# traits associated with smokers **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 29, 2011, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214 "2011-04-29T20:58:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![jasonh300](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/46a35a/32.png) [@jasonh300](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasonh300)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/61 "2011-04-30T18:35:39Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Are you saying this would go so far as to lie on studies? In my experience, the people who I’ve seen do this are smokers in denial. They would either lie in a poll or study, or would avoid being part of the study. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/62 "2011-04-30T19:04:38Z")
This is a simple question and there are dozens of sturies/surveys that all agree on the results. An average smoker is most likely to be male, less educated, living in the south or Appalachia or Nevada, and of lower socio-economic class. The fact that the rich, PhD holding CEO of your company in Massachusetts smokes does nothing to change the statistics. ---
**Author:** ![Hbns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hbns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hbns)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/63 "2011-04-30T19:24:45Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > “NON-proprietary studies.” I’m saying that I’m sure the tobacco companies have studied this carfully, but obviously they’re not releasing their findings. > > Sounds like there may be a book in this, entitled WHO SMOKES? Then I’d suggest buying the paper I linked as it is a summary of numerous internal tobacco company documents that came to light during one hearing or another. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/64 "2011-04-30T19:33:40Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > I am biased against smokers, admittedly, but I wonder which of my assumptions about them are valid. I assume that smokers, for example, are less educated than smokers, and also less intelligent, but have no idea if anyone has studied this systematically. … Don’t know about smokers as whole group, and don’t remember the source, but several years back I read that 50% of cardiac surgeons - who get to see the results of smoke on lungs and hearts every damn day! - smoke. (And about 2/3 of all doctors take stimulants like amphetamines or sleeping aids - many getting hooked on the stuff, again, despite the fact that they should know better and many doctors can see the bad effects of addiction every day. The explanation is that the stress of their job is so great that they need some form of relief immediatly, even if that has bad consequences long-term. ---
**Author:** ![Lamar\_Mundane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lamar\_Mundane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamar_Mundane)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2011, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/65 "2011-04-30T19:40:18Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > Don’t know about smokers as whole group, and don’t remember the source, but several years back I read that 50% of cardiac surgeons - who get to see the results of smoke on lungs and hearts every damn day! - smoke. (And about 2/3 of all doctors take stimulants like amphetamines or sleeping aids - many getting hooked on the stuff, again, despite the fact that they should know better and many doctors can see the bad effects of addiction every day. > > The explanation is that the stress of their job is so great that they need some form of relief immediatly, even if that has bad consequences long-term. You’ve got to be kidding me. Was this in the 1950’s? [From JAMA:](http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/271/16/1273.abstract) > [@](#): > > **Abstract** > > **Objective**. —To determine trends in cigarette smoking prevalence among physicians, registered nurses, and licensed practical nurses since 1974. > \*\* > Results\*\*. —Based on the data for 1990 and 1991, there were an estimated 18 000 physicians, 322 000 registered nurses, and 128 000 licensed practical nurses who smoked cigarettes in the United States.\*\* Compared with 1974, 1976, and 1977, by 1990 and 1991 cigarette smoking prevalence had declined from 18.8% to 3.3% among physicians (average annual decline of 1.15 percentage points\*\*); from 31.7% to 18.3% among registered nurses (average annual decline of 0.88 percentage point); and from 37.1% to 27.2% among licensed practical nurses (average annual decline of 0.62 percentage point). ---
**Author:** ![Isamu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/7c8e57/32.png) [@Isamu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isamu)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/66 "2011-05-02T02:13:49Z")
> [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](#): > > Okay, then, how about an apology for calling “BS” the OP written by an American about Americans (specifying “Republicans” and “Fox News,” both American phenomena) about whom you admittedly know nothing? That’s the least you could do. There was no indication in the OP that you were talking about America. Your location is listed as “Outer Control”, you can watch Fox news from many countries and you can “vote republican” in many countries. But maybe you didn’t know that? ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/67 "2011-05-02T02:49:23Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Interestingly enough, on the plus side for smokers, fewer smokers develop Parkinson’s disease (a fact I recently learned). Not that this is relevant to the OP, but since you brought it up, smoking also protects against the development of both ulcerative colitis and endometrial cancer (cancer of the uterus). ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/68 "2011-05-02T03:20:01Z")
