cigarette smoke allergy myth

For years ive heard people say they where allergic to cigarette smoke and each time i heard that i had to giggle , especially if they insist thier doctor diagnosed them with the allergy and gave them medication for it. The reason i laugh at their statements is from what ive read of journals there are no allergens in smoke , the particles themselves that are large enough to be allergens are actually burned up. Granted there are irritants in smoke that people can be hyper sensitive to but i cant think of a medication that would help with that other then avoiding smokers. Ive looked online to find studies that prove that cigarette smoke contains irritants not allergens so therefore you cant be allergic to smoke however the ones i find always have some questionable source. Im in no way trying to say smoking is good for you but im trying to show proof that smoke does not in fact contain allergens.


The main reason im doing this is because of an incident that happened to me while i was on vacation. I was standing in line on the sidewalk on a busy street to enter a museum and i was smoking a cigarette. The wind was blowing in the opposite direction of those who where in line and i made it a point to step somewhat out of the line. This area could in no way be considered a confined area and as i said i was making a conscience effort to avoid my smoke from bothering others. As soon as i lit up i saw a lady standing 50ft + away from me turn around and immediately start coughing. She promptly walked back to me and informed me of how her and her daughter had terrible allergies for smoke and how i was making them deathly sick. Now again let me emphasize the smoke was going the opposite direction she was in and did i forget to mention we where in gatlinburg Tennessee? which is located in the smoky mountains where it should be allergen heaven nonstop. Anyway i was polite and did extinguish my cigarette but this still wasnt enough to make her happy, my kids where near the front of the line playing with one of the sidewalk attractions and overheard the lady ask at the ticket counter if the guy taking tickets could make sure that my entry into the museum was delayed since the smell of smoke on me was enough to make her and her daughter violently sick due to allergies. This struck a nerve in me,('')
i admit that maybe i was wrong to do it but once i got in the museum i made it a point to skip a few attractions and catch up to her and do everything but hump her leg to get close to her.

I found it ironic that during the museum tour a gentleman that entered about the same time as her kept farting and it stunk so bad my eyes almost watered ('')
yet i was the stinky one? There is the argument that i dont have to smoke and that gas is a natuaral body occurrence but at the same time he could have taken beano with his meal just as i could not have smoked.



[edit on 3-8-2006 by minniescar]

[edit on 3-8-2006 by minniescar]

[edit on 3-8-2006 by minniescar]

Originally posted by minniescar
I found it ironic that during the museum tour a gentleman that entered about the same time as her kept farting and it stunk so bad my eyes almost watered ('

')
yet i was the stinky one?

That's funny and yet horrible at the same time! I've heard people say that for years and it always made me wonder. I find it amusing that this women was 50 feet away and up-wind and still thought you smoking was going to make her deathly ill. Some people just like to complain I guess.

Or maybe people are just tired of our taxes going to take care of easily preventable diseases you developed by sucking on a tube of paper stuffed with burning toxins?

You could have pointed out to her that one way to overcome allergies is to become aclimated to the allergen.

Whenever I move to a new area of the country I display mild allergy symptoms. They go away in a few days or weeks, as my immune system adjusts to the environment.

I have to wonder if this woman is aware of the fact that Canada spews more smoke into the air in a single day of forest fires, than a trillion smokers could produce in a trillion years.

People want to treat smokers like second-class citizens, and the only way to counter that push is to stand firm, and back up your decision (to smoke) with facts and logic. I smoke to increase my synaptic response and augment my memory to prevent Alzheimer's. I also use cigarettes as a way to increase dopamine levels and stave off depression without resorting to prescription drugs. They have the fringe benefit of reducing hunger pangs, and since I have a slow metabolism, this keeps me from over-eating and getting any fatter than I already am.

So when whining people with retarded immune systems (people who would be DEAD were it not for the wonders of modern medicine) give me flak for my behavior, I'm loaded and primed to fire right back at them.

People got a problem with smoke in the air? Blame Canada.

[edit on 3-8-2006 by WyrdeOne]

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I have to wonder if this woman is aware of the fact that Canada spews more smoke into the air in a single day of forest fires, than a trillion smokers could produce in a trillion years.

You are aware that forest fires don't contain the chemicals that cigarettes do, right? Like ammonia, nitrosamines (a carcinogen), cadmium, nickel, polonium-210, etc.

