Tobacco use declining despite industry interference: WHO
(news.un.org)
from alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 22 Jan 2024 05:57
https://lemmy.world/post/11024956
from alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to world@lemmy.world on 22 Jan 2024 05:57
https://lemmy.world/post/11024956
#world
threaded - newest
Good
Fuck cigarettes. Vaping is the new thing now đ
Edit: woah, I meant it as a joke. Guess I deserve all the downvotes for not clarifying.
Hard metals > tobacco
Fuck cigarettes AND fuck vaping. I fucking hate how many people vape at gigs and in line to places. Like fuck off, donât bring me into your bad decisions, keep them to yourself.
I agree with you that inconsiderate vapers need to fuck off, but when used for its intended purpose, helping adults quit smoking, vaping literally saves lives.
I tried every other smoking cessation method including prescription medication for 10 out of the 18 years I smoked but it just didnât work for me.
Then I went from cigarettes to vaping high nicotine to gradually tapering off until I was vaping nicotine free and then not at all. I havenât smoked OR vaped for over 3 years now.
Vaping is not intended as a smoking cessation product, it is a cigarette alternative. It happens to help people quit cigarettes, but the tobacco industry does not give two shits whether it does or doesnât. Vaping is addictive and still pretty bad for you.
There are no studies that have shown yet that vaping is bad for you long termâŠand donât send over the studies with the popcorn lung or the study of them literally burning a dry wick.
Nobody gives a shit what it was intended for when it helps people kick two pack a day 25 year cigarette habits.
Like me. And a few others in this very postâs comment section.
Iâm glad theyâre helping you kick cigarettes. Vapes are an addictive nicotine product, they werenât created to do anything but get nicotine into people of all ages.
Sorry, but your opinion doesnât match reality in this case.
businessinsider.com/history-of-vaping-who-inventeâŠ
The inventor of vape juice and the methods for vaping it, was a doctor who was trying to kick his own habit.
And it is not âhelpingâ me. It helped. Iâve been off cigs 7 years, and vape for 2.
Thatâs just factually inaccurate.
By better simulating the habit than other methods. You donât have to be a rocket scientist to make the connection. You have to be a special kind of stupid to confidently deny it, though.
True, but theyâre not the ones who invented vapes. In fact, they and organizations sponsored by the sales of âtraditionalâ smoking cessation products were the most ardent advocates for outlawing vapes, for obvious reasons. That some of them have bought Juul and other vape companies is just a cynical way of getting rid of the competition by devouring it.
Which is why itâs meant for adult smokers only. Itâs still nowhere near as addictive and harmful as tobacco, though, so even if you DO accidentally replace one addiction with another, youâre still better off than if you had continued smoking.
That is the best way for the transition. I clearly wouldnât have an issue with that kind of vaper because theyâre not ripping fat ones in my face and instead trying to better themselves. Like you did. You should be proud, I canât imagine itâs that easy to get off of an addiction.
Thanks, I AM kinda proud of it, heh. Like all addiction, though, you canât do it before youâre ready and have the exact kind of help you need.
About a month after I quit smoking with the help of vapes, I quit drinking with the help of a one week anxiety medication regimen my GP prescribed for the mental withdrawals (in spite of being a way too heavy drinker for many years, I was lucky enough to never get physical withdrawals).
With alcohol, I had tried a few different kinds of counseling, trying to force myself not to drink and even being forced to take antabus which can make you really sick if you drink on it, but all of it was either bad timing, a bad method for me or both.
Sorry if that was too much of a tangent lol, I can tend to veer verbose a bit at times đ
Nah, it wasnât too much. Itâs where the conversation landed. And Iâm glad youâre in a better place :)
If only i can say this to people who drive.
Yeah at school I see people vaping all the time. Just saw somebody on campus the other day take a huge huff of it the other day. Those things are huge. I keep thinking it might even be more dangerous than regular cigarettes probably because of its gargantuan size and the ease to just suck up a cartridge without a lighter.
I definitely think because of the ease of vaping people use it to a greater detriment than they would if they just smoked cigarettes. No matter how much better a single vape puff is compared to a cigarette puff, for some, one in every ten breaths is around their vape it seems. That, long term is going to fuck shit up, surely.
I definitely think flavored vapes should not exist. The point of e cigs and vapes were to transition tobacco cigarette smokers to quit smoking. Having flavored vapes with shiny packaging appeal to little kids a lot so theyâre keeping addicts on with nicotine in another form and introducing younger generations to more dangerous habits. These things pop up in middle schools and high schools all the time, sometimes even in elementary. Itâs a terrible issue for schools around my area.
You know who the VAST majority of people using flavored vapes are? Adults trying to quit smoking.
