:
|
Not once have I ever showed the slightest signs of withdrawal and I have never been tempted to smoke a danger fag (leftover cigarette tobacco in a roll-up) whenever I've gone without a smoke. And the longest I've ever been without one is two weeks.
|
try a month, and I'm not saying everyone smokes danger fags, just that my step brother did
:
|
And the people it makes sick still smoke? Mustn't be to harsh of a sickness. Everyone that I know of after their first time has either gotten light-headed, coughed heavily for a few times or, and I swear to god I'm not making this up, took an erection. I've actually never met someone who has been sick over a cigarette, although I don't doubt that they're has been people.
|
I might have been misusing the word sick, I ment the coughing
:
|
Well, the advertising is happening right now. There is going to be at least one person going to take up smoking after seeing a film star, musician, comedian, whatever glamourisng cigarettes, and the tobacco companies knows this.
|
I agree with you here, unfortunately the tobacco companies are still finding ways to advertise
:
|
People know already that smoking is bad for you so advertising that smoking's bad for you is kind of null-void in my books. Also, I believe that if someone want's to really give up smoking, they can give it up without outside help.
|
do you not understand the concept of addictive? if anyone could quit whenever they wanted the organizations wouldn't have been made in the first place, also one of the bad things about addictive substances is it makes people want more, thus making them not wan't to quit, there are many people who want to quit but can't because the withdraw would be extream, infact I've heard of one person were if they suddenly stopped the withdraw would be so bad they would die from the shock
:
|
First of all, don't blame house fires on cigarettes, blame it on the careless cunt who didn't stub it out correctly or fell asleep with it in his hand/mouth. Secondly, I've read stories about people surviving house fires because they smoked and their lungs were, if anyone could find a better way, built up against the smoke crippling them.
|
as scrabtrapman said, I was relating the smoke inhalation not blaming house fires on smokes, also as for the people who've survived fires because of smoking, perhaps everyone should expose themselves to bursts of radiation to increas thier chances of surviving a nuclier war, or maybe we should regularly cut oursels to develope thicker skin, the lungs got stronger because they had to to keep the people alive, I'lled be willing to bet that smoking killed more people in a variety of ways than it saved in this very rare scenario