When you were told to not smoke for health reasons, when you see anti-smoking ads

[gnosis92]

On South Park, the four boys were told not to smoke, and they saw an anti-smoking dance routine, so, of course, they went out and smoked.

So when I'm told to not smoke for health reasons, when I see anti-smoking ads I actually want to go and smoke. I've smoked, and I haven't become addicted or anything. It does make me wonder what other forbidden things are over-hyped. I experience a kind of freedom of will when I do what I'm told not to, with of course, morality being the biggest list of no's.

[anthrosciguy]

Of course keep in mind that the kids on South Park are about as smart as a box of rocks. Collectively.

[NZSkep]

Of course keep in mind that the kids on South Park are about as smart as a box of rocks. Collectively.

not only that but they are fictional as far as I know.

[Toto]

The evil cigarette companies capitalize on this adolescent need to break the rules. They are happy when the anti-smoking message is confined to some authority figure telling you not to do it, and they get unhappy when the anti-smoking forces devise more creative ways of getting the message out.

[SiliconWolf]

I don't remember ever smoking just to be rebellious. I did it because it was fun. I also didn't quit because someone else told me to. I quit because I told me to (and because I found a less painful way to do it).

[abaddon]

So when I'm told to not smoke for health reasons, when I see anti-smoking ads I actually want to go and smoke. I've smoked, and I haven't become addicted or anything. It does make me wonder what other forbidden things are over-hyped. I experience a kind of freedom of will when I do what I'm told not to, with of course, morality being the biggest list of no's.

I became a smoker a bit at a time. I didn't just start buying cartons one day. For 3 or 4 years I "bummed" a cigarette now and again, when around my smoking friends. I prided myself on my ability to take it or leave it. But the addiction developed from there. It's not over-hyped. And seeing a cigarette in someone's face doesn't make them look "cool" at all -- quite the opposite.

Rebellion's a pretty stupid reason to smoke (not that there are any intelligent reasons). Being the slave of a chemical is not freedom. And quitting is not easy -- which I did successfully some years ago, after wasting several thousands of dollars on the habit.

Not addicting yourself would be the independent, free-spirited thing to do.

[general_koffi]

It's not just the doctor on the TV telling you smoking is bad.

It's the mountain of research done to prove it.

If you're too bloody ignorant to read the research, then you deserve lung cancer.

[Revolutionary]

I've never had a desire to smoke, just like I've never had a desire to drink. I think the main reason is that is really, really stinks, plus it's expensive.

[Streamwinner]

http://www.angelfire.com/grrl/supermodel92686/machete_juggling.gif

[Pisano112]

So let me get this straight... someone in authority told you not to do something because it caused cancer... and you did it just to rebel?

You sure showed them. Reminds me of that Cake song...

Excess ain't rebellion.
You're drinking what they're selling.
Your destruction doesnt hurt them,
your chaos won't covert them.
They're so happy to rebuild it.
You'll never really kill it off.

It's not just the doctor on the TV telling you smoking is bad.

It's the mountain of research done to prove it.

If you're too bloody ignorant to read the research, then you deserve lung cancer.

I tend to agree. My mom died from lung cancer, but she started smoking in the late 60s/early 70s, before there was a mountain of research supporting the idea that tobacco's bad, mkay, and when everyone and their brother smoked. I wholeheartedly support your right to smoke as much as you want, but I also wholeheartedly support my right to call that a stupid fucking decision. :huh: Especially since you did it just to rebel against authority.

[Revolutionary]

It's silly to think that rebellion could come in the form of a pre-packaged product sold by a giant corporation. Then again, most people are silly.

[purple_kathryn]

It's silly to think that rebellion could come in the form of a pre-packaged product sold by a giant corporation. Then again, most people are silly.

I've also found that ironic

that and people are suffering under the illusion that they look "cool"

Morons.

[Cynic of Mammon]

In different circumstances, yours sound like the last thoughts of the child who was told not to play too close to the cliff...:banghead:

[Unbeatable]

When I saw my first anti-smoking ad, I already knew that smoking was unhealthy and that it smelled horrible. So when I saw the ads, I figured they weren't aimed at me; they were aimed at the people who were still ignorant. Given their condescending, heavy-handed nature, and the obviousness of some of the things they were saying, I figured their target audience must be pretty stupid (or irrational, given the attempts at emotional manipulation the ads often employ).

[loprogression]

None of those answers apply.

I started at 11 or 12 cuz it was the cool thing to do. Despite the anti-smoking ads, I continued to smoke until 19. Not to rebel, but because I didn't care, and had a 'nothing can happen to me' teenager attitude. I got smart and quit at 19.

