Smoking and fencing.

[teamusaepee]

Smoking is the number one cause of death, did you know that it is a major risk factor for heart disease, as well as for cancer, breathing problems, etc.?

I have not ever been addicted to nicotine, but I realize it is very hard to quit. I won't make any moral judgments about it but like Jeff said, stopping smoking really is the one best thing you can do for your health.

[fencingiraffe]

Originally Posted by D+F+P=Hadouken!

Fencing is an anaerobic sport, smoking will not hurt you.

smoking always hurts you.

[Peach]

Originally Posted by teamusaepee

Smoking is the number one cause of death.

No, it isn't. Golly, folks. It's bad for you, no doubt, but that's no excuse for fabricating dire statistics.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Dan Kellner is the #1 cause of death.

[TrainingDummy]

I used to smoke occasionally in college, but quit (minus the occasional hookah). I used to smoke ALOT of weed, but I quit for three reasons: 1) A run-in with The Man, 2) I started voice lessons 3) I started fencing, making smoking a bad thing for my lungs. Now I just drink, it's so much healthier .

[teamusaepee]

Originally Posted by Peach

No, it isn't. Golly, folks. It's bad for you, no doubt, but that's no excuse for fabricating dire statistics.

Well, actually, at least in the United States, it is. I haven't fabricated anything. The Department of Health and Human Services has ranked tobacco as the leading cause of death in the U.S., followed by diet and inactivity, and then alcohol (Source: McGinnis JM, Foege WH. Actual causes of death in the United States. JAMA 270:2207-2212, 1993.). Nearly 1 out of every 5 deaths is the result of cigarette smoking. Each year approximately 430,000 deaths in the U.S. are attributed to cigarette smoking (Source: CDC. Cigarette Smoking-attributable mortality and years of potential life lost -- United States. MMWR 46(20):444-451, 1997).

According to the U.S. surgeon general, benefits for quitting smoking are:
-Reduced overall death rates: 15 years after quitting, your risk of death from all causes returns to nearly the level of persons who have never smoked.
-Reduced heart disease risk: 1 year after quitting, the excess risk of heart disease caused by smoking is reduced by half
-Reduced lung cancer risk: it drops to as much as one half that of continuing smokers after 10 years. Risk of other cancers is also lowered.

[The Chaotic Wind]

I've bne offered cigaretes (amongst many other thins) but i've always said no.
What i find funny is that all the stoners think i smoke pot...then when they find out that i dont they say "oh my god dude! i hella wanna get stoned with you that'd be hella cool!"

unfortunrately part of the reason i don't do drugs is beause addictive personalites run in the family, grandpa was an alchoholic at one point and my biological dad just got done with crack, i'm pretty sure he stopped smnoking cigarettes to.

i have enough problems affording fencing gear as it is, getting addicted would just drain my already inadequate funds even more...that and i don't wanna be like my dad was.

[keropie]

From a brief search, it looks as though there is some support for tobacco being the number one cause of preventable death. There is, of course, a lot of questions about how exactly that is determined, since the leading causes are things like heart attacks, cancer, strokes, emphysema, etc., all of which are clearly linked to tobacco, but proving that person x, y, and z who all died of heart attacks wouldn't have had heart attacks without smoking is pretty tough. Additionally, in persons under 35 in America, the leading cause of death is accident. I do wonder how many of those accidents were considered preventable, since I"m sure a large number occur at least in part due to someone doing something dumb (driving around a curve at 75 mph and losing control).

But yes, tobacco is a huge health concern for Americans. Of course, what isn't?

[Peach]

Yup, smoking is bad for you.

Heck, so is drinking alcoholic beverages, especially to excess. I'd make a case that an inordinate number of accidental deaths and deaths from other causes are actually caused by drinking, but the cause is hidden in the death certificate ("careless smoking" fires, for instance, are very often "drunk and passed out" fires, and deaths from liver failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, choking, murders, some cancers, heart disease, and traffic accidents are directly attributable to alcohol).

I neither smoke nor drink, having given up both, but I don't buy into the fad of demonizing smoking and smokers. The US demonized drinking at one point and look where it got us

[Inquartata]

No, there's a difference between demonizing and prohibiting by law.Very often social diapproval will do more to correct behavior than making it illegal.

I am fine with the demonization. It discourages without absolutely foreclosing freedom of choice.

[Peach]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

No, there's a difference between demonizing and prohibiting by law.Very often social diapproval will do more to correct behavior than making it illegal.

I am fine with the demonization. It discourages without absolutely foreclosing freedom of choice.

Ah--I wasn't thinking of Prohibition. I was thinking of the temperance movement, which the anti-smoking movement resembles. It swept everyone into a fine fervor of hyperbolic and sanctimonious disapproval and allowed people to avoid dealing with all kinds of other social ills.

Prohibition did swiftly result in a rather fervent pro-drinking atmosphere and linked alcohol with organized crime. Making smoking illegal would probably encourage it, you're right.

[Feltan]

Originally Posted by Peach

No, it isn't. Golly, folks. It's bad for you, no doubt, but that's no excuse for fabricating dire statistics.

Why do I get the image of some Government worker in a nursing home rifling throught he pockets of a recently deceased 90 year-old looking for a crumpled pack of cigarettes just to "prove" cigarettes kill you.

Regards,
Feltan

[purpzeyFCLI]

Originally Posted by Feltan

Why do I get the image of some Government worker in a nursing home rifling throught he pockets of a recently deceased 90 year-old looking for a crumpled pack of cigarettes just to "prove" cigarettes kill you.

Regards,
Feltan

Ok, here's the thing, I don't think anyone is denying the fact that smoking causes cancer and death in various other ways. I smoke and readily admit this. It can and will kill you. I don't think anyone is denying that.

