Cigarettes, Lobbying, and Lacing. Is Tobacco Bad for You?

Cigarettes CONTAIN tobacco, tobacco should not be thought of interchangeably as cigarettes.

Cigarettes are tobacco + Pharma grade MAO-inhibitors and other less important, yet still harmful, things to talk about.

What is a MAO, and what is a MAO-inhibitor? MAO (Monoamine oxidase) is one of the enzymes responsible for cleaning the synapse when certain neurons fire in your brain. MAO can be thought of as an enzyme that says "ok that was nice, but you don't need that anymore" when you are presented with something that is potentially addicting. Cigarette companies put MAO-Inhibitors in their cigarettes, so it prevents your brain from feeling like it has had enough (www.jneurosci.org...). With this, along with many other malevolently addictive additives, the cigarette companies know that they can warn you all they want on the labeling; but you'll keep coming back, because it is neurochemically irresistible. No skull and crossbones, general surgeon's warning, or middle finger on the labeling is going to change your mind (unless, of course, you activate your free will).

Even nature's spirit cigarettes, which claim to have 100% additive free tobacco, still (this is speculation, because this information is well hidden) likely contains these addictive additives in the lacing of the cigarette. So they can legally say 100% additive free tobacco, yet still have chemicals in the lacing. Sneaky, sneaky, sneaky....

Cigarette companies, evil, shocker, blah blah blah, but what about tobacco: pure, unadulterated tobacco? It seems to be no better or worse than any other plant in terms of consumption. It has antioxidant (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...), and antiviral (www.sciencedirect.com...), properties. But, this shouldn't be a surprise, because most plants contain these sorts of compounds. Nicotine is relatively potent in tobacco, but it is also present in smaller quantities in potatoes, tomatoes, eggplant, etc.

With e-cigarette smoke we are taking all those goodies that come in the tobacco plant, stripping them off, and extracting only nicotine to be smoked. It is like extracting coc aine from the coca leaf: A biochemically well-balanced plant, turns into an addictive substance. Although, MAO-inhibitors were not detected in e-cigs, so that is a plus (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...).

Cigarettes should have to label their ingredients, and should not be allowed to put pharmaceutical-grade drugs in their products: the lacing or the tobacco. Their lobbyists know that a warning label is not going to change your mind; as long as you can get that irresistible nicotine/MAO-inhibitor combination into your lungs.

a reply to: cooperton

Perhaps it's the "burning" of tobacco that's the issue, since the burning of almost anything, natural or otherwise and without additives, creates toxins.

And what about nicotine? Essentially a poison.

I say continued, regular overuse (as with ANY drug) is the problem. Nicotine is addictive, and that's the problem with tobacco.

I smoked for 12 years, a pack + a day. Took me a year to kick it.

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: cooperton

Perhaps it's the "burning" of tobacco that's the issue, since the burning of almost anything, natural or otherwise and without additives, creates toxins.

And what about nicotine? Essentially a poison.

I say continued, regular overuse (as with ANY drug) is the problem. Nicotine is addictive, and that's the problem with tobacco.

I smoked for 12 years, a pack + a day. Took me a year to kick it.

Nicotine is not foreign to our nervous system, but it is the human intervention (addition of MAO-I and so forth) that has made "tobacco" much worse than in its natural state. I am not advocating smoking tobacco. And yes I agree, regular overuse of anything is not good. Everything in moderation, even moderation itself.

I'm going to smoke my cigarette and return with a more informative and witty response.

Once upon a time , the tobacco lobbyists owned Congress . The oil men could not take this .And there was a good portion of Congress who WANTED the oil barons to rule.But first , they had to completely remove the tobacco industry. They set up the Surgeon General's office to study the "bad effects" of smoking . The Surgeon General's office proceeded to run a test using rhesus monkeys . The ran the tests for the allotted time period using a pack per day on average of cigarette smoke to these test subjects. They sent their findings to Congress. They had found no adverse affects , and even noted the monkeys were much more relaxed.
Of course , certain groups could not tolerate the findings. They had to come up with something evil about tobacco. It was event put to the Surgeon General's office that Congress may have to "pull funding" for some of the more pressing projects. AT this point , the tests were re-ran , this time with the monkeys strapped yo a board with a hose taped in their mouths . A rather large hose. The effective amount of 20 - 40 packs were pumped into these tests subjects per day .
Of course , now they experienced multiple health problems. Congress could now drive the tobacco lobbyists out and make room for oil. Of course , there was more money for them to pocket from oil. The warning was put on the cigarette pack , tobacco was now evil and the oil barons were most happy .
Remember when the price of gas started to go up ?

So OP , you answer your own question for me.

a reply to: Gothmog

The good old "scientific method"...
Never manipulated, always the basis for "progression"...

Poor monkeys.

i think we should be able to sue the sh$$ out of the the cigarette companies. What ever it is they are putting in those things are more addicting than crack, or any other drug for that matter.

Ever been to an AA or an NA meeting? Everyone in there is smoking a damm cigarette.

In my 43 years I have done every drug (at least all the popular ones) you name it I have drank it, ate it, snorted it, smoked it, banged it, popped it, and dropped it.

