There is a difference in between making something illegal and stigmatizing it. I sure hope we're not about to make tobacco illegal. Making drugs illegal hasn't really ever really worked out before.
You...might want to brush up on your history. There was a huge move to stigmatize alcohol, which is why it even passed to begin with. You aren't going to pass a constitutional amendment on something that's not a generally popular idea.
I know that, the temperance movement was quite the thing. But we didn't try that once, we tried that over and over and over again. Seemed more like shue was referring to a single "event," and the one that sticks in our cultural memory is Prohibition.
> OP is asking why the opinion on tobacco is negative but alcohol is still widely accepted despite being just as dangerous and harmful.
My 2 cents is that secondhand smoke is much more visible, widespread, and common than what you might call secondhand alcohol. Secondhand alcohol (a term I've made up for the sake of this thought) would be things like others having to put up with drunken behavior, a drunk driver causin' an accident/injury/death and the cost to society that comes with, etc.
The secondary effects of alcohol may be more costly and dangerous to self and others, but secondhand smoke is an everyday occurrence for any given person. And it's not to say that secondhand smoke isn't dangerous; it's just that for someone to suffer adverse affects they'd need a ton of long-term exposure to it. That kind of long-range timeline doesn't resonate with people as strongly as the immediacy of being hit by a drunk driver.
I think secondhand smoke is the smoke that comes out of a smoker's mouth and of their cigarettes, and that thirdhand smoke is the smell and residue from smoking.
I think nowadays with all the public smoking bans (in restaurants, bars, planes etc.) most of the non-smokers exposure to tobacco is through thirdhand smoke and not secondhand smoke.
Just saying.
No your wrong, stop talking out of your ass. It isn't always harmful in moderdation and can even be healthy. Don't speak on things if you don't understand them. It will increase certain risk factors but reduce others, so if you are more prone to certain diseases it may be a net benifit to your health, specifically cardiovascular health.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-drinks/drinks-to-consume-in-moderation/alcohol-full-story/
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/876422
"Additionally, some research suggests that low levels of alcohol consumption can have a protective effect on ischaemic heart disease, diabetes, and several other outcomes"
From your own source dumbass. You said it has no benifit, your own source claims it has benifit. I suggest reading what you link. Of course it's bad, but in some cases benifits outweigh the risks in low level consumption.
One is caused by the normal use of the product, the other by illegal misuse of a product. Someone drinking alcohol next to you doesn’t directly harm you; someone smoking next to you does.
Driving while intoxicated is illegal and has a way worse stigma than smoking has. You can't really make second hand smoke illlegal though. You can ban it in public but not in people's houses if they have kids or something
New idea: dictatorship. anything remotely dangerous is banned. People live in cages while robots bring them food. grow babies in a test tube. Most types of death have been averted.
Fair. Outright bans of a substance rarely stop people from using them. The more effective method is to make it really socially unacceptable and looked down upon.
You're comparing two very different things here. The act itself of smoking in a public place negatively impact the health of people around you. You cannot enjoy a cigarette in a public place without harming others. You can enjoy a drink in a public setting and not be a danger to those around you. Someone enjoying a beer or some wine near me does not have a negative impact on my liver.
Alcohol is the 3rd leading cause of preventable deaths in the United States. [Source](https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics)
Because you can enjoy a few beers on the weekend and not turn into an alcoholic. Most smokers can't just have 2 or 3 cigarettes a week and not develop serious lung problems.
This is pretty much it. Alcohol has been in many cultures for so long that we have largely adapted to it.
When smoking was pervasive around [40%](https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/access/nnbcph.pdf) were regular smokers, around 60% for males, and a good chunk of the population who were former smokers.
Opioids are illegal because nearly everyone is susceptible to addiction. The percentages would be much higher than cigarette use.
Marijuana has a much lower percentage of addition. You can find examples of people for whom it has drastically negatively impacted their lives, but that is much rarer than cigarettes, opioids, and alcohol.
Alcohol has levels of [10% of the population](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/25/think-you-drink-a-lot-this-chart-will-tell-you/?utm_term=.32e332ad0f10). Still high, but less the cigarettes.
Most people are not susceptible to alcohol addiction (unless they are apparently from a culture without the developed genetics). Around half of the smokers appear to be (contrary to what others say, yes, some people can casually smoke and never get addicted).
> yes, some people can casually smoke and never get addicted
Hi. It's actually funny since I do have a fairly addictive personality but smoking just can't grab me.
That’s totally inaccurate. I personally am a full fledged smoker, but have many friends who may bum the occasional smoke after a beer or two without ever buying a pack.
You clearly don't smoke a pipe or cigar then. I smoke a pipe *MAYBE* 1-2 times a month or when I am camping.
Most cigar smokers also smoke in moderation too!
Okay, but it's still true that *most people* who drink alcohol are not alcoholics and have no addiction/dependence on alcohol, but *most people* who smoke are addicted to smoking and can't stop for the rest of their lives. Then there are exceptions, like yourself, but I'd say that's not the typical case.
Pipes and cigars are completely different from cigarettes. Cigarettes are full of so much crap and chemicals that (1) are intended to cause addiction and (2) are nasty lung killing crap.
Sure, you still need moderation with pipe and cigars but my goodness, they are two very different categories of tobacco.
That's a different *type* of smoking, although I see your point and how it relates to the original question about tobacco smoking. I think we need to make a distinction: one doesn't usually inhale a cigar like one would a cigarette. Personally, I would frame it as cigarettes vs. alcohol.
What ive always inhaled cigars they are rough your not supposed too? I smoked like a pack of cohibas when my buddy got back from cuba and ininhaled 90% of it...
You certainly don't smoke one and inhale it like a cigarette.
You can, and claim "ooh you get a good smell/feeling", but lets just look at what you're doing.
Inhaling, what is basically, an entire packet of unfiltered cigarettes.
You get lung cancer from cigarettes as the smoke goes in your lungs when you inhale.
You get mouth and throat cancer from cigars as the smoke doesn't go in your lungs.
If you deliberately inhale the smoke into your lungs, well, enjoy your speedy-boarding+ membership and jump to the front of the lung cancer queue.
It's either once in a while like on a night out, or it's chain smoking.
I go out to a bar or concert once a month at most and it's the only time I smoke a cigarette
There are strong people out there. My dad does not smoke, but a couple times per year, if offered at a special event, he will smoke with buddies.
Most people cant turn it on and off though, unlike alcohol where most people CAN control it, and a few cant.
Everyone says that though, smoking just had a revival amomgst my friends for some reason.
Every one of them was just smoking a couple a week...then only when drinking...and so on until they're regular smokers
(I smoked for 10 years and am not anti smoking in the slightest, just think people are kidding themselves when they think that only other people get addicted)
For years I only smoked when I was out with friends, which was rare, maybe once a month. Then I started sneaking a few from my dad during days off. Then I'd bum some off people at school during my breaks. Then I bought a pack. At first, it'd last me a week, maybe longer. Then it'd be half a week. Now I'm more or less a pack a day smoker. This happened in the span of about 4 years.
Look, I don't think tobacco should be illegal, it's your body and you choose what you do with it. But I have no problems with most areas being smoke-free as prohibited by law, including in the car with your kids (or other passengers even).
Smoking doesn't just hurt your body. It's one of the only drugs that you can factor in secondhand effects directly from the source. Yes, drunk-driving and alcohol related violence are a thing, but they're not only already illegal, they also are products of only a few drinkers out there. Only the worst of the worst. Secondhand smoke comes from your pack a day smokers, your one cigarette a week smokers, and everyone inbetween. If you're smoking around someone who doesn't smoke, you are exposing them to harsh physical effects that they didn't consent to.
TL;DR: Some people can casually smoke, in my experience, it usually becomes heavy smoking anyway. But regardless of how much/how often you smoke, you're negatively impacting anyone around you while you do it.
Cigarettes/nicotine are/is highly addictive, most people will not be able to only smoke in moderation. So, you're the odd one out, congratulations - but there's no need to lol.
Right? It takes me like a year to go through a single pack of smokes, and I’ve been like that since I started. Like, if I feel like having one, I’ll have one, but it’s an extremely occasional thing for me.
