[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

If you can see this message, the SSL certificate expiration has been fixed.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 41 KB, 640x633, smokers are so fucking stupid.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9372009 No.9372009 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]



>> No.9372019
File: 62 KB, 850x400, Einstein.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Only brainlets don't smoke

t. Einstein

>> No.9372026

Too bad that human lungs are made of cotton balls and not flesh covered in mucus that is constantly being replaced.

>> No.9372040

do you think this is a defensible argument?

>> No.9372060

Sounds like a pretty reasonable objection to me.

>> No.9372062

Indeed. Cotton balls are far more durable than human lungs.

>> No.9372063

the shit in cigarette smoke doesn't just disappear into nothingness when your lungs replenish mucus.
it's either metabolized by the body (bad), or accumulates in the lungs (bad).

>> No.9372066

Lots of animals have protective slime coats, Fish are the obvious vertabrate example.

>> No.9372067

those slime coats exist on the outside of the animal. whatever debris gets caught in that is sloughed off outside the body. not inside.

>> No.9372069

The mucus gets transported upwards and down your throat into your stomach and out through your digestive tract, or is simply coughed out. Sure some gets absorbed into the bloodstream where the liver and/or kidneys process it.

>> No.9372070

It doesn't reaslly matter. You could mush a burger up and filter it through some material and it would look utterly disgusting. People aren't going to stop eating burgers anytime soon are they

>> No.9372073

So i suppose the subjects to be worried about are the timescale it takes to replenish this mucus, and if these compounds can be destroyed by the stomach.

burgers are digestible material. tar isn't.

>> No.9372075
File: 160 KB, 620x415, lung.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9372080

>burgers are digestible material. tar isn't.
I mean that doesn't matter does it? By the time negative effects start being felt you're old anyway. Even non-smokers start getting health problems at 60+

>> No.9372087

it breaks down the "yucky nasty" disgust argument. food, however unappealing to see is perfectly safe for consumption.

>> No.9372091

>the problem is it looks bad
the problem is it's a mush of toxic shit that you can't even process, smartass

>> No.9372093

If you eat burgers every day it will clog up your arteries and have negative health effects just as bad as smoking 3-5 cigs a day will.

>> No.9372098

so we can agree that smoking is bad for you

>> No.9372101

Reminder that there's no point arguing with retards who already have convinced themselves that what they are doing is not harmful

>> No.9372110

Yeah, just as much as living in a smoggy city or eating take out more than 3 times a week sure. If you think that smoking is a death sentence you're starting to get into hyperbole territory. Japan has one of the highest rates of smoking in the world and also the highest life expectancy. If you're keeping yourself generally healthy, eating right, exercising then a few cigs a day isn't going to do much at all.

>> No.9372119

>if you live a super healthy life then doing one idiotic unhealthy thing won't do much

>> No.9372120

COPD and cancer discolor and deform the lungs. Smoking itself does not. You can see the same discoloring / deformity in diseased non-smoker lungs. It only gets passed off as a smoking problem by way of the circular logic that COPD and lung cancer are counted as "smoking diseases."
>Many observers, including myself, are unable to confirm the reports that significant cell or tissue changes occur in smokers more frequently than in nonsmokers. Certainly there are smokers with no changes and nonsmokers with changes.
>I have examined thousands of lungs both grossly and microscopically. I cannot tell you from examining a lung whether or not its former host had smoked.

>> No.9372122

>Exercising regularly and not gorging yourself on McDonalds is being "super healthy"
I guess you must be an American.

>> No.9372127

you're going to great lenghts to defend your bad lifestyle choice. I keep myself moderately healthy, I would never eat mcdonalds or smoke, that's retarded.

>> No.9372133

>you're going to great lenghts to defend your bad lifestyle choice
Not at all. Just pointing out the modern puritanical attack on it is unwarranted. Nothing wrong with smoking a pipe in the evenings whatsoever. Ever notice how all the anti-smoking propaganda uses a pack a day smoker as their example? It's like using a guy who eats 5 Big Macs a day as their case against Fast Food.

>> No.9372141

holy shit we found the smoking lobbyist.

