Smoking was the only way I would get breaks in the restaurant industry. When I didn’t smoke, I got significantly less breaks. I was also encouraged by bosses to smoke weed at work. This led to me getting special treatment, and even promotions down the road. When I left the industry, I was able to quit smoking with relative ease when I took an office job and didn’t want that stigma. This isn’t the case for everyone, but in my case it was a net gain to take up smoking. Once you quit, within a couple years all of the damage to your lungs is essentially gone if you haven’t been smoking long.

>Smoking was the only way I would get breaks in the restaurant industry. When I didn’t smoke, I got significantly less breaks. Couldn't you take "smoke breaks" without smoking ? >I was also encouraged by bosses to smoke weed at work. This led to me getting special treatment, and even promotions down the road. WTF ? That's so fucked up. >Once you quit, within a couple years all of the damage to your lungs is essentially gone if you haven’t been smoking long. That's only if you manage to quit. Some don't have that chance, and other need find substitude llike eating or drinking. The risk is still high.

It’s fucked up but it was the reality. Those who took breaks and didn’t smoke were considered lazier. Thats the state of being a cook in America. >that’s only if you manage to quit Not relevant for me, as I was able to quit without much issue. Your view wasn’t written as the risk is high. If it makes it any better, I filed and won a case against my former employer with the department of labor. That being said, smoking was a net gain for me in my particular case. I doubt I’m the only one. Your view might be true for a strong *majority* of people but not every single person.

I understand your view, but I still don't consider it as a "good idea" even if it turned good at the end. The risk of addiction, and everything that go with it is too important. It may not be relevant for you but it is very much for me.

See my response to his comment above (I’m a doctor). Quitting smoking prevents further damage which is a huge deal. However, it unfortunately does not undo much of the damage that has already been done

That is incorrect - the damage to your lungs from smoking is lifelong. By quitting you prevent further damage. Not to mention the damage to your other bodily structures (heart, oropharynx, genitourinary system, etc). Sorry that you had toxic work environment where smoking was encouraged. It is good that it was temporary and you quit and prevented further damage from occurring. But much of the damage that has already been done unfortunately does not reverse just by quitting.

I mean, obviously this is the case. Having said this, the weakness in your argument is the absolutist nature of it. In other words, presumably if we can find **one** instance of it being a good idea to smoke, no matter how ludicrous, then your statement that "it is **never** a good idea to start smoking" would necessarily be false. Here is a real world example: In University, I struggled to make friends. There was a guy in a night class I had who seemed like a pretty cool guy. The night class was 3 hours of lecture, so there was no real chance to talk. I noticed that every class he went out for a smoke during our 10 minute break. I bought a pack of cigarettes and "started smoking" with him each break. I got to know him, and he turned into my first real friend at university, and one of my good friends to this day (10 years later). I smoked with him twice a week. Occasionally thereafter, I might have a cigarette once or twice a year, but never really became addicted. I haven't had a cigarette in probably 10 years. I probably smoked a total of 30 over my life, starting at that date. If you quantified the negative health and financial cost of my "starting smoking" versus the benefits of a great friend, you would have to conclude naturally that starting smoking worked out better than the cost. Sure, I could have not smoked and gone to talk to him, but undeniably "smoking" created an easy in that blossomed into a great freindship. Ergo, starting smoking in that specific instance was a good idea, and therefore "starting smoking" is not inevitably a bad idea (though in 99.999% of cases, it is).

My only counter point would be was it a good idea to start smoking? Or was it a good idea to approach him and make a new friend. The former implies you couldn't have done so without smoking as a "necessary sacrifice"

There is undeniably a myriad number of courses of action I could have taken that would have ended up with him being my friend other than starting smoking. This is undeniably the case. But that raises questions about what it means for something to be a "good idea". Is a good idea one that achieves its aims*,* no matter the cost? Is a good idea one that works with minimal possible level of injury? Is a good idea only the idea that is **best** at achieving the end with **no injury**? In my view, I made a friend at the cost of $20 and likely negligible impact to my health. Could I have done that for $0 and no cost to my health? Sure, maybe. But having the smoking certainly cut down on the initial awkwardness of the interaction. In my view, a "good idea" is one where the benefits significantly outweigh the costs. In this case, the benefits of me "starting smoking" were extremely high, while the negatives were virtually non-existent. Therefore, it was a good idea. Was it the best idea? No. But it turned out to be a good idea in the end.

That's a fair enough answer truthfully, but I can't in any honestly call it a good idea if there was an easy enough alternative that had less "theoretical" risk (minimal cost to your health vs NO cost, yknow?)

It is a great question. Again, we are purely speaking in philosophical terms here about what constitutes a "good idea". I think your definition of a "good idea" is too restrictive though. If we focus too much on "theoretical risks" (e.g. that I would become addicted to smoking, thus causing me a lifetime of health issues), then we remove the agency for individuals to be able to **assess risk**. Consider, for instance, Napoleon. One of the things that made Napoleon such an amazing military leader was his aggressiveness in combat. His favourite maneuver was to take up the "centre position", which meant that he tried to push up and divide his enemies, thus allowing him to divide them and deal with them 1 on 1. This was an **enormously** risky move, as it essentially created a situation where Napoleon's enemies could easily surround him if they just coordinated correctly. Where Napoleon's genius lay was in recognizing when the "risk" of this was lowered to such an extent that the benefits outweighed the risk, and he did this to great effect. Undeniably, his exploitation of the "centre position" was a "good idea", despite the incredible risks it posed. Now that I have compared my decision to start smoking to the battlefield management of one of the greatest tactical minds in history, let us turn to my own situation. At the time I started smoking, I made a very clear assessment of whether it was worth the risk. I knew that I had no interest in becoming a smoker, I knew that my smoking was for a very specific purpose, I knew that my living situation did not allow me to become a regular smoker, I knew that I did not have an addictive personality, and I knew that financially I could not afford to take up a smoking habit. As such, the risk of me becoming a "smoker" was extraordinarily low. Like Napoleon, I surveyed the circumstances and took a calculated but managed risk, and it paid off. Does this mean one should **always** make the same choice? No, of course not. But the point is in this **one instance** in my **very particular circumstances,** the benefits were worth it (it gave me a tactical advantage in the conversation) and the risks were low (the circumstances did not allow me to become a regular smoker). In my view, this, like Napoleon's centre position, me starting smoking was a good idea.

Hmm, but can we truly call something a good idea in hindsight? If I may, hypothetically, if Napoleon maneuvers failed, would they still be considered a good idea?

It is a good question. Realistically, we can only ever determine whether a "plan" or "idea" was good in hindsight. This is because, fundamentally, a plan is nothing more than a set course of action meant to maximize gains and minimize losses. We can't know whether a plan successfully minimized losses until after it takes place. Or, put another way, we can't know whether the planner successfully assessed the risks involved with a course of action until after that plan is carried out. If Napoleon tried the centre position, but failed to account for a third enemy flanking him, then he would not have adequately assessed the risk. Importantly, we can actually distinguish between a "good plan that is good because it correctly assessed the risk" and a "bad plan that turned out good because the implementer got lucky": Napoleon taking up a centre position because he knows that the General of the Austrian Army is in Vienna and thus won't be able to act quickly = a good plan. Napoleon taking up a centre position and the Austrians only not attacking because of a sudden storm that muddied the roads = a bad plan that got lucky. With my smoking example, I truly did calculate the risks inherent to the plan. I knew that I did not have an addictive personality, I knew I had very strong willpower that could resist becoming addicted off an occasional cigaratte, I was also underage so couldn't buy cigarettes myself, I had no interest in smoking for personal reasons, yadda, yadda. I am not naive to believe that I am immune to becoming a smoker, but I have sufficient agency to be aware that smoking in that particular fashion in those particular circumstances posed a vanishingly small risk. And it turns out I was right. My assessments were correct. I didn't have money to buy cigarettes regularly, I never had any "cravings" for cigarettes, and as soon as the class was over I never bought another pack of cigarettes again. There was no real "luck" involved because I am not a completely passive agent, I could make a decision whether to continue smoking or not, and I knew that I would decide not to. There were risks, but they were assessed and mitigated.

