How old were you when you had your first cigarette?

M0rp43vs

Most Refined Escapist
Jul 4, 2008
2,249
0
0
The Lugz said:
my parents deliberately smoked when i was around to get rid of me, at-least someone had decent parents.
Do what I did and develop a resistance to second hand smoke(My extended family do not have such reservations about smoking in front of children and in someone else's home). Then follow them around when they light up saying how much you love secondhand smoke.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
I tried weed first, when I was 15. A plain old cigarette when I was 16 or 17, I guess - they're alright when you're pissed, since they clear up your vision but get you more buzzed.

Still, not a smoker - there's nothing good about it when you're not pissed. Tastes like shit. And hey, I figure you've got to choose between liver disease or throat/tongue/mouth/lung cancer.
 

SeeIn2D

New member
May 24, 2011
745
0
0
Never. I really hate being around smokers just because I hate breathing the shit in. Not my right to criticize people who do it, but I'll criticize whoever I want when I'm breathing it in just going out for a snack or something.
 

Musette

Pacifist Percussionist
Apr 19, 2010
278
0
0
Never have, never will. My entire mom's side of the family smokes, and a good amount of them need oxygen machines to breathe, especially at night. I'm lucky that my mom quit smoking long before I was born, but I've seen enough extended family have health complications to get rid of any curiosity I could have possibly had about cigarettes.
 

BytByte

New member
Nov 26, 2009
425
0
0
Not once, but I feel like I know what it is like. My uncle and his wife smoke 3 packs a day each. Even when you take a shower at their place, you walk out smelling like smoke. Has anyone else seen the Penn & Teller secondhand smoke episode? It will put your fears to rest.
 
Feb 22, 2009
715
0
0
Never have. Don't have a problem with it or anything, I'd probably try it if I thought it was something I'd enjoy (not exactly massively bothered about my health), but it's just never interested me.
 

Mr_Spanky

New member
Jun 1, 2012
152
0
0
Acrisius said:
No, my argument is a response to your argument that unhealthy people cost less. Which is simply not the case. I'm sorry about your dad, but it's not exactly a secret that diseases exist and that even the most healthy can get sick. However, it's equally not a secret that unhealthy people are many, many times more likely to get sick. Unhealthy people DO cost vastly more, both to themselves and to society. It's just a fact. Perhaps you're trying to justify your own unhealthy lifestyle. I couldn't care less about how you live your life, but I react when you start spreading incorrect information about how things work. I'm well aware of how things work and what they cost in Scandinavia, I'm from Sweden myself. We have very high taxes on both tobacco and alcohol, just like you do in Norway. It certainly helps cover the costs, but it doesn't cancel them out or come anywhere near of netting a profit.

Old people have paid for the care the receive later by working their whole lives and paying taxes. If they've been healthy, they've basically cost nothing up until that point. If they keep living healthy even in their seniority, many of them, if not most, will be able to keep taking care of themselves on their own for a very long time, until they're very near the end of their lives. And they still consume goods and services that employ thousands of people in Sweden alone. Using money that they didn't waste on substance abuse or healthcare. I can't for the life of me understand how you can even suggest that being healthy has downsides. Your health is the most valuable thing you have. That's why we pay so much for healthcare.
Ok first off - I didnt make any argument about healthy vs unhealthy I just chipped in my ten pence worth. Personally I think that basing what people can and cannot (or should and should not) do purely on economics kind of misses the point that we are human - not economic robots. But in any case.

Dont even bother to compare the level of taxation between Norway and Sweden. Cigarettes and alcohol cost DOUBLE here then what they do over the border. Most foodstuffs also cost (for the most part) less too but thats not relevant. Norway is the most heavily taxed country in Europe - by quite a long way.

The system here (as I believe it should be for all civilised countries) is one of universal healthcare. This means that from the tax "pot" comes all of the money for everyone to be able to access care free of charge.

Luxury items and things that are deemed to be unhealthy have extra tax put on them (above the 25% VAT) and this means that in Norway the total tax on a pack is about 85%. Which equates to 13-15 USD per pack - which is a lot straight to the gov.