The only one I still do (regularly) is smoke cigarettes. For the life of me I cant put these things down .

I am literally paying more than 6 bucks a pack so they can kill me.

BUT WEED IS STILL ILLEGAL IN MOST OF THE COUNTRY??

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Gothmog

The good old "scientific method"...
Never manipulated, always the basis for "progression"...

Poor monkeys.

I wish that I could name names. But I gave a promise back in the 70s when this was going on , I would not disclose. But this person was Chief of Lab for the Office of the Surgeon General , retired.
Oh , and btw , the French had a cure for cancer that had a good success rate. Swept under the rug.

This is something I've said for a while. I use pipe tobacco, local bought. I enjoy it, I don't fiend or have real urges. It relaxes me, and tastes/smells nice. Oh, and no rat poison.

originally posted by: alienjuggalo
i think we should be able to sue the sh$$ out of the the cigarette companies. What ever it is they are putting in those things are more addicting than crack, or any other drug for that matter.

Ever been to an AA or an NA or meeting? Everyone in there is smoking a damm cigarette.

In my 43 years I have done every drug (ate least all the popular ones) you name it I have drank it, ate it, snorted it, smoked it, banged it, popped it, and dropped it.

The only one I still do (regularly) is smoke cigarettes. For the life of me I cant put these things down .

I am literally paying more than 6 bucks a pack so they can kill me.

BUT WEED IS STILL ILLEGAL IN MOST OF THE COUNTRY??

Do you know why you pay 6 dollars a pack ? That is state "regulation" for health reasons. Wonder how much of that "regulation" goes in to the health system ?

a reply to: Gothmog

No need for names Goth, I believe you...

I'm not surprised about the cure either...
Knowing that Cancer is a trillion dollar industry globally, says it all.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

I am literally paying more than 6 bucks a pack so they can kill me.

Thats cheap we pay $23 a pack here......i quit at christmas and have not looked back,dirty stinky cigarettes,even if there is proof they are harmless which they clearly are not,getting ripped off for something that tastes like crap,smells awful is seemingly pointless....

a reply to: alienjuggalo

If you are addicted to cigarettes and try to smoke just pipe tobacco it won't feed your cravings very well.
That should be a huge sign that the OP is correct.
I can actually taste it. It seems to be in the paper of the cigarette not the tobacco per se, In some cases.

I am not a fan of tobacco on it's own. It's just hot smoke in your lungs. It tastes better, but it makes you feel sick if you go for the same high as a cig. It's a different animal.

Other greenies are much better.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Holy crap 23$ a pack? And people are paying it.. That should be proof enough they are adding addictive substances.

I think they should be illegal... Again I smoke a pack and a half a day for 25 years.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

lol 6 bucks. 14 for the good ones and 11 for the crap ones here in Canada.

Where I live the giving up smoking ads say "we all know that it's not the nicotine killing you, it's the over 200 chemicals that's killing you" I was amazed that they were admitting this in an ad. I'm a smoker but wish I wasn't, but struggle to give up as my husband smokes too. We grow some of our own which helps cut costs but it's so expensive here. I use to work in a cafe with outside smoking but some customers still complained but we're happy to breath in the toxic car fumes from the extremely busy road they were sitting next to.

originally posted by: Retikx
a reply to: alienjuggalo

lol 6 bucks. 14 for the good ones and 11 for the crap ones here in Canada.

I know here it is cheap compared most other places. When I started smoking they were 1$ a pack in the vending machine at the bowling alley, and like 8 bucks a carton at the stores.

I would swear to myself that i will never pay what you are paying, but if those were all i could get I would buy them.

I have no willpower when it comes to cigarettes.

a reply to: alienjuggalo

It is because they tax them so heavily....

Some people like yourself can smoke lots and not be affected,some people can smoke a single cigi and get cancer,it really is a personal thing....i know for me it was badly affecting my lungs,i smoked a pack a day for 20 years and i have found since i quit my lungs improving,i can hold my breath longer,run more than 20 metres without being puffed out,food tastes better,i have more beer money ....

originally posted by: Reverbs
a reply to: alienjuggalo

If you are addicted to cigarettes and try to smoke just pipe tobacco it won't feed your cravings very well.
That should be a huge sign that the OP is correct.
I can actually taste it. It seems to be in the paper of the cigarette not the tobacco per se, In some cases.

I am not a fan of tobacco on it's own. It's just hot smoke in your lungs. It tastes better, but it makes you feel sick if you go for the same high as a cig. It's a different animal.

Correct. I was just thinking that myself.

Also, I've read that tobacco pulls out whatever
is in the soil (more that most plants) and this
is part of the cancer problem because the soil
is full of carcinogenic chemicals.

Is there also an artificial fertilizer conspiracy???
If so, is that part of the de-pop conspiracy ???
Yes, I think so.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Brings back memories, my first and last experience with tobacco was a bowl of Copenhagen.
My father kept a pouch in a basement storage closet which was a mystery to me since he didn't smoke.
Of course I got sick, I was about 8 years old and its an acquired taste.

Have to thank my dad for that, had the habit progressed I might have ended up smoking roll your owns till the blisters on my fingers put them out "naturally".