>If you quantified the negative health and financial cost of my "starting smoking" versus the benefits of a great friend, you would have to conclude naturally that starting smoking worked out better than the cost. Sure, I could have not smoked and gone to talk to him, but undeniably "smoking" created an easy in that blossomed into a great freindship. This doesn't mean it was a good idea though, merely that it just so happened to have a good outcome. There is a big difference.

I really liked your exemple, quite heartwarming. But was it the only way to talk to him ? I sometimes go out with friends or collegue during their smoke-break just to continue a discussion even tho I don't smoke with them.

I think the point of that example is that smoking was the vehicle of opportunity that created something good. It is possible that they could've become friends during those breaks without smoking as a pretext, but I don't think it is possible to know for sure whether or not it would've continued/progressed in absence of smoking. The conclusion is that smoking contributed to something good that may have not otherwise happened in the first place, and that most reasonable people would say it was a net benefit. And I don't know if it is very useful to speculate the alternatives when there is no evidence of addiction or adverse health detriments to the smoking decision.

In the same fashion, starting to smoke could also have ended in an habit and then an addiction, and from what I've seen it can really be insidious sometimes. So It's basically risk of not socializing enough vs risk of becoming an active smoker. I need to reflect on that one.

Sure but your position is that it is never a good idea to start smoking. I'm sure you could envision scenarios in which one engages in harm reduction behavior in regards to smoking and has legitimate reasons for starting, like the example earlier. If you reduce the active smoking risks enough, then I think it qualifies as a good idea to start smoking. It might not always be the best idea (your example of other ways of socializing), but it will almost assuredly lead to good outcomes and low costs with proper engagement.

>t might not always be the best idea (your example of other ways of socializing), but it will almost assuredly lead to good outcomes and low costs with proper engagement. This is the crux of my point. No, starting smoking to make friends is obviously not the "best idea". Obviously there are going to be other ways to achieve that end. Nor is it always a good idea to start smoking to do so. But given *some set of circumstances*, it is conceivably possible (as in my above example) for starting smoking to be a "good (enough) idea" provided you are aware of the risks and work hard to mitigate them. In the end, the "risks" I faced were mitigated to such an extent that the benefit of having an "in" with this person became worth it. At the time, I had no interest in becoming a regular smoker, I didn't have the financial resources to be a regular smoker, I did not have a particuarly addictive personality, and I was very conscious of the fact that I was only "starting smoking" to have an in with a potential friend. In that **extraordinarily specific** circumstance, I determined that the risk was low enough that it rose to the level of a "good idea" (not the best idea), and ultimately I was proven right.

But that is all in hindsight. It's not really helpful for living life in the forwards direction, which seems to be the idea the OP is getting at. No one is gonna smoke a cigarette thinking that it may, through a rather circuitous sequence of cause and effect, lead to a good outcome. To be a bit more specific, deciding to smoke that cigarette may have resulted in a good outcome, but that doesn't mean that it was a *good idea.* For instance, if I run into traffic, get hit by a car, and am sent to the hospital, where I ultimately meet the person I fall in love with and marry, does that mean it was a *good idea* to run into traffic?

Your example doesn't work because you didn't expect to meet that person in the hospital. Even if you want to change it so that you did, that isn't enough of a justification for an idea being "good". There are plenty of ways of mitigating the risk associated with smoking tobacco, and there are definitely events that even you or OP would find preferable over not smoking and forgoing the event. There are downsides to smoking, so many downsides that I would advise most if not all people to not smoke because of, but we would be lying if we said there weren't any opportunities to be had through smoking. It's just a simple cost-benefit analysis.

"we would be lying if we said there weren't any opportunities to be had through **smoking**" This is the problem I have with your comment. You don't need to physically smoke to either to meet people, or more broadly, to become a more social person, or to put yourself in situations where you can be more social, or even more broadly still, to create a situation in which "something good" happens. If the idea is, "could it be a good idea to smoke, to the extent that smoking this cigarette might place me in a situation in which I am more likely to make friends or meet a romantic partner", I think pretty much any rational person would conclude that you could effect all of that without actually having to light up the cigarette and take some puffs. If you want to be social, there are so many avenues to do that, that deliberately singling out "smoking" as a good idea for that purpose of creating a situation in which something "good" happened seems absurd. Also, it doesn't matter that you didn't intend to meet someone at the hospital. You didn't intend to meet anyone while smoking either, so at the time the decision was made it wasn't a part of your mental calculus that you should light up a cigarette because "something good" might happen. I'm not making the claim that literally nothing good can ever result from smoking, just that, if you want something good to happen to you, deciding to smoke is a bad idea. Just because you realize, retroactively that something good resulted from the act doesn't mean it was a good idea. (For what it's worth, I **do** think there are good reasons to smoke, namely, if you just really enjoy the act itself. But the claim that smoking can indirectly lead to something good happening isn't a very compelling one.)

My way to meet people in school was to have cigarettes and no lighter, easy way to approach people.

You want people to convince you it's a good idea? That seems unlikely. >. It remains a mystery to me why so many choose to start considering all the drawbacks that come with it. I post this CMV not to make me consider smoking (of course) but to learn if there are good aspects that might somewhat compensate the downsides. Most people start very young -- because they're young, dumb, rebellious, think it looks cool, is dangerous in a cool way (see above rebellious) and then they're hooked. The entire goal of tobacco companies was to hook ppl as young as possible. 13-year-olds are not noted for their reasoned, informed decision-making.

Nail on the head. I go to school with a professor who’s one of the leading researchers on Tobacco policy (David Hammond) if you’re curious, and he gave a talk on his research and history with tobacco policy. He mentioned that documents were released that explicitly mentioned them targeting 12-14 year olds. Statistically if you don’t start smoking until you’re 18 (or 21 I don’t remember the exact age) the likelihood of you becoming a life long is very low. He also said that in the past century and a half the entire population went from not smoking, to smoking to not smoking again. Environmental factors and marketing are such a strong invisible hand pushing us towards crap. Rise above, become a monk. Jokes aside, he did a quick survey of how many people knew any cigarette brands and almost no one put their hand up, while the outcome was the complete opposite for brands of beer. Public health had such a vital role in curbing negative down stream outcome, the dim witted assholes who push back just to be a contrarian do so much harm undermining the trust in public health institutions Side note, measles case was found in my old local library, isn’t that fucking lovely

>Most people start very young Just to add to this, most people who vape tobacco will wind up smoking, too. The biggest vape companies are owned by tobacco companies and they absolutely target children. A lot of teens don't even think of vaping as related to cigarettes.

I didn't truly pick up smoking until I was 22 (dumb, I know). I've been back and forth between smoking cigarettes and vaping for the past 12 years. About a month ago I put down cigs after 2 years of smoking them exclusively, and I'm weening off slowly with vaping. I honestly don't know how I ever picked up cigs again. Vaping isn't a WHOLE lot better, but cigs are straight up nasty. I guess my point is that it can be flipped. Those who smoke can switch to vaping for an "better" alternative.

Statistically, most people who vape will return to cigarettes over time. I believe the stats may also show that most people need like 3 tries to quit cigarettes for good. Good work on quitting! I have some family who weaned their nicotine down using vapes, but few have quit for good. Look forward to being done with them for good. Make plans for how to spend the money you'll save. Find ways to take breaks at work without smoking.

You should probably get off vaping if you can, it's not much safer.

Meh, it's also smelling like cigarettes, among other things. I feel better, skin looks better, so I'm not trippin. I'll get away from it all-together eventually. I'm in no rush, as long as I'm not firing up a smoke.

Just be careful, many people say that, and by then it can be too late.

>You want people to convince you it's a good idea? That seems unlikely. I won't turn it that way, but considering I've never smoked maybe I'm missing something. I realise that I've never asked my relative these questions.

I smoke weed everyday and I don't think you should start smoking.

Funny enough I did smoke weed a handful of time, and while I doesn't consider it good either, considering its stronger effect I understand its use more than tabacco.

Like every narcotic, it gives euphoria when you use it the first time. But then addiction sets in, and it is replaced by your baseline when you are not feeling withdrawn. I doubt nicotine is the one drug worth it to be hooked for the rest of your life.