The flavor makes quitting easier for adults both by making the vape taste good AND by making cigarettes taste much worse in comparison.
When I first started vaping many years ago when the technology was in its infancy, I started with tobacco flavor. The taste being almost the same made it much more tempting to go back to cigarettes since they have additives in addition to nicotine to make them more addictive.
When doing flavored vaping though? Taking a drag on a cigarette tastes absolutely AWFUL. As bad as it tastes to someone whoâs never smoked before, if not worse.
Without flavors thereâs a big chance I wouldnât have been able to quit 3 years plus change ago and Iâd still be smoking today, shortening my life by decades.
Banning adult smokers from buying flavored vapes WILL kill people by making them unable to quit smoking.
And as for kids, guess what? In every country that has even CONSIDERED banning flavored vapes, itâs already illegal to sell vapes to anyone under 18. So in stead of killing a bunch of adults by taking away their best chance of quitting, you could just enforce the laws that already exist!
Thatâs a unique perspective. Thanks for sharing. Really changed my perspective on the flavored vapes. My perspective was that you donât need flavored vapes, only tobacco because thatâs targeting the cigarette smokers anyways
I thought we were over it. But there are so many school teenagers on the way to school in my area, smoking. The stinky normal kind. They must be really stressed out?
If a kid sees their mom and dad smoking all the time, theyâll probably start to believe that itâs not as dangerous as other people say. âThey seem to be fine, so I should be fine too.â I legitimately heard this often while growing up, sadly. If you grow up around a bad smell, you might not think of it as âbadâ smell, since youâre already used to it.
If someone is already depressed and hates life, they might not care about the harm that theyâre causing themselves 20 years later. Iâve known way too many people who didnât believe that they would stay alive until adulhood. Some of these people started these bad habits expecting to not have to stick around long enough to deal with the consequences.
Throw in the chaos of the last handful of years, along with the constantly depleting mental health resources, and I canât say that Iâm really all that suprised.
Even today, many countries have certain types of people trying to obliterate whatâs left of mental health resources. Then they wonder why their kids are struggling with mental health.
I can only imagine what itâs going to be like for Gen Alpha when they get older, poor kids.
Think of all that tobacco farmland that could be converted to food crops
You want to convert something to useful land? Get rid of golf courses.
And livestock
Livestock is more useful than tobacco and golf courses
Debatable. Depending on the golf course location and management, there could be an argument for them at least providing some space for biodiversity.
Tobacco doesnât produce as much of use, but also doesnât come with the same methane emissions, or slurry runoff.
Which golf course isnât an artificial mix of sand, roads and monoculture full of pesticides? I would guess they also have traps against wildlife that may damage their perfect loan.
I was definitely thinking of a hypothetical golf course; Iâm not under any illusions that the vast majority are biodiversity deserts.
Not for the same resource input it doesnât.
Humans can synthesize all amino acids themselves. Any external source is optional, and outside of extreme scenarios like quickly gaining muscle mass nothing you need to think about.
If you do find yourself in the extreme scenario, you will have no problems picking from the huge range of non-meat protein sources.
Hm, it seems you are right. Not sure how I didnât know that.
So is my understanding correct in that there are 3 groups of substances: vitamins, minerals, essential amino acids; that you would have a bad time without? Bringing the total to calories, vitamins, minerals, essential amino acids, and water?
In that case I suppose a minimum number of Livestock products are helpful in fulfilling that, though as the increase of supplemented products probably reduces the need, the amino acids can still be chemically synthesized, right?. The main criticism is also the amount, we are consuming (way) more livestock products than needed to fulfill nutritional requirements. Especially meat would still be optional, right?
I donât actually have experience with vegan diets, Iâve always figured eating little meat would get me most of the way with least of the effort.
Vital eh?
Iâd forgotten that I ought to be dead.
We have way more than enough livestock. Humans should be eating less meat.
Sorry for not being clear; that was the point I was trying to make.
Livestock is one of the reasons we can feed everyoneâŠ
Quite the reverse in fact! Livestock produces fewer calories and nutrients per square meter than crops.
No it does not. You cannot eat nor consume what livestock does, period. Their entire diet is shit you cannot eat, itâs literally roots, and stalks and basically garbage your body cannot use. They also drink non portable water.
On earth we have a land shortage. If you grow animal feed, that could have also been a foodcrop. In terms of land efficiency, meat is an order of magnitude less efficient.
We do not grow crops for just animal feed, the majority of what they consume is waste byproducts from what you are able to consume. Itâs around 85% of their diet. So unless you have a way to all of a sudden eat stalks or roots or leaves and grass, itâs wasted if not feed to livestock.