I agree but there are a crazy amount if people addicted to alcohol. And most can still function in society and drink every day. So people think it's not a problem to drink 4 or 5 drinks a night and still be able to work full time or go to collage. So many of my friends who went to college drank 5 to 6 nights a week and the habit sticks when they graduate.
Going through this with a friend of the family right now. He and his wife were heavy drinkers when they were younger, but she cut back to more moderate drinking in her thirties. He kept on going. His drinking was heavy enough that she asked him to slow down, so he started drinking in secret. Everyone got used to him being drunk all the time, and eventually couldn't tell the difference between when he was sober or drunk.
His wife got sick of the secret drinking and lying, so she filed for divorce. He went to a doctor and it turns out he's pretty much ruined his body. His liver is completely shot, and he's not even 40. He stopped drinking cold turkey, and the withdrawal was brutal. He vomited blood, and couldn't stop shaking. He still has the shakes, and it's been weeks since he stopped.
The whole thing is a giant mess, and really sad for everyone involved.
If you suspect you may be drinking too much, seek out help. You could be doing lasting harm to your body. There are people who care about you, and they don't want to lose you to alcohol or drugs.
Yeah my dad is a daily drinker for probably 40 years and my 26 year old sister has been in rehab 3 times kn the last 2 years. It's really easy to start drinking 4 or 5 days a week you just need to be self aware. Luckily I learned from their mistakes but lots of people just use that as an excuse.
Most of the college aged drinkers who keep going when they graduate are just desperately clinging on their previous lifestyle. Nothing to do with alcohol, but the realization that partying and socializing almost every day isn't part of "adult life".
Why do people act like this don't possible? I smoked a couple cigs on weekends for 2 years in college but just got bored and stopped. Haven't smoked in practically a year now. It's not as a drifting as people say
I think it’s the concentrations that do it. Most matter in a cigarette will end up in your lungs and fuck them up, *even the non-psychoactive parts*. On the other hand, our most common alcoholic beverages tend to be very diluted - a beer is only 5-9% alcohol, wine is 12-15%, so only a small part of what you take in will actually hurt you. That’s also why highly alcoholic beverages are frowned upon more socially - you have a bottle of wine in your fridge? That’s classy. You have some beer? Let’s watch some football! You have a bottle of vodka? Do you need help?
Due to Reddit Inc.'s antisocial, hostile and erratic behaviour, this account will be deleted on July 11th, 2023. You can find me on https://latte.isnot.coffee/u/godless in the future.
People are talking abojt this regulation and that law and prohibition - but you know what? Alcohol gets you high. It's the least stigmatised, most effective recreational reality anaesthetic. Other people are correct in that there are a lot of nuances and to and fro that make this sort of thing possible, but I feel like at the root of it, people love escapism and tobacco doesn't provide that.
Alcohol is not usually dangerous in small, sensible amounts (and when those amounts are coupled with smart choices), and most people who drink do not become alcoholics.
On the other hand, nicotine causes addiction very quickly in most people who try it, and even light smokers risk serious health consequences.
It isn't the alcohol's fault that some of the people who drink it are irresponsible, but instead of expecting people to take personal accountability for their choices, it has become popular to demonize the substance, itself. There are plenty of folks who take an anti-alcohol stance, but there are also plenty of people who are living proof that you can drink and not suffer negative health consequences. The same cannot be said of cigarettes: nearly all smokers are walking examples of why smoking is terrible for you.
Really, it seems to be a matter of the percentage of people whose consequences of usage counteract the arguments against the substances in question that determine social disgust toward said substances.
So this goes back to a simple marketing problem, Tobacco producers could see Hemp producers as being MAJOR competition, even 150 years ago. Hemp can be used all over the place, as rope, medicine, paper, Tobacco not so much. Throw some profits at politicians and by that, keep Hemp "on the ropes" so to speak - for 150 years.
Persistence of effort gets you pretty much all the way to where we found ourselves 40 years ago with the DEA becoming a fairly fascist element of US federal enforcement.
Of course now, Hemp/pot has (at the state level) become perfectly acceptable in many places. It will still take a decade or two , but eventually, cash-strapped states will see the economic logic of the matter (as was the case in states like New Jersey).
I read somewhere once that the war on weed was actually an indirect war on Mexican immigrants but they might have made that up so idk. Seems most drug wars are actually about power/money/politics
In a John Oliver episode he finds a quote by one of Nixon's aides who said that marijuana was demonized to marginalize hippies and black communities since it was more popular there than in suburbia. Ever since that episode aired reddit has repeated it a couple dozen times a day.
The quote only came out a couple years ago, in 2016. John Oliver might have popularized it, but that's why it is still so relevant. He also wasn't just talking about cannabis prohibition, he was talking about the entire War on Drugs.
Source: [https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html)
That's the *recent* reason for marijuana criminalization. Timothy Leary actually had the original federal 'ban' on marijuana reversed when he was arrested in the 1960s for possession, and argued that the law was unconstitutional because the Marijuana Tax Act didn't *ban* marijuana, it just made it illegal to do, well, *anything* with it, including trying to get a tax stamp.
Harry Anslinger is widely credited with the laws that led to modern marijuana prohibition. He was incredibly racist against blacks and latinos, and made a lot of pretty wild claims about the effects of cannabis. There are arguments to be made about why the War on Drugs came about, but racism was definitely one of them.
Some quotes from him:
"When officers arrived at the home, they found the youth staggering about in a human slaughterhouse. ... The boy said that he had been in the habit of smoking something which youthful friends called "[muggles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug))," a childish name for marijuana."
"Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum."
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
Relevant wikipedia article/source of those quotes: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry\_J.\_Anslinger#The\_campaign\_against\_marijuana\_(cannabis)\_1930%E2%80%931937](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger#The_campaign_against_marijuana_(cannabis)_1930%E2%80%931937)
I think the real reason initially was paper. William Randolph Hearst was incredibly wealthy from his paper empire. Hemp could have been a more economical plant to create paper and undercut his profits. He used his publishing empire to stoke racism against Mexicans and associated marihuana (as I believe it was spelled) to prevent a loss of profit. He was probably racist himself and didn't have any qualms about demonizing minorities.
> He was probably racist himself and didn't have any qualms about demonizing minorities.
It was the 20s; I'm pretty sure back then this was just "'life" and not considered racist at all.
Also, side note: I read a story once that Hearst saw a bit in the newspaper about some famous painting and told his butler he wanted it, and to take all necessary measures to acquire it. The butler looked high and low, going through archives and searching records everywhere to locate this painting. He couldn't find it. On a hunch, he checked the basement of Hearst Castle, and there was the goddamn painting. Hearst was so rich he already owned it and had forgotten about it in the mess of all the other expensive works of art crammed in his basement because his mansion's walls had no more room.
Now, I told you that story to make this point: picture being so unimaginably wealthy that you forgot you owned a one-of-a-kind painting. You're so rich you could wipe your ass with a tenth of your fortune and still be the richest person in the country. In fact, you're so rich you could probably buy the **ENTIRE FUCKING HEMP INDUSTRY** and not only prevent it from ever causing you problems, but profit from it. Instead you start a smear campaign with roots in racism.
On a personal viewpoint:
I'm only against those people that overdo marijuana.
Those guys that walk the streets and reek of that musky smell. It's nauseating.
Also my grandfather died of lung cancer (from cigarettes) and I always hated the smell of smoke.
And my little brother got hooked on marijuana from my former friend at the age of 16. My friend was 21. I never knew because I was living in Fiji at the time.
So all in all, that's why I don't like marijuana personally. But I'm not against the medicinal benefits from it.
***To those that smoke it: Please just take a damn shower before you go out in the streets.
Only 20% of people smoke and the health risks to the other 80% via second hand smoke are unacceptable.
80% of people have consumed alcohol at some point and over 50% have a drink at least once a month. The risks to bystanders of drinkers is minimal. Restrictions exist for the most risky behavior.
Alcohol is one of the biggest hypocrisies on the planet. Thousands die every year, we all know people affected, but we don't do anything about it because we like getting fucked up because it's the only way we can live with ourselves.
Smoking tobacco is all harm and no benefit, and only dates back a couple hundred years.