I became a stupid-ass douchebag and started smoking again after my seperation early September of this year. I understand the health risks, I feel the lack of lung capacity, but right now the pleasure of smoking outweighs the risks. And yes, I know that if I get lung cancer I deserve it. But I also deserve to smoke or do anything else distructive to my body.

I quit cold turkey after smoking for 7 years when I was 19. I have no doubt that I can do it again, as much as I am addicted to it again - even after only a month.

[sateryn]

i started smoking because i decided i needed a vice, and up to that point had none.
i continue smoking for the delight in having something to do with my hands, and because the sensation of smoking amuses me.
i fully acknowledge and understand the detrimental risks of smoking, and i don't care... just like i understand the detrimental risks of driving, and yet don't care and continue to drive anyways.

everyone dies. the alchohol smoker and the born-again tofu gourmet both die... the question is simply one of how amused you are while you're alive.

smoking amuses me - therefor i do it. if i suffer in 20 or 30 years because of that, so be it... it's the price i pay for being amused now.
you're not going to live forever, no matter what you do - independently sponsored anti-smoking campaigns are self righteous assholes telling you what you can and can't do with your life, and government sponsored anti-smoking is biggest example of an S&M relationship in the history of the human species.

[baron greenback]

With regards to the ads, they are pretty patronizing. They can't get away with ads informing us that brussel's sprouts are good for us, or that going to bed at ten o'clock will make you happier, and most lube places have figured out it doesn't pay to demonize people for not changing their oil every three thousand miles by now (although it took them a while).

It doesn't matter whether it's smart, stupid, rebellious, conformist, or even a good idea. What it is, is preachy and whiney. I'm not going to say "if you want/don't want me to smoke, do this or that with the commercials", because that's missing the point entirely.

The point is, the commercials shouldn't exist in the first place. The fact that people care enough about what I do with my free time to spend several million dollars on a television commercial, is a little unnerving.

[Toto]

...
The point is, the commercials shouldn't exist in the first place. The fact that people care enough about what I do with my free time to spend several million dollars on a television commercial, is a little unnerving.

"What you (and others) do in your free time" is about the major source of preventable death in this country, and affects everybody's insurance and tax rates.

I mean, do you really think that anyone cares about you? They care about the public money spent when children go to the emergency room with asthma because their parents smoke, when wage earners' families go on welfare after they have heart attacks caused by smoking, etc. etc.

[sateryn]

"What you (and others) do in your free time" is about the major source of preventable death in this country, and affects everybody's insurance and tax rates.
and yet, interestingly enough, it's about 10th in the list of preventable injury or life long disability, and yet the ones ahead of it on the list get VERY little attention.
so you're saying that 1 smoker dying is more of a tragedy than 10 people being crippled for the rest of their lives?

I mean, do you really think that anyone cares about you? They care about the public money spent when children go to the emergency room with asthma because their parents smoke, when wage earners' families go on welfare after they have heart attacks caused by smoking, etc. etc.
all of which means nothing compared to the fact that, annually, drinking related injury happens (purely in numerical terms) over 50 times more than smoking related injury (yes, i have sources to back that up, no i'm not posting them now because i'm at work and lazy - google it like i did, if you want to contest it)

it's somewhere around 350,000 deaths per year directly linked to smoking, and around 30,000 injuries - out of that 30k about 5k are serious permanent injuries.
alcohol related deaths per year is about 75,000, and about 708,000 injuries (of which, about 80,000 are serious injuries causing permanent damage)

this is why the US stigma on smoking is both unsurprising, but hypocritical - death frightens americans more than anything else. the idea of being maimed or in a coma is preferable to living your life the way you want to, and then dying - it's completely incomprehensible.
and it's hypocritical, because they wrap this whole anti-smoking thing in this mockery of 'caring' when they care NOTHING for other activities which cause vastly more injury and hardships.

[Toto]

Which activities cause vastly more injury or hardship that are not also the subject of public health campaigns? Or have you missed the ads by MADD against drunk driving? The ads about wearing seat belts? The campaign for safe sex?

And please do check your statistics. All of the government statistics that I have seen rank tobacco as the leading cause of death and disability.

[Morgana]

and yet, interestingly enough, it's about 10th in the list of preventable injury or life long disability, and yet the ones ahead of it on the list get VERY little attention.
so you're saying that 1 smoker dying is more of a tragedy than 10 people being crippled for the rest of their lives?I really don't think your conclusion follows from your premise there. You know nothing about any poster's actions to prevent those other causes of death and injury.

