Page 2 of 3

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 21 Feb 2011, 23:04
by Forboding Angel
knorke wrote:
Smokers put a shitton of effort into becoming smokers.
Yes, I guess the first few cigarettes dont taste good at all and you have to throw up :?
First few? Try the first few thousand. Non-smokers are annoyingly clueless about anything to do with smoking. There is a reason that all these "Initiatives" to keep kids from smoking don't work, and that is because all the material is put together by morons who are non-smokers. And then the same idiots who brought you smoking bans in bars wonder why scare tactics don't work. Unless the threat is imminent, smokers don't give a flying fuck, and those who are tempted don't either because they won't need to worry about it for years and years and years and they would never get hooked on something as silly as smoking.... etc etc, the world turns once again.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 21 Feb 2011, 23:38
by BaNa
I've been off smokes for 3.5 months now, it was a matter of counting how much money it costs per year (about 1500$), and seeing that i have no disposable income and a lot of debt :).

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 03:56
by Forboding Angel
Oddly enough, my reasons for quitting were based upon the fact that smokes in LA cost too damn much, and I can't get my brand out here. That said, I wouldn't go back though. There is a lot to be said for being capable of physical activity, plus I think I sleep better now and wake up more rested. Hell if I know why.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 06:37
by MidKnight
Former smokers (now non-smokers) should write anti-smoking media!

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 11:08
by Petah
SinbadEV wrote:These studies I keep mentioning also found that there are a large number of smokers who smoke less then 3 cigarettes a day and sometimes skip a few days having no chemical dependency whatsoever.
That's me in a nut shell. I was never a pack a day smoker. Some times would go a week or 2 with out smoking. I haven't smoked now for about 4 months.
I still crave one now and again. I did like smoking them, but I started because I wanted to hang out with the cool people.

I think Ive always been more addicted to alcohol than smoking. Also I'm quite addicted to caffeine now. 1-2 coffees a day, some times up to a litre of Red Bull. Crave them like made when I don't get one.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 13:31
by TradeMark
Petah wrote:I started because I wanted to hang out with the cool people.
lolo

i considered these smokers in our junior high school (where the smoking usually starts) as the losers, i think everyone thought the same... they were fugly and lazy, and such a crybabies. The funniest thing was: they thought they were cool because their life sucked & they smoked and drinked like adults.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 15:54
by Gota
TradeMark wrote:
Petah wrote:I started because I wanted to hang out with the cool people.
lolo

i considered these smokers in our junior high school (where the smoking usually starts) as the losers, i think everyone thought the same... they were fugly and lazy, and such a crybabies. The funniest thing was: they thought they were cool because their life sucked & they smoked and drinked like adults.
WHAT A NERD.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 15:55
by Gota
Petah wrote:
SinbadEV wrote:These studies I keep mentioning also found that there are a large number of smokers who smoke less then 3 cigarettes a day and sometimes skip a few days having no chemical dependency whatsoever.
That's me in a nut shell. I was never a pack a day smoker. Some times would go a week or 2 with out smoking. I haven't smoked now for about 4 months.
I still crave one now and again. I did like smoking them, but I started because I wanted to hang out with the cool people.

I think Ive always been more addicted to alcohol than smoking. Also I'm quite addicted to caffeine now. 1-2 coffees a day, some times up to a litre of Red Bull. Crave them like made when I don't get one.
Would you steal your grandmother's furniture to get it?

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 19:43
by Machete234
Gota wrote:A personal disposable steam based smoking apparatus.
The equivalent of a cigaratte only with steam, without burning and smoke.
vaporizer (very expensive)

Image


Also: caffeine addcition ROFL :mrgreen:
Cigarettes are the worst addicition ever in contrast to alcohol or cannabis etc.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 23:33
by Gota
How are cigarettes worse than alchohol?

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 23:35
by Wombat
cancer? also price.

wtfux why im smoking.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 23:40
by Gota
Alcohol makes you unable to function normally and also destroys your body i.e. liver .