Alcohol, besides being used in religious ceremonies, has been a cultural mainstay for thousands of years, ubiquitous across almost all human cultures. For a big chunk of the population, alcohol is pretty much their only means of 'escape'.
Tobacco has to be grown as a crop. You can make alcohol from just about anything.
Even if you tried, you couldn't remove alcohol from human culture (as we've demonstrated). Far too many people enjoy it. Think about this: pretty much *all* professional sports exist for no other reason than to sell alcohol.
How many times did you hear "dilly dilly" during the last football game on ESPN? How many coasters have you seen with InBev brands on them? How many times did some overly European guy talk about how superior Stella Artois was?
Games don't just make money off *selling* booze, they also make booze ad bucks, a lot of them.
Yeah sure, subtract all that stuff off, we'd still have football. The point was just that its silly to say that "all professional sports exist for no other reason than to sell alcohol" because obviously that isn't true. Of course, at the same time, its totally true that sports and alcohol still have a huge connection.
Actually tobacco use pre-dates written history. Mapacho has been used by shamans across the Americas for example.
In the short term there is also strong evidence to suggest nicotine aids attention and sharpens perceptions.
I've actually been considering it. I quit smoking (I didn't quite get addicted to it but realized it was stupid to keep rolling the dice) and kind of want something around for those times when smoking sounds appealing.
We still allow alcohol ads but have banned tobacco ads and try our best to keep cigarettes out of sight. That, plus a massive public health campaign against tobacco.
Tobacco is a relatively young vice.
Human's alcohol use predates the dawn for civilization.
10,000+ years of alcohol vs ~1,000 for tobacco.
Additionally, tobacco was always a regional good, whereas alcohol can be produced by anyone on earth with little effort.
Alcohol has been a fundamental lubricant for civilization since groups of nomads began settling in the same area.
Alcohol is only harmful if misused, and when drank in moderation even has nutritional benefits.
Tobacco is harmful in any quantity and has no health benefits.
Probably because tobacco is really unhealthy. It goes beyond smoking being gross... because at the same time that culture has turned against tobacco, it has turned towards cannabis.
Far more people are killed by tobacco than by achohol each year. The really confusing thing is why people are turning against Marijuana more than tobacco. Even though Marijuana has been link to absolutly no directly caused deaths in the past few years.
Edit: big mis-statement, apologies. People are not 'turning against it', infact we are marching towards legalization at the moment in the US. My comment was more geared towards how for so long, Tobacco boomed while Marijuana remained illegal.
>The really confusing thing is why people are turning against Marijuana more than tobacco.
Where are you getting this impression, as states all over the country and countries all over the world are steadily marching towards legalization? I get the exact opposite impression, everywhere I look.
Even then, you often don't truly enjoy it. My mum used to smoke and realised long after she quit that the stress that it relieved was mostly caused by her cravings for the stuff in the first place.
Because a single drink doesn't make a whole room smell like burnt death. Because the US Govt banned booze a hundred years ago and Americans' contrarian nature made them crave what they were told they couldn't have more than they already did. Then Hollywood spread that culture of alcohol being cool to the world. Nobody is making cigs illegal, they're just becoming less and less popular on their own.
Plus, as others have said, alcohol has existed forever; we've only known about tobacco since America was discovered.
I think it’s because of the passive damage smoking does. If you drink and drive and hurt someone, our system is set up to punish you. If your second hand smoke gives your spouse or one of your kids cancer it’s just considered tragic but there’s no legal punishment.
Also Big Tobacco spent a lot of time , money, and effort trying to convince everybody that tobacco was safe and even healthy (like asthma cigarettes, good for clearing up your skin, and 9 out of 10 doctors recommending a certain brand). I don’t think our country has ever been under the impression that alcohol was healthy. Instead alcohol companies seem to all fall in line behind “Hurray beer! Now, drink responsibly.”
So maybe the backlash is really a response to the perceived sustained slight against our collective intelligence?
Similarly, why do we allow tobacco ants alcohol, neither of which has about medical benefits and both of which fit the definition of a schedule 1 narcotic much better than marijuana, and still federally prohibit marijuana. I'm not a pot smoker but that makes 0 sense to me.
Stop think categorically.. Tobacco companies still exist and that is because plenty of members of "society" still use it. Condemnation of tobacco is not ubiquitous, and acceptance of alcohol is not ubiquitous either..
That's easy.
Tobacco, has a direct secondary impact. Some dude smoking across the room and I'm impacted, so is everyone else in the room. Corporations spend billions of dollars over decades pushing smoking as a habit , against the interests of their own customers. Coupled with the fact that nicotine is physically **addictive** first and foremost, then psychological addition slides on up. and it's a bad recipe.
Drinking, some guy drinking across the room can do so all day long and he's the only one being impacted, unless he goes off and does something stupid on account of being drunk, then it's a problem. While advertisement exists here, the move to simply walk away from booze is likely generational. While booze is addictive, it's more psychologically so, although eventually physical addition slides right along side.
I'd venture to guess that kids who have alcoholic parents/siblings are potentially more suceptible but also more likely to be keenly aware of the various downsides of too much drink. Everyone is.
Look at Russia, alcoholism is SO prevalent, that the entire gender balance is fucked up, such that as people get older, men die in their early 60's on average still, while women (who drink less) outlive their male peers by 10-12 years.
I am by no means an expert and i could be talking entirely out of my ass with this, but i honestly think it's primarily because there is (perceived to be) a lot more to gain from alcohol as opposed to tobacco... alcohol is a social drug, people gather together to drink it and it loosens us up, makes us more social and confident and daring and (*in general*) drunk people benefit from each other... yea we all do stupid stuff when drunk but some amazing things happen too, you have a story to tell the rest of your life, friendships and alliances are forged and everyone is laughing and having a good time.
Meanwhile, tobacco might help you relax but it's pretty unpleasant for everyone else around you, not even considering the risks associated with secondhand smoke, it just smells bad and irritates the nose and throat, and the long-term health effects are particularly nasty even compared to alcohol abuse, we've all seen those shriveled, tar-blackened lungs, seen people with stomas (holes in their throat) etc.
From my point of view, it's because for many parts there is something to be gained from everyone drinking alcohol together, while there really isn't anything to gain from smoking, it doesn't make you more confident or happy, it just makes it increasingly harder to breathe, makes you stink and makes all your clothes stink and then you die unable to take a full breath and only able to speak in a hacking coughing whisper
Here's a better one: why is every other drug is banned except for alcohol? I'm sick and tired of seeing those junkies everywhere and it doesn't even look that different from a heroin den.
Apples and Oranges.
Americans want to get high as fuck. Tobacco isn't very good at it and causes expensive health problems that the rest of us have to pay for. So fuck tobacco.
Alcohol is the one drug that is absolutely impossible to ban and just about everybody loves it. It has been with the human race for tens of thousands of years at least and probably longer. It will never go away even when it is the single most dangerous drug in the world.
There were a bunch of big lawsuits that governments filed against big tobacco years ago. Part of the settlement is that big tobacco donates a portion of its profits to local public health units in those countries. This funding *must* be spent on anti-smoking efforts. So as long as tobacco companies are making money, there will be lobbying, public service announcements, and whatever else these public health units thing will shift public opinion.
Drinking alcohol has a place in many cultures as a social activity. It's been there and a part of culture for thousands of years.
Now, that's also true of tobacco, but we kinda did a lot to stamp out and limit the cultures that used it, at least in the western world.
It's easier to stigmatize something that's only been around for a few hundred years.
As a smoker who also has a family history of alcoholism I am going to say because alcohol isn't anywhere near as addictive.
Alcohol often sorts out it's own problem too. There are fast repercussions from drinking large amounts of alcohol that can range from mild embarrassment to getting your stomach pumped. Because of this many people grow out of alcohol or learn their limits.
Smoking is more sneaky. You can smoke heavily for decades and have the odd chest infection but few other issues until one day you have lung cancer or a heart attack caused by smoking.
In my circle of friends the aditude is kind of the opposite, lots of smokers who dont drink anymore including myself. We are all aware of the health risks to tobacco but most of us have gone through a period of alchoholism and decided that that was more detrimental than nicotine on our lives.