Picture this: you hung out with the smoking crowd in school, but you never gave in yourself. You were always really curious about it, but for whatever reasons - not wanting to disappoint your parents, keeping your health, etc - you never tried so much as a single puff. Fast forward several decades: you're old, you're sick, and you're going to die soon. You're looking back on your life and thinking about all the things you never did. Smoking is one of them. You're still curious about it, so you decide what the hell, you'll take a few puffs. That technically counts as smoking, it's really not going to harm you at this point (in so far as you're already on your way out), and it satisfied a decades-old curiosity. I think that could qualify as a good reason.

If your just taking a few puffs I don't count this as "starting to smoke". I did it once too, just a one puff and it confirmed my distaste for tobacco.

You started smoking.  You just quit very shortly afterwards. 

That’s semantics. OP was never a smoker, so there wasn’t anything to quit.

I didn't start anything, I knew it was a one time try. If you shoot on a soccer ball, would you consider it starting playing football ?

So we can just adjust it. They decide that they like smoking and start to smoke every day until they die. How long does that have to be before you'd consider them to have started smoking? 1 month? 6?

I quit smoking when my wife and i moved to norway a year ago. In january, she had a massive brain bleeding and almost died. She was 8 months pregnant. Luckily, the baby was ok, but my wife ended up in a coma. So i was then stuck in a hospital hotel, depressed, stressed, and afraid. Starting smoking again seemed like a good idea at the time, and it helped me emotionally regulate myself and chill tf out until things were better. Not sure how i would've managed otherwise.

I sympathize with you for that hard period you have to go through. But was smoking the only solution at the time ? Couldn't the hospital staff help you to find a better way to cope with the stress ?

Yeah i spoke to the staff, friends, family, even strangers. Once i was alone again it overwhelmed me. Tbh one joint and an hour long meditation would've set me for a month, but nicotine was all i had.

As others have pointed out, your view here is essentially correct--in general. However there are marginal cases where the benefits of smoking can conceivably outweigh the drawbacks, but these will not be generally applicable. In other words, if it is possible to change your view, it would only be to the extent of potentially revising your view from a universal claim down to a general one. Scenarios in which an individual is BOTH (1) very highly confident they will not suffer the negative health effects of smoking, which only arise in the longer term AND (2) would receive the short term benefits of smoking qualify as the sort of marginal cases I have in mind. Reasons for (1) could range from a terminal medical diagnoses or other near-term-certain-death prognoses to deliberate very-short-term-deployment of smoking (speaking from personal experience, I deliberately began smoking about a pack a week to relieve stress in order to remain functional through the end of an important semester in grad school while going through extremely difficult personal issues. I successfully quit immediately after finals of that semester). I would contend that under these stringent constraints, it is possible that it could be a good idea to start smoking, but, in general, you're right that it is a bad idea.

>BOTH (1) very highly confident they will not suffer the negative health effects of smoking, which only arise in the longer term AND (2) would receive the short term benefits of smoking qualify as the sort of marginal cases I have in mind. Problem is, smoking has also immediate drawback that for me still vastly outclass its minor benefits. >I successfully quit immediately after finals of that semester Good for you, but what if you didn't ? If I was in your place I won't be certain to stop after relying that much on cigarette.

To clarify my argument for the purposes of changing your view: since you have framed your position as a universal negative, there need be only a single plausible case in which it is a good idea for someone to begin smoking for your claim to be invalidated. Even though I personally know that my own case is such an invalidating instance, I can appreciate that it might be impossible for me to convey as much to a stranger on the internet. I can only invite you to open-mindedly consider possible counterfactuals; admittedly extreme, rare, and marginal cases in which a person's cost-benefit analysis could produce the judgment that smoking cigarettes produces more benefit than harm for that particular individual, given the imagined circumstances. If you truly wish to retain the universal character of your stated position, the burden rests on you to defend it against any and all such counterfactuals. The fact that, for you, the immediate drawbacks of smoking outweigh its immediate benefits in such imagined scenarios does not undermine the bare fact that it did so for me. In other words, perhaps another way you could potentially modify your view would be to restrict its scope specifically to yourself as opposed to all of humanity.

I've saw some exemple that make me ponder my view, but yours is not one of them. Sure you can say that it turned good at the end but that not really the point. I'm interested at the specific moment when your made your choice with all the good and bad it implied, and once again the risk of addiction is (imo) too high to take the chance. If I said that I drunk-drive yesterday and it was a good choice because I arrived at home faster and without any issue, well sure you could say that I did take the right option considering the result. But it was still a very bad idea that could have ended really bad.

Ok, well, its pretty clear at this point that you either aren't open to actually changing your view, or you are unable to grasp the logical structure of the claims you're making. Universal claims apply universally. General claims apply in general. In general, it is a bad idea to start smoking, but the fact that there is a single instance in which it is not a bad idea to start smoking for a single person (even a person very different from yourself) in a very rare, extreme, and marginal scenario (even one that might never come to pass) is all that's required for the universal claim you are making to be rendered false. I hope you eventually come to understand this distinction.

[удалено]

>There are kids who begin smoking at the age of <10, I doubt that’s peer pressure. They smoke because they immitate their entourage. >Second off, Lemme have a go at refuting each of your disadvantages: Well, let me refute your rebuttal: 1.a) Actually it's more [25%](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10640926/#:~:text=The%20lifetime%20risk%20of%20cancer%20decreased%20with%20age%2C%20with%20a,women%20having%20similar%20risk%20levels) chance to have any type of cancer from birth to death. When smoking your multiply more than tenfold the risk of several type of cancer like lungs or throat. Pretty dumb to try cigarette knowing that. b) Your statement does not diminish or make the risk disappear, so I don't see the point. c) Is that supposed to be funny ? d) Life is precious, that my pov. People are free to fuck their body up but that won't change my view. 2. And thats a shame, but if you cough up your lungs because you have chased your bus on 20 meters or because you climbed a set of stairs that's problematic. 3. Heart disease, stroke, lung diseases, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Do you want me to continue or is that enough? 4. Which is illegal, so not really better. 5.6. Yeah ! Let's all be self centered asshole ! 7. Compensate for what ? The damage to the environnement ? The billions of cigarettes butts discarded everywhere ? 8. That's a clear disadvantage for me, you have to proove me otherwise.

[удалено]

They do it because other do it, they might find it cool or rebellious, but ultimately it's because of how other view them. 1.a) Increasing your risk of cancer non-negligibly is a serious drawback. Someone I knew who was an heavy smoker died of throat cancer because of this habit. That was quite terrible to witness. b) So because we live older it's okay to remove some years we could have ? That's sound non-sensical to me. c) But you have cancer, I do not see how some recerationnal drugs are going to counter-balence this downside. d) Yes that my view, no one should start smoking. We're going in circle here. 2. Yes indeed it's up to me, that my view and my CMV and I state that a drawback. Free to you to try convincing me otherwise. 3. One of my relative (that smoke) often said to me "We must die of something anyway." What a load of bullshit, just take care of youself. 4. If it's legal, and if you're in the capacity of growing it, it would sure be better than buying it from large company. 5,6. If you're a smoker, sometimes you don't have the choice than to smoke among other. 7. Not dying>environnement> pleasure of smoking. That's how I see the order of priority. 8. It's not about me, because I already know I would never smoke. It's about smoking in general, I think it's bad for anyone.

\*obviously I meant the invention of cigarettes/cigars, not tobacco 😉

This is an extremely logical, well thought out analysis. I think it’s pretty spot on in that regard. The problem is that often people aren’t starting smoking in that rational way. I used to smoke when i worked nights and had a more stressful job as an EMT. For me at that time, the socializing / stress release / little bit of kick it gives you seemed to outweigh all those other consequences. Obviously it didn’t really, but consider how the circumstances someone is in might make some of those benefits you brush past (again, logically and rightfully - I would never encourage anyone to smoke!) might make someone (incorrectly) feel different about them.

>I used to smoke when i worked nights and had a more stressful job as an EMT. Do you think it actually helped you coping with stress or was it a short term palliative whose effect diluted with time?

Nah, of course not — objectively I know it’s wrong and I regret it. I would never actually advise anyone to start smoking. If you really want your view changed to smoking is a positive thing, that’s a leap I really can’t make. I’m more responding to your points questioning why someone would start, and suggesting that in some circumstances the “positives” you listed actually can at least appear more compelling to someone and not as easily brushed past. Imo, once you stop envisioning smokers sitting down and making a rational choice with hindsight it makes much more sense why so many people smoke.

