Joe Jackson on smoking

I've always been a big fan of Joe Jackson; his musical career has gone through pop, rock, jazz, big band, classical and mixes of genres. Joe has sold millions of records worldwide and is a truly respected artist.

Joe wrote an interesting piece on smoking. He's a social smoker himself; he smokes only when he drinks (and no, he's not an alcoholic). In 2007, he wrote this 20 page essay on smoking. It's well-researched and gives a completely different, and lucid view of the whole matter. Although it deals with smoking, it does not only deal with smoking:

I was a very moderate smoker and almost gave up. But something about the sheer hysteria of the antismoking movement, and the various holes and contradictions in their arguments, made me suspicious. Some time in the late 1990s I arrived in Los Angeles and, as my taxi pulled out of the airport, I was confronted by a huge red billboard: SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS. I thought: even heavy smokers take several decades to develop lung cancer. Surely a nonsmoker, even regularly exposed to smoke in the air, would have to live to be about 300 to catch up? And how exactly would you know it was smoke that killed them, as opposed to, say, the appalling LA smog?

About the ridiculousness of the whole situattion:

Statistically (here we go again) higher cancer risks have been found for eating mushrooms, wearing a bra, or keeping a pet bird than for ETS. A bartender has a much higher statistical chance of dying in a bicycle accident, or from being left-handed and using right-handed things, than he or she has from exposure to tobacco smoke. I swear I’m not making this stuff up.

His approach is healthy and a nice change:

In the near term, things will get even worse not just for smokers but for anyone whose lifestyles or habits are deemed to be ‘risky’ or ‘unhealthy’. Those of us who want to resist need to get educated. There’s no point in pleading for our ‘rights’; as long as we’re perceived as committing both suicide and murder, we don’t have any. What needs to be addressed much more boldly is the antismokers’ scientific dishonesty, as well as their conflicts of interest. These things are provable in a court of law.

I urge you to read the whole thing before commenting. Any posts dealing with opinions that anything pro-tobacco is wrong should be removed. I don't have a problem with anti-smokers posting here, but read the essay first, than come up with intelligent arguments that you can back-up... If you can.

For smokers; read this and understand what he's saying. There's a way out of this anti-tobacco BS, but we have to work at it the right way. Our arguments need to be educated and we need to be aiming in the right direction. Note that the last page has sources and resources, many of them online.

The essay is located here. Click on "Download E-Booklet".

While you're there, visit his site and get acquainted or reacquainted with the man's music.

I agree completely. I've heard that all the studies that analyze the chemical components of tobacco smoke use the commercial brands that have already been chemically laced. The whole fiasco with second-hand smoke always seemed suspicious to me, for related suspicions of these scientific studies.

Just for fun, here's a list of all the ADDITIVES put in cigarettes - not chemicals, I'm talking about the ones added by tobacco companies. The real list is far too long to post here, this is only those beginning with the letter 'A'.
quitsmoking.about.com...

# Acetanisole
# Acetic Acid
# Acetoin
# Acetophenone
# 6-Acetoxydihydrotheaspirane
# 2-Acetyl-3- Ethylpyrazine
# 2-Acetyl-5-Methylfuran
# Acetylpyrazine
# 2-Acetylpyridine
# 3-Acetylpyridine
# 2-Acetylthiazole
# Aconitic Acid
# dl-Alanine
# Alfalfa Extract
# Allspice Extract,Oleoresin, and Oil
# Allyl Hexanoate
# Allyl Ionone
# Almond Bitter Oil
# Ambergris Tincture
# Ammonia
# Ammonium Bicarbonate
# Ammonium Hydroxide
# Ammonium Phosphate Dibasic
# Ammonium Sulfide
# Amyl Alcohol
# Amyl Butyrate
# Amyl Formate
# Amyl Octanoate
# alpha-Amylcinnamaldehyde
# Amyris Oil
# trans-Anethole
# Angelica Root Extract, Oil and Seed Oil
# Anise
# Anise Star, Extract and Oils
# Anisyl Acetate
# Anisyl Alcohol
# Anisyl Formate
# Anisyl Phenylacetate
# Apple Juice Concentrate, Extract, and Skins
# Apricot Extract and Juice Concentrate
# 1-Arginine
# Asafetida Fluid Extract And Oil
# Ascorbic Acid
# 1-Asparagine Monohydrate
# 1-Aspartic Acid

This is why I only smoke American Spirits. No additives =)

man that is crazy!!!! thats one hell of alist of ingredients to keep people hooked! im a smoker sad to say, lost 2 parents already to lung cancer. they were 52 and 61.
i had heard, formaldahyde was in ciggarettes, i didnt see that on the list. I knew ammonia was, and all that methyl crap! wow!

why do they mix so many things with the ciggarette? i had heard, its about quality and flavor.

reply to post by Son of Will


That's a nice list. However, it is misleading. The reality is a little bit different. In, say, China, you might have 1 000 additives to tobacco. In the US, if I remember right, it's around 700, that's already 300 less. In Canada, government regulations on tobacco are very stiff. Only 7 (seven) additives can be found in tobacco (I appologize, I don't have the source close at hand, but will try to find it). These are additives that allow cigarettes to burn even, but pose no health dangers as of themselves.