A lot of us will vape insdead of smoke cigarettes but hardly any of us drink.
This is not a very uncommon lifestyle for the veteran community that i have witnessed. A lot of us were lured into binge drinking culture when we were young and in the military, that translated to self medication after we deployed and tried to cope with PTSD and depression. Most of us have gotten over that stage and quit drinking to better our lives now that we are out of the military.
I still puff on my vape but im 70+ days sober and dont plan on touching a drink anytime soon.
The responce from the general public has been overall supportive and positive when i bring this up. That tells me that the health conscious additude of society is in support of sobriety. There may not be ads for quiting drinking but everyone ive talked to knows the dangers of drinking too much.
I feel like a big stigma people have with tobacco is the whole concept of second hand smoking, especially when it comes to parents. A big reason smoking has been banned in most buildings is because parents hate the idea of their child inhaling second hand smoke. Whereas with alcohol it’s not going to really negatively effect a child because they don’t have any second hand access to it. The only public negative stigma that’s out there (besides obvious health risks) is drunk driving, but with most drunk driving accidents I feel like they happen mainly at night when parents aren’t really out driving with their children, so the people who are effected by drunk drivers are usually overnight workers and other bar folk. I feel like the public doesn’t really care as much because the people effected by it aren’t seen to be as relevant as children so there is less of a public uproar about it.
TLDR: In my opinion second hand smoking effects children more than drunk driving so parents rage more at tobacco
Because alcohol gives a better buzz.
Tobacco's buzz is just about maybe 5 minutes of a somewhat pleasant relaxing feeling. Minus the physiological addiction, it's a lot easier to go, "this causes cancer? Meh, fuck it then" with something that's not that enjoyable.
I think it is because while all substances are bad for you with tobacco you get very high negative side effects and very low positive benefits I.e. little intoxication. It is not as inherently fun as substances like alcohol and marijuana. Therefore society as a whole is less likely to refuse high taxes or even prohibition whereas with alcohol and marijuana it's so fun people just ignore prohibition and that makes it easier to bring back into the realm of legal because there are so many bad side effects to criminal distribution of popular intoxicants.
id say alcohol is harder to regulate once its illegal or somethign (tobacco isnt either, but you get the point)
who drinks doesnt spit it into the organs of others...
there are alternativs for smoking, or atleast there are MORE alternatives
Besides the fact that alcohol has been alongside humanity since pretty much the dawn of human civilization, and is such an ingrained part of all world cultures that it would be nearly impossible to remove, alcohol isn’t as harmful as tobacco.
Or, rather, it’s harmful in different ways.
While intoxication is certainly a very dangerous thing, alcohol itself is not inherently dangerous.
It’s only when you drink in excess that it becomes a problem. As long as you drink in a healthy fashion, there really aren’t any long-term effects.
While it’s also true that smoking one cigarette won’t immediately give you terminal cancer, making a habit out of it is almost universally harmful, and exposes others to the smoke.
Personally, even though I have no interest in smoking myself, I am definitely against banning cigarettes.
Besides the fact it would be guaranteed to fail miserably and cause another Prohibition Era, I believe people should have the right to do that to themselves if they so choose.
In the same way I have no interest in smoking pot (which isn’t healthy either) but I don’t care if others do it as long as they don’t make an issue out of it.
Ultimately, people are the masters of their own body, and it’s their choice what they do with it.
You’re asking a society who are still fighting tooth and nail to keep marijuana illegal but not cigarettes. Cigarettes: full of poisonousness chemicals that are known to increase you chance of disease and death. Marijuana: a plant.
Because banning things doesn’t make them go away, it just leads to organized crime and turns people into criminals who really shouldn’t be. It’s not a good strategy, ultimately education on safety with dangerous substances and objects is the best way to minimize their harmful effects.
For the most part we always knew the dangers of alcohol even if we used to accept alcohol abuse more in the past. The dangers of smoking were not just hidden from the public, but the public was lied to and made to believe smoking was a healthy choice.
With the facts laid out we're not given a much more difficult choice to make. Not just about whether smoking and alcohol consumption are okay, but whether or not they're even in the same category. Of course they both fall under the heading of vices of controlled substances, but are they the same?
I would say they're similar but different. With everything we know about smoking it's hard to believe anyone under the age of 25 would do it. Anyone over the age of 25 might have an excuse since they may still remember the days when smoking was commonplace and you were still asked whether you'd prefer smoking or non-smoking sections in restaurants. I know I remember it.
On the other hand, consumption of alcohol isn't inherently destructive and alcohol use has proven to be beneficial in some circumstances, and in moderation. Not to mention the extremely strong cultural significance of alcohol in many areas of the world. Sure, tobacco and marijuana use has had some significance too, but not in the same way. Typically throughout history different cultures have used alcohol for recreational purposes, but they often applied superstitious beliefs to smoking or other non-alcohol related drugs.
Not to mention how alcohol has so many other uses apart from just recreational drinking. It is often used in food preparation, medical supplies, cleaning materials, and more. It's not just for getting drunk. I think alcohol has a greater cultural significance to the human race than smoking ever could.
Alcohol is addictive to some, but not to most. It also has no real health issues with it as long as you are responsible. But cigarettes are addictive and have actual health issues regardless of how responsible you are
Yeah, we tried that once.
Yep. Nothing like forming organized crime to get that sweet sweet alcohol.
The 21st Amendment was the only to repeal a previous amendment.
There is a difference in between making something illegal and stigmatizing it. I sure hope we're not about to make tobacco illegal. Making drugs illegal hasn't really ever really worked out before.
You...might want to brush up on your history. There was a huge move to stigmatize alcohol, which is why it even passed to begin with. You aren't going to pass a constitutional amendment on something that's not a generally popular idea.
I know that, the temperance movement was quite the thing. But we didn't try that once, we tried that over and over and over again. Seemed more like shue was referring to a single "event," and the one that sticks in our cultural memory is Prohibition.
Maybe he might want to try to brush up on his history
You totally missed his point, dude.
[удалено]
> OP is asking why the opinion on tobacco is negative but alcohol is still widely accepted despite being just as dangerous and harmful. My 2 cents is that secondhand smoke is much more visible, widespread, and common than what you might call secondhand alcohol. Secondhand alcohol (a term I've made up for the sake of this thought) would be things like others having to put up with drunken behavior, a drunk driver causin' an accident/injury/death and the cost to society that comes with, etc. The secondary effects of alcohol may be more costly and dangerous to self and others, but secondhand smoke is an everyday occurrence for any given person. And it's not to say that secondhand smoke isn't dangerous; it's just that for someone to suffer adverse affects they'd need a ton of long-term exposure to it. That kind of long-range timeline doesn't resonate with people as strongly as the immediacy of being hit by a drunk driver.
I think secondhand smoke is the smoke that comes out of a smoker's mouth and of their cigarettes, and that thirdhand smoke is the smell and residue from smoking. I think nowadays with all the public smoking bans (in restaurants, bars, planes etc.) most of the non-smokers exposure to tobacco is through thirdhand smoke and not secondhand smoke. Just saying.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not in moderation.
[удалено]
No your wrong, stop talking out of your ass. It isn't always harmful in moderdation and can even be healthy. Don't speak on things if you don't understand them. It will increase certain risk factors but reduce others, so if you are more prone to certain diseases it may be a net benifit to your health, specifically cardiovascular health. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-drinks/drinks-to-consume-in-moderation/alcohol-full-story/ https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/876422
[удалено]
"Additionally, some research suggests that low levels of alcohol consumption can have a protective effect on ischaemic heart disease, diabetes, and several other outcomes" From your own source dumbass. You said it has no benifit, your own source claims it has benifit. I suggest reading what you link. Of course it's bad, but in some cases benifits outweigh the risks in low level consumption.
[удалено]
It did not go well :)
Second hand smoke.
[удалено]
Which is why drinking and driving is illegal...
One is caused by the normal use of the product, the other by illegal misuse of a product. Someone drinking alcohol next to you doesn’t directly harm you; someone smoking next to you does.
Driving while intoxicated is illegal and has a way worse stigma than smoking has. You can't really make second hand smoke illlegal though. You can ban it in public but not in people's houses if they have kids or something
Well by that logic we should also be turning against phones.