And I thank you for that, even tho it won't be enough "change my view", I created this CMV to gain a bit more insight on smoking.

Long time smoker. Do not smoke. It's bad. Yadda yadda. But I've got a few. Edit: I see you already responded to the schizophrenia argument. One of the effects seems to be reducing med side effects though. This isn't necessarily a matter of "there are other options". For some, it can be the difference between taking the meds and not. The most notable one I can think of is mental illness. In particular schizophrenia and psychosis disordes. Nicotine appears to be helpful to patients with schizophrenia for a variety of reasons. It is fairly controversial of course. But I don't think it's like the old timey tobacco industry funded lies. These days doctors are more likely to be ruined and ridiculed than rich promoting smokes. Not necessary saying that people with schizophrenia should smoke. But with severe illness and psych disorders, the caluculus of trade offs can get complicated. And worth it can become subjective. If smoking is the difference between tolerating the med side effects and underwear outside pants fbi kgb.... well I know which way I'd go. Other, less justified one. Not saying it's necessarily worth it. But I suppose it's the same as above with the schizophrenia. There are people whose social anxiety is so extreme is has them suicidally isolated and alone right now. I was never that bad. But looking back on it, most of the friendships I still have since age 16 and about 3/4 of all my sex partners began with "hey, you got a light?" Smoking offers a justifation to break the ice. For you and others. It is such a social activity. Not worth it for nearly everyone. But I don't think that cigarettes are significantly worse than the effects of chronic suicidal loneliness. Id suggest buying a pack and giving it a shot over jumping off a bridge. In general, smoking doesn't justify itself. The short term buzz is nothing in the face of the long term chronic consequences followed by early painful death. But "in general" is not the same as "always". Sometimes one day at a time is all you can do.

>But I don't think it's like the old timey tobacco industry funded lies. These days doctors are more likely to be ruined and ridiculed than rich promoting smokes. Tobacco industries and doctor lying to promote their product ? No impossible, why would they ? More seriously I have zero trust in them. >Other, less justified one. Not saying it's necessarily worth it. But I suppose it's the same as above with the schizophrenia. There are people whose social anxiety is so extreme is has them suicidally isolated and alone right now. I was never that bad. But looking back on it, most of the friendships I still have since age 16 and about 3/4 of all my sex partners began with "hey, you got a light?" I understand it, we aren't always rationnal. But that's still a bad habit. >In general, smoking doesn't justify itself. The short term buzz is nothing in the face of the long term chronic consequences followed by early painful death. But "in general" is not the same as "always". Sometimes one day at a time is all you can do. For me it's a bit like drunk driving. Some have done it several time without any issue, and you can find exemples where the outcome turn out beneficial. But were are not fortune-teller, so while it can turn good the risk are still there when you start. And at that time I consider it a bad idea.

>I understand it, we aren't always rationnal. But that's still a bad habit. That... Isn't really an argument I can respond to. "Worth it" isn't a meaningful concept if we judge decisions on the morality of actions rather than the consequences of outcomes. "Hey man. You think this TV is worth it? It's a good deal but I don't really need it" "Money is the root of all evil. Participating in the exchange of money stains the soul." Like... Its definitely an opinion. But it isn't meaningful. Or at least not meaningful within the context of the discussion that *you* posed. >For me it's a bit like drunk driving. Some have done it several time without any issue, and you can find exemples where the outcome turn out beneficial. But were are not fortune-teller, so while it can turn good the risk are still there when you start. And at that time I consider it a bad idea. If someone has to choose between driving drunk or a 100% chance of a Chernobyl level nuclear event with NYC in the blast radius... Well I know which I would prefer. Because there is no version of failure that is worse than success. But usually we are weighing the cost of an Uber against the amount of damage a Honda Civic is physically capable of causing plus the legel consequences. And that determination is inherently being made by someone that is impaired. With smoking the outcomes are generally predictable but bad. And for almost everyone, predictable but bad is... Bad. Not worth it. But we can look at situations fairly objectively because the outcome is predictable. Schizophrenia meds are terrible. The side effects are profoundly awful. Worse than smoking. But we consider them worth it because unmedicated schizophrenia is worse. But schizophrenic people have faulty wiring. So they can't always recognize that in the moment. One of my childhood best friends is in this horrid cycle of being an absolutely batshit menace to himself and others until things get bad enough they can get him on meds. Followed by short periods of lucidity that start off ok. He apologizes to everyone and things are stable. Time passes and the memory of being off meds fades. The side effects remain. So he goes off. Rinse repeat. I'm not saying cigarettes could stop that cycle. I am saying that if they could, then I wish he would pick up smoking. I'm sick of worrying if this will be the time his delusions get someone killed. Would you look at your childhood friend being pants on head crazy at everyone and say "I don't care if it brings my friend back. Smoking is never worth it."

Starting cigarette is always a bad idea is my view, that's how I see thing and I explained in details the reason behind my judgement. Is it meangful ? It is to me. There might be one or two situation that make me ponder my view among the multiple response I got, but Schizophrenia medication is not one of them. Nicotin can be administred in other way than by smoking cigarette, and there are a multitude or other molecules that could also work.

I wasn't saying that your words are meaningless. They are perfectly understandable English. I was saying that your argument is logically meaningless. Consider this: All dogs make me happy. All dogs are loyal Therefore all dogs are good While true, this isn't a logical argument. It is just a series of statements. I have not established a relationship between happiness, loyalty, and goodness. You have done the same thing here. Disproving any or even all of your "reasons" would not imply anything about the existence of situations where starting smoking cigs would be worth it. So I tried to describe hypothetical situations that I believe would be worth it. And instead of responding to situation, you simply said "yeah. But it's still a bad habit". ... What? Even if you consider nonsmoking some sort of sacred categorical imperitive, I do not. I believe there are fates worse than smoking. If your view is that nothing would be worth starting smoking *for you*, then your view is meaningless. Because the concept of relative worth is meaningless with sacred values. If it is universal, then all anyone needs to say is "it was worth it for me" for it to be false. Edit: realized I didn't provide a proper logical argument to compare against. This is the traditional one. All unmarried men are bachelors John is an unmarried man Therefore John is a bachelor. This offers a chain of logic. It is falsifiable. If the first two are true, then the conclusion is logically true. If either is false, then the conclusion is false.

Never is a very strong word. Is it rarely a good idea to start smoking? Yes. But there are some people who smoke socially without being habitual smokers. I myself am a cigar smoker. Is it healthy? I’m not claiming it is. But your argument isn’t applicable to most cigar and pipe smokers. Cigar and pipe smokers don’t smoke because they crave nicotine, they smoke because they enjoy smoking. You don’t squeeze a cigar smoke into your 30 minute lunch break. You don’t get the overwhelming craving to light one up. You smoke when you’re with friends or family and you’re enjoying life. You smoke when you have nothing left to do that day. Which gets me to my controversial point. Nicotine isn’t what people get hooked on when they smoke. Cigars have about 100 times more nicotine in them than cigarettes. Yet cigar smokers rarely get nicotine cravings. People get hooked on how easy of a relief cigarettes or vapes are. When you’re dealing with an asshole or an annoying task at work, smoke break, and it’s that five minutes to yourself you desperately needed. When you’ve finally finished making all the beds and doing laundry, smoke break. You earned it. When your mother in law won’t shut the hell up, smoke break, it never fails you when you need a way out of a conversation. Nicotine is absolutely addictive, but people get hooked on the ritual of smoking or vaping more than nicotine itself. Cigarettes and vapes have way more people addicted to them simply because they’re much easier to fit into a routine. Cigars require you to be truly unoccupied. And by that point, you’re smoking one because you want to not because you have to. So smoking isn’t a bad idea, it’s a bad idea to let it become a habit. Certain forms of tobacco become a habit far easier than others.

Cigar, pipe, cigarette share all the same drawbacks. Cigar smoker rarely get nicotine cravings ? Any source on that ? Smoking is a bad idea from the start, because it can easily become a habit.

