Some Of The Health Risks From Smoking
Author: Gregg Hall
Scientific evidence of the health risks posed by smoking go back to the 1950s. Figures from the US government show that 28% of males 18 years old and above and 23% of females in the same age bracket were into the habit in the mid-1990s. The percentages were even higher in 1964, when the US surgeon general first issued an official warning that smoking was hazardous to one's health.
Following that formal warning, many reports were released on the link between cigarettes and tobacco to heart diseases, lung diseases, and cancers of the mouth and other tissues. However, the habit persisted, with young smokers doing so as an expression of rebellion and strong drive to be independent.
For adults, smoking marked an addiction to nicotine - the key factor that made smoking a pleasurable and addictive experience. This led to another warning from the surgeon general in 1988, which put addiction to nicotine on the same level as cocaine and heroin.
The danger in smoking comes from the chemical substances released either as a gas or as a particulate. Nitrogen oxides, hydrogen cyanide and most especially carbon monoxide are gaseous emissions from cigarette smoke that threaten to poison the body.
Nicotine is one of several hazardous particulates emitted from smoking. These particulates damage the cilia - the little hairs lining the lungs that help transport mucus out of the lungs, and all pollutants accumulated. When the cilia malfunction, pollutants remain in the lungs and the likelihood of influenza and bronchitis, emphysema and other diseases increases.
The possibility that smokers die from cancer and heart disease is twice that of their non-smoking counterparts. Individuals who smoke also have lungs that become less efficient with age much faster than those who don't. Smoking has been cited as the cause of over 400,000 deaths in the US every year.
Government agencies, scientists and health officials have also established that passive smoking, or second-hand smoke, also has ill effects. The National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion has reported that over 4,000 chemicals are generated by second-hand smoke, with more than 50 of those believed to be cancer-causing agents.
In 1975, the Centers for Disease Control released a report citing such a danger, noting that toxic chemicals stay in the air and are inhaled by unsuspecting victims. Thus, the concern over smoking as a private choice by individuals expanded into a public-health issue.
Passive smoking was cited as a cancer-causing agent by the US Environmental Protection agency in 1993. For pregnant women, smoking raises the chances that their baby will be underweight or that they end up with a miscarriage. Children less than a year old are twice as likely to have lung infections if their mothers smoke compared to counterparts whose mothers do not practice the habit. Individuals with asthma, allergies or other respiratory ailments were also warned, as exposure can worsen their conditions.
Some smokers gradually quit or smoked less, while nonsmokers became the focus of more protection, as government worked on policies and legislation to curb the habit. As early as 1964, the US signed into law a requirement that health warnings must be integrated into all cigarette advertising and packaging. Policies were also implemented to designate schools, offices and other public places as smoke-free buildings.
In the 1990s, class action suits started to bombard state and federal courts, claiming that cigarette makers employed deceptive marketing tactics to keep consumers from knowing that nicotine was addictive and worked on levels of the particulate in cigarettes to keep smokers hooked on their product.
More recent suits against the industry charge manufacturers of also misleading consumers into thinking that "lights" and similar products were healthier alternatives to regular cigarettes. These more recent cases later led to the multi-billion dollar settlement between the US government and industry in the late 1990s.
These lawsuits and the consistency of health lobbyists and persuasive government programs have helped pull down US smoking rates on a consistent basis over the last four decades, with government figures showing per capita rates at 22.5% and experts forecasting the rates to continue declining in the future.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/quit-smoking-articles/some-of-the-health-risks-from-smoking-16990.html
About the Author
Gregg Hall is a business consultant and author for many online and offline businesses and lives in Navarre Florida with his 16 year old son. Get stop smoking products from http://www.quitsmokingplus.com
[TEMPLATE]cannibis[/TEMPLATE]
Proud to be racist
?
I’am a racist. Well by most peoples standards.
I bleive in equality in what we are allowed to do,I don’t like sexual discrimination and if a person was being judged souly on there.sex or skin color I wouldn’t stand for it.
That being said here is why I’m considered racist.
People say that skin is just a color and we are all the same on the inside. Well thats not true. Every race reacts differently to different substances,even the break down of alchohol is different between races. Natives naturaly can’t withstand intoxication like other races.But with smoking per capita they have a smaller % smoking related cancer.
Asians break down alchohol differently than white people do too. Then behaviours between races are naturly different as well.Even muscle mass and other things. People are not all equal. We are all different and truthfully cetain races can’t intergrate with others…it’s like putting a sh*tzu with a pack of dobermans. We are all simuliar but not the same or equal.
Wow! Well if you don’t get it,what I’m getting at is that it isn’t just on the outside it’s on the inside as well,even in the mind. Every race is different and the equality movement is fine by me.
But I’m stating that we are by rule not the same there are exceptions but we different racesaren’t equal at everything.
I would be considered racist because I son’t follow propaganda to just believe we are all equal. Why do blacks excell at sports? Why are natives allergic to alchohol? We are not the same.
Differnet races are good at different things or worse.
Hmmm… not many answers.
Why would someone say I have the answer to that but won’t tell u?
Thats dumb. We r not the same,it is race. Not everyone from a race us subjest to there society or anothers but are still different in and out.
Just to say we are not the same I’ll be called dumb or uneducated. Well what there to be educated about? Thats a typical liberal remark. Can’t debate the argument so just argue the debater.
Snobs always try to say that (“Der your uneducated and uhhh yeah your not a genius)
I wan’t debating opinions.
I was debating facts.
This isn’t my opinion its the truth
has nothing to do with race. if everyone was built the same what would be the point? its not about color, although i dont have time to try to educate you on the subject. i wil move on.
have a great day. to the intelligent one tht says he got beat up by blacks for no reason trust me there was a reason.
Is it true New Zealand Smokes the most weed per capita? and what does per capita mean?
1 : equally to each individual
2 : per unit of population : by or for each person
Use example (not a literal statement of fact): Fairfax County, Virginia has the highest income per capita of an U.S. county.
34% of poor people smoke; 13% of rich do. Is Barry’s newest tax screwing the poor?
A two pack a day habit now costs you $737.30 in tobacco taxes thanks to One Term Barry, starting tomorrow.
Three times as many poor people smoke per capita than rich:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/03/20/us/032008smoking1.jpg
If you are a poor person making $12,000 a year, that cigarette tax is 6.2 percent of your income. If you make $120,000 year it is 0.6 percent of your income. Is Barry Obama screwing the poor yet again?
And to those who may be contemplating a glib, disingenuous answer: Smoking tobacco is an addiction according to the US government. Eighty percent of those who try to quit smoking fail.
Obama’s intention was to make sure *every* American gets taxed, commodity taxes are good for targeting specific income levels. In this case the poor.
But he also plans on increasing welfare, given the poor who are already on welfare more money too buy those cigarettes.
What does HDS per capita mean?
Doing a Statistics project and need to know what the data means when it says: Number of cigarettes smoked (hds per capita)
The data are per capita numbers of cigarettes smoked (sold) by 43 states and the
District of Columbia in 1960 together with death rates per thouusand population from
various forms of cancer.
1. CIG = Number of cigarettes smoked (hds per capita)
Is Kentucky a classic example of a mostly republican area?
Kentucky is about 90% republican…the 10% is the big cities.
Here are some facts about all republican kentucky:
1st in illiteracy
1st in poverty
1st in obesity
1st in smoking per capita
Main industry: Moonshine and marijuana and horses
Don’t get mad at me cause KY is a disaster. Don’t shoot the messenger.
Maybe you should go to Kentucky and tell them how you feel, good chance there will be one less liberal in the world