Well after seeing quite a few topics about who smokes what and how many they smoke a day I thought I post this essay that I wrote and see what you smokers really think about what you do. Yes thanks to the junk they put into the cigarettes it is very hard to quit smoking and of course the best stress reliever since the exercise bike. This essay is more gear towards kid's who smoke but for the adult's it could still prove to be useful info.

So after reading this essay what do you guys think who's more at risk the people who smoke or the those who don't smoke?



Smokers or Non-Smokers: Who’s More at Risk?

Smoking is possibly one the world’s oldest leisure activities and stress relievers since historians have dated the use of tobacco as early as the Mayan Empire (250-900 A.D) and it’s partial discovery by Columbus when he first landed on the new world. (Borio) By early to mid 20th century, however, smoking cigarettes started showing its deceptive side to both smokers and non-smokers alike. Although it would take years of research, thousands of reports and the constant battles between the courts and the tobacco, people were slowly beginning to know about the health risks of smoking cigarettes. The biggest question that surrounds smoking may be who was more at risk; those who smoked for 20-30 years or those who suffered form second-hand smoke for 20-30 years.

Though cigarettes are the most profitable commodity in the world due to its addictive nature, on the other hand it’s the most prolific reason why so many people have different forms of cancer, smoking mothers lose babies, and smokers paying a high financial price for their habit. The 2004 report, “The Health Consequences of Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon General,” by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that smoking can cause cancer in the bladder, oral cavity, pharynx, larynx (voice box), esophagus, cervix, kidney, lung, pancreas, and stomach “New Surgeon General's Report”. Now that’s ten different cancers a heavy smoker could get just by smoking cigarettes over a long period of time. Yet, the most common form of cancer that most smokers get is lung cancer, due to the fact the smoke that gets inhaled builds up over time in a person’s lungs. However, depending on a person’s body structure and how long a smoker has been smoking, it could take months to years for symptoms of lung cancer to develop. Those symptoms include shortness of breath, chest or abdomen pain, chronic coughing to name a few “Symptoms of lung cancer”.

Although getting cancer is on the top of the list of health risks for smokers, the number two problem is for pregnant mothers who smoke and their unborn children. Smoking mothers increase the chance they could lose the child anywhere from a few weeks into their pregnancy up to when their child is born “Women and Smoking”. Or some mothers could have problems conceiving altogether. However, problems for the children skyrocket the moment they are conceived in their mother’s womb. The problem that ranks number one is the fact they could die depending how much the mother smokes. Though the odds are that children could develop normally from a mother’s womb to when they become adults are somewhat small, children who do survive the first nine months are in a high risk of complications developing over time, which include colds, bronchitis, and other respiratory diseases “Women and Smoking”

Though people have to suffer through these problems as children and then as adults for the rest of their lives, the financial burdens for smokers are so heavy that during a smoker’s life time a smoker could be spending hundreds of thousands of dollars, and that’s including buying the cigarettes and paying medical bills to keep themselves alive. Based on a calculator program provided by www.cancer.org to show how much cigarettes would cost a person (I will be using myself as an example although I don’t smoke), lets say I started smoking at the age of 15 at $4.00 a pack and 20 cigarettes a day, in 10 years I would have spent about $16,196 for smoking. That is a lot of money to be spending on something that will eventually kill me. However, others are still susceptible to the health risks and financial costs of inhaling second hand smoke from those who they socialize with who do smoke, though it may take longer.

While non-smokers are saving that $16,196 from not buying cigarettes they still are susceptible to getting cancers, losing babies and paying for medical costs. So how are non-smokers still susceptible all of those problems? Simple, it is called second-hand or passive smoking. There are two ways for a person to inhale the smoke either through the smoke coming from a lighted cigarette or the smoke that is exhale by the person smoking. Although the only benefit non-smokers get from this is it takes longer for their bodies to develop the protection their body needs. However, some non-smokers could develop symptoms quicker then others, it just depends how long a person has been exposed to the smoking. When it comes to second-hand smoke for mothers and children, second-hand smoke is as dangerous to the child in the womb as if the mother was smoking directly (Children and Secondhand Smoke). Although the risks are still high in losing a child, the greater risks are the child’s development as he or she grows up; second-hand smoking can cause learning disabilities for the child such as reading and visual learning (Children and Secondhand Smoke). Children could also develop the same problems children of smoking parents, such as asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia and even low birth weight (Women and Smoking). Non-smokers will be saving thousands of dollars by not buying cigarettes, but in reality they will be spend even more then that from the medication, doctors and even respirators to help fight off whatever complications a smoker or non-smoker might have. Though non-smokers will be the healthier of the two groups in the world of cigarettes and smoking, it still makes people wonder when people will realize that is bad for your health.