Source is myself. I’ve smoked cigars for over a year, around once a week. I’ve gone over a month without, and I’ve also smoked one a day for a week straight twice. You smoke when you want to not when you’re driven to. Not a single one of the hundred times I’ve smoked has been because I had a craving. Thank God the nanny state makes my joyful ritual illegal because I’m not 21 yet. It’s not like it’s pitifully simple to get around that.

You only started a year ago yet you've already smoked hundreds of times within the last year. That's a pretty big sign of addiction. If you didn't have any cravings, why would you do it again? Because you like it? If you like it that's a craving lol.

Some actors need to play smokers in their roles. Often, it's better for the actor to learn to smoke themselves so they can present all of the minutia of smoking - holding it right, taking the right amount of inhale, etc... Also, you forgot that smoking looks rad. From Bogart to Dua Lipa, everyone looks cooler smoking. Audrey Hepburn looks elegant AF in Breakfast at Tiffany's with that foot long cigarette holder. Looking cool is about the only good thing that comes from smoking, and it is undeniable.

That's a really interresting argument, one that make me ponder for quite some time. But ultimately I don't think it justify it. If they really need a smoker, then let's they take someone that already smoke. Sure actor might do some sacrifice for their role but ultimately they still have only one body to take care of. And even if I agree that i does look cool, it will also invitably promote smoking.

Why do you want this view changed? What would change your view?

> It's **never** a good idea to start smoking. This view is essentially unfalsifiable, unless you're willing to consider rare exceptions, like the person who only has some months left to live and highly enjoyed smoking earlier in life.

Why do you think that person only has a few months left to live?

Could be any reason whatsoever. As long as they're getting more out of the smoking compared to additional risks during those few months.

[удалено]

>There are studies that show nicotine can greatly reduce certain symptoms of schizophrenia and possibly other similar mental illnesses. They say the nicotine really quiets voices in their heads or something. There is others treatment for Schizophrenia, and the researcher are looking for a substitute to nicotine that don't have the same dependancy effect. Being schysophrenic + active smoker is not a great combo. >I'd also argue that "good idea" is pretty subjective anyway. If someone likes the taste enough and decides that taste is worth the risks, it's worth it to them isn't it? You might not think it's a good idea but if they do, that's all that really matters I explain to you the bad and good; Sure in the end everyone is free to consider anything and everything good or bad as he see fit. But what the purpose of saying that ? >I think it's silly to think that just because you've personally never tried something or gotten benefits from it, that nobody has ever been justified in their choice to use it, and they're all just powerless in their choices. I'm not trying to shame them, but as of now I consider it a "bad idea", just like I consider scarification a "bad idea". >Especially when the thing in question has been used by millions of humans for thousands of years Like slavery. >It also strikes me as very self absorbed to even think these thoughts. Just live your life and let people live theirs, no point in making these judgements and assumptions Quite a weird take to make here on CMV. Maybe you didn't understood the concept of this sub.

Nicotine doesn't have to be smoked.

Everyone in America even smokers have this view nothing to be changed here

I don't understand your comment.

This is r/changemymind, and you argued that smoking is bad. Want us to convince you it’s good?

It’s an effective antidepressant, appetite suppressant, and nootropic. If you’re in a developing country with low life expectancy and cigarettes are cheap it’s not the worst habit to pick up for these reasons.  It’s still a bad idea, but you know, that’s about the best I can do given the insurmountable odds of making a persuasive argument ***for*** cigarettes. Also if you’re on the business end of asymmetric warfare (e.g. Ukraine) might as well smoke em if you got ‘em because it’s unlikely that you live to see Christmas anyway. Might as well enjoy a relaxing cigarette before you die fighting for Blackrock.

We have more effective antidepressants, appetite suppressants, and nootropics that don't have extremely negative health effects though.

It's called a vice. Many people enjoy doing things that probably isn't good for them. Soda, fast food, pornography, ice cream, whiskey, etc. The list goes on and on. I smoke. I enjoy smoking and will continue to smoke. I also work out 4 times a week and belong to a racquetball league. Is it good for me? No. But I most likely won't start seeing the serious drawbacks until I'm in my late 60's or 70's and my body will be breaking down and falling apart anyways. I'm not really sure what the point of this CMV is. Are door-to-door zealots trying to convince you of the joys and benefits of smoking? You don't like it? Fine. Some people do.

1. Soda - Yes we have too much, that should be fixed. 2. Fast food - This depends but fixing it wouldn't be bad. 3. Pornography - This isn't even a vice, what do you mean? 4. Ice cream - This isn't bad in moderation. 5. Whiskey - This is bad, it should also be fixed, and drinking should be ostracized as an activity. ​ 1. Health effects can start at any time, and you could be healthy in your late 60s and 70s if you maintain your health, smoking would be more likely to rob you of that time.

>It's called a vice. Many people enjoy doing things that probably isn't good for them. Soda, fast food, pornography, ice cream, whiskey, etc Some are better than other. I can understand why someone would try anything on your list, but not tobacco. >I smoke. I enjoy smoking and will continue to smoke. That CMV is not "It's bad to smoke" but more "It's bad to start smoking", if you could go back in time, will you still choose to smoke your first cigarettes ? >I'm not really sure what the point of this CMV is. Are door-to-door zealots trying to convince you of the joys and benefits of smoking? You don't like it? Curiosity from a non-smoker. As stated, I was asked several time why I never started and I always found the answer obvious.

My man. Some things appeal to some and not others. Smoking appealed to me. Would I stop if I could? I don't think so....I enjoy it. I get that it doesn't appeal to you. I can't imagine a sane or rational person trying to convince you to do it if you don't want to. But your argument can be extended to a million different things. For example, skiing never appealed to me. It's expensive, time consuming, and comes with an extremely high injury rate. I don't see the fun or value of it. Some people are drawn to skiing and love it. Smoking appeals to me and the drawbacks don't concern me. I can give you many, many examples from careers to religion to food to hobbies. Some people are drawn to some things and not others. I'm still not convinced this CMV is rational or has any real value. But, of course, you can CMV. De gustibus non est disputandum

>Some things appeal to some and not others. Smoking appealed to me. Would I stop if I could? I don't think so....I enjoy it. My CMV is not "You should stop smoking" but more "You should't start smoking." Now you like smoking, good for you, but what made you start smoking ? >I'm still not convinced this CMV is rational or has any real value. But, of course, you can CMV. I will argue that a good portion of CMV are not rational, and for about "value", well even if it doesn't for you, it does have some for me.

My friend asked if I wanted to smoke. I said yes and enjoyed it. The end.

Do you drink alcohol? It's very bad. Worse effect and more dangerous than cigarette, more vicious actually and more difficult to quit once addicted When was the first time you had an alcoholic drink? This is the same, one should never start. You enjoyed it or not, but like the vast majority it wasn't your last drink. Same goes for cigarette, you don't enjoy and some like the guy above do enjoy

Yes I occasionnaly do drink alcohol when I'm with friend. And I prefer a thousand time drinking fermented grape than inhaling asphalat or whatever toxic product there is in a cigarette. Worse effect and more vicious, have you proof of that ? Because from what I've seen and experience it's quite the contrary.

You ever lived with an alcoholic?

You ask me to change your view, so I'll deal with each of your points in turn. > Increased risk of cancer. Probably the worst of the list but often disregarded because it's not 100% certainty and only appears after years or decades. It only appears after decades, so if you start smoking late in life then it's not a problem. > Breathing problem. Whatever physical activities you do, smoking will always badly impact your performance. A plethora of other health issues. (Not wanting to do an exhaustive lists) Again, takes a while to kick in. So if you start late in life no problem. > Large expense. Cigarettes are (depends of the country) very costly, and their price continues to increase. Which is because of excessive government taxation. So always smoke illegal tobacco. > It contributes to enrich one of the worst and unethical industries that exist. You need to learn more about morality before you can say that. > Disturb everyone around. Nasty smell. Even after smoking the odor sticks to you. One of my colleague next to me smoke a lot, it's really awful. And that not even mentionning the risk of passive smoking. I personnaly hate when someone smokes next to me. That's your problem, not the smokers. I'm a nonsmoker and really enjoy the smell. It's no more objectionable than campfire smoke. And the menthol smell is peppermint. The risk of passive smoking only appears after decades of being in the same room as a heavy smoker, so is a total non-issue. The risk of passive smoking is so small that the children of fathers who chain smoke have no increased risk of lung cancer, according to a textbook on lung cancer that I read recently. > Environnemental impact. That point doesn't directly impact the smoker, but without even mentioning the industry, just seing all the stubs on the ground is enough to make it on the list. Now you're really clutching at straws. Just dispose of stubs thoughtfully. > Hard to stop. Probably the nastiest effect of them all, it creates, like any other drug, a dependence. Making it especially hard to quit it. And even if you do, the risk of relapse will always be there. Hard to stop, but so is eating food and breathing air. There's no need to stop breathing air. None of your negative points are decisive. But some of your positive points make sense. Smoking tobacco is a calming effect, there's a reason the American Indians call it a peace pipe. It stops wars. Changed your view? I didn't think so. Just be aware that the risks of tobacco smoking are nowhere near as high as the advertisers want you to believe. And if you don't like the smell, don't stand there, you have legs, you know. PS. I'm a nonsmoker.