>> No.9372145

moderation is the key brainlet. there's truth in both sides.

>> No.9372149

better than the fool who takes anti-smoking PSAs literally.

>> No.9372154

>Nothing wrong with smoking a pipe in the evenings whatsoever
it is. you're putting shit in your body for no reason. and your obsession with big macs when called out is super silly.

e.g. kentucky has a big smoking problem which leads to its tremendous lung cancer rates

>> No.9372158

>I can do bad things in moderation because then I don't feel the effects
sure, you can. that doesn't mean it's not bad.

>> No.9372159


>> No.9372161
File: 2.12 MB, 320x240, 1483025506048.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Anti-smoking agenda gets pushed heavily about the same time governments start realizing they're going to need their population to work til 70 to pay for social security
Huh. How about that

>> No.9372163

the point is that there's reward vs risk. smoking in moderation risk is so minuscule that it's ridiculous to be totally paranoid of.

>> No.9372167

interesting, any other pet theories?

>> No.9372170

>it is. you're putting shit in your body for no reason
Pipe smoking is extremely pleasurable. I wouldn't say there's no reason. I keep using the food analogy because your crusade against someone who smokes moderately is silly when it's no worse than eating poorly, or not exercising. I'm going to live far longer than the millennials who stress constantly about things other people do, I have no doubt about that.

>> No.9372176

>your crusade
we're in a "smoking is bad" thread. if you wanna bash something else make a "X is bad" thread.

>Pipe smoking is extremely pleasurable

>> No.9372182

what is wrong with you? you're being incredibly aggressive towards a poster who is rationally and calmly explaining his opposing opinion.

it's because he's right you fucking brainlet.

>> No.9372185
File: 5 KB, 250x174, q5OL30E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>december 16th 2017
>someone has fucked up this experiment the same exact way as everyone else and it's not even old footage
Are non-smokers actually brainlets?
Like how tarded do you gotta be to recreate a video of an experiment you can find on youtube already and then not even alter the experiment despite how stupid it is? Have non-smokers even heard of exposure? Do non-smokers realize lungs aren't made of cotton?

Real talk how do non-smokers end up being more oxygen deprived than smokers.

>> No.9372189

Seems like it always goes that way.
>Smoking is bad!
>Actually I enjoy it and it's not really any worse than living in a smoggy city in moderation
>FUCK YOU Stop doing things I disagree with!
Like, dude, why are you so invested in what other people do?

>> No.9372201

it's amazing how consistent they are.

>> No.9372202

>Real talk how do non-smokers end up being more oxygen deprived than smokers.
Anti-smoking shit is pushed heavily in schools nowdays so you get these weird straight edge kids coming out thinking they're morally superior because they don't smoke.

>> No.9372212
File: 29 KB, 485x298, sb.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Are non-smokers actually brainlets?
>The beagles were strapped side-by-side to a long bench, in a rather unnatural upright position. They were fitted with face masks, which forced them to inhale and exhale smoke from lighted cigarettes. A mechanical device lit a new cigarette and dropped it into the air line, as soon as an old one was used up. Although the Surgeon General later claimed that the smoking machines did not force animals to inhale and exhale deeply, the newsreel footage sure made it look as if the dogs were inhaling and exhaling very deeply.
>Whatever the case, in the 1971 Report, the Surgeon General conceded that the experiments with dogs, using smoking machines, had failed. However, also in the 1971 Report, the SG described a new experiment, conducted by a government physician, Oscar Auerbach, and others, in which the Beagles were forced to smoke in what the SG described as a "more natural" manner.
>Specifically, Auerbach claimed to have slit the throats of 78 Beagles and inserted tracheotomies. He claimed that he had been able to train the dogs to smoke cigarettes through those tracheotomies. A table was presented, showing the number of dogs that managed to survive for 875 days, smoking either regular cigarettes or filter tips or no cigarettes at all. Amongst the 8 controls who did not smoke, there were no deaths. Among the smokers, however, there were 24 deaths from various causes, variously listed as "aspiration of food", lung fibrosis, etc.

>> No.9372216

you doubled down holy shit. you need your oxygen immediately.

