Quizzes & Puzzles61 mins ago
Should We Now Move The Smoking Ban To Public Open Spaces?
111 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
@Eddie51
//Nicotine is more addictive than Heroin is what I meant to say, sorry.//
If I remember rightly, Nicotine triggers the release of endorphins by the brain, producing a 'high'. At least it does the first half a dozen times. Cruelly, for the rest of their lives, smokers have to indulge to lift themselves from a 'low' back to a 'normal' level. Even an evening chain-smoking in the pub fails to produce the kind of 'high' they once had.
Heroin mimics the natural endorphins but, worse still, replaces them. The brain loses the ability to make the natural compound and the user begins to require the drug just to maintain normal brain functioning. Their lows are devastatingly low, using just raises them to 'functional' and, like with alcohol, highs require steadily higher doseages (the liver gets ever more effective at breaking intoxicants down, until it fails), which inevitably leads to disaster.
If only we regarded tobacco pushers the same way we regard drug pushers, eh?
//Nicotine is more addictive than Heroin is what I meant to say, sorry.//
If I remember rightly, Nicotine triggers the release of endorphins by the brain, producing a 'high'. At least it does the first half a dozen times. Cruelly, for the rest of their lives, smokers have to indulge to lift themselves from a 'low' back to a 'normal' level. Even an evening chain-smoking in the pub fails to produce the kind of 'high' they once had.
Heroin mimics the natural endorphins but, worse still, replaces them. The brain loses the ability to make the natural compound and the user begins to require the drug just to maintain normal brain functioning. Their lows are devastatingly low, using just raises them to 'functional' and, like with alcohol, highs require steadily higher doseages (the liver gets ever more effective at breaking intoxicants down, until it fails), which inevitably leads to disaster.
If only we regarded tobacco pushers the same way we regard drug pushers, eh?
Ref the costs/tax argument. There is a tendency to focus on the direct health costs but that's just the tip of the iceberg. There are all sorts of indirect costs associated with smoking, fires etc, higher insurance premiums, indirect health costs eg life time care for children born handicapped because their mothers smoked etc etc
Actually, TTT, the article Eddie51 linked to accounts for all those secondary things (fire & rescue etc), which was why I said I was only quibbling with the 'lost productivity' element, which was only 2.9bn out of a total ten times that size.
I see no-one has challenged my assertion that, in spite of everything, the tobacco companies are still making a profit, making any whining about smokers costing the taxpayer a classic case of misplaced anger. Set your sights on the right targets and you can fix society in short order.
I see no-one has challenged my assertion that, in spite of everything, the tobacco companies are still making a profit, making any whining about smokers costing the taxpayer a classic case of misplaced anger. Set your sights on the right targets and you can fix society in short order.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles100 mins ago
Strands#265 Did You Hear That?
Quizzes & Puzzles131 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles136 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles245 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.