- Reviews & Essays
- Is Smoking Really the Cause?
Note: You can change font size, font face, and turn on dark mode by clicking the "A" icon tab in the Story Info Box.
You can temporarily switch back to a Classic Literotica® experience during our ongoing public Beta testing. Please consider leaving feedback on issues you experience or suggest improvements.
Click here
I have come to wonder if all the hubbub about smoking and second hand smoke is justified. Let's look at the facts; now I am not going to throw a bunch of numbers out there because anyone can make statistics work in their favor, I just want to open a few eyes. No I am not a scientist nor have I done any experiments to back my claim; it is just a little thing I have come up with.
My grandmother was 95 when she died. She smoked two packs of cigs a day until the day she died. She didn't die of lung cancer in fact she didn't die of cancer at all. I just wonder why one person like my grandmother can smoke two packs of these supposedly cancer causing agents and not get cancer yet others claim even if they have never smoked that it was cigarettes that made them get cancer.
Can inhaling toxic fumes cause cancer? More than likely and I do believe that some people have actually acquired cancer from smoking. I just find it hard to believe that it is smoking that is killing all the people the anti-smoking campaigns claim.
Just less then half the population in North America were smokers in the 70's, present day the last I had read it is somewhere in the mid teens for percentage. Cancers of the magnitude we have seen in recent years were not around then but now all of a sudden the evil cigarette is blamed for it all. Once again I am not saying it isn't the cause of some of the cancers out there but I find it hard to believe it is responsible for all the ones they claim.
Let us try a little experiment I have thought up. First go buy a carton of smokes and smoke one after another until the whole carton is gone. What do you think might happen if you did this? If you are a smoker my guess is you would probably quit because it would be pretty disgusting. If you are a nonsmoker it would probably make you sick to your stomach. Would you get cancer? I doubt it highly. Would you die right there? Well maybe from the stench of cigarette smoke. Just kidding, although it might be sickening and disgusting the likelihood of death isn't even fathomable.
Now part two of the experiment. Take a hose and attach it to your tail pipe (don't really do this). Once it is attached start your car and try smoking the hose. What do you think might happen now? That is right you would be dead as a fucking doornail.
Smoking has been on the decline since the 80s yet cancer rates are going up. They used to say smoking would kill you but when nonsmokers started getting some of the cancers smokers were getting all of a sudden out comes the "secondhand" theories. There are even some people that believe it can be transferred on clothing and they get it that way. (Incredible!)
So can anyone tell me if the amount of smokers have decreased and the ability to smoke in different places like, bars, stores, work and other areas of the like have been criminalized how can the amount of cancer still be on the rise?
How about this for an answer; Cars are the actual cause for this problem. But since the government is controlled by lobbyists that makes it an issue that will never be touched. The only increase in the world that actually lets out toxic fumes that are accessible to pretty much everyone on the planet is exhaust from cars. If you tried my little experiment above (this would make you possibly the dumbest person on the planet!) You know just how dangerous those fumes are!
So in closing I can not for one second believe half the ads on the television and radio and on packs of smokes saying that cigarettes are the cause of all these horrible things. Are they bad? Of course they are we have been told that since we were children that it wasn't good to smoke. Are they disgusting? Yes, I don't like the smell of the smoke on my clothes after I have gone out to a bar or party. Can they cause lung disease and cancer? Probably but I don't think on the grand scale the scare hounds are trying to convince us all exists.
I believe there are many causes for these cancers and diseases; cars exhaust being the prime one. But that is too much money for the government to lose. So just think about all the ads you have seen and the Truth campaigns and look around you next time you are out and see just how many people smoke compared to the amount of cars on the street. I bet there are plenty of more vehicles.
Anyway I stress again please don't really do my experiment it was just tongue and cheek but I imagine you got the point. Take care I am off to light up a cancer stick.
- COMMENTS
mikeswivesover 2 years agoLooks like dirtyjoe69 stopped publishing shortly after this essay. Hope smoking did not do him in. He was/is a remarkably varied and inventive author and I wish he would find his way back.
But, concerning smoking, he has a legitimate question, but I think there is more than one answer. These are my observations.
1. As he says, smoking does cause cancer, but maybe not as much as "statistics" suggest.
2. The second hand smoke issue is dubious and while it can cause cancer, you would be hard pressd to get a serious estimate of how many cancers it does cause. Not zero, but the actal hard data is nonexistant or never actually stated.
3. Smoking and second hand smoke cause other serious problems with COPD being the elephant in the room. I think COPD may be enough reason to ban smoking.
4. Medical statistics are horribly inaccuate and official designation of cause of death is often wrong or ignores the complication of multiple contributing factors. (Diabetes, for instance can provide a stimulus for cancer as it compromises the immune system.)
5. Lots of other chemicals cause or facilitate cancer but the doctors and the lobbyists are happy to stay away from blaming corporations and the failure of goverment oversight of our food, workplace and household/garden chemicals.
6. I would point out that 40+ years ago, a lot of folks died of other causes at earlier ages before cancer (from smoking or any source) could get them. Example: Heart attacks for late middle-age men were much more often fatal in the 1950-1970 period but these people live longer now to die of something else.
7. I would also point out that many of the cancer "cures" are bogus since many cancers are treated when they would not have developed to become a problem. There are a lot of women with mastectomies and men with prostate surgery for cancer that would have gone unnoticed decades earlier and never developed to be a problem. (Some cures are real but most just suck our money and insurance money into the big fat feeding trough of the medical machine.)
It does not take much reading of the medical and scientific literature to realize medice is a business first and an occasional health improvement is only lucky frindge benefit.
Anonymousover 12 years agoTobacco is the great American scapegoat. What about all the steroids and chemicals that are fed to the meat and veggies we eat, what about all the plastic being used for everything. Plastic (petroleum) pcb's, known to cause cancer.
Anonymousabout 14 years agoI do smoke but I agree with you, totally' now we have another chemical added to our smokes to make them go out when we aren't puffing on them, it doesn't seem to work when you put them in an ashtray they will continue to burn down to nothing. I am sure that in the future we will find that this chemical is a cancer causing agent, thanks libs.
I just wish other people would not stress about my smoking and start worrying about their fat and alcoholism, that is killing more people than cigarettes. If all the smokers quit there would be a big void in the tax system to the tune of several million dollars a day, how do you think uncle sam would make that up??
Anonymousalmost 16 years agoyou made a point that I have believed for a long time. I am a smoker of more than fifty years and altho I would be the first one to tell anyone they shouldn't start smoking I do not believe that it is the absoulete killer that the people who think they should tell you what you are supposed to do say it is. most of my family smoked as I was growing up and even the ones that didn't were always close around smoking. My grandparents,aunts and uncles, cousins,and parents all lived to ripe old ages (from 75 to 100 yrs old). my mother is still alive at the age of 85 and still getting around nicely , thank you. I just wanted to say thank you for saying the truth much better than I could.
Anonymousabout 16 years ago...that smoking does not kill, or that it is in any way good for you. The point (which is actually fairly well made) is that there is likely more to all of the cancers and other diseases than governments/big businesses are encouraging us to see.
Yes, smoking is bad. Yes, it can kill you (although there is evidence to suggest that there is a genetic factor that plays a role in whether a smoker will get cancer or not). Is it the sole cause of all of our lung cancer? Doubtful. It is A cause of lung cancer.
The more important point, I think, is to look at EVERY scrap of information with a critical eye. Do not accept claims as truth without investigating it for yourself.
