What all UK cigarette packaging will look like by May 2017

Good? Bad? Will this actually deter people from smoking?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ELV5HV6-koI
livescience.com/15115-5-health-benefits-smoking-disease.html
foodwatch.com.au/blog/energy-boosters/item/eating-for-exams-what-to-eat-to-boost-concentration-and-memory.html
news.health.com/2014/07/21/10-foods-that-boost-concentration/
health.com/health/gallery/0,,20434658,00.html
law.cornell.edu/constitution/tenth_amendment
youtube.com/watch?v=ZYlaDdQDsb0
youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2509609/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.318.1611&rep=rep1&type=pdf
ecigarette-politics.com/blog/nicotine-high-toxicity-myth-destroyed.html
smartypantsvitamins.com/the-overdose-risks-of-vitamins-why-proper-dosage-matters/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880486/
skadden.com/professionals/bernd-r-mayer
sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1612432/000104746914007932/a2221414zf-1.htm
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

it wont deter a single person

It worked in Australia.

Go read Jacob Sullum's book For Your Own Good.

Same shit in canada and smokers still smoke.
Does nothing but make libreals feel good.
Might as well ban drugs.

authoritarian bullshit

fuck off nanny-stater

My mother just bought a plain case and transfers her cigs to it. We've had those gory packs for a while

>unironically using the authoritarian meme
Holy shit go back to reeddit leftycuck

...

That's really clever, actually. Props to Leaf Mom sticking it to the authoritarian liberals.

I really don't understand why everyone has decided to lose their shit over smoking, but somehow drinking is cool... Also, why do half the people I know that want to ban smoking tobacco simultaneously demand that smoking weed is made legal.

People are weird..

The packages look cool as fuck. Almost like collectables.

If they want to stop people smoking... just make them even more expensive. That's the main reason why people quit anyway.

How many hours of molymeme do you watch nigger?

Go prep your mexican bull faggot

I promised my late mother practically every day during my childhood that I'd never smoke a single cigarette throughout my entire life. That packaging would make me an instant chainsmoker out of pure spite.

Seems like a great business opportunity for cigarette case makers.

in brazil smokers jokingly say while buying their packs: "any will do except for the erectile disfuction one"

Im to desensitized for that to affect me

Thanks Bestgore and liveleak

I thought this fucking bullshit was only in Canada we're so alike! We are much whiter tho.

Why don't they use similar imagery with guns in America?

Kek

cigarette case 10/10 for panache. makes me want to start smoking again

Guns don't cause lung cancer.

I used to be a smoker but you get over it eventually. Waste of money, waste of life.

Just weigh the pros and cons. Well, there is really only one "pro" -- ~~feels good~~ and even that is because you're soothing a con (addiction) from occuring.

>molymeme
probably 1-2 tops

>2016
>being a pussywhipped nanny state authoritarian
kek

Here's an idea, sell cigarette tins or cases.
Put them in a variety of colors or for an increased price let it be custom made.
You could make a killing!

>Will this actually deter people from smoking?
It's helped a bit. We should add similar to booze and fast food.

Would you breathe in anything else which isn't air?

We do that too. It kinda makes things worse for some, but stops others.

Reminds me of the bill hicks joke about not buying cigarettes with the lung cancer warning and instead getting low birth weight lol

No it didn't, taxing it to hell did, fucking nazis. I don't even smoke ciggies, just stop hiking my cigars up.

>Stopping the tabbaco jews is le nanny state
eww kike stop talking to me!

useless. Any non retard has already stop smoking.

studies have shown that they aren't that bad up until you hit your 40s. once people hit middle age, their bodies can't heal as well and the nasty shit in the smoke really fucks you up. people who smoke into their 50s and 60s are basically guaranteed to have some kind of smoking related health problem (hypertension, heart disease, lung disease, etc) and that shit causes a crazy burden on the healthcare system

they do make your skin age horribly, though. it's a bad habit.

>brand new mossberg arrives in a case with picture of nigger blasted in the face from it on top of the case.
That'll work

>just stop hiking my cigars up.
If you're not willing to pay for a luxury item, you mustn't really want it. Besides, it's only like $250 for a box of good Cubans. Though that might go up with them being legal in America soon.

That's great until you get a person with a gore fetish.

Why does it show a vagina in the top left

>worked

The constant tax increase sure is. Many of my mates are considering quitting simply because they can't afford it.

Well, maybe compared to pic related it might.
>hey we'll give ya free shit

All cigarette users should be gassed.

Oops

Rich people didn't get rich by paying for over priced shit.

Seems pretty fucking silly.

Imagine if every new car sold had a paint job of people involved in terrible car accidents, so we were all driving a portable version of ogrish.

Dude! Those are fucking awesome! Collectable cigarette cards are back!
Sweet!

In Australia people were selling cases for cigarette packs to cover those pictures. Pretty sure the government banned them.

They've looked like that in Canada for as long as I can remember. I'm 24.

Why even fucking bother with that dumb shit? If you want people to stop smoking either outlaw it or fucking leave smokers alone. It's getting retarded.

thats not even close to what a vagina looks like

>hates authoritarianism

>sucks Trump cock

Wew.

Have the same here.
Must be a new EU law or whatever

I have some bad news for you son

And there we agree.

They won't. They'll just bitch as it's raised to $40/pack.

Yea, most smokers i know have a nice cigarette case. But the point is just stop someone at the servo or grocery store saying, "gee, that looks appealing. I might give them a shot", at which point the (((industry))) has them.

You should tell that to the 1930s in regards to alcohol.

No it didn't.
If you're not wealthy, you're not supposed to have shit like that.
just like you shouldn't have nice brand watches, or sports cars.

It looks extremely tacky, and wasteful to see working class people spending all of their money on a car or watch when they should be saving so they can invest and actually afford things like that.

mexico has these saw it when I went to Cabo san lucas

Where are you from? They have huge warnings but still in bright colors.

Been there done that

sales of these will probably go up.

i suppose on ban on them is next.

Smoking is degenerate, but people should be allowed to destroy themselves if they choose to.

Tobacco companies will now have a new stream of income selling LUXURY(TM) PREMIUM(TM) metal cigarette cases.

People aren't going to drop their smoking addiction because of the carton either way. It's mostly a deterrent to stop people from starting in the first place.

If only

Which side are you on Aussie? Degenerate smoker side or jew liberal government side?

>all that gore
>penis obscured by thumb

Fitness is key to a happy lifestyle.