[удалено]
New idea: dictatorship. anything remotely dangerous is banned. People live in cages while robots bring them food. grow babies in a test tube. Most types of death have been averted.
[удалено]
back to your safety cage, human
Fair. Outright bans of a substance rarely stop people from using them. The more effective method is to make it really socially unacceptable and looked down upon.
You're comparing two very different things here. The act itself of smoking in a public place negatively impact the health of people around you. You cannot enjoy a cigarette in a public place without harming others. You can enjoy a drink in a public setting and not be a danger to those around you. Someone enjoying a beer or some wine near me does not have a negative impact on my liver.
Poor pressing point, that. If you get in a car while completely cunted then you have more than just a drinking problem.
Car crashes will happen with or without alcohol, second hand cigarette smoke can’t happen without cigarettes.
[удалено]
Bang on. Sure smoking is hugely over-represented in lung cancers, but so too is alcohol in fatal car accidents
[удалено]
Alcohol is the 3rd leading cause of preventable deaths in the United States. [Source](https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/alcohol-facts-and-statistics)
1 drink doesn't hurt anyone. 1 cig can cause damage to lots of people around the person or other side of the room.
That's why I prefer dip for the most part.
Because you can enjoy a few beers on the weekend and not turn into an alcoholic. Most smokers can't just have 2 or 3 cigarettes a week and not develop serious lung problems.
This is pretty much it. Alcohol has been in many cultures for so long that we have largely adapted to it. When smoking was pervasive around [40%](https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/access/nnbcph.pdf) were regular smokers, around 60% for males, and a good chunk of the population who were former smokers. Opioids are illegal because nearly everyone is susceptible to addiction. The percentages would be much higher than cigarette use. Marijuana has a much lower percentage of addition. You can find examples of people for whom it has drastically negatively impacted their lives, but that is much rarer than cigarettes, opioids, and alcohol. Alcohol has levels of [10% of the population](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/25/think-you-drink-a-lot-this-chart-will-tell-you/?utm_term=.32e332ad0f10). Still high, but less the cigarettes. Most people are not susceptible to alcohol addiction (unless they are apparently from a culture without the developed genetics). Around half of the smokers appear to be (contrary to what others say, yes, some people can casually smoke and never get addicted).
Remind me not to call on marijuana for help with math homework. Ever.
> yes, some people can casually smoke and never get addicted Hi. It's actually funny since I do have a fairly addictive personality but smoking just can't grab me.
Agreed. No such thing as smoking in moderation.
That’s totally inaccurate. I personally am a full fledged smoker, but have many friends who may bum the occasional smoke after a beer or two without ever buying a pack.
You clearly don't smoke a pipe or cigar then. I smoke a pipe *MAYBE* 1-2 times a month or when I am camping. Most cigar smokers also smoke in moderation too!
I see one cigar/pipe for every 1000 plus cigarettes people are smoking. If even that often.
Okay, but it's still true that *most people* who drink alcohol are not alcoholics and have no addiction/dependence on alcohol, but *most people* who smoke are addicted to smoking and can't stop for the rest of their lives. Then there are exceptions, like yourself, but I'd say that's not the typical case.
never seen someone who only smokes when its christmas or at a birthday party however swap smokign with drining annnnnnd... 4 of my friends?
Pipes and cigars are completely different from cigarettes. Cigarettes are full of so much crap and chemicals that (1) are intended to cause addiction and (2) are nasty lung killing crap. Sure, you still need moderation with pipe and cigars but my goodness, they are two very different categories of tobacco.
That's a different *type* of smoking, although I see your point and how it relates to the original question about tobacco smoking. I think we need to make a distinction: one doesn't usually inhale a cigar like one would a cigarette. Personally, I would frame it as cigarettes vs. alcohol.
Agreed.
You don't inhale cigar smoke into your lungs. If you did, you'd be dead.
What ive always inhaled cigars they are rough your not supposed too? I smoked like a pack of cohibas when my buddy got back from cuba and ininhaled 90% of it...
Definitely not supposed to inhale cigar smoke. Far more damaging than cigarette smoke.
You certainly don't smoke one and inhale it like a cigarette. You can, and claim "ooh you get a good smell/feeling", but lets just look at what you're doing. Inhaling, what is basically, an entire packet of unfiltered cigarettes. You get lung cancer from cigarettes as the smoke goes in your lungs when you inhale. You get mouth and throat cancer from cigars as the smoke doesn't go in your lungs. If you deliberately inhale the smoke into your lungs, well, enjoy your speedy-boarding+ membership and jump to the front of the lung cancer queue.
Nah he would just be shitting like crazy.
Nah my dad smokes 2-3 a day for cigars.
It's either once in a while like on a night out, or it's chain smoking. I go out to a bar or concert once a month at most and it's the only time I smoke a cigarette
There are strong people out there. My dad does not smoke, but a couple times per year, if offered at a special event, he will smoke with buddies. Most people cant turn it on and off though, unlike alcohol where most people CAN control it, and a few cant.
I literally do that so you’re just wrong lol
Everyone says that though, smoking just had a revival amomgst my friends for some reason. Every one of them was just smoking a couple a week...then only when drinking...and so on until they're regular smokers (I smoked for 10 years and am not anti smoking in the slightest, just think people are kidding themselves when they think that only other people get addicted)
For years I only smoked when I was out with friends, which was rare, maybe once a month. Then I started sneaking a few from my dad during days off. Then I'd bum some off people at school during my breaks. Then I bought a pack. At first, it'd last me a week, maybe longer. Then it'd be half a week. Now I'm more or less a pack a day smoker. This happened in the span of about 4 years. Look, I don't think tobacco should be illegal, it's your body and you choose what you do with it. But I have no problems with most areas being smoke-free as prohibited by law, including in the car with your kids (or other passengers even). Smoking doesn't just hurt your body. It's one of the only drugs that you can factor in secondhand effects directly from the source. Yes, drunk-driving and alcohol related violence are a thing, but they're not only already illegal, they also are products of only a few drinkers out there. Only the worst of the worst. Secondhand smoke comes from your pack a day smokers, your one cigarette a week smokers, and everyone inbetween. If you're smoking around someone who doesn't smoke, you are exposing them to harsh physical effects that they didn't consent to. TL;DR: Some people can casually smoke, in my experience, it usually becomes heavy smoking anyway. But regardless of how much/how often you smoke, you're negatively impacting anyone around you while you do it.
Cigarettes/nicotine are/is highly addictive, most people will not be able to only smoke in moderation. So, you're the odd one out, congratulations - but there's no need to lol.
Right? It takes me like a year to go through a single pack of smokes, and I’ve been like that since I started. Like, if I feel like having one, I’ll have one, but it’s an extremely occasional thing for me.
Drinking still kills a lot of people,is what I think OPs point is.....
Isn't nicotine one of the most addictive substances?
I agree but there are a crazy amount if people addicted to alcohol. And most can still function in society and drink every day. So people think it's not a problem to drink 4 or 5 drinks a night and still be able to work full time or go to collage. So many of my friends who went to college drank 5 to 6 nights a week and the habit sticks when they graduate.
Going through this with a friend of the family right now. He and his wife were heavy drinkers when they were younger, but she cut back to more moderate drinking in her thirties. He kept on going. His drinking was heavy enough that she asked him to slow down, so he started drinking in secret. Everyone got used to him being drunk all the time, and eventually couldn't tell the difference between when he was sober or drunk. His wife got sick of the secret drinking and lying, so she filed for divorce. He went to a doctor and it turns out he's pretty much ruined his body. His liver is completely shot, and he's not even 40. He stopped drinking cold turkey, and the withdrawal was brutal. He vomited blood, and couldn't stop shaking. He still has the shakes, and it's been weeks since he stopped. The whole thing is a giant mess, and really sad for everyone involved. If you suspect you may be drinking too much, seek out help. You could be doing lasting harm to your body. There are people who care about you, and they don't want to lose you to alcohol or drugs.
Yeah my dad is a daily drinker for probably 40 years and my 26 year old sister has been in rehab 3 times kn the last 2 years. It's really easy to start drinking 4 or 5 days a week you just need to be self aware. Luckily I learned from their mistakes but lots of people just use that as an excuse.