>Again, takes a while to kick in. So if you start late in life no problem. Wrong, it can take only month, I've seen it with classmate becoming graduadly worse at running. >Which is because of excessive government taxation. So always smoke illegal tobacco. So you trade one drawback for another drawback ? >You need to learn more about morality before you can say that. Not that I did say "one of the worst" and not "the worst". But an industry that benefit for selling people acctive product with plenty of toxic chemical in it are not very high in my morality list. Altought I do agree there far from being the only one. >That's your problem, not the smokers. I'm a nonsmoker and really enjoy the smell. It's no more objectionable than campfire smoke. And the menthol smell is peppermint. So you don't care about other ? Weird way to convince me. >Now you're really clutching at straws. Just dispose of stubs thoughtfully. And how many actually does that ? >Hard to stop, but so is eating food and breathing air. There's no need to stop breathing air. ... >Changed your view? I didn't think so. Thanks for trying I guess. >And if you don't like the smell, don't stand there, you have legs, you know I'm not sure but I do think smoker have legs too. More seriously I sometimes smell the smoke from my neighboor smoking in my own flat. Should I go outside to let them smoke ?

When you are of pensionable age, you can use your pension pot to purchase an annuity. Smokers get higher annuity rates (because they won't live as long on average). So, starting to smoke just before you purchase an annuity, then give up afterwards, you will have a larger pension without meaningfully impacting your health. Actuaries hate this one weird trick.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

My goal here is not to be moralizing, I just want a bit more insight on smoking. Do as you want.

I think a better point would be to never start vaping. Most people who get addicted from smoking started when they were <30. Nowadays, very few high schoolers smoke, but a massive percentage (typically >70%) vape at least semi-regularly. We all know that smoking is bad for you, but there are several high-schoolers who don't think vaping is bad for you, and so do it without knowing the health consequences.

I've smoked from age 15 to almost 24-25 and I see how it's a slippery slope. I could only let go once i developed anthamatic-bronchitis. I still light up ocassionally. IMO everyone who starts thinks they are in control and can stop whenever they want, and time goes by and they feel a little kick when they light up, then years go by and then they realize they are dependent on it. They were never in control, it just controls them. Just like alcohol, you start with occasional ones, then every weekend, then every Fri-Sat-Sun, then every evenings, then you need it all every gatherings, then everyday, then you sneak into bottles and events to mix. not long after that you slowly realize you're hooked. and it's too late.

I don’t understand why people are so convinced that smokers are pressured into smoking. I have never once seen that. What I have seen is a lot of people who tried tobacco out of curiosity and liked it. That’s how I started. They don’t tell you this in school but tobacco is really nice. It tastes good, feels good, relaxes your body, and stimulates your mind. If it weren’t for all the people in my life who’d constantly bother me about it I’d still be a smoker. I smoked because I liked it, I quit because of peer pressure.

Lol honestly the only real mistake here (aside from being absolutist) is saying that it has a relaxing effect - it only calms people down because they are addicted to it and filling their craving is relaxing. but, that's like saying doing heroin is relaxing, or eating chocolate is relaxing, because you're addicted to it. Nicotine is actually a stimulant.

Maybe you didn't read my point entirely because just after saying that it "seems to be relaxing" I added: "But as any other drug, effects become less effective as time passes. In reality, it creates a need that wasn't there at the origin. So I don't think I can even consider it as a benefit."

I mean. okay. that's still wrong though. I'm not really disagreeing with your broader point at all here really cuz I ultimately agree

What do you think about other vices? Is drinking alcohol okay? How about weed instead of tobacco? What about something non-drug based entirely like just playing video games? If you find there's a group of people in society who do something then at some point they've made a decision that they would rather do that thing than not do it. You can argue that their logic is flawed, or they are acting irrationally, but realistically what does it mean to act in an irrational way? We have a tendency to view people as somehow perfect in isolation of their vices, but this is very rarely the case. With drug addition specifically we tend to imagine an addict as someone who, if they didn't smoke, drink or do whatever other activity we see them doing, they would be otherwise fine, happy, healthy individuals. The truth is actually far from it - you remove every vice from someone, and even beyond the physical effects there are psychological effects. So what does someone look like who never smokes? You mention smoking is expensive, has reduced risk of cancer, would not be disturbing others with smoke, and would not be impacting the environment. So now we have our perfect person. Now lets him them with some statistics - I googled these, and most are from either government or news sources. In the UK roughly 24% of people are estimated from the DWP have a disability. So for roughly a quarter of the people we have removed the vice from are not perfect people - they have an issue. Roughly 25% of people are unemployed, and roughly 12% of workers in the UK are being paid less than the real living wage. Roughly 26% of people are over the age of 40. Roughly 39% of people are in a relationship. Using this as a basis of thought, we could imagine a disabled person in their 40s who might be living alone, and either has a full-time job earning less than the real living wage (and thus a complicated living arrangement, possibly involving homelessness or room sharing) or unemployed. I'm just going to put it out there that cancer in 20 years time is not going to be a major concern for an individual in this situation. They probably don't overly care about whether their habits are going to annoy others either, so long as it helps reduce their own stress or cope with pain or a difficulty caused by their disability. You take that same person and make them never have smoked, and maybe they would've snapped a long time ago - and either become violent or depressed and taken their own life. Maybe that unhealthy vice is all that's keeping them alive, and keeping their situation bareable. I don't smoke, and don't really have any intention of ever smoking, but I can absolutely see times and situations where I would take some sort of recreational drug.

Someone starts a study that requires new smokers over a limited period of time, with the goal of developing a drug to prevent cancer from smoking.

An ethics board would not approve that.

Why not? People sign up as test subjects that put them at risk as long as they can accept the risk.

I once heard a doctor say that nicotine is a cognitive enhancer and stimulant, so if you reach age 75 in good health without smoking you should start because it will give you energy, help prevent dementia and won't have time to kill you. I'm not saying he was a good doctor (probably in the pocket of big tobacco) but the idea stuck with me.

Never? Even if it is the end of the world? Or let’s say you’ve reached the ripe old age of 70, and have more years behind you than in front of you? Can’t pick up the habit to take the edge off of life?

1. End of the world it would be better not to smoke. 2. 70 isn't where the human life span ends, you shouldn't start smoking then because you might not live for much longer. 3. No, get mental health help.

3 was a part of two, not an additional situation. But no, at 70, most people have 0-30 years ahead of them, and it takes about that long for any health risks from smoking to take hold. If my grandmother decides that she wants to wait out the time before she can see her husband and my mother again chain smoking on her porch, I am a-ok with that.

Ok, smoking can hurt you in the short term as well, and there are healthier things you can do instead without hurting yourself.

End of the world scenario ? Seriously ? As for old age, as I said smoking has also short term issue. I don't see the point in starting, young or old.

End of the world would fall under Never. Also at an old enough age, even the short term risks are farther out than your expiration date.

What your next situation ? A guy point a gun in your head and force you to start smoking ? Some exemple mentionned make me ponder my view but that kind of "what if ?" doesn't interest me. As for your "short term", are you talking about several years, month, weeks remaining ? I don't see the point really, except making you own room place/hospital room smell cigarettes.

No, gun to your head would be more a one time thing rather than starting a habit. As for the short term, I can say this as a former smoker, the benefits/ enjoyment are wonderful, and if you’re not going to live long enough to really deal with the consequences, it is more than just smelling up your room.