Also, as in Jackson's essay, most of these additives are found in just about anything you eat and, quite often, in higher concentrations.

So no need to worry about it very much.

Originally posted by Son of Will
This is why I only smoke American Spirits. No additives =)

I changed from tax class J to tax class L, when the almost $25 a pound tax was put on the J class tobacco. J class is called 'loose cigarette tobacco,' L class is 'loose pipe tobacco.' Most of the RYO smokers I know have switched as well.

Don't let the description fool you though. The 'pipe' tobacco is just a slightly longer cut and a higher moisture content. For the most part. Many companies switched to producing L class because of the tax.

Anyways, just a couple of weeks ago I switched to a more natural tobacco called PIIYPASI, from Southern Cross. It is a much shorter cut with a thicker taste so I am unsure if I will continue to use it.

I would like to smoke Natural American Spirit, but the tax on it is to much for me and PIIYPASI is about a close to natural as I can find in my area.


BTW, it stands for Put It In Your Pipe And Smoke It. Though I roll filtered cigs with it.


That is quite A list of additives you have found. Some of them have been banned recently, due to the flavorings restrictions on cigarettes. That is a good a reason as any to change tobacco, grow your own or best of all quit.



OP, I have always thought that the anti smoking nuts where hysterical. I've heard talk before of THIRD HAND smoking. I know it's bad for you and it can hurt others, but unless you are confined within an unventilated smokey room, I don't see much of a problem. To add, I do hold a higher standard for children around smoke. I don't smoke around either of my nieces unless I am outside, and even then I still watch where the wind blows my smoke.


Edit: Bad grammar and speeling. ;D

[edit on 21-6-2010 by sporkmonster]

I was a heavy addict to tobacco products overall. I used to smoke 50 + cigarettes even when i was 19 and until 20. Gradually reduced cigarettes to 10 and now to 1 or 2. But still i'm unable to contain the tobacco usage. Although reduced, i'm unable to stop. Than again there are a lot of things to be afraid of. Practically everything in a city environment.

Originally posted by Son of Will

This is why I only smoke American Spirits. No additives =)

I heard that Philip Morris recently bought American Spirit, so I'm kind of going off the brand - can you trust Philip Morris not to mess with it? :-(

I also read recently about the fungus in tobacco as maybe being the real cause of lung issues - makes a lot of sense when you look into it. My initial thought was, wouldn't any fungus be incinerated, but of course, the smoke travels directly through non-burning tobacco, collecting the fungus and mold as it goes, and transporting it directly into the lungs.

During my smoking phases, I'm very similar to most smokers - I want to enjoy my puff, and whilst feeling a little guilty about those around me that I'm upsetting, I feel indignant I should be allowed to enjoy my fix. I swear that I brushed my teeth and don't stink, but my wife still bans me from a 3 foot area around her for several hours until my own sense of smell re-normalizes and I can empathize with her situation!

During my non-smoking phases (now much more often), I can't abide sitting anywhere near a smoker. There's nothing worse than sitting in a cafe enjoying a beer or a juice and the sunshine, and some smoker comes along, sits next to you and lights up. Yeuuch!

I've found most smokers have little compassion for the smell and irritating nasal/eye experience they inflict upon those around them. Even the smokers who fully 'get it', still find ways to justify it so they can feel better about the fix - myself included, I'm ashamed to say!

[edit on 21/6/10 by RogerT]

My grandmother lived to the age of 105, and she was surrounded by heavy smokers all her life.

It makes you wonder. And the PC thing has gone too far.

Do not smoke

Do not have fun

Do not drink

Do not enjoy your life

Not that I am saying you have to smoke and drink in order to enjoy your life.

Just that we are here for a short time, so do what you want (within reason and without hurting anyone or anything).

i grew up as a kid with smoking being allowed everywhere, even in public transportation, imagen lighting up a nice cig on a bus today!!! today, 23 years of age, i have becomed a smoker myself.

I enjoy it.

I quit sometimes.

Its all good...

but i can still remember the time i grew up in, you know what? people was happy..the gov did not make people think about useless things like this...

Today people think about ohhh smoking is bad, maybe i breath 1/10000 of what the smoking person next to me just inhaled, maybe i'll die... and then they take a sip of their diet soda...


it's all about what the super ego allow?