I just started smoking again and my runtime has already increased after 2 weeks.

You realize fedoras came back that same way right? Youll think you have panache, but youll be a baby-faced pube stached little bitch and itll become instantly uncool.

It's pretty much like that now over there, 2/3 of one side of the pack is a picture like that.

It's not that expensive, I have a monthly cigar that costs $20-40.

this only lasted a few months, people get used to the packaging pretty quick and wont care for the most part.

So it happened, hey?

youtube.com/watch?v=ELV5HV6-koI

>bans plastic boxes
what will they bin their knives in then?

I didn't notice the colors. I'm from BC. I thought the pictures of dead people were more important.

Weed is less harmful than tobacco. Not kidding.

Neither. Unlike your politics, most things have more than two sides.

Right there

If we put heavy metal band names on the pictures, perhaps sales will improve. And they'll stop putting gore images on the cig boxes.

they'd sell more though

Yes, as long as it doesn't impact on others. Which smoking does (even ignoring smoking in public), at least in places with socialised healthcare.
But then, so does sugar.

i like this. smokers are >literally gassing themselves

Actually, that would probably help with sales.
People would see that and go "Damn, this thing really serves it purpose!"

brb going for a smoke

Stop selfishly leaving the house, cunt. You might get injured.

Also they have to cover up the displays of cigerettes on the shelves.

On what? Physical health? Yup.

Mental health and general energy and ambition of the human spirit? Nope.

Do you also go in public smelling like you usually do, you unbathed smoke-addict?
You reek

FUCK YEAH!

OLD MATE BRIAN!

Eye cancer is my favourite one though.

Been to thailand. They dont give a fuck.

When i leave the house for work, shopping, or recreation, I'm benefiting the economy in such a way to offset the risk of piano falling on my head. Smoking is of zero benefit to anyone. Well, almost (((anyone))).

The ideal Jewish complexion.

Fuck off you neo-traditionalist little bitch.

>Smoking is of zero benefit to anyone
untrue. It reduces certain health risks, treats anxiety and improves memory, concentration, and mood.

it really depends on the delivery method and how it's been prepared. If it's ingested, it's pretty much harmless, or rather no more harmful than the item it's contained in. Smoking it still puts fine particulate and ash into your lungs, there's really not any "safe" level of this kind of exposure. Where tobacco and marijuana start getting really dangerous is in the addition of chemical preservatives and flavorings, these are the things that really get into your pulmonary vascular system and start reeking havoc....but marijuana is rarely treated in this manner, which I suppose is an argument for its relative safety...never fear, with as much as marijuana is worth, it won't be long until some large company starts doing it though...

>Seems like a great business opportunity for cigarette case makers.
People said that in Canada and Australia and for about 4 weeks they sold a few.

newfag

Memeing aside, I actually think along these lines when I come to a stop sign.

Disdain for the state has entered every aspect of my life.

>It reduces certain health risks,
False. And still wouldn't be worth the ailments it inflicts.
>treats anxiety and improves memory, concentration, and mood.
Far better things out there for that. Namely, diet.

Saw the pic first thinking it would be about Australia

We make it look like awesome band art, they can't actually attack the actual bands because the images are sourced from absolutely nobody. If the pictures get popular enough (in an appreciated way), they won't be able to use gore as an effective deterrent.

You've made a powerful enemy today, sign.

The only reason for a government to want people to stop smoking is spending less ca$h on welfare/public healthcare (in countries where this is a thing).

So instead of taxing the shit out of smokers and forcing these shitty (but nicely collectible) covers on cig boxes, they should outright give people an option to either quit smoking or keep their cancer/emphysema/bronchitis health coverage. Want to smoke? Sure, we just won't cover you if you get super ill from it, because it's about money anyway.

BTW I smoke a couple cigs a year, never had any lung issues.

>False. And still wouldn't be worth the ailments it inflicts.
nope, you're wrong.
livescience.com/15115-5-health-benefits-smoking-disease.html

>Far better things out there for that. Namely, diet.
That's changing the goalposts. My point is, smoking DOES benefit people in many ways, directly contrary to what you just claimed.

>diet
>far better at improving memory and concentration than nicotine
source? I don't believe it for one second.

Top meme, my friend.

What's the big deal? They don't even allow Swedish snus! Even Canuckistan here allows snus.

my nigga

Smoking is cancerous behavior and not just figuratively. Smoking is pure degeneracy.

>couple a year
>same health risks as daily smoker

Fucking beaner intellectual

Why do leftists hate tobacco so much? Ah, It's an estrogen suppressant.

>livescience.com/15115-5-health-benefits-smoking-disease.html
Did you actually read the link? It says that smokers have better joints because they're less likely to exercise. Not a boon. And that smokers are thinner (very circumstantial) because they already have one addiction, and don't rely on food. And that cardiac health is improved because you're more likely to have a heart attack, and thus be monitored.
>That's changing the goalposts.
Not really. It's just another way to treat those things.
>source?
First of all, source on nicotine being great at improving memory and concentration.
foodwatch.com.au/blog/energy-boosters/item/eating-for-exams-what-to-eat-to-boost-concentration-and-memory.html
news.health.com/2014/07/21/10-foods-that-boost-concentration/
health.com/health/gallery/0,,20434658,00.html
Also, nootropics are better and safer than nicotine, with none of the detriments.

Forgot to follow the link in the last thread, but someone pointed out how it only suppresses estrogen in women, which is why smokers often have erectile problems.

Check the mexican cigarettes boxes some are worst that this

...

>Yea, most smokers i know have a nice cigarette case. But the point is just stop someone at the servo or grocery store saying, "gee, that looks appealing. I might give them a shot", at which point the (((industry))) has them.

No one ever starts smoking because of the damn packaging.

>they can't actually attack the actual bands
It's not like the bands would be able to advertise like that, though. So they'd only get popular with the people to whom they're already popular.

no it didn't nor did raising the tax on them
according to their own figures they are counting on smoking increasing

>usa
>cannot into non-binary thought

No it fucking won't - the only deterrent is jacking up the prices, and even then people began to roll their cigs years ago, as it's much less expensive than buying cigs. Hell it's very common among youngsters especially because of how cheaper it is to just make your own cigs.

Trust me, there are plenty of big names that cross into the "We can have gorey band art for this album" that have a big enough fan base.