But could you please post that list and its source? I think it would provide an interesting perspective. I poked around, but the only thing I could find in the five minutes I was willing to devote to the task was this list from the Mayo clinic (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mens-health/MC00013):

Top 10 causes of death in men
1 Heart disease 28.4
2 Cancer 24.1
3 Unintentional injuries 5.8
4 Stroke 5.2
5 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) 5.1
6 Diabetes 2.8
7 Influenza and pneumonia 2.4
8 Suicide 2.1
9 Kidney disease 1.6
10 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 1.5
Total 79

Of these, they consider "Don't smoke" to be a way of avoiding 1,2,4,5,7 and 9.

all of which means nothing compared to the fact that, annually, drinking related injury happens (purely in numerical terms) over 50 times more than smoking related injury (yes, i have sources to back that up, no i'm not posting them now because i'm at work and lazy - google it like i did, if you want to contest it)

it's somewhere around 350,000 deaths per year directly linked to smoking, and around 30,000 injuries - out of that 30k about 5k are serious permanent injuries.
alcohol related deaths per year is about 75,000, and about 708,000 injuries (of which, about 80,000 are serious injuries causing permanent damage)

this is why the US stigma on smoking is both unsurprising, but hypocritical - death frightens americans more than anything else. the idea of being maimed or in a coma is preferable to living your life the way you want to, and then dying - it's completely incomprehensible.
and it's hypocritical, because they wrap this whole anti-smoking thing in this mockery of 'caring' when they care NOTHING for other activities which cause vastly more injury and hardships.I think there is more consistency in US law than you give credit for. Smoking near other people affects their health. Drinking affects only your own health. Drinking and driving affects other people's health. There aren't any laws against smoking alone or drinking if you don't do dangerous things while drunk. The only damage done to other people is actuarial and that is theoretically covered by taxes on cigarettes and alcohol. Drinking and driving is responsible for huge numbers of deaths and injuries, but it also gets a whole lot more attention than smoking.

I think the laws against recreational drugs are hypocritical compared with the treatment of alcohol, caffeine and nicotine, but that's a separate topic.

[Overkill]

Yeah, alcohol doesn't effect other people like smoking does!
Bullcrap.
http://www.madd.org/stats/11087
Nearly 17,000 car crash fatalities, over 12,000 which involved drunk drivers.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/ac.pr
400 million dollars lost as a result of alcohol related crime alcohol was involved in about 40 percent of crime and according to both the victim and the criminal.
Lets bring in child abuse.
http://www.preventchildabuse.com/abuse.htm
Look at that last paragraph. Substance abuse increases child abuse 300 percent and neglect 400 percent.
Ah, but second hand smoke is such a killer.:rolleyes:

[KingoftheJews]

Anti-smoking ads do sometimes make me want to go out and smoke because they're so patronizing. I can't stand feeling like someone else thinks I'm so stupid that they can't talk to me without resorting to "Oh, look, we're so hip and modern"-type language. Also, those "Above the Influence" commercials (as long as you're not above our influence commercials) make me want to hit someone.

Quite honestly, the prospect of getting lung cancer doesn't bother me. They'll have me on enough Fentenyl that it won't really hurt, anyway. I'll probably be dead in a year, too, so limited familial suffering. Yellow teeth and wrinkles don't either. It's cosmetic. I don't really care what I look like.

However, nearly every smoker I know wakes and promptly starts coughing up absolutely disgusting crap. (Oh, the sound of it). Now that, that would make me absolutely dread falling asleep for the rest of my life. Just knowing that I'd have to get up in the morning and hack up phlegm and all the nice stuff that accompanies that, would make me hate getting up every morning.

Thus, I don't smoke. And I probably would have made this decision after my first cigarette, anyway, because I don't like the feel of it (yes, I tried smoking - ya only live once, and I wanted to make I sure I was't missing out on any experiences). Still, ewww.

[gnosis92]

There's one commericial where a teenage smokes and then explodes.

That kind of scare-mongering is a bit over the top.

Anyhow, part of all this is how much anti-smoking proseltyzing there is, and how harmless smoking just one cigarette is.


So let me get this straight... someone in authority told you not to do something because it caused cancer... and you did it just to rebel?

You sure showed them. Reminds me of that Cake song...





I tend to agree. My mom died from lung cancer, but she started smoking in the late 60s/early 70s, before there was a mountain of research supporting the idea that tobacco's bad, mkay, and when everyone and their brother smoked. I wholeheartedly support your right to smoke as much as you want, but I also wholeheartedly support my right to call that a stupid fucking decision. :huh: Especially since you did it just to rebel against authority.

[CanoeMan]

I became a smoker a bit at a time. I didn't just start buying cartons one day. For 3 or 4 years I "bummed" a cigarette now and again, when around my smoking friends.

This is what I do, and I just the other day had my first real urge to smoke without company. I was studying, and found myself feeling "man, a cigarette would feel nice right about now." Scared the shit out of me.

[purple_kathryn]

Quite honestly, the prospect of getting lung cancer doesn't bother me. They'll have me on enough Fentenyl that it won't really hurt, anyway. I'll probably be dead in a year, too, so limited familial suffering. Yellow teeth and wrinkles don't either. It's cosmetic. I don't really care what I look like.

