You inject smoke into your lungs…purposefully. And you are not addicted?
I’ve essentially stopped smoking, and I consider myself a non-smoker. Last week, I was offered a cigarette by a workmate, and I accepted. This is because I wanted to enjoy a cigarette. I am an adult aware of the dangers of smoking, and I made a conscious decision to indulge. I smoked the cigarette. I enjoyed doing so. Days later, and I’m not jonesing for nicotine. Even typing this isn’t doing it. I might have another cigarette next week, or maybe next month, or in six month’s time. I may go out drinking beer and have five or six smokes in a night.
So yes, I am capable of “injecting smoke into my lungs purposefully” without being addicted.
Not everybody who draws wine into their belly is an alcoholic either.
You throw burning alcohol down your hatch…purposefully. And you are not addicted?
You ingest scalding hot coffee/tea down your throat…purposefully. And you are not addicted?
You eat sauce that burns your lips…purposefully. And you are not addicted?
You eat candies that make people fat…purposefully. And you are not addicted?
You may or may not do any of these things, but I’m sure you know at least one person who does, and you don’t consider them an addict. If you do consider them all addicts, well, you’re either a nutcase or part of a relatively extreme religious group; in either case, I hope you find the thread you were looking for.
No, I’m not, not anymore than a person who drinks an occasional beer is addicted, or someone who smokes a joint once in a blue moon is addicted, or someone who buys the occasional lottery ticket is addicted. I know it’s not for everyone, but I enjoy the taste of cigarettes and the slight effect of nicotine on my mood. I can quit smoking for days and weeks with almost no effects, so I know I’m not addicted. It’s purely a taste and slight drug-effect thing.
Also, smoking makes me look really cool. Like the Fonz.
Are you sincerely equating eating hot sauce to smoking? I did not indicate that the activities that you have described herein are or are not addictive. You would have to ask a qualified psychiatrist.
Smoking is something no reasonable human being would do unless there was an addiction, regardless of how much or how infrequently. If you can provide evidence to the contrary; I’d love to hear it.
Easy.
People start smoking.
Presumably, they aren’t already addicted to nicotine when they have their first cigarette. This suggests that they have other reasons for smoking than addiction.
But anyone who continues to use nicotine with any degree of regularity will eventually develop a physical dependenc to it. That’s a just a biological inevitability. There are not special people who are born with ability to regulatly use physically addictive substances with immunity.
Sure, but Mince seemed to be suggesting that, given our knowledge about the health effects of smoking, that no-one would ever do it at all if not for the addictive effects. I merely pointed out that people who take up smoking usually do so (at least nowdays) with full knowledge of its dangers, and also without yet being addicted. Nor are these people always impressionable teenagers.
It seems to me that this fairly obvious fact contradicts Mince’s rather bald assertion that “Smoking is something no reasonable human being would do unless there was an addiction.”
Also, even among smokers who are addicted, and who know they are addicted, attitudes about quitting vary considerably. Many regret starting, hate their addiction, and wish they could quit. On the other end of the spectrum, though, are those who have not even the slightest desire to quit, who wouldn’t quit even if they could, and who are happy to take the health risks that come with doing something that they enjoy. Sure these people are addicted, but some of them would probably smoke even if it weren’t addictive.
For better or worse, most of us do things that we know are bad for us.
As a non-smoker, I find this interesting. Being around cigarette smoke for long gives me a headache (hence I’ve never had the burning desire to try smoking)…except cloves. I sort of like the smell, actually. OTOH, they remind me of a guy I went to college with, so there’s that 
When I was smoking, I would smoke cloves very occasionally. I couldn’t smoke them too often because they were entirely too greasy and would just coat my throat with the clove oil from the smoke.
Of course. You describe what psychologists attribute to “peer pressure” in a lot of cases. That is possibly why a lot of individuals start smoking. But I can’t imagine too many adults feel pressure, from their colleagues or friends, to smoke. Likely, those who continue to smoke are addicted.
We are left, then, with the occasional smoker; who claims they are not addicted. What, then, is their impetus for smoking, even only occasionally? Is it peer pressure?
I have the suspicion that I’m hijacking the thread. But I’m hoping davenportavenger, or another occasional smoker could rationalize why they smoke “on occasion.” And I don’t think “because I enjoy an occasional cigarrette like you enjoy an occasional beer” will satiate my curiosity. I do enjoy an occasion alcoholic beverage; but I do believe it is because I am addicted. I enjoy the way it makes me feel. It gives my pleasure. Much like the aforementioned hot sauce and candy. I concede that it does not make a person summarily addicted. But it also does not make a person summarily not addicted, based solely on the premise of occasional use.