Hell, turning the gore into memes. The idea is to just throw the leftists off their game. If we can spin it into something that will increase the sales of tobacco, we'll literally be forcing the hand of the anti-tobacco twats.

>treats anxiety and improves memory, concentration, and mood

Literally curbs withdrawal symptoms

literally Dave Hughes

No, but it is a bit of a deterrent. Plus it's a big "fuck off" to those (((corporations))).

Yes, but again, unless someone is already a fan of whomever is enough of an edgelord to have that as an album cover, it won't be seen because you can't have it on display.
Maybe find a more productive way to get at leftists?

Trash.

law.cornell.edu/constitution/tenth_amendment

I am starting to hope Trump loses so we can have a civil war and we can wipe this nation clear of this filth.

And they have "accomplished" nothing. I am quoting that word because a nanny state cucking its citizens away from so called 'harmful' practices cannot accomplish shit, so much as ruin shit.

>Did you actually read the link?
admittedly not, I just skimmed it and didn't consider that it would play "gotcha" with me
>those sources
don't actually provide any studies showing the effectiveness of certain foods to increase concentration or memory, but are speculative that X food's pharmacology should or is associated with better concentration.

>Not really. It's just another way to treat those things.
No no no no no. You are trying to make tobacco out to be a bogeyman (in accordance with leftist/authoritarian shill propaganda), and believe there are no benefits to smoking. There are
youtube.com/watch?v=ZYlaDdQDsb0

>Also, nootropics are better and safer than nicotine, with none of the detriments.
>none of the detriments
kek, the research on most nootropics just isn't there so this is a tenuous claim at best

Tobacco, like pornography and communism, are Jew weapons. When you realize that, it's easy to reject them.

All it takes is an skilled enough graphic designer and an anonymous message boards. If it sticks, other communities will echo it. But keeping it exclusively as an album cover wouldn't work alone, I see your point. We need to be creative.

Probably foam tbqfhf (to be quite fairly honest senpai).

this is what lack of capitalism does to you

kek'd

MARCH II O I VI

>You are trying to make tobacco out to be a bogeyman
Because humans aren't really meant to breathe in anything which isn't air. Let alone pay Jews for the privilege.
>believe there are no benefits to smoking. There are
Even if there were, it wouldn't be worth the cost. It's like saying there's a benefit to shooting yourself in the leg because it'll treat a lead allergy.
>the research on most nootropics just isn't there
Only because they're so new. Still preferable to cigarettes which only work by virtue of staving off cravings. Hell, sugar increases concentration by having some when you're craving it.

So you just want gore spammed online? Because we already have that...

Yes, praise the invisible hand for its supermarkets full of sugar-filled shit and mutant produce, the freedumb to get addicted to tobacco and alcohol, and sick fools living in the intellectual squalor of television and social media in bland soulless suburbs who have to drive everywhere to do anything.

We still have too much capitalism desu senpai.

>No, but it is a bit of a deterrent.
No.
It isn't.
Anyone who starts already smoking knows the risks and chooses to smoke anyway. Do you know how much time a smoker spends looking at their package of cigarettes? Exactly how long it takes to find the package and put it in their pocket.
All you've done is make the smoker feel resentment toward the nanny that makes them look at ugliness for a split second every day.
Lets put it in simpler terms for you.
Do you know what else is unpleasant to look at?
Your average vagina.
That still doesn't stop men from fucking women and eating pussy. Why?

The item in question wasn't created for you to spend hours visually admiring it as a work of art. Sure some of them actually are nice to look at, but that's entirely secondary and utterly unimportant to their evolutionary function.

You almost got it. Oversimplified, but close. We take (((their))) licensed gore art and have it serve the opposite of their intent. Such as tying the art to big names (that can benefit off the art) or including it into jokes or memes. (((they))) won't be able to attack/sue anyone and will be forced to abort their gore campaign.

>All you've done is make the smoker feel resentment toward the nanny that makes them look at ugliness for a split second every day.
Good. Hopefully it makes them feel shame, too.
>Do you know what else is unpleasant to look at? Your average vagina.
Must be a lot of tarts in your area.

You're ignoring that the vast majority of people aren't keen on gore, and will just associate whatever you add to it with being repugnant.

>Because humans aren't really meant to breathe in anything which isn't air.
Everything on this planet was born to die. I don't really see the issue if some people choose to abuse their bodies and die a little earlier to enjoy themselves.

>Let alone pay Jews for the privilege.
you seem to be in favor of massive cigarette taxes which don't seem to have any curbing effect on tobacco use, but just seem to unfairly tax the lower classes?

>Even if there were, it wouldn't be worth the cost.
sure but if you're actually interested in doing cost-benefit analysis then you should acknowledge the benefits people receive from smoking, which can be significant.

>Only because they're so new.
...which means that there is no reason for you to believe they are particularly risk free.

It works

I smoke and do chew.
Fucking debate me.

people become addicts because they feel like shit. smoking stimulates the brain which makes them feel better temporarily. by putting those images on packages you just make them feel even more shit and guilty which in turn makes them want to smoke even more to get rid of the shitty feeling.

I'm a non-smoker and this is disgusting.

>I don't really see the issue if some people choose to abuse their bodies and die a little earlier to enjoy themselves.
I concur, but they're being a detriment to others as they do so. Like with trannies getting the snip on the NHS.
>you seem to be in favor of massive cigarette taxes which don't seem to have any curbing effect on tobacco use,
Meh? Luxury items don't deserve such protections against tax.
>but just seem to unfairly tax the lower classes?
>unfairly
If the plebs thought it was unfair, they could choose not to pay for the pleasure of hamstringing themselves.
>sure but if you're actually interested in doing cost-benefit analysis then you should acknowledge the benefits people receive from smoking, which can be significant.
Except it's still not worth the cost. And the benefits are only on those who are already at a disadvantage by smoking. Because they simply cannot test it by having someone start smoking. Catch-22.
>...which means that there is no reason for you to believe they are particularly risk free.
True, but given that they benefit non-smokers, and aren't harmful to people not taking them, they're already ahead.

Any movement has to start somewhere. Sure, I agree. No one wants to look at someone split open or a fucked up looking foot or face. But there are groups of people who can tolerate it. We start there. Enough creative people pitch in, we can virtually do anything.

All drugs should be tax-free and legal, with cyanide put in.

It has had a huge effect in places where it is implemented. I remember only 10 years ago you could see people smoking all over Oslo every day. Even I smoked, but now you only see a smoker maybe every other month.