Iâll try to take a more nuanced and in depth look.
As a start, Iâm relatively sure the main use of a large chunk of agricultural land is solely food production. A cursory search gives data like this image
<img alt="global land use" src="https://ourworldindata.org/images/published/Global-land-use-graphic_1350.webp">
from this page.
Itâs reasonable to assume some of the plant waste of food crops feeds some of the livestock, but if that much land is exclusively used for animals it would seem reasonable we could at least double the human plant food production with a reduced animal portion in that land use.
From a pure energy efficiency perspective animals are around 10%, so if you take half of produced plant calories and use them for animals, that will result in 10x fewer calories of animal products than the other half of the plants. This lines up with the energy spread by end human food product, which seems to be something like this:
<img alt="this is a shitty image link, that will probably break in the future. sry" src="https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fw6jULDG.png&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=4bc81a3ad1c1c139b80223918fbb9fcb28856b242703a2545e1b49b962dfb64b&ipo=images">
By the raw numbers and that coarse approach we expect 75% âž± 10% : 25% â 1:3.3, the actual data seems to be slightly worse at 1:4.
So it seems to me we are using something like 25% of the land area to produce 80% of the food, just by not passing it through animals. And if you are right then some of the animal calories are even supplemented with the plant waste of those 25%.
The raw energy approach is actually quite a good approach by now, because we can use technology to transition most things into each other. You can pass plant waste into animals and loose 90% of the energy, or convert cellulose into (digestible) sugar and get the full energy. Or use it for other things that take energy like drug production. Using the plant waste on animals still brings that opportunity cost that means more land is used in other places to get the cellulose for those alternative uses, or to produce sugar the old fashioned way from more dedicated crops.
Traditionally you had land that you could not use for agriculture but could use to graze goats, you had plant material you could not use for anything but feeding animals. Animals were our bioreactors to transform that material or land into usable products. Now we have better chains of use.
The energy approach will finally be complete when we can turn plant material straight into animal products, with methods like lab grown meat or artificial milk, but we are not there yet. When we are, the energy balance of those should be close to that of plants and this entire problem simplifies greatly.
much of the land that is attributed to animal agriculture is grazing land, and is not suitable for growing crops.
much of the waste that is fed to animals does not have a better use, as you are suggesting. for instance, soycake. no one wants to eat that, but itâs high protein. giving it to animals conserves resources.
this assumes some sort of centralized economy, instead of letting farmers give wasted apples to their neighbors horses or whatever.
And cemeteries
And enough pavement that anyone can store their cars close to pretty much any destination they have in mind.
Por que no los dos?
Do we actually need more food crops though?
I thought we already produced enough food to feed the whole planet. Distribution is the real problem.
Smaller more diverse farms would help, but the grocery stores would have to learn how seasonal, regional crops work. Instead of offering pineapples, kiwis, and strawberries 365 days a year.
Why canât they? At least in North America refrigerated railcars make year round fresh fruit an option. Plus frozen fruit is an option anywhere
I vote just keeping the fields dormant so we can actually do crop rotation and stave off massive crop failures.
Personally Iâd like to see the fields replaced with the forests that were cut down for them in the first place but thatâs not likely to happen
Theyâd just be replaced by soft woods to be cut down every 20 or 30 years. Trees are nice, but North Americaâs old growth forests are what they are at this point. Theyâre not a great carbon sink, either.
IMHO, trees got stuck in the mind of the environmentalist movement in the 1970s, and it distracted from a bunch of things that were way more important. Iâd almost call it controlled opposition.
Arguably we need more algae and other water dwelling carbon sinks.
Would work if we decentralized the fuck out of everything and people could live in the forests
Iâm proud to say I am 3 months smoke free, after 15 years smoking without a break!
There ya go, keep it up! And if no one has said it, I am proud of you.
I can confirm, no one has said you are proud of them.
Weâre counting on you now
I quit in September! Congrats! Quitting smoking was way harder than quitting drinking for me, and I was a daily drunk functional alcoholic for years.
Wow, qutting drinking and smoking, you must be a strong character. I donât know you but Iâm pretty proud of you. Wish you the best!
Thanks, it was tough, but very worthwhile. Hope the best for you also!
Good job to all the people quitting!
Well done pal! Keep the good work
Wish so much that Iâd never started. This shit is so addictive.
I quit cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana. Yay mood swings and anxiety! (Donât worry, I know itâs for the best)
I mean, if youâre feeling worse â is it really for the best?
Cigarettes no problem really, but the other stuff was seriously detrimental to my concentration abilities at work.
Maybe you can get some medicine approved form that helps your anxiety without the negative side effects.