Perhaps, if you’re going to push this debate, you could offer us a clinical definition of “addicted,” and then a clinical definition of “summarily addicted” and “summarily not addicted.”
Is this a sliding scale, an incremental scale, or the use of made-up terms?
I am asserting this very hypothesis. If not for addiction, why do something, with knowledge, that is so counterproductive to your well being? There has to be an altered psychological state (perhaps not addiction). Obviously people smoke, even the occasional smokers, for the pleasure. Is pleasure an addiction? I don’t think that question could be rightfully answered. But it is possible. If you believe in Freud’s pleasure principle and that man does everything in accordance to pleasure and against pain; and pleasure is an addiction (which is not wholly unlikely), then everything we do could be considered an addiction, even the infrequent things, like browsing a message board or reading a newspaper.
But I guess my root question remains: What about smoking gives someone so much pleasure that he does it counterintuitively?
No, I won’t push. As I’ve already indicated, I am hijacking. But for clarification: By “not summarily addicted”, I simply mean that perhaps one should not be judged an addict simply because he smokes occasionally. And “summarily not addicted” means the inverse.
This is hardly a scientific debate on my part. It is more of an intuitive discussion. And it seems counter-intuitive that someone would smoke without being addicted, absent other compelling psychological factors. That is all.
Well, as I said, I haven’t done any real smoking since high school (and it wasn’t much even then, but it was at least at the level where I would buy a pack for myself from time to time). But I will still smoke a very occasional cigarette (or small cigar, and no Monica Lewinsky jokes, please) when in the company of smokers. As in, this happens once every two to three years, on average. That “occasional” enough for you?
Why? Hell if I know, really. I like setting things on fire. I like the sort of “tea ceremony” ritualized gestures of lighting and holding and tapping and waving the cig. I like the half-scary feeling of drawing smoke into my lungs, and I like exhaling it (“Look at me! I’m a DRAGON!”). I like that smokers don’t have to worry about whether their smoke is bothering me, since I’m smoking myself. I like the soothing effect of the nicotine. I like that some guys find it sexy.
And no, I don’t worry at all about its being bad for me. Smoking one cigarette every two or three years is absolutely negligible as a health risk. And I really don’t see how anybody could realistically describe that level of consumption as an “addiction”.
Are you familiar with the term “analogy”? All of the activities I’ve described herein contain potentially addictive drugs (alcohol, caffeine, capsaicin, caffeine), just like nicotine. Lots of people use each of them in moderation, just like nicotine. Is smoking a terrible thing to do to your body? Yes. Are there a lot of people who smoke without being addicted? Yes. As a non-smoker, you don’t notice it because (a) the ones who catch your attention are the addicts and (b) when someone’s smoking a cigarette there’s no way to tell they’re not addicted, although you can tell if they are addicted if you see them chain-smoke or go into withdrawal.
I can’t provide evidence as to what a “reasonable” or “unreasonable” person would do, because there’s no operational definition of “reasonable” and I’m not going to play with one we make up here, either. This isn’t a nitpick: your argument is “you must be insane or an addict to smoke”. This Martin Hyde-like characterization of all people unlike you as being mentally ill is something I’d rather not justify by finding cites just so you can say “I still think smokers are crazy!” To your credit, you’re trying to be scientific and logical about it, but underneath all of that is a conviction that smokers are doing the Wrong Thing. I’m afraid that’s something I can’t undo with a cite.
Actually, there are LOTS of them. I bet you’re one of them. Have you ever had coffee, tea, soda or beer?
[former-occasional-smoker-hat-on]
Often, yes–sort of. A lot of occasional or “social” smokers smoke when their friends are smoking because it’s a group activity they want to take part in. You could call that peer pressure, although it’s not the same as teenagers telling each other “Come on, man! Do it! You know you want to!”
But a lot of occasional smokers just like it. I, for one, love the taste and smell of clove cigarettes. That’s why I used to smoke them–I liked them and I liked doing it. When I was around non-smokers I didn’t do it, because I didn’t need to. I never got “the jones”. When I started my current relationship, my girlfriend was pretty concerned about the health effects of my smoking. Since it bothered her, and since I wasn’t addicted, I quit: I set a deadline (New Year’s) and just did it. I remember once–several weeks afterwards, long after the time when the last physical effects of withdrawal traditionally end–thinking “Man, I could really go for a smoke”, but I shrugged it off and went on with my day. But I had no withdrawal. I missed giving up on a fun social activity that I used to like taking part in, but I never shook, rattled, rolled, got irritable, craved or did anything of the sort. You could call me an addict, but I’m pretty sure any addictionologist would tell you you were pretty far off the mark.
Why do you eat candy or have sex? I suggest you give this article a good read.