Health benefits of smoking tobacco

[cistanche_enjoyer]

I recently came across this review. I know I need to be extra careful with what I read on the internet, but the studies they link come from official sources and seem pretty convincing. What do you think?

https://www.sott.net/article/338885-A-comprehensive-review-of-the-many-health-benefits-of-smoking-Tobacco

[Sugarcoat]

@Schizophonia

 

 

[Norbert Somogyi]

1. You may want to read this critique and debunk of the study you provided - made with Perplexity

Lung cancer statistics show a steady decline of occurence over the years since regulations have been strengthened over time across the globe (circa 1975-). Here's a link

Your study seems to cherry-pick the cognitive-enhancing effects of nicotine, but there are some problems with it. Smoking involves a lot of chemicals when inhaled (70 out of them are known and classified as carcinogenic), and nicotine is also addictive. You can get nicotine gums or patches if you want to focus on that. However. there are other numerous cognitive-enhancement methods you can do without these chemicals and the risk of addiction. Sleep, healthy diet, exercise, hydration, Omega-3, Vitamin D, other supplements and nootropics potentially. 

Vitamin D seems to be play a crucial part here, too. The body uses it to heal the inflammation and other damage caused by frequent smoking, however most people are already deficient and this increases the risk for cancer. Higher vitamin D levels can off-set some of the damage and drastically reduce the risk of cancer, whike Omega-3 also seems to play a beneficial role here too (reducing inflammation, improving cognition and depression and even the urge to smoke). Personal note: I quit smoking 3 weeks ago or so, 3 months after embarking on a supplementation journey, and 4-5 weeks after including Omega-3 (smoked for 2 years between 3-30 cigs a day - managed a week without it once last year, but fell back). Phlegm is still coming up my throat, most likely healing. Here's an overview you can take a look at

Ever since I quit, here's what I acquired: Cognition improved even further, just like clarity. I have a greater sense of self-control, energy and sharper attention. My taste buds and nose are stronger too, as well as whiter teeth.

Finally, the Tobacco Industry did not shy away from funding scientific research that helped their case, induced confusion and delayed necessary regulations.

Edited May 4 by Norbert Somogyi
Fixed some bits I glossed over initially

[Jodistrict]

When I was in the Amazon, I was introduced to mapacho.  It is a Peruvian tobacco which is very strong.  The shaman had been smoking it since he was a child.  He was in his fifties and in perfect health.  I saw him once walking up a hill carrying two heavy water bottles over his shoulders.   I was told that what causes the cancer in commercial tobacco are the chemicals that  are used to dry the tobacco.  In Peru they dry the tobacco naturally and add no chemicals.   Tobacco is also considered a sacred plant, so they are aware it can either heal or kill you depending on how you treat it.

Edited May 4 by Jodistrict

[Schizophonia]

But there's also CO, combustion products like aromatic hydrocarbons, tar, and other carcinogenic delights; so if you just want nicotine, you might as well just use a vape, gums or patches.
And actually, it's probably better to use a compound with a longer half-life but similar pharmacology, like a racetam, because the nicotine lasts a short time.

I like to smoke here and there, but it's for the taste, the convenience, and it's generally purely recreational.

My favorites are Marlboros and Gauloises, before I used to smoke Dunhill because they are supposed to be "healthier" but in fact I don't like them too much.

Edited May 4 by Schizophonia

[samijiben]

I roll my cigarettes, danish export, been doing it for years. 

Dumb fucking mistake. Unless you like hacking and howling into the morning doo for an entire hour on a daily basis. The whole valley hears that rainbow of colors coming out my damn mouth

Hawk tuah, ehhh GROSS, MAN!

[integral]

When you look at identical twins where one smoke and the other didn't you find that the smoking twin died younger.

I think the biggest benefit of smoking is that it suppresses your hunger and if you have the right genetics and you're avoiding eating it can make you live longer cuz of the benefits of fasting. Possibly. I know a lot of people that all they do is smoke cigarettes and drink coffee and like they just barely eat at all and honestly they look fine. But their mental state is a disaster...

Edited May 5 by integral

[Hayato]

There are no benefits.

Science and most studies today are bought and paid for.

 

[Michael569]

"No ingredient of cigarette smoke has been shown to cause human lung cancer. No-one has been able to produce lung cancer in laboratory animals from smoking"

This is actually true, it has technically never been proven that smoking causes lung cancer because designing clinical trials trying to give people lung cancer by smoking would be unethical. We know from epidemiology (observing people who smoke without interfering) that smokers are "more likely" to develop it but epidemiology cannot infer causality so technically science has never been able to prove that smoking causes cancer. 

The black lung part is also really interesting, I didn't know about that. Overall, the first part of the article is actually pretty interesting and he/she is spot on on the problem with confounding variables and impossibility of assessing the cancer outcome with smoking. 

The bit about inflammatory bowel disease is also interesting, I've heard about this line of evidence and would be really curious to know more and whether this has been repeated. Maybe IBD and smoking are kinda like obesity protecting from osteoporosis because heavier body has thicker bones but it would be stretching the evidence to say "being obese is good for you". And maybe smoking does really do something beneficial for IBD, who knows. The problem is IBD is treatable, lung cancer is much harder to get under control. 