You can get a decent cigar for like $4. It's hardly a rich man's hobby.

>by a nice cig case
>buy cigs by the carton
>transfer into case
>laugh at liberals

That's my point. It's already a "thing", and people don't like it unless they're on Cred Forums.

>Dominican
Cubans are a trope for a reason.

we still have branding and everything. we just need the graphic warning on 1/4 of the box, which is otherwise exactly how the maker designed it.

in australia and elsewhere they have plain boxes with just the warning on the box and the product name in plain text. supposed to take the "cool" out of smoking.

another thing I heard is they want to make cigarette boxes lime green as it's apparently the least appealing/"cool" colour

>Good. Hopefully it makes them feel shame, too.
Why would it make them feel shame you mong?
Do you understand how resentment works?
It's an outward emotion not an inward one.

Every time i think of individual liberties being assaulted by busybody, false-pious, know-it-alls it makes me sad.

Then i just look at stupid europe and laugh.

Christ this whole world is going to the fucking hippies and the housewives.

>Why would it make them feel shame you mong?
For being a drain on society. The same way i hope fatties and alcoholics feel, as they're basically the same thing.

No it didn't cunt. Not one person that I know who smokes has quit because of these pictures.

Actually, I got a good idea right when I posted that last thing. We use their licensed gore art and tie it to big names that everyone loves. Mcdonalds, Walmart, Pizza Hut, etc etc etc. Just tie it to things with the same or similar message that "X" will kill you.

Devalue (((their))) message. Makes cigs acceptable again.

In Russia 1.5$ per pack did the job. 45$ / month too high payment.

And no matter it 1$ or 2$ cogarettes it all low quality shit. 10 years ago it was much higher.

I like the varied artwork. Who will be first to collect them all?

thanks for correcting the record cancuck

And I thought ours were bad

I always try to take the ones about pregnant women in hopes of feeling less concerned.

Only as long as hardworking people exist to give the lazy a free ride.

I don't even smoke but these seems really gay. Either way idc

>show dead babies and mutilated people
>cannot show benis

>smoking the herbal jew

>We use their licensed gore art and tie it to big names that everyone loves.
It's illegal, but sure. If it can bring down those other poisons, go for it.
I doubt it'd benefit (((cigarettes))), though.

How did it work?

I still smoke the tobbacjew just as much.

>but they're being a detriment to others as they do so.
>le second hand smoke kills meme xddd
sure, blowing smoke in your kids face isn't healthy but most people have common courtesy.

>Meh? Luxury items don't deserve such protections against tax.
>DESERVE
>economic sanctions
leftist drivel.

>If the plebs thought it was unfair, they could choose not to pay for the pleasure of hamstringing themselves.
Why are you so unconcerned with the economic interests lifetime smokers who will probably never quit? Far from being public menaces, some of these people are great family men and most of them are lower class to begin with.

>Except it's still not worth the cost.
Yes, but the prohibitions and regulations against it also impose significant costs, and things need to be kept in proportion if you want to have actually beneficial policies instead of just jumping on le prohibitionist nanny state bandwagon.

...

>unironically puts a globalist faggot in charge of his country

loving every laugh

I see.
You're a fanatic and your opinions are rooted in your feelings rather than reality.
Well have fun resenting the cool kids faggot, I'm sure you'll go real far.

top cigarette

Pure fearmongering, why aren't tobacco companies suing the fuck out of the government for millions in losses?

Hah. You just stated the folly of your argument. With an anonymous message board
>heavy implying
It'd be possible to get the big corporations squirming in panic. And anti-tobacco companies? What can they do? Put double or triple gore? It'd blow over.

Because no one is going to let go of walmart or mcdonalds. No one is that sophisticated anymore. Or just for the sake or argument, there won't be enough people leaving those big names just because of a few shitty pictures stolen from the anti-tobacco ads.

Win-win

>but most people have common courtesy.
Smokers? Haven't seen it happen yet. Outside public buildings, one often has to walk through the toxic miasma.
>leftist drivel.
Wouldn't leftists be in support of people being "free to choose"? The point still stands: it's a luxury item, with no benefit to society. Why shouldn't fools be parted from their money?
>Why are you so unconcerned with the economic interests lifetime smokers who will probably never quit?
Because it's bad for the economy. Duh. At least you septics have the benefit of the money staying (partially) in your country.
>Far from being public menaces, some of these people are great family men
If that were true, they wouldn't smoke. They'd care more about their children.
>and most of them are lower class to begin with.
And if they weren't so stupid as to waste their money on poisons, they might not be.
>Yes, but the prohibitions and regulations against it also impose significant costs
Here at least, cigarette regulations make a pretty penny for the state. Which is why they're not banned.

>Well have fun resenting the cool kids
Ah, so you were projecting, and it's your opinions being rooted in feels. Otherwise you may have tried to refute my points, you weak willed peasant.

Most tobacco executives are white, not Jewish

Most Anti-tobacco groups are Jewish.

Makes one think.

You only see the packaging when you pull it out of your pocket. Its not that big of a deal.

the whole reason for this is because the tobacco companies were sued to shit. that's why they started to put the warnings on the packs. now i guess they are allowed to do this too and the tobacco companies can't do shit about it. it doesn't matter really. smokers are gonna smoke and cigarettes are very cheap to produce

Walk ouside in Brazil and most of those happen anyway

>It'd be possible to get the big corporations squirming in panic. And anti-tobacco companies? What can they do? Put double or triple gore? It'd blow over.
Why would they care? I'm just not getting why you think it'd affect anything, especially given the small scale it'd be on.

>Most tobacco executives are white, not Jewish
>implying
Besides, one doesn't have to be a semite to act like one.

>implying

Great retort.

Just put a picture of a healthy, happy white couple on the packages. That will get brits to stop using them faster than anything else

It's on par with your post, newfriend. The crux was that they act like your typical kike CEO.

Bigger question is why I'd care if they care. My only focus is on anti-tobacco groups. Devalue their gore pictures and make it a norm to ignore gore and still go for the product despite exaggerated warnings. Considering the big names and the many consumers who'd defend and debate it, it'd roll into it's own meme on auto-pilot. Maybe it won't remove gore off of cig boxes, but it'd make people give less than a fuck about it.

>projecting
What do you call this post user?
Your personal feelings about smokers, fatties, and alcoholics are irrelevant to their opinions of themselves. They don't give a shit what you think and never will either.