Also most people who start smoking, like I did, in my late teens do not end up carrying a lifetime habit. I started with a habit of 20 a day and now I smoke 1 or 2 - im thinking about quitting next year - we shall see.

Research has shown that 90-95% (higher by some estimates) of smoking damage is negated after a 10-15 year period of not smoking. It is rare for smokers to develop serious smoking related illnesses until at least mid 40s and thus anyone who quits smoking by the age of 30 (say) has contributed to taxation through their habit but is unlikely to incur extra in terms of needing more healthcare. And most people DO quit before they reach 30.

Healthy people in the modern age are shown to be able to be kept alive for much longer through advances in science. I even read an article in New Scientist some time ago about how in a few generations it would possible to effectively "reverse engineer" the human body to be able to regenerate cells and organs faster than they decay. Hence giving rise to all sorts of moral questions - but I digress.

Every scientific advance, when practically applied in a medical context costs money. And these treatments to prolong peoples lives are becoming more and more common hence costing more and more money. People who are sick through smoking related illnesses tend to, frankly, die sooner and require less medical treatment in the long run which costs less money.

I understand you dont like smoking but arguing against it from a purely economic standpoint will always fall through the floor. In countries that dont have universal healthcare they have either private healthcare where you pay for what you need or an insurance based system. And of course any insurance company will take into account any unhealthy habits you have as part of getting you a quote. Last time I checked those sorts of insurance companies were doing pretty well.
 

Jamous

New member
Apr 14, 2009
1,941
0
0
I haven't smoked and likely won't. It's never appealed to me and I can't see that changing.
 

mattaui

New member
Oct 16, 2008
689
0
0
I'm 35 and I've never had the slightest desire to smoke. I can't stand cigarette smoke in the air around me, so it was never a temptation to inhale that stuff directly into my lungs.
 

Psycomantis777

New member
Apr 24, 2012
93
0
0
I was Fifteen, I figured it's one of those things I'll probably end up doing, figured I'd get it out of the way.
 

Psycomantis777

New member
Apr 24, 2012
93
0
0
My parents are both heavy smokers, it's quite different smoking yourself. Second hand smoke doesn't really carry the... erm, kick, I guess...
 

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,023
0
0
Must have been around 10 or 11. Hell, it really was like in one of those PSA's made to frighten parents come to think of it. Me and two friends were just hanging around by an overgrown riverbank after school, and saw some tough guys (from our perspective, at least) at around 15 smoking underneath a dingy old railway bridge. So, we went over and asked nicely. Oddly enough, I was the only one who didn't cough most of it back up again. And odder still, I'm the only one of us three who smoke today. And I was the "good" kid who voted against asking them.

It's honestly a rather fond memory today, weirdly, because it was just so stereotypical, like walking into a very special eposide of 7'th Heaven or a scene from a movie set in the 1930's or something.

Then I had a taste on and off on occasion until I started smoking for realsies around 17 as a coping mechanism. It's a little companion habit I honestly like these days. I don't worry too much about quitting, though. I probably will some day, either freely or because the EU makes me or something. But whatevs, we'll see.
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
There's two answers to this question.
First time when I was 5. I ate it.
Second time, and the first time I actually smoked it was when I was 12 or 13.
 

OmniscientOstrich

New member
Jan 6, 2011
2,879
0
0
Never have and never will, for reasons which at this point should be fairly self-explanatory (along with being firmly admonished about it as a kid). No skin off my back what other people do with their bodies though. S'all good.
 

shrekfan246

Not actually a Japanese pop star
May 26, 2011
6,374
0
0
Marter said:
I never have because it's bad for you and stuff.

And it's an expensive habit, one which I don't want to try to afford.
Marter, you stole my answer.

But yeah, same as the above. I've got enough health problems racing through my genes, and I've got practically no money to speak of. I'm also moderately asthmatic and in terrible shape, and inherited a small allergy to cigarette smoke from my father.