My favorite part is the idea that horrible damage suddenly happens in your 70s and 80s, as if decades of long term use can’t possibly add up to something.
Somewhere in the 70s they found a dude with complete liver and kidney failure who was in his 80s. He was a smoker.
After autopsy, they too HIS lung, one guy, took a pic, and paraded it around America saying "this is what all smoker's lungs look like."
It was a patent lie.
The body is fully capable of filtering out waste and pissing and shitting it out... until the excretory system fails. Then sepsis sets in and a person dies of sepsis.
God, the sheer unadulterated stupidity of you loud mouth prohibitionist asshats...
Nicotine also does damage to the brain. Plus if they are old enough to have been breathing in leaded gasoline and everything else, there is no hope for them.
THC and it's derivatives plus the terpenes and everything else we are constantly discovering in cannabis have health benefits. Some strains even enhance some things even for those who don't really need the help.
LSD is not harmful and you can't overdose on it.
MDMA in its lab form does no damage to the brain and can help treat depression, ptsd, etc.
MDMA that has been mixed with fuck knows what for filler and stepped on by fuck knows who, can and will do damage.
Nicotine is a poison. We use it as an insecticide and know how it works on insects. You'd have to be a trump supporter to not see the fact that it does similar to the human body and people are increasing their intake as the stupid vapes and pouches take over.
I'll bet the fattest blunt you've never smoked that I know more about the history of drugs, more specifically cannabis in the USA than you could ever hope to.
Exceptions to the rule don't make the rule obsolete. How many smokers do you know that could reliably run any distance further than 800m? I don't know any, but I do know plenty of people that quit smoking because it was inhibiting their exercise. Being a human that grew up in an area that normalized tobacco consumption and played sports, I've tried cigarettes. It absolutely affects performance in a very negative way. He completed the marathon in spite of his smoking, and would have performed better even if he stopped for a couple weeks beforehand and immediately resumed smoking after.
ah, I suppose that's a fair point. I said "run", not "compete". I love my mom and I'm proud of her for both quitting and picking up running, but she definitely couldn't compete in our town's annual 5k celebration run
Don't feed the troll, guys. Either this guy is just playing with you, or he probably also believes the earth is flat or something. There are few things so well scientifically explored as the plethora of different negative consequences of smoking, so if he would be interested in realistic insights, he would stumble across studies and answers everywhere himself easily, so that is definitely not the case. Also, there are plenty of longterm extremely harmful drugs that might even increase ones performance short term, so this runner obviously didn't prove anything to anyone.