, and they squandered it. So now we are suppose to pay for an essential service and education. I won't even go into the fraudulent election. Now our city took a poll to see if they could tax us because they have a budget deficit. The people of my city are in revolt mode,so they have backed off.......until next time..........

ENOUGH WITH THE TAXES.......

BTW, my husband and I are both registered voter's yet only one of us was allowed to vote. The ballot did not go through the registrar, but came in the mail from the City, and said one vote per household. The second election they lost by 2 votes, and then guess what, they found some more votes and passed it.

This is happening all over my county!

[Hannah Bell]

93. With smoking, it's a two-fer:, three-fer, four-fer:smokers = minority (1/4) of adults, also tend to

be poorer (= not much political muscle, + smoker/lower class observational/statistical tendency).


The PTB get to spew out study after study "proving" that smoking is responsible for increasingly implausible ills, the monopolist tobacco corps reap bigger & bigger profits, the PTB get more revenues so they can cut taxes at the top, & the upper middle gets another scapegoat for their free-floating anxiety & hostility.


The main reason we're nickle & dimed at the local level is the pullback from the feds. "Unfunded mandates" & defunding to states. More fallout from the Reagan/Bush "tax cuts to the rich" regimes.

[laugle]

99. It's not only the upper middle that gets their

scapegoat. I agree that many people seem to use it as an avenue for hate and hostility. Some people have a hard time seeing the larger ramifications.........I know you don't.

[JDPriestly]

103. Your logic is wrong. Healthy people are far more productive than unhealthy people.

And smokers are notoriously prone to illness especially respiratory problems. Smoking diseases are particularly expensive. It's one thing to die at the ripe old age of 95 from a heart attack in the middle of the night. It is quite another to die after months, possibly years of chemotherapy for some form of bladder or lung cancer.

I'm sick of paying for unhealthy smokers.

[LooseWilly]

116. Are you sure you're not being prejudicial here?

From what I hear, that argument has also been (and far more documendetly so) leveled against mothers. Especially single mothers.

Mothers take far more sick days to take care of sick children than smokers take.

Are you sick of paying for mothers taking time to care for sick children too?

And how, exactly, are you paying for unhealthy smokers?
And, are you sick of paying for unhealthy obese diabetes patients?
What about elderly smokers? Are they sick because they smoke?, or because they're elderly?

And what about us healthy smokers paying taxes to take care of peoples' children... and for schools that we're not attending?

[joshcryer]

126. Smokers account for the vast majority of low wage jobs in the country.

Your view is highly prejudiced and ignorant. Without those low wage earners we wouldn't have half of the shit we do. Our society would look nothing like it does.

And you can betcha that those low wage earners would have a shit of a time getting through their shit days without some vice to make it all better.

Guess what happens to most smokers who quit? They get on anti-depressants (and are even told to!). And they gain weight because they replace one vice for another to make themselves feel better about their shit existances.

It's all so very cute.

[The Straight Story]

129. And I am tired of paying for health care from immigrants, soda drinkers, non-amish people, etc

When we start tying peoples' lifestyles to paying for health care we hit the road to total control of how others live. And that is not somewhere I think we should be going.

[opihimoimoi]

131. I dunno about smokers but I do know the GOP cost us BIG BUCKs

what with their poor judgment and decisions....

BushCo has robbed us of our Vitality

Many have lost their savings....

Blame Bush? Shit yeah....he is the MBA President...the guy with Perfect GUT FEELINGS...he has divine input...so he sez.

What did he cost America?

Trillions....dozens of trillions due to his Incompetance....the GOP is a cancer trying to spread....

Keep it contained and reduce it....