Little bit of a difference between forest fire smoke and cigarette smoke.

People want to treat smokers like second-class citizens, and the only way to counter that push is to stand firm, and back up your decision (to smoke) with facts and logic.

So it's logical to suck burning hot ammonia fumes into your lungs? Wow.

I smoke to increase my synaptic response and augment my memory to prevent Alzheimer's. I also use cigarettes as a way to increase dopamine levels and stave off depression without resorting to prescription drugs. They have the fringe benefit of reducing hunger pangs, and since I have a slow metabolism, this keeps me from over-eating and getting any fatter than I already am.

You realise that exercise does all of the things you just mentioned, right? Daily exercise raises dopamine levels naturally, acts as a mild appetite suppressant, helps regulate biochemical pathways, coordinates muscles, and keeps your basal metabolism at a low level. All without breathing heavy metals in my face or making me pay taxes to support your lazy, cancer-ridden body =).

Mariella

Or maybe people are just tired of our taxes going to take care of easily preventable diseases you developed by sucking on a tube of paper stuffed with burning toxins?

Obviously you are unfamiliar with how smoking works , see unlike nonsmokers who get sick and cling to life and milk taxpayer money for years we smokers get sick and die. On average a smoker who develops lung cancer dies in less then a year. Look at the statistics of the life span on smokers they die younger then nonsmokers so how are they taking your tax money? I pay my insurance and if i get sick i go to the doctor and my insurance comes into play, no again explain how this takes your tax money?


I work for a company that employess roughly 50 employees , we have had two kidney transplants , two heart valve replacments, 4 bypass surgeries,
two major spine surgeries, a brain tumor, 1 person with colon cancer, 2 people with skin cancer. This has all been within the past five years and all non smokers , yet ive been to the doctor twice in the past ten years both times for stiches yet since im the smoker so im causing high insurance rates? Again explain to me how you are supporting our cancer ridden bodies?

You are aware that forest fires don't contain the chemicals that cigarettes do, right?

you are correct they dont contain the exact same chemicals wood smoke actualy contains higher levels of some chemicals and it remains active in the body substantially longer then tobacco smoke and studies show its more dangerous then cigarette smoke......burningissues.org...

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Or maybe people are just tired of our taxes going to take care of easily preventable diseases you developed by sucking on a tube of paper stuffed with burning toxins?

Well however you spin it those who smoke contribute far more in taxes than they do 'damage' to the population in terms of health. That's very much admitted even if there is no real proof that smoking causes cancer in any large percentage( most tests show a protective effect for lung cancers) of even smokers. To suggest that smoking poses a serious health risk to anyone BUT the smoker is just denying what studies have been telling us for decades.

The reason the tobacco industry isn't bothering to fight this is that they are basically now taking responsibility for natural industrial pollution without anyone being able to sue them due to warnings on all their products. Government and industry always in the long run resolve their differences and normally not to your general benefit. Why anyone should get taxed so heavily for doing what they like ( with no serious health risk to others) is just bizarre and not the mark of a free society.

Don't jump on bandwagon's before asking where their taking you.

Stellar

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Or maybe people are just tired of our taxes going to take care of easily preventable diseases you developed by sucking on a tube of paper stuffed with burning toxins?

Tax? I think that is one myth, in the UK anyway. The amount of tax paid when buying cigarettes is ALOT higher than treatments and hospital care for sick people.

Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion.

www.ash.org.uk...

In effect smokers pay for their own care. The only down side is the effects caused to non-smokers- yet still i'm more than sure one day in your life you will benefit from smokers 'damaging your taxes'!

I'm a smoker!!!! Okay now that I'm out of the closet, thanks for the post, I'm sick and tired of people constantly complaining about the fact that they are allergic to cigarette smoke. Now I can fire back some information to shut them up. I recently talked to a co-worker that was seriously overweight, eating the most fattening, grease laden lunch you could imagine and she was whinging about people smoking and how it was gonna kill her cause she dosen't wanna die of lung cancer.
Here in Australia we pay an amazing amount of money on cigarettes in taxes and if we all gave up smoking the public health system would collapse completely becasue it needs the smoking taxes to keep it running. So I'm actaully doing somewhat of a public service by smoking to help keep the public hospitals open. LOL.
Cheers
crash

Passive smoking not so bad?