Just started smoking regularly and nicotine is good .

>muh corporations
>muh CEOs
go back to leftypol

>My only focus is on anti-tobacco groups.
Why?
>but it'd make people give less than a fuck about it.
Except very few people would be seeing it, so it'd have no effect.

I don't think you understand the term...
>Your personal feelings about smokers, fatties, and alcoholics are irrelevant to their opinions of themselves.
Of course. I wasn't arguing otherwise. I was just stating my desire that those who are a drain on society feel shame for it. To be projecting, i would have to be a fat, alcoholic smoker with those feelings.

Just had my morning smoke, nice autumn colors and crisp air.

Too much of a capitalist/nationalist/white for it.
Or did i just hit too close to home, Chaim?

>Smokers? Haven't seen it happen yet. Outside public buildings, one often has to walk through the toxic miasma.
>the toxic miasma
>the smell of cigarettes
>this is as bad as secondhand smoke
>oy vey, it's anuddah shoah!

>Wouldn't leftists be in support of people being "free to choose"?
I was referring to your view that luxury items are evil and taxes aren't really a big deal

>The point still stands: it's a luxury item, with no benefit to society. Why shouldn't fools be parted from their money?
let natural selection take its course, if you are so sure of the evils of smoking. There is no need to exacerbate the poverty of smokers.

>Because it's bad for the economy. Duh.
lifetime smokers are part of the economy, and who's to say that whatever your nanny state spends its blood money on is better than what smokers would spend it on?
>inb4 they'll spend it all on smokes!
No, probably not. Smokers generally have a very fixed quantity that gradually increases, regardless of the costs.

>And if they weren't so stupid as to waste their money on poisons, they might not be.
That's bullshit. 95%+ of the cost of cigs is the tax (in your country, anyway). All of the income from the tax translates to an even larger amount of dead weight loss.

>If that were true, they wouldn't smoke. They'd care more about their children.
More bullshit. Just because you can't quit doesn't mean you don't love your kids. People who are addicted to smoking can be just as good fathers as people who don't smoke. The fathers that I know who smoke are better than the average of the ones who don't, in my experience.

tobacco is a gods herb and should not be disrespected like this

>too much of a capitalist for it
>advocates nanny state interventions for every social "evil" under the sun
>doesn't even appreciate why CEOs are paid well
kek

(((Their))) messages has pussified the public. To the point where one's decision to make friends with another could completely hang on whether he/she smokes or not. People are afraid of second hand smoke and think cigs are literally satan wrapped in a sheet of paper. The original surgeon general's message was literally good enough, but they didn't stop there.

>Except very few people would be seeing it, so it'd have no effect.
You have no statistical proof of that.

Did they raise the tax on tobacco?
They have the pictures here and it did nothing. They raised the taxes and people stopped smoking

>tfw eager as fuck to smoke some cigarettes but everything is closed

I don't think YOU understand the term.
You're projecting your emotional desires upon other people. They don't care.
>capitalist
lol
Whatever you say Che.

Disgusting. Go back to your cuckshed.

We have that shit here
And no it doesnt work

You fucking liar no it didnt

>the smell of cigarettes
>this is as bad as secondhand smoke
That IS secondhand smoke, genius. And some people don't like smelling like shit.
>I was referring to your view that luxury items are evil and taxes aren't really a big deal
My bad then. I didn't mean to imply luxury items were evil. Just that cigarettes are a luxury and a detriment, which are thus deserving of scorn. Taxes are only no big deal on such things.
>let natural selection take its course, if you are so sure of the evils of smoking.
Happily. But again, the problem is when affecting others.
>There is no need to exacerbate the poverty of smokers.
Is that not contributing to the natural selection, though? It's just a dick move that taxes from cigarettes aren't put back into the healthcare system. Why do you think they dindunuffin, and are so deserving of their wasted funds?
>lifetime smokers are part of the economy,
Follow the money. It's wasteful for that money to go towards cigarette companies.
>and who's to say that whatever your nanny state spends its blood money on is better than what smokers would spend it on?
Not me. The taxes are usually wasted.
>That's bullshit.
If they didn't spend $20-30/pack every day or so, they might be able to do better in life. Same with many other vices.
>The fathers that I know who smoke are better than the average of the ones who don't, in my experience.
A lovely anecdote, but a good father would preserve his health for his kids.

>doesn't even appreciate why CEOs are paid well
Hell no. I'm not some communist who thinks CEOs "Don't deserve their pay." I just think CEOs of cigarette/fast food/alcohol companies are massive Jews profiting from harming white people.

>mfw

>People are afraid of second hand smoke
As they should be. People don't like breathing in car exhaust either.
>You have no statistical proof of that.
How many people see gore at the moment?

>They don't care.
Again, duh.
>lol
>Capitalism means you can't have ethics or care about your nation
JIDF used to be better disguised.

It didn't do shit here. Biggest waste of fucking time in politics.

There is nothing unethical about tobacco son.

>(((you)))

Toxins can be cleared out pretty effectively, mucous clearance of smokers is crazy efficient despite cilia paralysis. It's the carcinogens that get you 2 to 4 decades from now

See starting at 9:40

youtube.com/watch?v=TRL7o2kPqw0

...

A pussified world. All thanks to a group of drama queens. Well I'm satisfied with all your answers and convinced that my idea could single handedly disassemble this gore strategy from the anti-tobacco groups.

it's a fuckin band aid, so mothers groups feel good about themselves. Waste of money and time imo.

COLLECT ALL 30 !!!

This is a lie. The combustion of weed actually has more carcinogens in it than combusted tobacco, like an insane amount more. Plus it's pretty heavy in Ammonia byproducts.

The only reason stoners don't get lung cancer is because they don't chain smoke. Those studies that correlated tobacco and cancer were in those that smoked more than 20 cigs (a pack) a day. Can you imagine smoking 20 joints a day?

Probably public smoking regs too.

Everyone dies somehow.

>for niggers

>A pussified world.
Yea, we should also drink lead based paint and sniff mercury. Otherwise a Costa Rican will think we're pussies.
But hey, good luck to you with your vague and stupid ideas.

Not true. See No radioactive polonium and lead in weed. The radiation causes most of the cancers.

