# Is Smoking Really 'THAT' Bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 1, 2017, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723 "2017-02-01T02:28:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/21 "2017-02-01T13:10:48Z")
> [@naita](#): > > By that I don’t mean the “Smoking kills!” labels. They are obviously not supposed to be precise and accurate information on the danger of smoking. I think “Smoking kills!” is more accurate than any other possible “\_\_\_\_ kills!” statement. The only thing comparable I can think of is weight and lack of exercise. Any number of things that are rightfully thought of as health and/or death risks kill much fewer people than smoking. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/22 "2017-02-01T13:25:17Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > That makes it sound so cut and dry (although you touch on it by mentioning morbidity). “Is it worth dropping dead 5 years early to not quit smoking?” isn’t really the question. The question is more like “do I want to be in generally poor health, have to carry an oxygen tank around with me, and wonder if I can tackle stairs without entering an unstoppable coughing fit… and then die 5 years early too?” - the quality of life issues are at least as important as longevity. By the same token, the human body fails with age and since smokers die younger they avoid some of the pitfalls of advanced age. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/23 "2017-02-01T14:15:28Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Who benefits from the unfair malignment of Big Tobacco? It certainly isn’t the media, which would no doubt love to increase ad revenue. And government benefits from tobacco sales and the jobs created by Big Tobacco. So why would these entities be so eager to take part in the grand conspiracy? What do they gain by perpetuating untruths? Insurance companies. We got rid of all the crappy shit that comes along with smoking but insurance premiums still go up. We never saw a societal dividend for quitting smoking. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![x-ray\_vision](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/x-ray_vision/32/351_2.png) [@x-ray\_vision](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/x-ray_vision)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/24 "2017-02-01T14:18:34Z")
> [@yezlles](#): > > Rolling your own can be far less malignant than smoking major brands. Can be? Do you have any factual evidence for that claim? I know of one study that found no differences. > **[A comparison of exposure to carcinogens among roll-your-own and factory-made...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19523045/)** > > Consumption of roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco is rising, but little is known about its in vivo delivery of toxins relative to factory-made (FM) cigarettes. To start to address this issue, this study compared the concentrations of metabolites of... > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > By the same token, the human body fails with age and since smokers die younger they avoid some of the pitfalls of advanced age. Not exactly a great argument. The data shows less quality of life in the years before dying for smokers than non-smokers. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/25 "2017-02-01T14:35:32Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Smoking is bad for you but like pretty much all poor lifestyle choices, it generally kills you in your 70s (although morbidity will show up before then). Whether you think a few extra years in your 70s and 80s from not smoking is worth it is up to you. I don’t know much about the relationship between quantity of cigarettes smoked and life expectancy > > Can you smoke and lead a long and healthy life? Yes. On average, smokers live less than non-smokers… According to the CDC, the number of years lost to smoking is \*\*at least \*\*10. [https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data\_statistics/fact\_sheets/health\_effects/tobacco\_related\_mortality/](https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/) That is in addition to lost quality of life towards the end of life, so you’ll on average be comparing a fairly OK 67-year old non-smoker with a smoker in his last year of life. ---
**Author:** ![leahcim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b4bc9f/32.png) [@leahcim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leahcim)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/26 "2017-02-01T14:53:55Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I have no scientific data. However, occasionally I arrange life insurance for clients. And from the company’s responses to health and habit data I can write cheaper insurance for someone with a history of shooting heroin than someone who smokes regularly. Funny how when there is money at stake so much argumentation goes away. Nearly every life-insurance policy I’ve been offered comes at a “non-tobacco” price and a significantly higher “tobacco” price, even if no other underwriting work is done. If life insurance companies ask only one question to adjust their estimated probability of your death, it is “do you smoke”. ---
**Author:** ![HumbleThinker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@HumbleThinker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HumbleThinker)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/27 "2017-02-01T14:58:31Z")
> [@Jim\_B](#): > > Interesting discussion I had with my doctor not too long ago. He has since retired. But I told him, every year around Christmas time, I light up a cigar. I asked him, surely there is no harm in _ **that** _, is there? He said, not at all. In fact, when he went home that day, he was thinking of doing the same. > > Now, I don’t have any cites to give, sorry. But my general impression of the smoking debate, is that people are all piling on the tobacco companies. They are an easy target, and rather politically vulnerable too I think (unlike the gun industry–for example). > > My question is simply this: Is smoking really as bad for you as the media and powers that be want you to think? Could it be less toxic than we are led to believe? Actor George Burns lived a long, fruitful life. And he smoked cigars. Can you smoke, and still live a long healthy life? And finally, could there be a safe amount