Later the article delves into an endless mechanistic speculation on different neurochemicals and antioxidants, bridging speculation from in vitro studies into human outcomes data (extremely frowned upon way of presenting evidence). For example, take this statement : Interestingly, smokers' lungs have been found to contain 80% more glutathione than the lungs of non-smokers. From this the author concluded that smoking is positive. How do we know it is not the opposite way, smokers having increased glutathione because body is pushing more resources into protecting itself from excessive oxidative stress. Author claims that levels of glutathione were increased up to 2 months after. Again, how to we know this is a good thing and not a sign of severe metabolic stress? The author repeats this thinking process with the other antioxidants and the hormesis theory. 

The article concludes with giving examples of a few random centenarians who smoke which is an extremely poor and unprofessional way to present the evidence because you can find outliers everywhere that seem to contradict everything you've always known about XYZ topic. Existence of outliers does not negate the original hypothesis (hypothesis being that smoking is probably harmful) 

Maybe smoking really does have some potential benefits coming from the niccotine itself for mental health, ADHD and attention overall but the inhalation of hydrocarbon particles, tar and solvents might become dangerous for some people. 

It might come to individual resilience why some are ok and others are not (available pool of anitoxidants, the effectiveness of DNA repair, variety of detoxification pathways in the liver clearing our hydrocarbons, repair of tissue, the availability of certain protective resources, the regulation of the immune system etc) and it is true that most smokers do not get sick. But this doesn't mean smoking is safe or beneficial which is what it seems is the conclusion this article is heading towards. It is the seed oils & oxidation or cholesterol and heart disease once again, different topic same framework of counter argumentation. Basically bridging gaps in knowledge with pseudoscience. 

The article lists all of its references which is amazing and I love that they've done that but when you look deeper, most of them are in vitro and in vivo. That's not a problem in and of itself but there is not a single reference to systematic review or meta analyses. When trying to challenge the narrative on something as significant as health effects of smoking, you can't do that on the basis of in vitro studies. 

In a topic with so much potential for harm, this article is potentially not just misleading and contributing to confusion but almost borderline unethical with the way arguments are being presented, despite appearing extremely well presented. 

Edited May 6 by Michael569

[Princess Arabia]

Just saying "smoking" is like just saying "eating". Depends on what's being smoked. Just about all conventional cigarettes contain added chemicals. 

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

What's next? Hidden benefits of snorting coke? LEL

[Princess Arabia]

1 minute ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

What's next? Hidden benefits of snorting coke? LEL

Lol

[Someone here]

I literally regret and curse the very first day I have put a cigarette in my mouth .it's turned into impossible addiction and my health is deteriorating on daily basis.  But I'm 2 months sober now .pray for me guys  I feel slightly better right now.

[Jodistrict]

2 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

What's next? Hidden benefits of snorting coke? LEL

Anything that goes against the current learned belief system seems silly.   In the 1940s many people, including doctors, believed smoking was harmless or even healthy.   Some doctors even prescribed cigarettes for ailments like asthma.  It wasn't until the 1950s when the scientific evidence mounted that public perception slowly shifted.

 

[Schizophonia]

2 hours ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

What's next? Hidden benefits of snorting coke? LEL

The nicotine and harmalans in tobacco have an antidepressant effect and help with concentration.
Or even socializing, in fact; it's even better than coffee; coffee makes me robotic.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

2 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

Anything that goes against the current learned belief system seems silly.   In the 1940s many people, including doctors, believed smoking was harmless or even healthy.   Some doctors even prescribed cigarettes for ailments like asthma.  It wasn't until the 1950s when the scientific evidence mounted that public perception slowly shifted.

 

Except the reason behind that narrative wasn't ignorance, they knew tobacco and cigarettes were harmfull but they chose to keep it a secret because they were corrupt and funded by the tobacco industry, which even went as far as paying off scientists to create fake studies that supposedly proved tobacco's harmlesness, creating massive marketing campaigns starring movie stars and athletes, and even using feminism for their own benefit (a move feminists surely aren't unfamiliar with, LUL) pushing this idea that it's hip and cool and that independent women smoke LEL

Nowadays tobacco industry, though still massive, is being held on a leash and that leash is getting tighter and tighter as the time goes on. And that's because the current narrative (that smoking is BS and harmfull) is... wait for it... CORRECT

[cistanche_enjoyer]

3 hours ago, Schizophonia said:

The nicotine and harmalans in tobacco have an antidepressant effect and help with concentration.
Or even socializing, in fact; it's even better than coffee; coffee makes me robotic.

So you occasionally smoke when going out?

[Schizophonia]

15 hours ago, cistanche_enjoyer said:

So you occasionally smoke when going out?

No i essentially smoke alone, for exemple will i watch videos, if i am on actualized...

I just keep that occasional, both to keep the effect, avoid addiction, and of course for health.

Just like alcohol actually. 

[cistanche_enjoyer]

Have you tried nicotine pouches like ZYN? Any difference with real tobacco?

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Yeah, they're the ideal choice if you feel like you don't really need your gums (or mouth in general) anymore