That tax revenue ain't

Though it's literally feeding off people's addiction, draining them of cash when they can't get help or quit. Never knew how that was morally sound

See also:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2509609/

>No radioactive polonium and lead

What are you taking about? Heavy metal are hardly the most contributing carcinogens in smoke, of any plant. Majority are PAHs

>putting gory screenshots from dark souls on cigs
>not metal as fuck

Hey that does sound pretty badass. To drink lead based paint and sniff mercury. You should do it and I'll take a shit in honor of the leftist straya and it's shitty family. Don't be such a pussy, m8

>That IS secondhand smoke, genius.
>secondhand smoke is a serious health risk when people smoke outside
jesus you are deluded

>and are so deserving of their wasted funds?
>wasted
what the fuck man, you really are a nanny state authoritarian. Being unhealthy doesn't mean you forfeit your right to have money

>Is that not contributing to the natural selection, though?
by imposing upon natural selection, you may be changing the outcome.

>follow the money
DEAD WEIGHT LOSS

> It's wasteful for that money to go towards cigarette companies.
No it's not. Cigarette companies promote job creation and economic exchange, and anyway most of the money goes to government which wastes it on things like pic related.

>If they didn't spend $20-30/pack every day or so, they might be able to do better in life. Same with many other vices.
it would only be $0.50/pack if it weren't for people like you who think it's OK to fuck up people's lives if they're a "deplorable"

>Not me. The taxes are usually wasted.
so you admit that cigarette tax money usually doesn't go to do society any good? You're not going to be installed as dictator any time soon, user, so supporting these taxes only supports creating DWL.

>A lovely anecdote, but a good father would preserve his health for his kids.
people aren't perfect, and anyway the anecdotal evidence i have is of fathers who are currently living into their late 60s. By that principle, people who have kids late (in their 40s) are also bad people

Yea I agree it's not morally sound. It's the same as a doctor going "hurr you don't know what it's like working in emergency' -still takes paycheck for 1mil a year.

Nope. People just buy covers.

Also a carton is something like $160 and people still buy them.

I love smoking and I love the smell of diesel exhaust. Reminds me of afghanistan

The polonium in tobacco comes from the use of fertilizer. How confident are you that your weed farmer doesn't fertilize his crops?

I don't know about anywhere else but all I've ever heard was people shitting on smoking. It doesn't stop a single person who's interested in it. There are probably still 24/7 anti-smoking ads too. Funny how you see way less alcohol warnings and everyone and their granny loves getting piss drunk cause wew drinking culture.

>it worked

everyone who smokes still smokes.

We have this shit in Australia. I don't even fucking smoke and I disagree with it. Unless they put it for anything that increases the odds of death by a similar percentage to smoking on average.

I think it will lead to an increase in aftermarket cigarette containers.

>I just think CEOs of cigarette/fast food/alcohol companies are massive Jews profiting from harming white people.
That's what I think about government goons who make cigarettes $20-30/pack

Hydroponics use premade nutrient solutions, there is no soil patch to fertilize.

There are few consumer products intended for consumption that are as likely to lead to death as nicotine.

>Although some tobacco company researchers genuinely believed that the amount of PO-210 in cigarette smoke was too small to be a major risk factor for lung cancer induction, this opinion was not shared by company lawyers

Pretty much sums up that article. It's simply trying to push the Surgeon General to put "May be radioactive" on cigs, it doesnt provide any evidence polonium is a significant risk factor in tobacco smoke. Polonium most definitely is a mutagen, that's been well established, but its hardly driving force in the carcinogencity of smoke

Hence why that labeling never got passed, it's too much ad hoc and too little casualty.

maybe if you're smoking on psychedelics

>implying all weed is grown with hydroponics

This^ im surprised there isnt a 15% tax on coffee yet

>implying I buy all the weed grown in the world

>Buy cigarette case
>Throw pack out after transferring them

>nicotine
>more likely to cause death than McDonalds
kek, you mean cigarettes right? Nicotine is actually pretty harmless as long as your method of delivery isn't cigarettes

We've had these shock pictures on cigarettes and loose tobacco for a while now. All the smokers I've asked don't mind at all. So once you're hooked on that stuff, it doesn't have any effect on you.

It might deter teens wanting to smoke for the first time. Thankfully the numbers of first time smokers are already down, among most teens smokers are seen as losers.

You mean like vapes? but that just puts water into your lungs.

pussy cant handle it, those are fucking metal cases

grow a pair kid

>that just puts water into your lungs.
Plus nicotine and whatever makes up the flavour. It's not healthy, but healthier than the smoke of burned stuff.

Pure nicotine is deadly as hell even a small amount can leave you blind or in a coma they even have to constantly rotate the people who harvest it so people don't get sick, dipshit.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine_poisoning

Your reading comprehension is horrible. Alpha particles are the bowling balls of DNA damage. Nothing else in cigarette smoke comes close. That is why Polonium 210 is so popular with Mossad and KGB.

>vapes
yeah but also gum and cigars and snuff.

>but that just puts water into your lungs
and? it clearly lacks all of the main problems of cigs, and I don't think small amounts of water really cause lung damage

a lot of thing are deadly as hell in doses that are 10-20 times the normal dose

Nicotine has one of the smallest LD50's of known substances. 50mg of it will kill 50% of people. That is 2.5 patches worth.

>implying pre-made means anything

Really silly now. I mean, there is radon in your water. There are isotopes everywhere. Polonium is inherent in fertilizer, you think growers are getting their stuff from some radiation free niche?

>vaping water

I have now realized I am way under my league here. Good day, believe what you want

Nothing that is not controlled as a prescription pharmaceutical.

But now you've just shifted the problem from carcinogenics to pneumonia which would probably be worse considering how people abuse antibiotics and super viruses are slowly emerging.

Its bad and it will not stop people smoking. Even if it did, its not up to the government to intervene in people's habits.

There is no recommended dose of pure nicotine because it is caustic and dangerous and the other thing I mentioned had nothing to do with dosed, simply handling raw tobacco plants.

A). We're not talking about your anecdotal personal weedman, we're talking about marijuana in general
B). The fact that you use a "premade nutrient solution" to grow your hydro, does not change the fact that plants need phosphorus to grow. The primary source of agricultural phosphorus is apatite. Apatite contains significant amounts of rare-earth elements which is where the polonium contamination comes from.

Do you think the tobacco industry went to the metaphorical fertilizer store and said "give us the brand of fertilizer with the polonium contaminated phosphorus in it, we're trying to kill people!"?
No they bought the same agricultural fertilizer from the same sources as every one else. The exact same fertilizer sources the hydroponics industry goes to get the phosphorus to create their "premade nutrient solutions".

