My family doctor says 2 cigarettes every day is not that bad for you

My family doctor says 2 cigarettes every day is not that bad for you.

“Use it don’t abuse it” he says

Can someone truly use tobacco products in moderation?

Attached: DA3F9768-7AEB-47E1-8F49-D1EADA87D52A.png (750x1334, 1.66M)

Other urls found in this thread:

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2477686/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2889502/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3834742/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No

>irradiate your lungs, but only a little bit
Doctors are fucking retarded and the pedestal we have them on if almost as high as their ego.

The absolute state of Amerimutt doctors.
> mfw

Attached: TopKekFam.png (181x201, 67K)

Nicotine is for fucking idiots.

Weed, for example, I can understand because there's an actual measureabe and 'worthehile' effect.

What the fuck do you get from a cigarette otehr than a tiny fleeting buzz? Even half a can of Red Bull has more effect.

Smoking is fucking pointless; it's feeding a needlessly expensive addiction.

I work as a radiographer, and one of the guiding principles is that there is no safe dose of radiation, no matter how small. I apply that to any carcinogen that's coming into contact with cancer-prone tissue. No amount of cigarettes are safe.

this is your brain on weed

>there is no safe dose of radiation, no matter how small
That's why you're a radiographer and not a physicist.
>what is hormesis
t. physicist

>weed is worthwhile
It's a drug that makes you content to be bored.
That's not worthwhile

P A T R O L L E D

I don't smoke weed either.

The point was that from an effects POV - which is why people take drugs in the first place - nicotine is fucking pointless. It's a mild buzz. Less than a cup of coffee.

I don't mean that it's 'worthwhile' from an activity perspective, I mean that from a consumption perspective, you get more bang for your buck with it.

Nicotine in moderation is possible, and its probably even a decent idea to use smoking to help on a cut. However, its not at all a remotely bright idea to regularly inhale smoke particles of miscellaneous origins into your lungs. Theres all kinds of shit in your everyday tobacco products that will seriously fuck you up if you ingest it or inhale it as smoke, and its not the nicotine.
If you do choose to do it, be mindful that you're much better off vaping. Also dont act like a faggot if you do.

Hormesis doesn't apply to radiation you nigger. There literally isn't a beneficial dose of nicotine either.

Nic buzzes are nice and calming. Why do think guys in WW2 movies are always smoking?

yeah, they only last as long as it takes to exhale the smoke. Not worth it.

>Hormesis doesn't apply to radiation you nigger
>LNTM

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2477686/

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2889502/

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3834742/

>There literally isn't a beneficial dose of nicotine either
implying nicotine is what we're concerned about regarding smoking cigarettes

Because over 50% of men used to smoke and you didn’t fit in if you didn’t smoke. Why do you think so many men had long hair during the 70s? It’s because hippie chad wore long hair and was banging all the broads and little betas said, “I want to look like that guy”.

It’s all about being normal. If you’re an outlier prepare for a lot of pain

To take the edge off the fact that they were getting fucking panzered. You think they gave a fuck about delayed onset lung/throat/mouth cancer when you got Nazis wildin out and you gotta save a bunch of French pussies?

Can you even read? The linear no-one threshold model literally says there is no safe amount of radiation. That's what "linear no-threshold" means. As radiation exposure increases, risk of harmful effects increase linearly. Stop LARPing on a korean locksmithing forum.

Can you not read all those peer-reviewed papers disputing the validity of the shitty linear no threshold model? It's not accurate. Just because that's what they taught you in your shitty 200 level health physics class (actually you probably don't have even a bachelors degree kek) doesn't mean it's accurate.
I bet you believe atoms look like the fucking Bohr model too you retard. A model is just that, a way to attempt to describe reality in a simply manner. That doesn't mean it realistically describes reality, because the LNTM does not.

All of those studies are saying that LNT is horse hockey.

>mfw a troll thread turns into a fucking brain mogging

This user speaks truth, and o say this as a smoker, though i'm trying to convert to vaping.

Another thing whu it can't be done in moderation is because of all the addictive substances tobacco companies use to make it more easily consumeble. Like anti-cough substance.

Nit only that, but i've seen video's of people farming their own tobacco, saying it's wayyy less addictive and much safer than the cigarettes you buy in the store.

ikr
i thought we all were stupid here

Attached: 1529428103077.jpg (753x707, 331K)

Pipe tobacco and cigars have some interesting studies.

Can't you just smoke fake cigarettes if you just want to do the movement ?

is that oc?