Those come with other side effects
Voluntary suffering in order to bring about future positive ends is essentially integral to having a good life. Thatâs like saying to someone who just started exercising and is complaining about being sore, âif youâre feeling worse, is it really for the best?â Yes. It definitively is.
Worst thing about alcohol imo is that I can never do anything really productive. Like a beer or two and instead of idk, reading or making something or programming Iâll just be doing nothing. Takes my focus right out
I wanna see a massive dump of them. All of them. If you gonna smoke smoke weed. Fuck tobacco and anyone who thinks itâs cool. They have the freedom to choose for sure, but anyone that chooses that is 100% idiot until proven otherwise.
No ifs, ands, or buts. If you like it, you are part of the problem.
Quitters finally saw the light. People who start smoking in the 2020s are just outright stupid. Itâs not all over TV anymore, itâs not the cool teenage rebellion thing. Itâs not even hidden knowledge about how bad it is to start, and how hard quitting is. Wtf is making people start now?
Smoking weed will bring a lot of the negative health effects of tobacco smoking. Is it so cool that one may underestimate it? That reminds me of something.
Thereâs so much garbage in tobacco cigarettes that the comparison is barely worth making.
Now, yes, burning any plant material will release carcinogens that can increase cancer risk. Incidentally, this includes sitting around a campfire, but most people in developed countries donât do that every day. However, studies on marijuana smoke find that smoking one joint a day for a year gives slightly elevated testicular cancer risk, and inconclusive results for other cancers.
Possibly, marijuana has a protective effect that tends to cancel out the inherent carcinogens.
Thereâs a lot of research disagreeing
2
The reality is no, cannabis probably doesnât block carcinogens. Nor is it more harmful to your lungs than tobacco. But itâs not really clear that itâs less harmful than a filtered cigarette. I think it is probably a bit healthier of a habit just in that people usually smoke much lower quantities. But if you take a smoker and stoner each smoking 10 times a day theyâre both at a higher risk of lung complications than non-smokers. Also importantly, cannabis is not chemically addictive (it definitely can be an addiction though) whereas nicotine very much so is.
Itâs also just not at all the same thing.
An aircraft mechanic canât just go out on his five minute break and smoke a j and go back to it.
Yeah, maybe one small hit at best. Whoâs smoking 10 joints in a day, wtf?
If youâre smoking weed like you would smoke tobacco, youâve got too much damn money and arenât doing anything in your life anyhow.
The industry interference: Here have more of the stinky cancer paper tubes that donât do anything but make you addicted then sooth the addiction.
There is a high from nicotine, it just goes away so quickly as you get addicted.
It also goes away quickly when not addicted.
Source: tried nicotine, was disappointed.
Try it again!
Congratulations, you have been awarded the âWorst Advice of the Monthâ award. Shame on you.
Thatâs not the only thing they do. They also reduce your capacity for work⊠and life. I have a reason to believe that people dying from âoverworkâ are actually because:
Just a hypothesis. No scientific backing.
⊠other than first hand exp with reducing ability to work after long term exposure in a heavily contaminated environment.
What offices have smoke?
Overwork is still very common despite less people smoking.
Also, nicotine is a simulant and really doesnât make you less productive. Just like coffee wonât. Actually thereâs an argument it should help.
I wonât act like I know what comes out of peopleâs exhalation after they come into an unventilated room after smoking in the stairway just next to it (with the only door blocking anything, being always kept open), but I can say for sure that:
If it is a stimulant that comes out of that smoke, itâs definitely stimulating unwanted attributes of the brain.
Millennials killing the tobacco industry
Letâs gooooo đ„
Tucker Carlson cancelled by big healthcare before he could get the check from Philip Morris.
thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-nicotine-frees-yâŠ
Good. Now itâs oilâs turn.
I donât smoke in any regular capacity. Last time I smoked was new years this year. The time before that was October '22.
On new years eve I drank, and I thought I could keep the alcohol high going if I smoked. Bad idea, the next day was shot too. Completely fucked. Never again.
Every time I smoke Iâm reminded why I didnât smoke for >1 year prior.
Iâve been surprised in recent years how much more smoking has subtly popped back up in media. Most times itâs also not in a way that applies to the plot or illuminates anything you didnât already know about a character.
Also in sports, things like Nickelodeon getting so involved with the NFL for kids with cartoon recreations of games, etc. They are propping up a new generation of sports hero role models in people like Joe Burrow. For awhile, heâd be celebrating all their victories with trashy cigar parties in the locker room, as like, a kid in his early 20s who just got slimmed by Nickelodeon a few days before?
Itâs been pretty odd to see the resurgence in media in the last decade plus.