Smoking Does Not Cause Lung Cancer (According to WHO/CDC Data)

The Who Study

In defense of smokers

Had those left from previous posts and there is some good information in general. If you have time to read the last you will feel far less guilty about doing what is well within your rights.

Stellar

Originally posted by bsl4doc
Or maybe people are just tired of our taxes going to take care of easily preventable diseases you developed by sucking on a tube of paper stuffed with burning toxins?

Hold on a sec... in the UK, a pack of cigarettes costs about £5. £4.50 of that is tax. So who's paying the taxes on this on, do you think?

Still, I'm very sure cigarette is still harmful, even without allergy, because of the toxins already found in it.

I think the lady had the right to ask you to put the cig out, but then to ask the ticket counter to delay your entry is just the lady trying to be rude back at you. And was uncalled for. All the lady had to do, was delay her entry if she was that worried about the smell of smoke. Tricky situation, since really smoking cigs around anyone in public has become a thing of the past and a bit taboo these days. Im really on the fence with the whole Vapor cigs also, I can see where people dont want to breathe that nicotine enriched vapor either, but plenty of people don't see it that way, time will tell if that stuff is any safer than smoking a pack of cigs. The amount of nicotine is up to the vapor smoker themselves to choose. 12 mgs, 18 mgs, or 24 mgs. I dont know if it goes any higher

Cigarette smoke is not an allergen, meaning that people cannot be allergic to it. It is an adjuvant though, making any allergies a person has worse. If you smell smoke and are allergic to something else, it will make that allergy worse. If you are consuming foods you shouldn't consume, it can escalate the allergy.

People should pay attention to this, many people are consuming foods they are intolerant to. If cigarette smoke bothers you a lot, try to figure out why. Our western diet is full of foods that people cannot tolerate, simple food colorings or flavor enhancing chemistry can cause problems. So can foods that they say are good for us. The plant defense chemicals are troublesome to many people when consumed and if eaten regularly without cooking can cause problems which can be agrevated by cigarette smoke. I do not believe smoking cigarettes in a confined space with others who do not smoke is a good practice, it is inconsiderate. But people need to be aware that there are a lot of foods and smells that are adjuvants and they need to figure out what they are intolerant to. Like I said, many veggies need to be cooked or these antibrowser chemicals can cause problems. The smoke triggers a histamine response to things. Too high of histamine levels is no good and too high sulfur food consumption with reduced sulfur oxidase creation can cause problems.

I have been studying this intensely over a long period of time because of my granddaughters problems with asthma. I have helped her get it under control, but it isn't easy. She has been conditioned to believe she is meant to be sick and needs to take inhalers. What I am studying is how to teach her to modify her diet so she does not have asthma. I have been observing and have found triggers. Studying the triggers as related to asthma, I have found a pattern. I may not be able to cure her problem totally but I know I can lessen the severity of the episodes and reduce the times it occurs. She will still need to carry an inhaler, just in case.

Blaming this on cigarette smoke is dumb. less people had these problems when more people smoked before.

Excellent thread. S&F. This will probably bring out people who do not look at the real evidence and say that there is an allergy. Even Mayo clinic says there is no allergy to cigarette smoke along with many studies by legit firms. But if people believe they are allergic, they panic and that causes a release of histamines.

a reply to: rickymouse

Cigarette smoke may not be an allergen but it can certainly be an irritant. Tomaeto, tomato.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: rickymouse

Cigarette smoke may not be an allergen but it can certainly be an irritant. Tomaeto, tomato.

Yeah, I can see a lot of problems in some people with tomatoes too. There are a lot of cross reactions in this fruit, reactions they knew of for a thousand years before we started to eat them. Most people cannot even recognize the allergy symptoms because they have eaten them all their lives. Most of the complications in tomatoes are not really allergies either, just a variety of metabolic issues and cross reactions between other plant defense chemistry that people consume.

Oh, sorry for getting off topic, yes Tobacco, or in fact most smokes, does increase reactions in the body that can cause irritation. What I am saying is to identify the true cause.

i saw a lady complain about someone that was using a e-cigarette claiming she was sick from the e-cigarette 'smoke'.

many of these people by the way are ex smokers.