>They were fitted with face masks, which forced them to inhale and exhale smoke from lighted cigarettes. A mechanical device lit a new cigarette and dropped it into the air line, as soon as an old one was used up.
you completely missed the smoking anon's point. unreal.

>> No.9372218
File: 241 KB, 362x480, maga_pepe_large.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Holy shit this actually makes me want to assault non-smokers.

>> No.9372219

Learn to read, I'm agreeing with him and arguing against the anti-smokers you brainlet.

>> No.9372221
File: 63 KB, 501x721, lobotomy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

my bad. xd

>> No.9372222
File: 87 KB, 957x621, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

All smokers should be publicly lynched at the stake for their crime of polluting mankind's genepool.

>> No.9372227
File: 67 KB, 500x672, Smoking soldier.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sure anon

>> No.9372259

I fucking hate these (((experiments))) they're so half assed.
>Device not actually simulating breathing - no exhalation
>Medium is kept in glass, where you can watch the whole thing but also which gives rise to condensation
>Cotton balls somehow are supposed to = lung tissue which is so fucking lazy
I mean ffs fucking ground beef has closer resemblance to a human lung than cotton balls, the absolute most absorbent fucking little shits ever. I mean if u really want to see what a ciggy does to the human lungs there are photographs of cancerous smoker lungs a click away and yes it's absolutely horrible still but man that doesn't make these stupid videos any better

>> No.9372262

OMG r u fucking kidding me dud. I hope you die a very early, slow, painful death you useless human being.

>> No.9372265

At least they didn't slit the throats of a bunch of doggos and install smoke inhalation devices where their trachea used to be only to find they still weren't able to induce cancer in any of them.

>> No.9372270

Great non-argument, idiot. Sorry the conflict between reality and your anti-tobacco mental programming hurts so much.

>> No.9372277

I would've preferred that. Pseudoscience makes me pseudocidal

>> No.9372339

LMAO SMOKERS ON SUICIDE WATCH (immediate risk instead of their usual prolonged)

>> No.9372341
File: 32 KB, 720x719, 1513057821595.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>anti-tobacco mental programming
Do you even realize who you're starting to sound like? I don't need to form an argument for something that is concrete. Cigarettes cause lung cancer. Water is wet. People are stupid idiots that will defend their bad habits at no cost. These things are concensus

>> No.9372347

Why do non-smokers get lung cancer as well?

>> No.9372359


Bumping this thread to show off this teenage brainlet's post

>> No.9372378

Secondhand lol. No but really, there is enough shit in the air to give rise to mutating cells, believe me. I find it insane that we're not all dead right now.

>> No.9372380

>this teenage brainlet's
*your post

>> No.9372456

This thread actually made me gain sympathy for smokers because of the obnoxious sperg.

>> No.9372472


>Pipe smoking is extremely pleasurable

>Pipe smoking is extremely pleasurable
Ignoring the fact that leaf tobacco for pipes or cigars isnt the same as cigarettes, this is identical to telling someone they are disgusting because they like black coffee while you prefer cream. re t.child

>> No.9372474

smokers are a burden on society

>> No.9372479

>what is ciliary dyskinesia

>> No.9372482

lmao this is amazing

>> No.9372497

>le what about this extremely rare disease xD
>gotcha! i fucking love science!
simply ebin

>> No.9372525

So you're saying all the demonstrations of what happens to lungs or actually observations of lungs in cadavers of people that smoked are faked as part of some anti smoking conspiracy?

>> No.9372527

Delicious chocolate chip cookie

>> No.9372533

>why do people who don't eat shit get sick as well? Checkmate anti shit eating shills

>> No.9372548

Yeah but should have immediately lost it after they started bringing in flat earthier tier arguments.

>> No.9372554

I honestly didn't realize smokers had this much of a victim complex.

>> No.9372573

>someone dies in a fire or a coal mine
>"wow look at this smoker lung u shudn't smoke. is bad 4 u"

>> No.9372662

>Soldier, so probably retarded
Checks out

>> No.9372760

THIS. God I don't even want to get started on it shit gets me so furious. Absolutely disgusting habit that is an intrusion on others' healthy choices

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.