of smoking you can do? Consider the discussion I had with my doctor, as my “cite”. > > Thank you in advance to all who reply:) Yes it is quite bad. I’m sure, like with everything, you can point to media events that overstate even the quite detrimental effects of smoking. But the real focus should be on the science, which when taken as a whole, correctly states how bad smoking is for you. I have seen no meta-studies or modern line of research findings suggesting that the earlier science overstated the negative impacts of smoking, such as what arguably happened with saturated fat in the 90s. Now what the science doesn’t say, is that there is a 1:1 connection between smoking and dying. There are people that smoke a bunch and still live a long life with minimal health results. But these are the exception, not the rule. I have heard the cigars are not as bad for you for this or that reason, but I have not looked up whether this is just folk knowledge or scientific fact. But is smoking, cigars or otherwise, once a year less bad than smoking a pack a day for a year? Most assuredly. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/28 "2017-02-01T15:00:23Z")
> [@Grim\_Render](#): > > According to the CDC, the number of years lost to smoking is \*\*at least \*\*10. > > [https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data\_statistics/fact\_sheets/health\_effects/tobacco\_related\_mortality/](https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/) > > That is in addition to lost quality of life towards the end of life, so you’ll on average be comparing a fairly OK 67-year old non-smoker with a smoker in his last year of life. I’ve heard that stat too, and math is not my strong suit. But it is confusing to me. I’ve read total elimination of cardiovascular disease will add about 5-7 years to human life expectancy. I’ve also read total elimination of cancer will add about 3 years. The combined value of eliminating both is maybe 7-8 years due to overlap. So if most smoking deaths are due to increased risk of vascular disease or lung cancer, how can smoking have more impact on life expectancy than the total elimination of all forms of vascular disease and cancer? Is it because years of life lost are not the same as years of life gained? Or because those years of life lost are in your 70s, and the years gained are in your 80s, and the human body fails with age so a year of life at 85 is harder to obtain and maintain than a year at 75, etc? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/29 "2017-02-01T15:11:23Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > By the same token, the human body fails with age and since smokers die younger they avoid some of the pitfalls of advanced age. I would like to know precisely how you come to this conclusion. I think if you actually knew any person who suffered from years of debilitating, smoking-related illness before they died, you’d change your tune pretty fucking quick. ---
**Author:** ![Grim\_Render](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@Grim\_Render](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grim_Render)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/30 "2017-02-01T15:27:01Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > I’ve heard that stat too, and math is not my strong suit. But it is confusing to me. > > I’ve read total elimination of cardiovascular disease will add about 5-7 years to human life expectancy. I’ve also read total elimination of cancer will add about 3 years. The combined value of eliminating both is maybe 7-8 years due to overlap. > > So if most smoking deaths are due to increased risk of vascular disease or lung cancer, how can smoking have more impact on life expectancy than the total elimination of all forms of vascular disease and cancer? Is it because years of life lost are not the same as years of life gained? Or because those years of life lost are in your 70s, and the years gained are in your 80s, and the human body fails with age so a year of life at 85 is harder to obtain and maintain than a year at 75, etc? I believe it is because both cardiovascular disease and cancer are more frequent in smokers than in other people. Hence they lose more years to it than a non-smoking group. For example, imagine a group of people characterized by a mutation that makes them extremely susceptible to cancer, with an average lifespan of about 38. If you could discover a way to cure that susceptibility, they would gain about 40 years of average lifespan. While cancer would still only subtract 3 years from the overall population. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/31 "2017-02-01T16:21:40Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I would like to know precisely how you come to this conclusion. > > I think if you actually knew any person who suffered from years of debilitating, smoking-related illness before they died, you’d change your tune pretty fucking quick. I find your condescension insulting. I’ve met smokers and non smokers. Are the non smokers who live to 86 and end up in a nursing home for three years or the person who lives long enough to develop alzheimers disease really better off than the person who died in seven months from lung cancer? By age 85 almost half of people have alzheimers disease, that is only 20% for people age 80. Staying alive as long as possible is not always a laudable goal. The body fails with age and everyone gets sick and dies in this life. I don’t know a ton about it, but morbidity is more important to me than mortality, especially when mortality just means dying at 79 instead of 82. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/32 "2017-02-01T16:29:44Z")
> [@Grim\_Render](#): > > I believe it is because both cardiovascular disease and cancer are more frequent in smokers than in other people. Hence they lose more years to it than a non-smoking group. > > For example, imagine a group of people characterized by a mutation that makes them extremely susceptible to cancer, with an average lifespan of about 38. If you could discover a way to cure that susceptibility, they would gain about 40 years of average lifespan. While cancer would still only subtract 3 years from the overall population. Yes but heart disease and cancer are far and away the top two killers. [![](http://www.live-news24.com/assets/news_photos/2016/04/23/image-4009.jpg) ](http://www.live-news24.com/assets/news_photos/2016/04/23/image-4009.jpg) Stroke is in the top five, but not as big. Either way the combo of heart disease, cancer and stroke makes up about ~60% of all causes of death. So it isn’t just smokers who die from these disorders. My point fundamentally is I do not think dying at 78 from lung cancer is a travesty but living to 85 and developing alzheimers or ending up totally disabled is a success. The body fails with age, the longer you live the more parts of it will fail. ---
