As a non-smoker, I am constantly surprized by the idiosy that is smoking... To draw into your lungs toxic particles from burnt substances just seems totally un-natural, and well.... stupid. To top it all off, the number of people who smoke who have friends or family with lung problems is staggering. Sure, some of these smokers stand outside, and don't smoke in cars, or wind the window down, and then say "Well, I'm being conciderate, I have the window down!"
Most non-smokers would know, that that doesn't make a differance really. The car still fills with invisible passive smoke which they still have to breathe. So what about these people who smoke outdoors? Are they being conciderate to others? Well... lets see... A smokers smoke will travel on a breeze for about 50 to 100 metres before disapating enough to not be noticable.
Personally I don't think smokers really concider how much, or how many people their "right to smoke" actually affects people around them. Sure, they have that right, as do non-smokers have the right to breathe fresh clean air. Is it right to say "My right as a smoker is to smoke where-ever I choose!", yet have that one persons choice affect multiple people. I'm all for peoples right to do something, even if it is just plain stupid in my opinion, but when it affects more people than the individual who chooses to smoke, then I think it's only fair to concider the entirety of who is affected by that choice.
From what I have been able to work out, smoking was originally used in religious ceremonies and events, it wasn't something that people took part in every day. Christopher Columbus was the first European to discover tobbaco in the America's, and returned to Europe with it. Seems to me that all Western cultures opt to take the mysticism out of that which they cannot explain, by turning it into a popular everyday occurance. Through the 1600's, smoking became more and more popular, and developed into the industry we see today.
I am truely amazed that people pay not only the tobbaco company's, but the government as well, for the right to choose to distroy their health, make themselves smell bad, yellow their teeth, and possibly give them long term, or even life treatening health issues. What is the real benefit? The right to choose? The Ex-smokers I have spoken to rave about how much better they feel from not smoking, they rave about how much better their homes smell. While a few also say they miss it, they acknowledge that it is much better that they don't smoke.
More and more people are falling ill because of smoking each day, I for one have two people close to me who have life threatening illness' because of it. And whilst I love them dearly, and care for them and their health, I cannot bring myself to feel sorry for them. Their illness' were more than likely caused by smoking, which has been a documented cause of illness since 1602.
Here are a few facts about the documentation, as well as a link back to the Cancer Council website with the original article:
- In 1602 an anonymous author published an essay titled Worke of Chimney Sweepers (sic) which stated that illnesses often seen in chimney sweepers were caused by soot and that tobacco may have similar effects. This was one of the earliest known instances of smoking being linked to ill health.
- In 1795 Sammuel Thomas von Soemmering of Main reported that he was becoming more aware of cancers of the lip in pipe smokers.
- In 1798 the physician Benjamin Rush wrote more on the medical dangers of tobacco.
- During the 1920s the first medical reports linking smoking to lung cancer began to appear. Many newspaper editors refused to report these findings as they did not want to offend tobacco companies who advertised heavily in the media.
No comments:
Post a Comment