.

Actually my uncle died of lung cancer - which spread to his bones. His last few months were in utter agony and it was a "relief" when he finally died. I can only imagine what his wife went through.

[MindRevolution]

I don't smoke because everyone in my family smoked when I was growing up and it bugged me to no end. That shit is seriously annoying to be around. I also had my grandma die of cancer caused by smoking, and it was the most pathetic thing I've ever seen. She was 57 years old (she had her kids young...) but she looked like she was 90 when she died. It was just terrible watching her die like that. This was I don't know exactly how old I was but a year two before I turned 13. That was enough to never make me pick up a cigarette ever in my entire life. I refuse. You'd have to put a gun to my head.

So if you do smoke, don't take some "health professional" word for it. Take mine. If you get lung cancer you will die a horrible death.

In the interest of full disclosure she did smoke at least 2 packs a day of camel unfiltered. Still, terminal cancer is something you want no part of.

[Vandrare]

Amusingly, I've never even tried a cigarette because when I felt any peer pressure or saw cigarette ads promoting smoking as cool it just really pissed me off! I hate being manipulated! The more pressure there was to smoke because it was cool... the less chance there was I'd ever consider it. After all there are just so many reasons never to smoke, and I'm not going to get suckers into smoking and dying horribly just so some rich bastards can get even richer!

That and, doing anything just to be cool strikes me as idiotic.

:-D Anna

[CelticChic]

I believe I tried it once at a sleepover when I was 10. It made me so ill that to this day I cannot be near a smoker, even if they aren't smoking, without feeling sick. The smell is bad enough, but it also makes me cough as if I were a smoker. Thanks but no thanks. I don't remember any ads when I was a kid and I have always felt that it makes one look stupid rather than cool so no danger there for me.

ETA: At least one family member of mine died of lung cancer due to smoking. It was not pretty, and yes, they were very much in pain. I fully realize I will die eventually, I might even die doing the things I get pleasure from. However, I intend to enjoy my life as much as possible first and ruining my lungs will prevent me from doing that as I get older. I would prefer to be the old lady out hiking up the Rockies rather than struggling to breathe as I walk a few blocks down the street. But, that's just me.

[His Noodly Appendage]

I just watched my grandfather take 20 years to die of emphysema (and have him take out all the bitterness thus generated on me).

That was more than enough.

[tensorproduct]

On South Park, the four boys were told not to smoke, and they saw an anti-smoking dance routine, so, of course, they went out and smoked.

In fairness, the South Park boys didn't take up smoking just to be rebellious. The dance troupe they were incredibly lame and warned that if kids didn't smoke they could grow up "just as cool as us."

If that anti-smoking campaign came to my school I would have lit up right then and there.

[Canard DuJour]

So when I'm told to not smoke for health reasons, when I see anti-smoking ads I actually want to go and smoke. I've smoked, and I haven't become addicted or anything. It does make me wonder what other forbidden things are over-hyped. I experience a kind of freedom of will when I do what I'm told not to, with of course, morality being the biggest list of no's.
I might be curious to try it, but I'd be wary of developing a habit. Different things. In that sense, the ads work (though I was actually a smoker but that was peer pressure, i'm ashamed to say).

[Monkey Wrench]

I smoked for twenty years,before I quit. Now I have ashmatic bronchitis. It was one of those stop smoking adds that made me quit, "Nothing else matters when you can't breath". Ever had an anxiety attack because you were having an ashma attack?:frown:

[Matty]

It's silly to think that rebellion could come in the form of a pre-packaged product sold by a giant corporation. Then again, most people are silly.Thats a really good point.

"What you (and others) do in your free time" is about the major source of preventable death in this country, and affects everybody's insurance and tax rates.

I mean, do you really think that anyone cares about you? They care about the public money spent when children go to the emergency room with asthma because their parents smoke, when wage earners' families go on welfare after they have heart attacks caused by smoking, etc. etc.I've never really placed a lot of stock in that argument. Smokers on average pay about 80% of the cost of a pack straight into the tax coffers, that sounds like a fair bit of extra contribution to me, so don't make out that the contribution playing field is level. If the government decides to spend those extra mega billions generated, on wars and other silly things, rather than into the health service, i fail to see how that is the fault of the smokers.

Plus they usually die younger than average so an objective look should really take into account the extra health care they don't use by being dead, weighted towards the extra health care burden of advanced age of course. The "smokers cost us billions in healthcare" assumption is really not as clear cut as the anti smoking lobby would have you think, right or wrong.

That said smoking is quite obviously a fucking stupid thing to do, killing yourself slowly in the interests of rebellion is doubly stupid. And i say that as an occasional smoker.