**Author:** ![quimper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7c8e57/32.png) [@quimper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quimper)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/33 "2017-02-01T16:54:29Z")
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611103914466](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611103914466) > [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Yes but heart disease and cancer are far and away the top two killers. > > [http://www.live-news24.com/assets/news\_photos/2016/04/23/image-4009.jpg](http://www.live-news24.com/assets/news_photos/2016/04/23/image-4009.jpg) > > Stroke is in the top five, but not as big. Either way the combo of heart disease, cancer and stroke makes up about ~60% of all causes of death. So it isn’t just smokers who die from these disorders. > > My point fundamentally is I do not think dying at 78 from lung cancer is a travesty but living to 85 and developing alzheimers or ending up totally disabled is a success. The body fails with age, the longer you live the more parts of it will fail. I don’t understand your point. Smoking is a direct factor in causing heart disease, cancer and stroke. It knocks off 10 years of life expectancy AND makes those end years much much much worse. A recent Swedish study found that [50% of smokers will develop COPD](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954611103914466). COPD is a horrible horrible way to go; you basically slowly drown in your own lung secretions over a period of months/years until you die. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/34 "2017-02-01T16:55:43Z")
An anonymous doctor with a nicotine addiction as a “cite”? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/35 "2017-02-01T17:18:47Z")
Yes, smoking is that bad - and if someone lived to the ripe old age of 90 while being a chain smoker, they’re probably an anomaly who would have lived even longer without cigarettes. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/36 "2017-02-01T17:57:03Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > Are the non smokers who live to 86 and end up in a nursing home for three years or the person who lives long enough to develop alzheimers disease really better off than the person who died in seven months from lung cancer? There’s been [studies](http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/3/3/196.full.pdf) that find that the quality of life of a non-smoking 86 year old is roughly equivalent to a 71 year old smoker. > [@](#): > > Staying alive as long as possible is not always a laudable goal. … I don’t know a ton about it, but morbidity is more important to me than mortality, especially when mortality just means dying at 79 instead of 82. I’m pretty sure you don’t know much about it, which is why I asked the question of why you think that smokers are getting some kind of mild benefit from dying younger, which you seem to think means dying quicker. I think staying healthy is a laudable goal, and as a general rule, smokers will have a significantly fewer healthy years. You understand the distinction? ---
**Author:** ![SpoilerVirgin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@SpoilerVirgin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SpoilerVirgin)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/37 "2017-02-01T18:26:07Z")
Only [67%](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/02/26/the-terrifying-rate-at-which-smokers-die-from-smoking/?utm_term=.208c296de848) of smokers will die of a smoking-related illness. That means that one-third of all smokers will die of something unrelated, which explains George Burns, and your chain-smoking grandma who lived to 93. But that also means that if you smoke, there is a two-in-three chance that it will cause your death. Does it really make sense to do something that kills two out of every three people who do it? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/38 "2017-02-01T18:33:44Z")
> [@Jim\_B](#): > > Interesting discussion I had with my doctor not too long ago. He has since retired. But I told him, every year around Christmas time, I light up a cigar. I asked him, surely there is no harm in _ **that** _, is there? He said, not at all. In fact, when he went home that day, he was thinking of doing the same. > My question is simply this: Is smoking really as bad for you as the media and powers that be want you to think? Could it be less toxic than we are led to believe? Actor George Burns lived a long, fruitful life. And he smoked cigars. Can you smoke, and still live a long healthy life? And finally, could there be a safe amount of smoking you can do? Consider the discussion I had with my doctor, as my “cite”. > > Thank you in advance to all who reply:) You mean, is there any real significant harm in lighting up one cigar a year? No. Since cigars and pipes arent inhaled, you can likely smoke one a day, as long as your dentist checks you mouth twice a year. But is smoking two packs of ciggies daily deadly? Yes, very. Yes, some people survive into their 80s even while being smokers. Some people survive playing Russian roulette. A couple of people have survived falling out of a airplane without a parachute. Doesnt mean it’s safe. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/39 "2017-02-01T18:35:36Z")
> [@yezlles](#): > > Rolling your own can be far less malignant than smoking major brands. Those brands are so addictive,… i.e. a possible trade off is smoking can be beneficial to the cognitive functioning of schizophrenics. Hardly, got a cite? No, _nicotine_ has possible benefits. Smoking has _none._ ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723/40 "2017-02-01T18:49:38Z")
Piling on the tobacco companies? Trust me, your one cigar a year, isn’t keeping them in business. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-smoking-really-that-bad/778723.md?page=3)