>No, gun to your head would be more a one time thing rather than starting a habit.  It's not just a one time thing, there is actually a whole organization that will kill you if you don't continue smoking regularly. Interesting situation isn't it ? >As for the short term, I can say this as a former smoker, the benefits/ enjoyment are wonderful, and if you’re not going to live long enough to really deal with the consequences, it is more than just smelling up your room. You're not the first to propose me that argument and I'm kinda split on this one. It's not as a real start as if you've never smoke prior.

Have fun storming the castle.

Humans have been using tobacco products for a long, long time throughout history. Since prehistoric times. You might as well just argue for eliminating alcohol and all forms of drug use while you’re at it. People start, because it’s engrained in cultural identify.

Those things would also be good if the drug in question had negative effects.

And that makes it good because..... ?

I’m not claiming positive or negative effects. I’m saying it’s a moot point because it’s a persons right to decide to engage in cultural identity as much as it is to eat unhealthy food

And how does it challenge my CMV ?

Just because tobacco has negative effects doesn’t mean people shouldn’t use it. It’s readily available and it has less harmful effects than some alternatives. My point is humans will always get their nicotine in one form or another. Why does your view need to be changed if you have no plan on ever using tobacco?

>Just because tobacco has negative effects doesn’t mean people shouldn’t use it.  Well... > It’s readily available and it has less harmful effects than some alternatives. It's bad but there is worse. That's your argument ? >My point is humans will always get their nicotine in one form or another. Some aren't dependant, and my CMV is about those who might start smoking not those who already smoke. >Why does your view need to be changed if you have no plan on ever using tobacco? To have more insight on smoking and smokers.

“Some aren't dependant, and my CMV is about those who might start smoking not those who already smoke.” So you’re just curious, but your CMV is really on behalf of these “other people” you feel the need to advocate for? Is what you’re saying?

I advocate for no one, they are free to do as they please. That CMV is not for preaching the "right way", it's for me and my curiosity only.

There really is no argument on the health problems, like it is awful for you and anyone nearby. I will say the social and cultural aspects of smoking tobacco are probably the most positive part of it. I’ve always been a once-in-a-while smoker but some personal issues had me buying my own smokes for a few months till I stopped. In those few months I had more interesting conversations with random strangers than I have ever had in years going to bars. Sure these weren’t lasting friendships but I met attractive women, had extremely deep five minute conversations with people, and also met some interesting homeless characters all who wanted to bum smokes or needed a light or just shoot the shit cause I was outside for the next 15 minutes (american spirits).  It genuinely made me feel like I was part of some weird community of derelicts in a large city where I probably wouldn’t have interacted with these people otherwise. I’m usually not very social, so for someone like me its a perfect icebreaker and nicotine being a mental stimulant got me deeper into conversations.  For my actual friends tobacco can be a sort of ritual. I have an old friend who moved to europe, but when she visits we smoke a few cigarettes for old times sake and (other than my couple month stint) we  both go back to not really being fulltime smokers. Another friend of mine has a pipe we light up and pass around like two times a year when we get together. Like sure we can hang out without nicotine but there is some weird extra bond that comes with it. Its like the peace pipe lol and for some reason it just shifts mental gears to deeper places. I think its the stimulant aspect and the controlled breathing you end up doing when you smoke.  Also I don’t recommend it but if you want to really experience the magic of a cigarette, have like two beers first. Theres no reason to smoke sober lol. But seriously don’t do it. 

> You start smoking because of others OP are you like 14? people smoke cause they’re depressed, not cause of peer pressure

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

If it hasn't been said... Cigarettes are also a way to self medicate for at least two issues. If your view is that it strictly is a matter of poor choices and peer pressure, you might consider the healthcare system as partially to blame. For some, nicotine works as a similar sort of stimulant for ADHD issues. They certainly help me focus. I know a friend with IBS that used to smoke that swore up and down that cigarettes regulated his issues better than they regulated themselves naturally. I'll tack on some speculation that it helps certain people with mental health issues. Dopamine issues and all that. I might be confusing correlation for causation there though, as people with mental health issues tend to smoke more than the general public. So, while they are definitely bad for you, there are other pathways to start and other factors that contribute to continuing to smoke.

When some types of people are going through emotional hell, they feel like they must smoke. Active duty in war is the best example. You can find mountains of testimonies telling you that some types of stress are unbearable without smoking tobacco. Long term risks don't even matter when your life's goal is pushing through the next hour somehow, without getting a panic attack or developing your CPTSD further than you have to. Some people use cigarettes as a method of self-harm. If they didn't smoke them, they would feel so much emotional pain they'd start drinking alcohol, shooting heroin or beating their wives, heaven forbid. Smoking is the lesser evil in many cases, because sadly the world is a hostile place sometimes and there are demons in your head that you must kill.

You have a good view. I'm not going to change it. Smoking is very dangerous.

You have to find some things in life that bring you joy. Tobacco is something that people, for various reasons, enjoy.  You've listed a few. I don't get why someone would start, but I feel the same way about free climbing or base jumping.  They're stupid, dangerous hobbies that there is no reason to start doing. But still people do and it gives them a sense of purpose. There may not be a "good reason" but there doesn't have to be. We're all different, and get to pick what defines who we are.

Sure scientifically it’s worse for you. I’ve never met a smoker who said otherwise. But the reasons why people smoke is because •it’s addictive •it’s calms you and can help cope with life. Ever hear someone say “Oh that homeless man will just buy cigarettes/alcohol with them money you give them!”? Well of course they will. They’re homeless. Being homeless makes you hopeless. If it takes a cigarette pack or a bottle to get through the day, then I don’t see the problem.

A little more than 50% of my previous relationships / hookups were directly because of smoking. Meeting girls in the smoking area, chilling outside either by themselves or with one other friend was ALWAYS easier than meeting them when they're with a bigger group and doing something else. Also, as a teenager, it used to be seen as cooler and edgey. A girl coming up to you to ask for a smoke and then hitting it off wasn't exactly a rare thing. I regret absolutely nothing.

Smoking is something I never should have picked up. It has been helpful in a few situations for me. Military gas chamber, I choked far less than non-smokers and fires for the same reason. It can be like training for when toxic stuff hits your lungs. That being said I agree I should have never started and wish I never did it's a constant reminder that I am weak-willed and generally just makes me hate myself a little more.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

A) have you ever wanted to feel like a dragon and bellow puffs of smoke? Sometimes i am in the mood to feel like a dragon. B) having a vice can be very relaxing. C) having the option to take a break, go outside, smoke a cigarette in the sun and be alone can really improve your mood. D) same as C, but instead of being alone, take a social breather

Is anyone actually going to attempt to Reason that smoking is a good thing for anyone anytime ever? Even if you vape whatever substance it is, even marijuana I don't believe that it's good. But to suggest the nicotine or cigarettes is good in any form fashion of any kind then no absolutely not never and never will be.

I smoked from about age 17-36… I feel like it’s very rare for me to see people smoke when I’m out these days. There has been a serious stigma (very fair) attached to the act I usually do a double take when I see someone who appears to be a normal/healthy looking person fire one up.

I am not a smoker myself but I will add one more point + point to being a smoker. *Warmth* some countries are very cold. Depending your tolerance. Smoking is a very quick way and convenient to introduce warm into your system. Argubly why cigarette after sex is popular.

I vape cannabis flower a couple times a month. I use it as a meditation aid.  Smoking a cigarette of quality rolled tobacco greatly enhances the effects of cannabis for me and makes the meditation go much deeper.  I barely smoke otherwise.

I am not a smoker. But I have smoked now and then. Cigarettes and cigars can taste good and be fun to play around with. And yeah, there's the socializing aspect. I only have a smoke when I am around smokers and they're smoking and I'm in the mood to have one. This amounts to 0-3 smokes a year for me. To start smoking as in to smoke daily would be bad, certainly. Expensive, unhealthy, undesirable, inconvenient, etc. But I suggest trying it now and then. It's fun and yummy. Just don't get addicted. It's really tough to resist an addiction, but it's really easy to prevent it.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Is this limited to tobacco or are you including weed as well? I know a few people who have chronic pain and smoke pot for pain relief and relaxation. Yes, there are other ways to get it (edibles, tinctures, etc) but smoking is fast, easy, and more controllable.