The truly sickening part is that the only play this polonium contamination scandal is getting is as an angle to attack smoking. Phosphate fertilizers aren't just used to grow tobacco you know...

Worked in germany. Tobacco lobby is working overtime right now to undo the change because after like a dozen price raises and other things that didn't get a single person to stop, this one cut into their profits significantly.

Fuck smokers.

>implying the risk of pneumonia is as significant for vapes as cancer is to cig smokers

>vitamins

All I know is doctors here warn of vapes and e-cigarettes because they do damage to your health. On the other hand they recommend them to people who just can't quit smoking, because they do less damage than burning sticks of tobacco.

I think they did it all backwards, a few years ago they made it law that cigarettes can't be on display in shops, so nobody is going to see the packaging until after they buy it. A wall of gore would be more effective at stopping people smoking because they wouldn't have to start to see the supposed health risks.

My numbers are off, but it is still roughly equivalent to the toxicity of sodium cyanide.

I'll trade you a Low Birth Weight one for your 9 Out Of 10 Lung Cancer one.

If you chain smoke the thing like people do with normal cigarettes already then yes it would be a real risk.

These people should just slap those nicotine patches on their arms and move on with their life.

Which vitamins will blind you or kill you if you take 10?

If you do a little research you will learn that phosphate fertilizers do not account for the polonium content of tobacco. It is present in tobacco grown with or without fertilizers. The reasons are as yet unexplained, but have to do with the unique properties of the tobacco plant.

>A). We're not talking about your anecdotal personal weedman
see
>How confident are you that your weed farmer
>your weed farmer

tl;dr the rest, if you can't get the first point right, why bother continuing.

If the polonium concentrations in cigarette smoke were that high people would be dropping like flies, and I don't mean in twenty years I mean in a few weeks.

You really think the KGB would allegedly use Polonium to kill people if they have to wait twenty years for it to kick in?

Here you go, one of the fundamental papers of carcinogens in tobacco. Over 700 citations

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.318.1611&rep=rep1&type=pdf

I have been reading up on this polonium fertilizer stuff and it seems to be all published in no name 'predatory journals' or are literally blog posts (I'll let you look up what that means, since I have a feeling you aren't actually in academia).

Seems they are all pushing for the same thing in their conclusions, that is to label cigs as a radiation risk. Its a good cause for the anti-smoking league to pursue, people are terrified of the word radiation. But again, hasn't happened yet because, like I said, these are junk publications with little merit.

Like, please, just think critically for a second here: why has this label never come out, in all these years they have been pushing it? Its not like the government has anything against labeling tobacco as dangerous anymore.

Nobody who seriously smokes in the UK buys their cigarettes in the UK anyway. It's pretty much all gone black market.

Kek

spam detection so I can't post the primary source. Follow the first link here ecigarette-politics.com/blog/nicotine-high-toxicity-myth-destroyed.html

I did do a little research. That research led to fertilizer.

>but have to do with the unique properties of the tobacco plant.
What it magically spawns the element polonium out of thin air?

When do we start getting photos of diabetic foot ulcers on bottles of coke?

>pedantry
>honestly thinks hydroponically grown plants don't require fertilizer

see the link I just replied with

>If you chain smoke the thing like people do with normal cigarettes already then yes it would be a real risk.
this is just speculation

there is literally nothing wrong with smoking.

Please just ignore him, I don't think he understands

Water in your lungs is bad, more water in your lungs is even worse.

What part of that is just 'speculation'?

...

are you stupid

Yeah, way off. That low ld50 was done in rats, which is usually pretty viable data, except we have cases now of people ingesting a gram or more and surviving

Doesn't seem to work in Singapore.

fuck smokers
>he says as he downs his second double quarter pounder of the day down his fat gullet

Will they put it on cigar boxes too?

that vaping is a serious health risk because of the water

Also you don't need to say sodium cyanide, just say cyanide, that's the deadly part. Sodium is just there to balance out the charge. You look like an idioit when you do

Good, there's nothing I hate more than waiting in a line with someone smoking 3 cigarettes in a row and filling the area with smoke, fucking drug addicts.

The impotencia one cracks me up. Looks like he is trying to reason with his dick.

>water

There is no water in eliquid, only trace amounts, much less than that's already in your lungs. I mean, do you know how much energy it takes to bring water to vaporize? Not to mention, it would kinda burn a lot

If it is so bad for you, why not ban them? Increase the legal age every year until everyone is too old to by them. Oh right, taxes.

Oh shit, you have a source so reputable, its labeled as spam, can't wait to check it out and see how it is definitely conclusive and not at all vague and questionable it is.

>see the link I just replied with
You forgot to include the vitamin link I guess, I don't see a link about vitamins that kill if you take 10-20.

Fertilizer is specifically applied to soil, no soil, no fertilizer, only nutrients because you have different concerns if you aren't using the ground to plant in.

K-E-K

People survive several gunshots to the head too, that doesn't mean it isn't a fatal dose of lead, they just got lucky.

I support any and all government measures to reduce tobacco consumption, including greatly increased taxing, plain packaging, further restrictions to where smokers can smoke and advertisement campaigns. Luckily it is going down in Australia.

>water
Isn't ejuice made of alcohol and random solvent type chemicals?

So what's the story behind the banning of cigarettes around the world?
Is it so insurance companies can continue milking people for longer, and hospitals can cut a few costs?

Give me the radpill Cred Forums.

>well I was going to be completely fair to your side of the argument and try to see if there was anything to your argument by checking your source out, but it looks like Cred Forums's spam filter blocked you from posting it so your scientific publication article
kek

smartypantsvitamins.com/the-overdose-risks-of-vitamins-why-proper-dosage-matters/

>hurr when you put the nutrients in duh soil it's fertilizer but when you put em in duh water it's different!

Upping the prices to 34 aus$ a pack you degenerate. Really makes you think

read the reply chain, I'm not the one claiming that

yes, holy shit, fuck smokers.

Walk down the street? Fucking smoke in your face
Walk outside any fucking building? Fucking smokers lurking the minimum number of feet legally required from the entrance blowing smoke in your face.
Rent? Fuck you. Your apartment smells like an ashtray because the asshole two stories down blows smoke out the balcony 24/7
etc etc etc

Ban cancer smoke from public.

>muh lethal dose of 0.001 mg!

You couldn't make an argument, though, you googled the first thing that seemed like it supported your point and felt fine that it was basically just spam to sell ecigarettes.

