Comments on: Stogie Commentary: Risk Is Where You Find It

By: cigarfan

cigarfan — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:10:12 +0000

Lies, damned lies, and statistics, as Mark Twain said. I used to work in a building with a psychiatrist's office in it. I think about 85% of the people who went into that office were cigarette smokers. They would stand outside the door, waiting for their names to be called, smoking and flinging butts into parking lot. So what does this correlation mean? Did they smoke because they were mentally afflicted, or did smoking cause their affliction?

And now that I think about it, I don't recall ever seeing a cigar smoker outside that office. I just had an idea for a study. Where's my earmark??

By: jake

jake — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:58:16 +0000

In my personal opinion, While it is important to make junk science known to be junk, it is also very important to not become the other side of the spectrum. I doubt anyone would say that smoking brings a net health benefit. When someone becomes the polar opposite of an anti-smoking group, then they are just as bad.

I think that the best argument for reduced taxes on tobacco is, and should be, that it is an individuals choice to do whatever they deem fit.

By: CWS

CWS — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:00:44 +0000

I'm smoking my cigars for the health of kids every where . . . and yes, a tax on fast food would be fitting.

By: Patrick M

Patrick M — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:48:53 +0000

An interesting tie in to this idea was posted on a forum board that I read in relation to SCHIP. Saying that they are taxing something (tobacco) that doesn't even impact the majority of individuals that SCHIP is "helping". A 1 cent tax on every item sold at a fast food establishment would be a better target of the tax since fast food is a bigger detriment to the health of the children that SCHIP is supposed to help.

By: Patrick S

Patrick S — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:51:49 +0000

George- An great look at the issue of risk and how people (particularly anti-tobacco advocates) use it to push their point of view. Directly on point with this article is the book Smoking: Making the Risky Decision. It makes the point that in fact smokers actually overestimate the risks of smoking. So when it comes to deciding whether the rewards outweigh the risks, most smokers are already biased against smoking... but you wouldn't know it from the way the anti-tobacco forces present it.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:37:53 +0000

Good article. Sorry if this post rambles a bit. I was just thinking about this issue a couple weeks ago. I started reading up on the health risks of smoking, looking for info on cigarettes versus cigars. The funny thing to me was how low the risk of cancer…from cigarette smoking!

The way our society presents it (health care institutions, media, teachers, politicians, attitudes, perceptions, etc.) you'd think it was a 50-50 coin flip or better chance of getting cancer from smoking. I guess saying "you're twice as likely as a non-smoker" doesn't sound quite as powerful when you hear the low percentages associated with that are. Yeah, it's still higher, and it's definitely a risk, and there are other non-cancer health risks, but it's not quite as shocking if all the numbers are presented. And when you add to that the junk science aspect of those studies and findings, you really have to wonder what the actual risk is.

I'm willing to bet that Big Mac and fries once a week, the lunches our schools feed our kids, and those double lattes every morning are far greater health risks, but right now it's easier to attack smoking as the cause of perceived problems. I've come to see this as something more than a "nanny stater" issue. It's not just a political issue. It's bigger than that. It's some sort of collective delusion whereby people are scapegoating one vice for all the ills of our society. Between this and "drunk driving" we've found our 21st century witches.

By: George E.

George E. — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:03:36 +0000

Also, a critical factor that is often ignored when people look at risk is applicability. For example, whatever the odds of dying while on a motorcycle, if you never get on one, your odds are zero.

By: Mac and Nudo

Mac and Nudo — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:51:14 +0000

The riskiest thing most of us do every day is drive to and from work. And many of us eat unbalanced diets that are too heavy in fat and cholesterol.

Yet tobacco has become THE lightning rod for health fanatics’ criticisms. Why? I have to imagine because many of these nanny-staters would simply like to live in a world where everyone has to obey their preferences.

Secondhand smoke? Puh-lease. That’s the last thing you should be worried about if you already spend all your time sitting around in bars…

By: rob c

rob c — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:27:51 +0000

Great article. Couldn't agree more. I'm in a risk based profession and can tell you people are very strange when it comes to risk in their life