The only non-health related statistic I can recall was a finding released in '98 or thereabouts by the U.S. Dept. of Labor that smokers were slightly more (~4%-5%) productive workers than non-smokers. I can’t recall any other data that went along with it, but I could easily believe that that slight productivity bump may have been more than offset by medical/health losses due to smoking. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/69 "2011-05-02T16:18:20Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > In the US, tobacco smoking declines as education rises. And, of course, there are other factors as well. For instance, smokers tend to be overwhelmingly male. > > [Prevalence of tobacco use - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_tobacco_consumption) In the US, smokers are not overwhelmingly male. Source: looking around at life in the US. It may be true about the education correlation, but I have met or known several smokers with PhD’s. My alma mater is covered by a haze of smoke sometimes. I was back recently and was shocked by the number of people smoking near doors and on paths. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/70 "2011-05-02T20:52:50Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > And they smell bad. > > I know _very_ few religious smokers - your body is God’s temple and all that. There are some, of course, but most smokers I have known have been areligious. Based on my observations, very few Evangelical Protestant Christians smoke, and it is my understanding that Mormons also have a low smoking rate. Of all the dozens of Evangelicals I have known, I can think of only one who smoked. I’m not sure to what extent it applies to other religions. There seem to be plenty of Muslim and Hindu smokers around here, and I read somewhere that Scientologists tend to smoke a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/71 "2011-05-02T21:00:17Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > I know _very_ few religious smokers - your body is God’s temple and all that. There are some, of course, but most smokers I have known have been areligious. I expect that’s just the people you know. Sheer numbers militates against your hypothesis; there just aren’t enough “areligious” people in this country for most smokers to be areligious, even if _all_ such people smoked which they don’t. ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/72 "2011-05-02T21:55:56Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > In the US, tobacco smoking declines as education rises. And, of course, there are other factors as well. For instance, smokers tend to be overwhelmingly male. > > [Prevalence of tobacco use - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_tobacco_consumption) Not in the US and most [industrialized nations.](http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/01/us-smoking-women-idUSTRE7206B320110301) > [@](#): > > US - For instance, current smoking was higher among men at 23.9% than women at 18.1%. > [@](#): > > An analysis in 74 countries found that men are five times more likely to smoke than women in countries with lower rates of female empowerment, such as China, Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Uganda. > > In countries with relatively high female empowerment, such as Australia, Canada, Norway, Sweden and the United States, this gap is small and women smoke almost as much as men do. ---
**Author:** ![mckall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eada6e/32.png) [@mckall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mckall)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/73 "2011-05-03T00:18:37Z")
Is the argument for smoker = low educated based on the premise that the more education you have, the less likely you are to make a decision that has negatives for you? I’m curious because, as many people have come in to mention, I don’t fit any of the criteria you mentioned in your OP. I am educated, if a Master’s Degree qualifies me (not bragging, just mentioning) and I’d consider myself a fairly faithful person. I’m a Dem, watch Fox for the unintentional comedy, don’t own a gun, etc. The reason I ask is because if that is truly the premise of your argument, I can’t see how that is true in all cases. Which has been pointed out. I’d say this is a case of confirmation bias at best. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/74 "2011-05-03T00:26:05Z")
> [@mckall](#): > > … if that is truly the premise of your argument, I can’t see how that is true in all cases. Which has been pointed out. > > I’d say this is a case of confirmation bias at best. I don’t understand why people are persisting in claiming that I’m making any sort of argument here, much less in providing anecdotes to show that my “argument” is not universally true. I’m admitting to some biases of mine, and asking for hard data to suppport or refute those biases. What’s the friggin’ point of telling me that your uncle’s neighbor’s friend’s wife is a smoker but she has twelve doctorates and is a registered Bolshevik, so NYahh-nyahh, there, you silly poopyhead? ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/75 "2011-05-03T00:34:37Z")