So who would be more at risk, the smokers or the non-smokers? Both groups of people can suffer the same fates whether they know it or not. A smoker could go through life and just suffer breathing problems while a non-smoker could have full blown lung cancer or visa versa. I would say the non-smokers are more at risk because most of the time they are inevitably around smokers wherever they go and while smokers know the risks they have a hard time beating the addiction to those tobacco products they buy everyday.

Works Cited

Borio, Gene. "Tobacco Timeline." 2005. 05 Mar. 2007 <www.tobacco.org/resources/history/Tobacco_History.html>.

"Calculate the Cost of Smoking." Cancer.Org. 05 Mar. 2007 <www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/PED_10_cigCostCalc.asp>.

"Children and Secondhand Smoke." www.entnet.org. 2007. 5 Mar. 2007 <http://www.entnet.org/healthinfo/tobacco/secondhand_smoke.cfm>.

"New Surgeon General's Report Expands List of Diseases Caused by Smoking."
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. 27 May 2004. 5 Mar. 2007 <http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040527a.html>.

"Second-Hand Smoke: the Science." No-Smoke.Org. Nov. 2006. 05 Mar. 2007
<www.no-smoke.org/>.

"What are the symptoms of lung cancer?" VCU Massey Cancer Center. 15 Dec. 2005. 05 Mar. 2007 <www.massey.vcu.edu/.>.

"Women and Smoking Fact Sheet." American Lung Association. Mar. 2006. 5 Mar. 2007 <http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=33572>.

 

 

 

Reply

they say smokings bad for you. on the other hand passive smoking is worse. you cant really escape it

Reply

People that smoke are more at risk, because they inhale more smoke than other people do, and also inhaling hot smoke burns your airways and lungs, whereas the people that passive smoke breathes in cold smoke.
You can get away with it by using one of those cheap gas masks, like when I go to the city or something, I normally where the mask if there are like 5 smokers, but 1 I just hold my breath

Reply

It's interesting to think about it. When one person smokes and the exhale all of that smoke, they are affecting everyone around them. So if the smoker is around more than 1 person, he would be hurting the others more than himself IMO. So if the smokers can smoke off on their own with few people around, they won't be affecting everyone else as much. In general, the smokers seem to be more at risk because they smoke so often and it's hard, even after they stop if they did, to get back to normal.

Reply

I think that non smokers are in the bigger risk because if you check smokers they understnad that smoking is killing them it is just that they don't have enough power to stop. And if you check non smokers they are influnced due to society is not able to divide and restrict smoking.

I think that if smokers want to kill themselves they should feel free and do it alone of in the company of other smokers and not in the company of non smokers because they are then in fact killing or poisoning other person in process.

I don't like smoking and it is bad habit and anyone who is not strong enough to stop shouldn't have even started or he or she should go to some sort of rehabilitation center to help them out because they obviously don't see the problem they have and what are they doing to the people around them.

Reply

I am torn on this. I mean, they say second hand smoke is worse then the people smoking it, but I have to agree with csp4.0. They are the ones that end up with the black lungs that we all see in Health class. So, I guess it'd be worse for the smoker since he will be the one in the end having lung cancer.

Not to get too off-topic, but there are a lot of laws trying to be passed, in Arizona at least, to stop public smoking in restauraunts and bars. I am not sure about other state laws, but that's what they are trying to pull here and all the bartenders are thinking it is going to drive away customers and are finding ways to try to get around it.

Smoking is definitely something you can't just get away from. It's everywhere, until some laws are passed.

Reply

Obviously smokers are more at risk, they dont only smoke in public places, and the people who dont smoke will always smoke passively far less than the smokers.
That said, i think people who smoke in public with people around them who arent smokers are kind of irresponsible. I mean its proven that passive smoking is dangerous as well as normal smoking, so when people smoke in public they are hurting everyone who is near them.
Some parts of the UK have created "smoking areas" in bars & resteraunts, and have banned smoking in the rest of the bar/resteraunt. IMO this is a great idea and should be done everywhere else as well.

Reply

I'd say that both are at risks in their own ways, but do tend to agree that smokers are the ones much more at risks by the poisonous gases that they are breathing, the external effects of what happens when they smoke more regularly (eg yellow skin, wrinkly skin at a much younger age). But yes, smokers do end short of breath and therefore are a much higher chance of getting lung cancer than non-smokers that are around smokers (either by their own choice, or in unfortunate situations where they may have to work around them).

Reply

I know one thing, non-smokers are more at danger. It is better you dont start smoking at all. If you are amidst smokers, the best thing is for you t leave there if you are a non-smoker. Reason is 'cos the smoke been exhaled is even much more dangerous than the one they are inhaling and if you inhale this, you are been subjected to more danger than the smokers themselves.

Reply

Or if you're a non smoker, and near a smoking area with smokers, I would suggest leaving immediately to area where there is less smoke! Inhaling it, or working in a area where its smoke designated also has its effects, considering breathing it does have similar effects to those that smoke, but those smoking still are at more risk for reasons I said in the last post.

Reply