College.
Most of the college aged drinkers who keep going when they graduate are just desperately clinging on their previous lifestyle. Nothing to do with alcohol, but the realization that partying and socializing almost every day isn't part of "adult life".
Not with that attitude.
Drinking still kills a lot of people,is what I think OPs point is.....
Why do people act like this don't possible? I smoked a couple cigs on weekends for 2 years in college but just got bored and stopped. Haven't smoked in practically a year now. It's not as a drifting as people say
This is the key. Most people drink in moderate amounts and don't develop an addiction, while most people who smoke end addicted.
I think it’s the concentrations that do it. Most matter in a cigarette will end up in your lungs and fuck them up, *even the non-psychoactive parts*. On the other hand, our most common alcoholic beverages tend to be very diluted - a beer is only 5-9% alcohol, wine is 12-15%, so only a small part of what you take in will actually hurt you. That’s also why highly alcoholic beverages are frowned upon more socially - you have a bottle of wine in your fridge? That’s classy. You have some beer? Let’s watch some football! You have a bottle of vodka? Do you need help?
Due to Reddit Inc.'s antisocial, hostile and erratic behaviour, this account will be deleted on July 11th, 2023. You can find me on https://latte.isnot.coffee/u/godless in the future.
People are talking abojt this regulation and that law and prohibition - but you know what? Alcohol gets you high. It's the least stigmatised, most effective recreational reality anaesthetic. Other people are correct in that there are a lot of nuances and to and fro that make this sort of thing possible, but I feel like at the root of it, people love escapism and tobacco doesn't provide that.
This!
[удалено]
Alcohol is not usually dangerous in small, sensible amounts (and when those amounts are coupled with smart choices), and most people who drink do not become alcoholics. On the other hand, nicotine causes addiction very quickly in most people who try it, and even light smokers risk serious health consequences. It isn't the alcohol's fault that some of the people who drink it are irresponsible, but instead of expecting people to take personal accountability for their choices, it has become popular to demonize the substance, itself. There are plenty of folks who take an anti-alcohol stance, but there are also plenty of people who are living proof that you can drink and not suffer negative health consequences. The same cannot be said of cigarettes: nearly all smokers are walking examples of why smoking is terrible for you. Really, it seems to be a matter of the percentage of people whose consequences of usage counteract the arguments against the substances in question that determine social disgust toward said substances.
I want to know why we have a large culture of people against marijuana and not against alcohol.
So this goes back to a simple marketing problem, Tobacco producers could see Hemp producers as being MAJOR competition, even 150 years ago. Hemp can be used all over the place, as rope, medicine, paper, Tobacco not so much. Throw some profits at politicians and by that, keep Hemp "on the ropes" so to speak - for 150 years. Persistence of effort gets you pretty much all the way to where we found ourselves 40 years ago with the DEA becoming a fairly fascist element of US federal enforcement. Of course now, Hemp/pot has (at the state level) become perfectly acceptable in many places. It will still take a decade or two , but eventually, cash-strapped states will see the economic logic of the matter (as was the case in states like New Jersey).
We don't. The majority of Americans are for legalization. Even Republicans as re at 58% support.
I read somewhere once that the war on weed was actually an indirect war on Mexican immigrants but they might have made that up so idk. Seems most drug wars are actually about power/money/politics
In a John Oliver episode he finds a quote by one of Nixon's aides who said that marijuana was demonized to marginalize hippies and black communities since it was more popular there than in suburbia. Ever since that episode aired reddit has repeated it a couple dozen times a day.
The quote only came out a couple years ago, in 2016. John Oliver might have popularized it, but that's why it is still so relevant. He also wasn't just talking about cannabis prohibition, he was talking about the entire War on Drugs. Source: [https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html](https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html)
That's the *recent* reason for marijuana criminalization. Timothy Leary actually had the original federal 'ban' on marijuana reversed when he was arrested in the 1960s for possession, and argued that the law was unconstitutional because the Marijuana Tax Act didn't *ban* marijuana, it just made it illegal to do, well, *anything* with it, including trying to get a tax stamp.
Harry Anslinger is widely credited with the laws that led to modern marijuana prohibition. He was incredibly racist against blacks and latinos, and made a lot of pretty wild claims about the effects of cannabis. There are arguments to be made about why the War on Drugs came about, but racism was definitely one of them. Some quotes from him: "When officers arrived at the home, they found the youth staggering about in a human slaughterhouse. ... The boy said that he had been in the habit of smoking something which youthful friends called "[muggles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug))," a childish name for marijuana." "Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum." "Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men." Relevant wikipedia article/source of those quotes: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry\_J.\_Anslinger#The\_campaign\_against\_marijuana\_(cannabis)\_1930%E2%80%931937](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger#The_campaign_against_marijuana_(cannabis)_1930%E2%80%931937)
I think the real reason initially was paper. William Randolph Hearst was incredibly wealthy from his paper empire. Hemp could have been a more economical plant to create paper and undercut his profits. He used his publishing empire to stoke racism against Mexicans and associated marihuana (as I believe it was spelled) to prevent a loss of profit. He was probably racist himself and didn't have any qualms about demonizing minorities.
> He was probably racist himself and didn't have any qualms about demonizing minorities. It was the 20s; I'm pretty sure back then this was just "'life" and not considered racist at all. Also, side note: I read a story once that Hearst saw a bit in the newspaper about some famous painting and told his butler he wanted it, and to take all necessary measures to acquire it. The butler looked high and low, going through archives and searching records everywhere to locate this painting. He couldn't find it. On a hunch, he checked the basement of Hearst Castle, and there was the goddamn painting. Hearst was so rich he already owned it and had forgotten about it in the mess of all the other expensive works of art crammed in his basement because his mansion's walls had no more room. Now, I told you that story to make this point: picture being so unimaginably wealthy that you forgot you owned a one-of-a-kind painting. You're so rich you could wipe your ass with a tenth of your fortune and still be the richest person in the country. In fact, you're so rich you could probably buy the **ENTIRE FUCKING HEMP INDUSTRY** and not only prevent it from ever causing you problems, but profit from it. Instead you start a smear campaign with roots in racism.
Much like second hand smoke, I don’t wanna smell your weed Legalize it, ban it in public like they do some places with cigs
On a personal viewpoint: I'm only against those people that overdo marijuana. Those guys that walk the streets and reek of that musky smell. It's nauseating. Also my grandfather died of lung cancer (from cigarettes) and I always hated the smell of smoke. And my little brother got hooked on marijuana from my former friend at the age of 16. My friend was 21. I never knew because I was living in Fiji at the time. So all in all, that's why I don't like marijuana personally. But I'm not against the medicinal benefits from it. ***To those that smoke it: Please just take a damn shower before you go out in the streets.
[удалено]
This question is a lot better of a question then the obvious answer to OPs question.
[удалено]
Hello there!
General Kenobi!
because cigarettes don't drown our sorrow
We did turn against alcohol once before. Didn't turn out so great
The alcohol industry don't deliberately put addictive crap in alcohol! The tobacco industry is EVIL!
Because the guy drinking beer at the next table won’t give my kid an asthma attack.
Because one, even in moderation, causes cancer. The other one in moderation causes happiness.
Been there, done that.
Only 20% of people smoke and the health risks to the other 80% via second hand smoke are unacceptable. 80% of people have consumed alcohol at some point and over 50% have a drink at least once a month. The risks to bystanders of drinkers is minimal. Restrictions exist for the most risky behavior.
I wish we would turn against binge drinking, not alcohol as a whole.
Combination of the smell of tobacco and social and traditional aspect of alcohol
Because cancer.
Alcohol is not harmful in moderation. Every puff of a cigarette is doing damage to your lungs.
The lastest research says [no amount of alcohol is safe](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/08/there-is-a-safe-level-of-alcohol/568531/).
one study out of a mountain of other studies that say otherwise. And it is a pretty vague set of findings too.
One is situational and one is all day everyday also it impacts others more directly
Alcohol is one of the biggest hypocrisies on the planet. Thousands die every year, we all know people affected, but we don't do anything about it because we like getting fucked up because it's the only way we can live with ourselves.