Have we still not understod what it's all about.... LIFE, why worry, LIVE, your life is not about what the meter on the dashboard says...only the gov worry about that...


And honestly, even if we all lived a perfect life, and took perfect care of ourself, would we then be happier??

these regulations (And many others) do not care about personal happiness

DO NOT MAXIMIZE LIFE without a reason people, its all about just being happy about what we have right now.

YOU will DIE at some point anyway, who cares how pretty you look when that happens

[edit on 21-6-2010 by fulllspectrum]

Ajmusicmedia, thanks! Great article. Kudos to Joe for doing his homework. Seems no one else will, as our MSM surely won't. Aren't they already working on ways to demonize third hand smoke when second hand smoke has not been proven to be harmful?

Bloody worthless MSM.

So I sent this along to a few people. Funny how Joe could get all this info and put it together like this. How come no one else can? I already know the answer but it still stinks.

Wish I could figure out the key words for the search feature of an older thread....

It had to do with the ratio of ppl that die from everything from cigs to guns to doctors yes doctors...kill more ppl a year than cigs and car accident combined if I remember correctly..maybe someone has the thread bookmarked for my pleasure..."wishfull thinking"

The hysteria of the anti-smoking group never ceases to amaze me. When I was being treated for breast cancer, my oncologist strongly suggested that I quit smoking. I asked why and he replied, "Isn't this enough of a wake up call?" I told him it would be if I had been smoking through my nipples. That was 15 years ago.

Originally posted by Son of Will
I agree completely. I've heard that all the studies that analyze the chemical components of tobacco smoke use the commercial brands that have already been chemically laced. The whole fiasco with second-hand smoke always seemed suspicious to me, for related suspicions of these scientific studies.

Just for fun, here's a list of all the ADDITIVES put in cigarettes - not chemicals, I'm talking about the ones added by tobacco companies. The real list is far too long to post here, this is only those beginning with the letter 'A'.
quitsmoking.about.com...

# Acetanisole
# Acetic Acid
# Acetoin
# Acetophenone
# 6-Acetoxydihydrotheaspirane
# 2-Acetyl-3- Ethylpyrazine
# 2-Acetyl-5-Methylfuran
# Acetylpyrazine
# 2-Acetylpyridine
# 3-Acetylpyridine
# 2-Acetylthiazole
# Aconitic Acid
# dl-Alanine
# Alfalfa Extract
# Allspice Extract,Oleoresin, and Oil
# Allyl Hexanoate
# Allyl Ionone
# Almond Bitter Oil
# Ambergris Tincture
# Ammonia
# Ammonium Bicarbonate
# Ammonium Hydroxide
# Ammonium Phosphate Dibasic
# Ammonium Sulfide
# Amyl Alcohol
# Amyl Butyrate
# Amyl Formate
# Amyl Octanoate
# alpha-Amylcinnamaldehyde
# Amyris Oil
# trans-Anethole
# Angelica Root Extract, Oil and Seed Oil
# Anise
# Anise Star, Extract and Oils
# Anisyl Acetate
# Anisyl Alcohol
# Anisyl Formate
# Anisyl Phenylacetate
# Apple Juice Concentrate, Extract, and Skins
# Apricot Extract and Juice Concentrate
# 1-Arginine
# Asafetida Fluid Extract And Oil
# Ascorbic Acid
# 1-Asparagine Monohydrate
# 1-Aspartic Acid

This is why I only smoke American Spirits. No additives =)

Thank you for your post on all the additives. In my view this should be scrutinized more closely. Somehow the anti smoking community has not focused much on the toxic addditives to nicotine. Nicotine is bad enough, but thee combinations of these chemicals could be devastating.

reply to post by ajmusicmedia


There's a couple of things he over looks.
The first being that cancer is hardly the only long term risk of smoking. There are many more terrifying diseases that can result from smoking such a COPD, Emphesema, ect.

Lets also examing that: Any smoke going to your lungs will deprive your body of oxygen, which is damaging.
His logic is also faulty, cancer doesn't have some sort of exposure chart that determines how much you need to smoke before you get cancer. It can be one exposure to it can damage the cells processes that will cause the cancer. Although that's a bit extreme I will admit, it is probably caused over a long term exposure to the chemicals.

I do agree there is a certain anti-smoker hysteria however, and I think in light of the health concerns it shouldn't be banned. However it also shouldn't be legal to force someone to your bad habits. That could be worked out legally, but it's just pure jackassery to require the law in it.

I think that the law has completely overstepped it's bounds, in banning smoking in privately owned business'. Smoking in public however is a matter of democracy. If people want smoking to be banned in their local community and city, and thats what the majority want. I see nothing wrong with that.