Originally Posted by
Unknown Cyclist
Hi Chipcom,
I'm sure you are right about causal effects.
When you say " Smoking increases your risk", what does it increase your risk of - exactly ?
It increases your risk of heart disease, lung disease, cancer, etc. But again, increasing risk is not certainty. My risk as a smoker was what, roughly 20% higher than that of a non smoker? Putting a loaded gun to my head and pulling the trigger increases my risk of death by bullet 99% compared to someone who ain't so stoopid.
Ironically my lung capacity was 10% higher than the average non-smoker - should I use that to claim that smoking can increase one's lung capacity? I don't think so.
It's been pretty much a no-brainer since long before any studies were done that inhaling smoke of any kind probably ain't real good for you lungs. Smoker's know the risk...and like any addict, trying to bully them with inflated facts and overblown rhetoric isn't going to make them change their ways. Nobody changes until they want to change...until they hit bottom. All you can do is present them with truth and give them support when they finally hit bottom and want to quit. THAT is my entire point of blowing up here...you guys are being counter productive to your 'cause'.
__________________
"Let us hope our weapons are never needed --but do not forget what the common people knew when they demanded the Bill of Rights: An armed citizenry is the first defense, the best defense, and the final defense against tyranny. If guns are outlawed, only the government will have guns. Only the police, the secret police, the military, the hired servants of our rulers. Only the government -- and a few outlaws. I intend to be among the outlaws" - Edward Abbey