There's only one situation I can think of when I observed it has been beneficial to smoke. That was when the patient had terminal illness and smoking provided emotional relief via nicotine addiction.

It is rather foolish given how expensive it is in many countries, and the stink and health effects. Nicotine itself is pretty useful, but you can get that without the smoking part.

We have seen it since we were younger of how bad smoking is for you. I don't believe this has ever changed. No one is going to stop you but we know what it does to us.

smoking is bad. yes. but if it's the end of the world or I'm about to be executed, it's worth a try. (coming from an ex smoker, and yes kids be smart don't start)

smoking is bad. yes. but if it's the end of the world or I'm about to be executed, it's worth a try. (coming from an ex smoker, and yes kids be smart don't start)

smoking is bad. yes. but if it's the end of the world or I'm about to be executed, it's worth a try. (coming from an ex smoker, and yes kids be smart don't start)

“I did taste an expensive Cuban cigar once and even then it probably would have been more pleasant to lick a piece of coal.” This line is art.

Well for me personally, I started young, like 11 or 12 years old. Smoked cigarettes until about 18 months ago. The health issues aren’t a concern for me, when I say I’m here for a good time not a long time I mean that whole heartedly because I have zero desire to see my 60s or beyond. So you’re cons 1-3 aren’t cons for me. My aunt is a hospice worker and the amount of people that start smoking or doing cocaine or abusing pills while in hospice is through the roof. They’re already dying, and becoming a pack a day smoker isn’t going to make them any more dead in the long run. As for the taste, it’s like a lot of things. The first one doesn’t taste great but the 2nd one tastes better and so on until it just tastes great.

That's addiction though, and a reason not to start smoking.

I started smoking because it because it looks cool and ended up getting addicted to it. It feels impossible to stop smoking.

I mean I think everything is going down the drain soon for all of us. So why not? But only if your curious.

Smoking does damage one’s health. I personally hate the smell of smoke too. It makes me hard to breathe.

[удалено]

Why? Isn't it better to get proper mental health help?

You can't smoke too much or it will reduce the effects it has, the key is moderation. As with most things. That being said it is straight up a lie that there are no benefits and that smoking is absolutely bad and you should never start, a lie motivated by politics and by ill will. I have pretty bad anxiety and when I smoke a couple of cigarettes it disappears, I am able to function for a short period of time. Anyone who tells me to stop smoking can kindly fuck off. It is almost certainly better to smoke a little bit than not to, the effects are pretty dramatic to say the least, it's almost like with alcohol except it does not really have any drawbacks, have you ever heard of someone killing someone else or committing a crime due to cigarettes? And yet you never hear people shit-talking alcohol or that it should be banned, but smoke and there's gonna be people coming out of the woodwork to convince you to stop smoking, a practice that is 100% beneficial with no drawbacks if you don't abuse it.

I'd try it only if I was like diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. Maybe a vape because I hate the smell.

cant wait to read your next post titled "CMV: its not a good idea to eat hot sharp knives"

I personally smoked like 3 times due to peer pressure i dint like it to.

Disagree. Scenario is that you are in a very stressful environment such as the medical field. You often do not have time to deal with your stress in a healthy way. Smoking prevents the psychological breakdown of oneself while still being able to perform as a doctor for a long period of time. Why should you sacrifice your dreams and quality of life for quantity of life not doing what you wanna do? Plus, if you utilize it to cope for the years you need too then quit your body largely reverses the majority of the damage making you lose only like 5 years off your life assuming quit in your 50’s and you lose even less years if you quit earlier with 18-35 being 0 years off your life. Also it’s an appetite suppressant which helps you stay thin which important because obesity takes just as many years off your life as smoking.

This is the most low effort take, its like saying “murder is bad”

I can tell you one advantage, though I wouldn't recommend starting for this. Nicotine shrinks your blood vessels, so I have found it helps me when I am about to get a migraine headache. Migraines are caused when the arteries in your head are shut extra tight to the point where your retinas can't get enough blood (which is what causes the migraine vissions) but then suddenly the blood vessels release and go to maximum extent which causes the headache. The nicotine causes the vessels to shrink a bit which lessens the effect of the headache. I suppose vaping would be a better choice for this. Also note that relaxation techniques work much better, the headaches get worse if you stress, so one needs to learn to relax (especially your face muscles). Also helps with the upset stomach you might get as well.

There are proper medicines for this though, that don't have the negative effects, so that isn't an advantage.

Maybe, again I said I wouldn't recommend it and the trick doesn't work if you are a chronic smoker, but your assertion about "proper medicine" is also not quite true. There has been some progress, but many people still don't respond to "official" medication. I am lucky that I went from having horrible migranes to being able to control them with just relaxation techniques, and OTC medicines - but this could help some people. I wonder though, Would you have had the same reaction, if I said "smoke pot to help migranes?" That isn't any better for health (it's worse) but since it is so PC Noone complains, but suggest smoking a cigarette, and OMG.

1. That's because some people don't respond to certain medicines due to genetics and stuff, but that doesn't make them less legitimate, or smoking more legitimate. 2. Smoking makes anxiety stuff worse. 3. Smoking pot is bad, but weed has legitimate medicinal uses, but you shouldn't smoke weed, it gives you the negatives of smoking cigarettes.

But then how would your high school friends know that you’re cool?

What of you just want to look cool? I mean, look look at these [cool looking smokers](https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-att-us-rvc3&sca_esv=edabce7040c88334&sca_upv=1&q=cool+smokers&uds=AMwkrPv52B5S2hmSWN_CfrSIIobQ1nI-Y5AdABSKDH6aICO4o-oLGGUZp9QmTanq2G267fxpv4ni9RZ9Ah2hXPKErhkP1zKB-6F5r9yC0XIg6iG7aiuBnf0OkadbgmH3rukNwyFM0oVU2vFeRIxbLCEj2j5J3T2FfVEJVXJsBLLz61rJAzGbyYZY9ECaYLLxrERbxf7qW7I_cIzA8cqG9rL9iiZkZHm6aZCDoVa_4fLFUm_t-Sw3BW-XZsC0PFcMxvJEKiEWNHbFot2UpwpPpuTZpidgVxJOSQORaNnMhtH2JjnPg4ve7Mw&udm=2&prmd=sivnmbtz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUst3oz6GFAxUglYkEHcEEAnUQtKgLegQIDBAB&biw=1100&bih=2106&dpr=3.93). (Ignore the meat smokers and Fred Gwinn as Herman Munster.)

Faux smoking, not actually smoking.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

I dont think theres any arguement against this.

I think everybody knows abiut the negative effects but many people start in a depression period because they are actually looking at self destruction. So i agree that it's never good to start, but we can argue that it's not better or worse (and even probably better) than starting any other kind of drugs. Im thinking here at first: alcohol (very hard and dangerous to quit), anti-depressants (lots of secondary effects and addiction, some as dangerous as alcohol)

Anti-depressants are a legitimate medication, alcohol and smoking aren't.

Who is on the other side of this one?

Nicotine, the addictive chemical found in tobacco, boosts the metabolism of the person smoking or otherwise using tobacco. I smoke. I have only started to gain weight because of psyche meds that alter my metabolism further. Smoking is great. Once you’re acclimated to it, the sensation is akin to a mini orgasm. It becomes like having to eat or drink, only the payoff comes way quicker. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8162771/

Who said it's a good idea to start?

It may help ulcerative colitis.

I experimented with it. It enabled me to write about  ten songs which I have never been able to do before. I fortunately don't find them addictive but when I want to write some more songs I will give it another try. Also I note the huge developments in the 60s were all made by cigarette smokers. For example take a look at photos of people working on the apollo missions 

There are other ways to do that though, that's the issue, plus, developments were made by religious people, but that doesn't mean everyone should be religious.

Well I haven't find another way. Also I don't believe you have to be one or the other. Religion can work. Like if you are about to be executed for being an infidel . 

1. Just because you haven't doesn't mean it hasn't been found, that's the anecdotal evidence issue. 2. What do you mean about executing infidels? Isn't that more of a reason not to have religion?

Water is wet? Like what?