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 22 Feb 2011, 23:43
by BaNa
It is much harder to develop a real addiction to alcohol than it is to cigs.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 02:38
by Petah
BaNa wrote:It is much harder to develop a real addiction to alcohol than it is to cigs.
I don't believe this to be true.
Gota wrote:Would you steal your grandmother's furniture to get it?
Both grannies are dead :P, but I have been known to take alcohol from parents with out asking.
TradeMark wrote:lolo

i considered these smokers in our junior high school (where the smoking usually starts) as the losers, i think everyone thought the same... they were fugly and lazy, and such a crybabies. The funniest thing was: they thought they were cool because their life sucked & they smoked and drinked like adults.
For me its was my first job. All the people who where managers, had all the friends, through parties, had fast cars, etc etc were the 'cool' ones.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 07:26
by Forboding Angel
BaNa wrote:It is much harder to develop a real addiction to alcohol than it is to cigs.
I disagree with this as well.

Imo weed is the worst addiction because it quite literally turns you into a dumbass if smoked too often for too long and everyone here has at least 3 friends that correlate exactly to my point.

The only exception being the occasional functional weed smoker who is smart and doesn't turn into a dumbass. Everyone here knows at least 1 person irl that matches this description.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 08:12
by BaNa
I wasn't saying that alcohol addiction is better or something, but a real alcohol addiction (ie: physiological) takes years and years of work, while cigs get you sooner.

I kind of agree about weed making you stupid, but Imo it gets your ambition much sooner and that is the real bad part.

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 08:21
by pintle
As Spring's biggest stoner (shuddup peet) I feel obliged to point out that cannabis is not at all chemically addictive, and that nicotine is rated alongside heroin in the addiction stakes (by actual science dudes).

I got addicted to nicotine from smoking joints, nothing to do with looking cool.

I find self righteous attacks on my smoking to be quite laughable; I have no problem with people who care about me expressing their desire for me to not harm myself, but some of the rhetoric ppl throw at you is just stupid, I tend to reflexively respond with my own equally useless moral evangelism (stop eating meat!).

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 09:10
by Forboding Angel
Little known fact... Your system is clear of nicotine within 24 hours (which is why smokers get the need to smoke as often as they do). Additionally, the withdrawal symptoms are so mild that you would barely even notice them.

Nicotine is the excuse, not the problem.

Regarding weed, that may be true, however weed is dependency forming, just like cigarettes. Any of you non-stoners ever noticed that hardcore stoners always have that half slitted eye thing going on and always talk as though they are on morphine?

There there are the ones who never quite seem to be able to think clearly.

Meh, imo weed is exponentially worse than cigarettes. Not so much for health reasons as what it actually does to you.

Let me say this, in some way, all smokers want to quit, but if it were as easy as reading a porno then it wouldn't be an issue, but the fact is that trying to quit is like trying to carry around an elephant on your back (which is exactly why I paid so much money for hypnosis. 1 hour later, I was a non-smoker without any symptoms typical of quitting.).

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 13:25
by Machete234
BaNa wrote:It is much harder to develop a real addiction to alcohol than it is to cigs.
That is what I meant
BaNa wrote:I wasn't saying that alcohol addiction is better or something, but a real alcohol addiction (ie: physiological) takes years and years of work, while cigs get you sooner.
I think you need to drink daily for at least half a year to get any withdrawal symptoms when you stop.
Forboding Angel wrote: The only exception being the occasional functional weed smoker who is smart and doesn't turn into a dumbass. Everyone here knows at least 1 person irl that matches this description.
The problem is there are people who smoke heavily and are still functional while for some others what you say might be true.

I think this amotivational syndrome is 70's propaganda and 40 years prior to that weed was supposed to make you aggressive.
They just cant make up their minds.
Forboding Angel wrote: Nicotine is the excuse, not the problem.
Do you think some people just subconsciously want to die?
Why do they keep smoking after a limb is taken off?

Re: an invention is required.

Posted: 23 Feb 2011, 13:57
by TradeMark
I dont think you need to drink for a year to develop alcohol addiction, all you need is to get the good feeling, and when that wears out, you want it back, so you keep drinking... same with any addiction really.