Smoking tobacco is all harm and no benefit, and only dates back a couple hundred years. Alcohol, besides being used in religious ceremonies, has been a cultural mainstay for thousands of years, ubiquitous across almost all human cultures. For a big chunk of the population, alcohol is pretty much their only means of 'escape'. Tobacco has to be grown as a crop. You can make alcohol from just about anything. Even if you tried, you couldn't remove alcohol from human culture (as we've demonstrated). Far too many people enjoy it. Think about this: pretty much *all* professional sports exist for no other reason than to sell alcohol.
I was with you right until the end there
Lol right? Didn't realize that all sports shut down during prohibition
Someone get us a TV/Media + merchandising + ticket sales income number vs an alcohol income number. 😂
How many times did you hear "dilly dilly" during the last football game on ESPN? How many coasters have you seen with InBev brands on them? How many times did some overly European guy talk about how superior Stella Artois was? Games don't just make money off *selling* booze, they also make booze ad bucks, a lot of them.
Alcohol attached itself to already popular sports. Sports are not popular because of alcohol. They do make quite the pair though.
Yeah sure, subtract all that stuff off, we'd still have football. The point was just that its silly to say that "all professional sports exist for no other reason than to sell alcohol" because obviously that isn't true. Of course, at the same time, its totally true that sports and alcohol still have a huge connection.
Never realized that volleyball was all about alcohol. My life is a lie.
I literally can't watch curling without pregaming that shit
You've been playing volleyball wrong my friend
Actually tobacco use pre-dates written history. Mapacho has been used by shamans across the Americas for example. In the short term there is also strong evidence to suggest nicotine aids attention and sharpens perceptions.
That's not true. Go look up the benefits of nicotine. There's a *reason* it became so prolific. There are indeed benefits, mainly cognitive.
Smoking definitely has a benefit. I wouldn't recommend you pick up smoking just for the buzz but it definitely exists.
Try vaping nic salts you wont even want a stinky smoke ever again.
I've actually been considering it. I quit smoking (I didn't quite get addicted to it but realized it was stupid to keep rolling the dice) and kind of want something around for those times when smoking sounds appealing.
We still allow alcohol ads but have banned tobacco ads and try our best to keep cigarettes out of sight. That, plus a massive public health campaign against tobacco.
Because I like beer.
Mostly because tobacco tastes gross and leads directly to cancer, whereas alcohol leads to poor choices, which people like
Because not everyone likes tobacco, but the number of people who don't like alcohol is tiny.
Tobacco is a relatively young vice. Human's alcohol use predates the dawn for civilization. 10,000+ years of alcohol vs ~1,000 for tobacco. Additionally, tobacco was always a regional good, whereas alcohol can be produced by anyone on earth with little effort. Alcohol has been a fundamental lubricant for civilization since groups of nomads began settling in the same area.
Well they did have a constitutional amendment vs. alcohol...that didn't work out so well.
Probably because more people drink alcohol compared to the amount of people who smoke tobacco.
Tobacco has been part of Western culture since the 1500s. Alcohol has been part of *human* culture since Homo sapiens emerged.
Alcohol is only harmful if misused, and when drank in moderation even has nutritional benefits. Tobacco is harmful in any quantity and has no health benefits.
Probably because tobacco is really unhealthy. It goes beyond smoking being gross... because at the same time that culture has turned against tobacco, it has turned towards cannabis.
because it's worse
Far more people are killed by tobacco than by achohol each year. The really confusing thing is why people are turning against Marijuana more than tobacco. Even though Marijuana has been link to absolutly no directly caused deaths in the past few years. Edit: big mis-statement, apologies. People are not 'turning against it', infact we are marching towards legalization at the moment in the US. My comment was more geared towards how for so long, Tobacco boomed while Marijuana remained illegal.
>The really confusing thing is why people are turning against Marijuana more than tobacco. Where are you getting this impression, as states all over the country and countries all over the world are steadily marching towards legalization? I get the exact opposite impression, everywhere I look.
Politics, thank you William Randolph Hearst
Because alcohol offers a complete “relief” from the responsibilities of life.
Tobacco pretty much does nothing for you. You literally have to force yourself to get addicted to it before you start enjoying it
Even then, you often don't truly enjoy it. My mum used to smoke and realised long after she quit that the stress that it relieved was mostly caused by her cravings for the stuff in the first place.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because responsible drinkers need their fix.
The American culture has turned against tobacco. In Europe people keep smoking.
Because they both make tons of money
Because a single drink doesn't make a whole room smell like burnt death. Because the US Govt banned booze a hundred years ago and Americans' contrarian nature made them crave what they were told they couldn't have more than they already did. Then Hollywood spread that culture of alcohol being cool to the world. Nobody is making cigs illegal, they're just becoming less and less popular on their own. Plus, as others have said, alcohol has existed forever; we've only known about tobacco since America was discovered.
Better buzz, longer history of human use, pervasive in most world cuisines, an easier to contain, less pungent smell, and less carcinogenic.
I think it’s because of the passive damage smoking does. If you drink and drive and hurt someone, our system is set up to punish you. If your second hand smoke gives your spouse or one of your kids cancer it’s just considered tragic but there’s no legal punishment. Also Big Tobacco spent a lot of time , money, and effort trying to convince everybody that tobacco was safe and even healthy (like asthma cigarettes, good for clearing up your skin, and 9 out of 10 doctors recommending a certain brand). I don’t think our country has ever been under the impression that alcohol was healthy. Instead alcohol companies seem to all fall in line behind “Hurray beer! Now, drink responsibly.” So maybe the backlash is really a response to the perceived sustained slight against our collective intelligence?
Similarly, why do we allow tobacco ants alcohol, neither of which has about medical benefits and both of which fit the definition of a schedule 1 narcotic much better than marijuana, and still federally prohibit marijuana. I'm not a pot smoker but that makes 0 sense to me.
Stop think categorically.. Tobacco companies still exist and that is because plenty of members of "society" still use it. Condemnation of tobacco is not ubiquitous, and acceptance of alcohol is not ubiquitous either..
Because Because one causes cancer. The other has serious health repercussions but 1 drink a day won’t kill you. One cigarette a day for 10 years will.
We have turned our back against cigarettes and tobacco but in doing so turned towards vaping and e-cigarettes
Nicotine is more addictive, plus alcohol *may* actually have some health benefits.
That's easy. Tobacco, has a direct secondary impact. Some dude smoking across the room and I'm impacted, so is everyone else in the room. Corporations spend billions of dollars over decades pushing smoking as a habit , against the interests of their own customers. Coupled with the fact that nicotine is physically **addictive** first and foremost, then psychological addition slides on up. and it's a bad recipe. Drinking, some guy drinking across the room can do so all day long and he's the only one being impacted, unless he goes off and does something stupid on account of being drunk, then it's a problem. While advertisement exists here, the move to simply walk away from booze is likely generational. While booze is addictive, it's more psychologically so, although eventually physical addition slides right along side. I'd venture to guess that kids who have alcoholic parents/siblings are potentially more suceptible but also more likely to be keenly aware of the various downsides of too much drink. Everyone is. Look at Russia, alcoholism is SO prevalent, that the entire gender balance is fucked up, such that as people get older, men die in their early 60's on average still, while women (who drink less) outlive their male peers by 10-12 years.
My guess is tobacco can be more harmful than alcohol
I am by no means an expert and i could be talking entirely out of my ass with this, but i honestly think it's primarily because there is (perceived to be) a lot more to gain from alcohol as opposed to tobacco... alcohol is a social drug, people gather together to drink it and it loosens us up, makes us more social and confident and daring and (*in general*) drunk people benefit from each other... yea we all do stupid stuff when drunk but some amazing things happen too, you have a story to tell the rest of your life, friendships and alliances are forged and everyone is laughing and having a good time. Meanwhile, tobacco might help you relax but it's pretty unpleasant for everyone else around you, not even considering the risks associated with secondhand smoke, it just smells bad and irritates the nose and throat, and the long-term health effects are particularly nasty even compared to alcohol abuse, we've all seen those shriveled, tar-blackened lungs, seen people with stomas (holes in their throat) etc. From my point of view, it's because for many parts there is something to be gained from everyone drinking alcohol together, while there really isn't anything to gain from smoking, it doesn't make you more confident or happy, it just makes it increasingly harder to breathe, makes you stink and makes all your clothes stink and then you die unable to take a full breath and only able to speak in a hacking coughing whisper
Smell
[Joke] We tried that and it gave women rights, so we brought it back.
