Comments on: Candy Flavored Cigarettes Marketed to Teens?

By: Tavon

Tavon — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 07:58:41 +0000

I am so sick of all of these people who have the audacity to want to ban smoking and sue tabacco companies.
My Mom taught me, as well as school, from a child that smoking was bad for yoir health. This was something that I carried all the way through high school, I was the “goody-two-shoes” who NEVER even tried a cigarette until I was legally old enough, this was no doubt due in part to my severe case of asthma.
When I tured 22 for some reason, I started smoking. I know, and have known the health risks associated from at least age 5, and I still continue to choose to spoke. No one made me do it excpet myself. It was my choice the tabacco companies had nothing to do with it. Even if they had never invented cigarettes, I would still be breathin in the dirty Baltimore air, and drinking. . . . . So I think people need to lay of tabacco companies.

By: Anne Haight

Anne Haight — Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:51:03 +0000

I now have a mental image of someone snorting burning magnesium (which reminds me of my ex-boyfriend for reasons that are obvious to people who know the guy in question).
I agree that the byproducts of combustion are questionable, at best, in terms of inhalation by human beings. Wood smoke is actually pretty damn bad for you, in significant quantities, and this would be termed “natural” by most viros.

By: Al

Al — Thu, 09 Dec 2004 20:07:49 +0000

Anyone that expects the major carcinogens to be dramatically increased or decreased by changing paper is confused.

Smokestacks, catalytic converters, filters - these are all methods of trying to eliminate, reduce, and control pollution from combustion. Carbon dioxide and water are the main effects - but they aren’t pollution other than in a “global warming” sense. But the carbon monoxide and oxygen-bearing nitrogen compounds are the pollutants that are trying to be removed.

You get those _any_ time you burn _any_ carbon compound in air (which contains nitrogen). There is no way to escape this without removing the carbon or the air. (Burning magnesium doesn’t create CO, but I wouldn’t snort burning magnesium either.)

You can perhaps shift which of the more carcinogenic you’re ingesting, but the slate of choices starts at ‘bad’ and goes downhill from there.

By: Sigivald

Sigivald — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 19:30:39 +0000

I don’t see how burning paper is any worse than burning tobacco, in the amounts in question.

And, heck, I know plenty of adults that like their cigarettes flavoured on occasion. Screw the damned “What about the Children” patrol.

By: polltroll

polltroll — Mon, 06 Dec 2004 16:10:25 +0000

The worst part of a cigarette, health wise and for taste, is the paper and chemicals IMHO. The paper for sure. If a cigarette were wrapped in a tobacco leaf, like a cigar, the smoker would be removing the consumption of burnt paper. I haven’t found an un-flavored tobacco leaf product for rolling my particular brand of tobacco so I’m searching for handmade cigars that can be unrolled and the leaves used for cigs. Would you rather inhale the smoke from paper or tobacco.

I know that’s not really your topic but as a particular smoker I couldn’t resist.

This is also off topic as I troll;

[Troll deleted. -Ed]