That says you have to take 50 times the recommended dose over several months to build up to a big tummy ache over vitamin D and the only time it mentioned something fatal was talking about giving children under 5 iron.

Vestigial war on plants and Paganism by the dominant Abrahamics who have a history of self hate with anything of the natural world, the Puritans, Quakers and all that too. The legalization of weed is really just a technocratic Inquisition as they are taking names combined with extreme fascist licensing programs and will dole out punishment in the way of blacklisting later.

Yeah, living much beyond 70 except those in very good health - many smokers actually, is kinda brutal. We didn't evolve to live much past that and when the brain organ goes it gets really ugly which are the brunt of new age old folks diseases.

It is different nutrients by necessity because fertilizers have things that don't break down as easily and completely as liquid nutrients, thus will never be metabolized by the plant, so you need to make the distinction so people use the correct tool for the correct job.

well read the paper I linked, I'm not going to rewrite it here for your convenience.

>vitamins
yeah it's a bit of a stretch but so is the LD50 of nicotine

No it's the exact same nutrients just in a liquid suspension.

Also, it would hurt your position to have to summarize it and realize it is vague, biased, and inconclusive.

>Hey that does sound pretty badass.
Guess that Darwin Award stuff is legit.

>deluded
Go suck on a tailpipe, then.
>Being unhealthy doesn't mean you forfeit your right to have money
No, but being unwise generally does. And yes, I am an authoritarian, because too many people make stupid choices. You're proof of this.
>by imposing upon natural selection, you may be changing the outcome.
Changing the tax rate =/= affecting natural selection.
>Cigarette companies promote job creation and economic exchange
Are they the absolute best with no detriment? If not, they could be better used in different ways.
>it would only be $0.50/pack if it weren't for people like you who think it's OK to fuck up people's lives if they're a "deplorable"
Those people are intentionally fucking up their own lives, my moronic leftist friend.
>so you admit that cigarette tax money usually doesn't go to do society any good?
Nah. It could, but sadly does not. Still, better than not having it.
>By that principle, people who have kids late (in their 40s) are also bad people
Agreed.

You probably won't do well here, with all the Nazi types.

>That's what I think about government goons who make cigarettes $20-30/pack
How is that harming white people?

>it was basically just spam to sell ecigarettes
>Archives of Toxicology, January 2014, Volume 88, Issue 1, pp 5–7
kek

Smokers, druggies and alcoholics all deserve to be sent to the gulag.

They do here, but you can usually peel it off.

>calling me a leftist
>being a nanny-state supporter
kek

I prefer the term "Heinlein State"

is that why dick is small?

you fucking mong, I'm not citing the ecigarrete-politics link, I'm citing the article it links that Cred Forums spergs at for no apparent reason.

I prefer the term, nanny state.

Lobbyists for tobacco companies pay for studies to be done all the time look at
>Food and Chemical Toxicology, Volume 40, Issue 1, January 2002, Pages 93–104

Cigarettes do shit to your hormones, so smokers end up impotent. Which is why Jews like people smoking, so they can sell them viagra.

Because you're a leftist with no foresight, or concern for your people. Or you probably only care about (((your people).

doesn't reduce the validity if the methodology is correct.

1. not a leftist
2. I am concerned about people. You're the one who dismisses the real human costs that $20/pack has on smokers, many of whom are our political allies and many more of whom are patriarchs and productive members of society.

>You're the one who dismisses the real human costs that $20/pack has on smokers
That's like caring about the cost of a key of cocaine. Why should anyone care about the cost of willingly poisoning oneself?
>many of whom are our political allies
(((Yours))) perhaps.
>and many more of whom are patriarchs and productive members of society.
They'd be more productive without such a toxic vice.

That is why it is LD50 and not LD100. Jesus this board has gotten stupid. LD50 of nicotine is 6.5 -13.5 mg/kg. So for your fat ass, 650 mg will kill you with 50% probability. Same as cyanide.

If its the one by that journal number
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880486/
by
skadden.com/professionals/bernd-r-mayer

which are the lawyers for this company
sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1612432/000104746914007932/a2221414zf-1.htm

which
>We are a world-leading e-cigarette company. According to Frost & Sullivan, we were the second largest e-cigarette designer and manufacturer in the world in terms of both revenues and production volume in 2013.

So the reason that ecig company had the link is because their lawyer lobbyist shill wrote the study and paid to have the advertising put it at the top of the search results.

Except the numbers are based on the dry weight, which is not ionized, moron. Go have a smoke.

m8 your arguments are all shit, and even if I did point the flaws out to you with perfect eloquence you would hold to them. You're a 16 year old edgy shill who supports creeping fascism, not only for your ideal government, but for the leftist nanny state Aussie government.

well if you read the article you might have seen that the evidence for a 60 mg lethal dose really is lacking, regardless of their motivations for pointing that out.

What evidence do you have (primary source) for such a low lethal dose in humans?

>even if I did point
But you won't. Because your position is based on feels, probably due to your nicotine cravings.
>but for the leftist nanny state Aussie government.
It's a right wing nanny-state. Curious to see what Hillary will do to yours.

I have been the more reasonable of us two. Nice b8

>australia
>right wing
HAHAHHAA I can't believe you exist. Yep 15 year old nanny state feminazi confirmed

>I have been the more reasonable of us two.
Really? "Duuude, smokes are like, really important for families and shit. Anyone who disagrees is a fascist."

And it's not surprising you don't recognise Australia is rightwing. Given that you probably think the USA has "Freedom™ "

>Duuude, smokes are like, really important for families and shit. Anyone who disagrees is a fascist.
yeah I guess that's how my argument would sound if you interpret everything as an emotional 16 year old nanny state shill, kek

Forensic Science International
Volume 195, Issues 1–3, 25 February 2010, Pages e19–e22

>yeah I guess that's how my argument would sound if you read back through the posts
FTFY.
You've really not put forth a compelling argument for compassion towards smokers or other addicts.

I can't get past the paywall. Is
>The postmortem data reviewed by Maehly and Bonnichsen (1963) and more recently by Corkery et al. (2010) and Solarino et al. (2010) revealed minimal nicotine blood levels of 2 mg/L, but rapid decline of blood nicotine after death (Sanchez et al. 1996) may have led to underestimation of the actual lethal concentration in delayed autopsies.

accurate?

You haven't put forth a compelling argument this thread