> [@mckall](#): > > Is the argument for smoker = low educated based on the premise that the more education you have, the less likely you are to make a decision that has negatives for you? No, the “argument” is that people with less education are overrepresented in statistics when we ask people if they are or ever have been a smoker. It’s not an argument. It’s not a judgement. It’s not a prejudice. It’s statistics. It’s self-reported statistics. If we ask 1000 college graduates if they smoke or used to smoke, fewer of them say yes than if we ask 1000 GED holders who never went to college if they smoke or used to smoke. It doesn’t mean no highly educated people smoke. It doesn’t mean no high school dropout doesn’t smoke. It doesn’t mean that more education \*makes \*you less likely to smoke, even. All it means is that there is a correlation between less education and smoking more. Why is this so hard to grasp? > [@](#): > > I’d say this is a case of confirmation bias at best. No, it’s a case of you not understanding the linked studies. ---
**Author:** ![mckall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eada6e/32.png) [@mckall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mckall)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/76 "2011-05-03T03:33:03Z")
Oh please. You’re bias are completely affecting your entire stance on the issue. And the point in letting you know about those of us who smoke and happened to have an education is to dispute said biases. You have assumptions, people here are helping to disprove those bias. As was earlier mentioned, the amount of people who do not admit to being a smoker, especially due to social stigma attached, as proven by the non smokers in this thread. To **WhyNot** , my argument applies there. I’m not attacking the credibility of your studies; but I am attacking the bias of the argument. Regardless of what is or is not supplied, non-smokers tend to treat smokers as less than they are. Generally speaking. Do we really have to go into correlation and so forth? Since, it seems to me, the linked studies of smoking to lower education are in that vein. So please, don’t patronize me. The generalities in the OP are the issue here, for me, and illustrating examples is certainly relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/77 "2011-05-03T04:06:10Z")
> [@mckall](#): > > Is the argument for smoker = low educated based on the premise that the more education you have, the less likely you are to make a decision that has negatives for you? It’s not an argument, it’s a statistical fact. You could argue about why it occurs, or what it means, but not about the fact itself. > [@mckall](#): > > … I can’t see how that is true in all cases. It isn’t. It is a statistical statement about averages: the average smoker is less educated than the average person. Certainly not true in all cases. (Hardly anything is true in all cases.) ---
**Author:** ![mckall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eada6e/32.png) [@mckall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mckall)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/78 "2011-05-03T04:26:25Z")
Oh please. You’re bias are completely affecting your entire stance on the issue. And the point in letting you know about those of us who smoke and happened to have an education is to dispute said biases. You have assumptions, people here are helping to disprove those bias. As was earlier mentioned, the amount of people who do not admit to being a smoker, especially due to social stigma attached, as proven by the non smokers in this thread. To **WhyNot** , my argument applies there. I’m not attacking the credibility of your studies; but I am attacking the bias of the argument. Regardless of what is or is not supplied, non-smokers tend to treat smokers as less than they are. Generally speaking. Do we really have to go into correlation and so forth? Since, it seems to me, the linked studies of smoking to lower education are in that vein. So please, don’t patronize me. The generalities in the OP are the issue here, for me, and illustrating examples is certainly relevant. ---
**Author:** ![pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a9a28c/32.png) [@pseudotriton\_ruber\_ruber](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pseudotriton_ruber_ruber)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 6:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/79 "2011-05-03T06:28:51Z")
> [@mckall](#): > > Oh please. You’re bias are completely affecting your entire stance on the issue. And the point in letting you know about those of us who smoke and happened to have an education is to dispute said biases. > > You have assumptions, people here are helping to disprove those bias. As was earlier mentioned, the amount of people who do not admit to being a smoker, especially due to social stigma attached, as proven by the non smokers in this thread. Really? You think the dozen or so smokers in this thread “help” disprove (or prove) that a trait exists among hundreds of millions of Americans? Have you ever heard of “The plural of datum is not ‘anecdotes’”? I think your response is defensive, unhelpful and a little bit funny (and a little bit sad) as the more I hear of it, the more confirmed my biases get. If my biases are off, the way to make me feel foolish is to show me a study such as I’m asking for. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2011, 7:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214/80 "2011-05-03T07:32:03Z")
> [@robert\_columbia](#): > > In the US, smokers are not overwhelmingly male. Source: looking around at life in the US. > > It may be true about the education correlation, but I have met or known several smokers with PhD’s. My alma mater is covered by a haze of smoke sometimes. I was back recently and was shocked by the number of people smoking near doors and on paths. Yes, I admitted that I’d misread the statistics in the second post after that one…I posted, someone else posted, then I posted again saying that I’d misread the statistics. Or were you in too much of a hurry to play gotcha to read the whole thread? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/traits-associated-with-smokers/580214.md?page=5)