I think the issue, as you have touched upon is this: The causes of deaths by smoking that do not NECESSARILY include direct causes, e.g. lung cancer cannot be empirically proven in specific instances to be attributed to smoking.

So for instance, if a person dies of heart disease and smoked, their death may be attributed to smoking. But a history of heart disease in the family and the fact that the person consuming a pound of bacon everyday for breakfast might not be considered.

The idea is, it's hard to say EXACTLY how many deaths are caused specifically by smoking. There is no question it causes MANY MANY deaths, but the question is, how inflated are the statistics, or are they inflated at all? And there may be no answer, but the point is, there isn't necessarily a way to determine the direct cause in all cases.

[Fencergrl]

Intersting how ZZ & I had a similar view on smokers... a "ewww yuck!" response. Turns out our countries share similar % rates of smokers. The national average for Sweden & Canada is 19% of our population are smokers. In my province it is 15% and in the city I live this is even lower.

Public places are smoke free. I seldom smell cigarette smoke. I have to think really hard to come up with a list of people I know that smoke. Oddly enough, with Vancouver being a very health conscious place, you are more likely to smell marijuana smoke than cigarette smoke.

Sweden appears to be different than most of Europewhen it comes to tabacco use. http://main.uab.edu/smokersonly/show.asp?durki=66394

The national average number of smokers in the US is 23%, with some areas having almost 30% of their population smoking. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/datahighlights/Page4.htm

I think where one lives, has a huge impact on how one views their own and other's habits. I can afford to say "I would never live with a smoker" as this represents a very small portion of the population. If I lived in Spain, I would likely have to soften this position, as it would eliminate a large chunk of the population.

I also think that it's much easier to quit smoking in Canada or Sweden than it would be in Spain, Austria or Italy, as there's a great deal more social pressure to do so.

[jeff]

The statistics are tricky, and it's often difficult to look at an individual person's outcome and say "this was caused by smoking". What percentage of that coronary was the smoking contracting the tubing, and what percentage that Whopper? Even with lung cancer: I just learned this weekend of a very good foilist of my age group who developed lung cancer, even though he never smoked. It happens. Smoking's effect can be unreported: somebody can have emphysema that eventually leads to death without smoking being noted on the death certificate. Or, somebody might go in to get a hernia repair and not be able to get off the ventilator because their lungs are shot. That happens too. My wife just told me about one of her patients who is a terrible surgical risk because of smoking he did years ago - his lungs are ruined even though he stopped smoking. If he dies (approx age 50), the smoking might not be listed among causes of death.

But, when we talk about groups of people we can do some quantification: you can do things like measure mortality by age for smokers and non-smokers and see what difference it creates. The numbers people in public health come up with do have a basis in fact.

If you smoke: stop. That's even more important than going on a diet, even for very overweight people.
If you don't smoke, don't start.

EDIT: Drinking in moderation (and when not behind the wheel of a car) )is NOT a health risk, in fact it's been correlated with cardiovascular benefits.

[carlos]

For any one individual fencer, athletic performance will be better without smoking. Sure, there are top fencers who smoke, but they're not good BECAUSE they smoke, they're good in spite of it.

Smoking 'relaxes' smokers because once addicted, they become nervous during withdrawal. Caffeine often cures my headache, but the headache comes from caffeine deprivation. Saying smoking relaxes you is like saying heroin cures shakes and nausea.

Time was when some Tour de France riders would have a quick smoke before a hill. That time has long gone. Maybe fencing will catch up with cycling...although without the steroids.

[ShadyLane]

Originally Posted by Army Fencer

Pharmacologically, nicoteen is an interesting drug because it both relaxes and focuses the individual using the drug. As such, it is remarkably useful for fencing. On the other hand, it's also remarkably addictive (nicoteen, that is).

Yup, that stuff is additive all right...There was this guy on campus who used nicotine patches during exams. He doesn't smoke but the nicotine from the patch calms him down and he noticed that he can focus and study better. But, it's highly additive, he says...he doesn't recommend using nicotine patches in order to study "better"...

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by Fencergrl

Intersting how ZZ & I had a similar view on smokers... a "ewww yuck!" response. Turns out our countries share similar % rates of smokers. The national average for Sweden & Canada is 19% of our population are smokers. In my province it is 15% and in the city I live this is even lower.

Public places are smoke free. I seldom smell cigarette smoke. I have to think really hard to come up with a list of people I know that smoke. Oddly enough, with Vancouver being a very health conscious place, you are more likely to smell marijuana smoke than cigarette smoke.

Sweden appears to be different than most of Europewhen it comes to tabacco use. http://main.uab.edu/smokersonly/show.asp?durki=66394

Both countries are just too cold and wet to make keeping a cigarette lit worth the effort. The cure may be as bad as the disease.

[dramamine]

Jeez, everyone here is talking like cigarettes are performance enhancers. I don't want to name names but there are two specifically I can think of who were senior national team members before beginning smoking, and their results dropped significantly over time due to bad cardiovascular fitness.

I used to smoke pot a few times a week, even during track season. In the past couple years I've cut it down to once every six months or so, if even that. With no change in my training my results, cardio (I had never run 3k in under 10 minutes until I stopped smoking pot, and it was always a goal for me) and general sense of well being have all improved greatly.

I feel like I just went to confessional. I have never smoked a cigarette before though, only pot.

[Fencergrl]

Originally Posted by dramamine

Jeez, everyone here is talking like cigarettes are performance enhancers.

Yeah... I wonder how many sport specific forums would you find that happening???

Much less have elite athletes who smoke.

Perhaps we can make fencing more popular by using that in our advertising.... "When you don't want to