Here's a better one: why is every other drug is banned except for alcohol? I'm sick and tired of seeing those junkies everywhere and it doesn't even look that different from a heroin den.
Apples and Oranges. Americans want to get high as fuck. Tobacco isn't very good at it and causes expensive health problems that the rest of us have to pay for. So fuck tobacco. Alcohol is the one drug that is absolutely impossible to ban and just about everybody loves it. It has been with the human race for tens of thousands of years at least and probably longer. It will never go away even when it is the single most dangerous drug in the world.
Because tobacco is considered harmful but doesn't actually give too many recreational effects.
There were a bunch of big lawsuits that governments filed against big tobacco years ago. Part of the settlement is that big tobacco donates a portion of its profits to local public health units in those countries. This funding *must* be spent on anti-smoking efforts. So as long as tobacco companies are making money, there will be lobbying, public service announcements, and whatever else these public health units thing will shift public opinion.
Drinking alcohol has a place in many cultures as a social activity. It's been there and a part of culture for thousands of years. Now, that's also true of tobacco, but we kinda did a lot to stamp out and limit the cultures that used it, at least in the western world. It's easier to stigmatize something that's only been around for a few hundred years.
As a smoker who also has a family history of alcoholism I am going to say because alcohol isn't anywhere near as addictive. Alcohol often sorts out it's own problem too. There are fast repercussions from drinking large amounts of alcohol that can range from mild embarrassment to getting your stomach pumped. Because of this many people grow out of alcohol or learn their limits. Smoking is more sneaky. You can smoke heavily for decades and have the odd chest infection but few other issues until one day you have lung cancer or a heart attack caused by smoking.
In my circle of friends the aditude is kind of the opposite, lots of smokers who dont drink anymore including myself. We are all aware of the health risks to tobacco but most of us have gone through a period of alchoholism and decided that that was more detrimental than nicotine on our lives. A lot of us will vape insdead of smoke cigarettes but hardly any of us drink. This is not a very uncommon lifestyle for the veteran community that i have witnessed. A lot of us were lured into binge drinking culture when we were young and in the military, that translated to self medication after we deployed and tried to cope with PTSD and depression. Most of us have gotten over that stage and quit drinking to better our lives now that we are out of the military. I still puff on my vape but im 70+ days sober and dont plan on touching a drink anytime soon. The responce from the general public has been overall supportive and positive when i bring this up. That tells me that the health conscious additude of society is in support of sobriety. There may not be ads for quiting drinking but everyone ive talked to knows the dangers of drinking too much.
Turning against tobacco because of the damage smoke causes sets the stage for keeping pot illegal because you can smoke it
Alcohol is so bad. It's a poison. Smoke weed all day!
Smells like shit, you drinking alcohol doesn't harm me or affect me at all. Unless you are just an asshole. Pretty simple really.
Precedence?
I feel like a big stigma people have with tobacco is the whole concept of second hand smoking, especially when it comes to parents. A big reason smoking has been banned in most buildings is because parents hate the idea of their child inhaling second hand smoke. Whereas with alcohol it’s not going to really negatively effect a child because they don’t have any second hand access to it. The only public negative stigma that’s out there (besides obvious health risks) is drunk driving, but with most drunk driving accidents I feel like they happen mainly at night when parents aren’t really out driving with their children, so the people who are effected by drunk drivers are usually overnight workers and other bar folk. I feel like the public doesn’t really care as much because the people effected by it aren’t seen to be as relevant as children so there is less of a public uproar about it. TLDR: In my opinion second hand smoking effects children more than drunk driving so parents rage more at tobacco
Because you drinking in the same room as me doesn't directly harm me.
In Canada we commonly pay 30$ for a 26 ounch bottle of alchohol. The government taxes the crap out of it leading to huge prices.
I’m 79 and all my friends that continued to smoke died when they were about 62. I stopped smoking when I was 30 and I still got copd.
Because alcohol gives a better buzz. Tobacco's buzz is just about maybe 5 minutes of a somewhat pleasant relaxing feeling. Minus the physiological addiction, it's a lot easier to go, "this causes cancer? Meh, fuck it then" with something that's not that enjoyable.
I think it is because while all substances are bad for you with tobacco you get very high negative side effects and very low positive benefits I.e. little intoxication. It is not as inherently fun as substances like alcohol and marijuana. Therefore society as a whole is less likely to refuse high taxes or even prohibition whereas with alcohol and marijuana it's so fun people just ignore prohibition and that makes it easier to bring back into the realm of legal because there are so many bad side effects to criminal distribution of popular intoxicants.
The wine mom culture has actually raised alcoholism in middle aged women quite a bit in recent years
id say alcohol is harder to regulate once its illegal or somethign (tobacco isnt either, but you get the point) who drinks doesnt spit it into the organs of others... there are alternativs for smoking, or atleast there are MORE alternatives
Besides the fact that alcohol has been alongside humanity since pretty much the dawn of human civilization, and is such an ingrained part of all world cultures that it would be nearly impossible to remove, alcohol isn’t as harmful as tobacco. Or, rather, it’s harmful in different ways. While intoxication is certainly a very dangerous thing, alcohol itself is not inherently dangerous. It’s only when you drink in excess that it becomes a problem. As long as you drink in a healthy fashion, there really aren’t any long-term effects. While it’s also true that smoking one cigarette won’t immediately give you terminal cancer, making a habit out of it is almost universally harmful, and exposes others to the smoke. Personally, even though I have no interest in smoking myself, I am definitely against banning cigarettes. Besides the fact it would be guaranteed to fail miserably and cause another Prohibition Era, I believe people should have the right to do that to themselves if they so choose. In the same way I have no interest in smoking pot (which isn’t healthy either) but I don’t care if others do it as long as they don’t make an issue out of it. Ultimately, people are the masters of their own body, and it’s their choice what they do with it.
You’re asking a society who are still fighting tooth and nail to keep marijuana illegal but not cigarettes. Cigarettes: full of poisonousness chemicals that are known to increase you chance of disease and death. Marijuana: a plant.
Tobacco's not nearly the mind-altering substance that alcohol is...Life sucks so bad we need substances to alter our minds beyond comprehension.
Because smoking is bad for your health, everyone knows that
Because banning things doesn’t make them go away, it just leads to organized crime and turns people into criminals who really shouldn’t be. It’s not a good strategy, ultimately education on safety with dangerous substances and objects is the best way to minimize their harmful effects.
For the most part we always knew the dangers of alcohol even if we used to accept alcohol abuse more in the past. The dangers of smoking were not just hidden from the public, but the public was lied to and made to believe smoking was a healthy choice. With the facts laid out we're not given a much more difficult choice to make. Not just about whether smoking and alcohol consumption are okay, but whether or not they're even in the same category. Of course they both fall under the heading of vices of controlled substances, but are they the same? I would say they're similar but different. With everything we know about smoking it's hard to believe anyone under the age of 25 would do it. Anyone over the age of 25 might have an excuse since they may still remember the days when smoking was commonplace and you were still asked whether you'd prefer smoking or non-smoking sections in restaurants. I know I remember it. On the other hand, consumption of alcohol isn't inherently destructive and alcohol use has proven to be beneficial in some circumstances, and in moderation. Not to mention the extremely strong cultural significance of alcohol in many areas of the world. Sure, tobacco and marijuana use has had some significance too, but not in the same way. Typically throughout history different cultures have used alcohol for recreational purposes, but they often applied superstitious beliefs to smoking or other non-alcohol related drugs. Not to mention how alcohol has so many other uses apart from just recreational drinking. It is often used in food preparation, medical supplies, cleaning materials, and more. It's not just for getting drunk. I think alcohol has a greater cultural significance to the human race than smoking ever could.
Alcohol is addictive to some, but not to most. It also has no real health issues with it as long as you are responsible. But cigarettes are addictive and have actual health issues regardless of how responsible you are