Is There A Debate About Smoking While Pregnant That I Don’t Know About?

Yesterday, while researching an article I wrote about how one study claims women smoke cigarettes so they can have smaller babies and therefore an easier delivery, I stumbled across a pretty startling website.

I didn’t realize that smoking while pregnant was debatable, like perhaps having a glass of wine occasionally during your third trimester. Yet, there it was, staring back at me from the screen of my laptop:

Courageous British Mum Says Smoking During Her Pregnancy Helped Make Her Baby Stronger

Wait, WHAT? I’m familiar with the young mom in Great Britain who says smoking helped make her baby’s heart stronger but did that headline say “courageous“?

I clicked on for a closer look and lo and behold, the article outlines all the arguments about why smoking is bad and then says there is no factual proof supporting those arguments. Okay, so it could just be one weirdo who really digs smoking, I thought, but after the article there were several comments from women who agree that smoking is harmless. Here are just a few:

Smokers ignore health warnings

No one would drink a glass of poison if it was emblazoned with large letters warning that it would kill them. But millions of people every day ignore similar warnings on cigarette packets. Do seasoned smokers ignore the stark health warnings that declare "smoking kills", "smoking seriously harms you and others around you" and "smokers die younger", or are their eyes trained not to see them? That's what academics at the UK Centre for Tobacco Studies – based at Bath and Bristol universities – decided to investigate using eye-tracking technology. Their aim was to find out whether the government's introduction of health labels – which began in the 1970s with the message, "Warning by HM Government. Smoking can damage your health" – was effective at preventing the habit or encouraging addicts to stop.

What they discovered won't please the tobacco giants. The academics' findings suggest that the best way to stop non-smokers from picking up the habit is to force cigarette-makers to box up their fags in plain packets devoid of any branding whatsoever. The work was carried out by Marcus Munafò, professor of biological psychology at Bristol University, and Linda Bauld, professor of socio-management at the University of Stirling, who noticed that tobacco firms had enjoyed significant surges in sales after jazzing up their packet designs.

The academics point out that, as governments around the world bought in increasingly strict restrictions on cigarette adverts on billboards, TV, cinema and more, tobacco firms began spending more time and money investigating new ways to attract customers. And, slowly but surely, their cigarette packaging became increasingly imaginative.

Munafò points to an example of when Sterling introduced price-marked packs to emphasise their value in 2008. "Its market share increased from 5% to 6.1% in four months," he says, before going on to flag up a limited edition "Celebration" pack of Lambert & Butler in 2004, which included pictures marking the brand's 25th anniversary. That, say the academics, helped to increase Lambert & Butler's market share by 0.4% – or some £60m – during four months on sale. Munafò points out that a couple of years later, Benson & Hedges Silver introduced a new "slide pack", which opened via a side panel rather than flip-top, and saw sales rocket 25% over six months, then a further 32.5% (or more than £74m) after a year. "In the latter two cases, spokespeople for the producers, Imperial Tobacco, producer of Davidoff cigarettes and Gauloises cigarettes and Gallaher, explicitly attributed sales success to the packs," Munafò adds. "And an industry paper, Tobacco Journal International, pointed out that 'tobacco packaging is no longer the silent salesman it once was – it now shouts.' The tobacco industry clearly acknowledges that the pack is a marketing tool."

So Munafò and Bauld called in 43 non-smokers, light smokers and daily smokers to look at both plain and branded cigarette packets to help them to work out the different effects. All of their research packs featured health warnings, but while the branded packets were samples from 10 of the UK's most popular cigarette-makers, the others were simple, unadorned white packets, with their brand name and number of cigarettes displayed only nominally in a standard font. The academics then fitted their volunteers with eye-tracking technology to see how they responded to the packets.

"We measured the number of times each person viewed the top half of the pack, which contained the brand information, and the bottom half of the pack, containing the health warning information," explains Munafò, who as an experimental psychologist specialises in investigating the cognitive and biological basis of addictive behaviours. After analysing their findings, the researchers found that non-smokers and light smokers paid more attention to the stark health warnings on plain packs than on those adorned with names like Marlborough. By contrast, the frequent smokers did not – Bauld and Munafò believe they might have conditioned themselves to ignore them.

It might not sound surprising that stark health warning stood out more, and had a more significant impact, on plain packets, but the researchers say their evidence adds support to the idea that the government should force the tobacco industry to dump decorative packaging. Munafò reckons if the likes of British American Tobacco, maker of Dunhill, Kent, Lucky Strike and Pall Mall, amongst others, were forced to standardise the colour and design of cigarette packaging – with all branding removed apart from a standard typeface including the name, relevant legal markings, and health warnings – it would boost the effectiveness of warnings. He adds that previous research suggests that the deterrent of plain packaging would be most powerful among children and young people, or those who believe they are smoking "healthier" cigarettes.

"Studies with teenagers – those not yet smoking or not smoking regularly – have found that they are brand-aware, including awareness by cigarette pack colour and design alone," says Munafò. "And smokers can believe that some brands of cigarettes are less harmful than others due to packaging, for example substantial false beliefs about the relative risks as a result of terms such as 'light' or 'mild', brand descriptors of 'taste' or lighter colours being used on packaging. Plain packaging reduces levels of these false beliefs."

The government has committed to consulting on the idea of introducing plain packaging. Bauld and Munafò have sent their findings to the Department of Health for discussion with its tobacco policy team. But other countries are ahead of us: in January next year, Australia will be the first to introduce plain packaging for cigarettes.

In the meantime, Bauld and Munafò are furthering their research, including using brain imaging to look at how the brain responds to plain and branded packs. But Munafò is clear about what he thinks the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, should do. "The government should introduce plain packaging of tobacco products and maintain text and visual health labels on packs," he says. "There is good independent evidence on the impact of visual warnings on attitudes to smoking and smoking behaviour."

Funding cancer research is top priority, ACS, lawmakers agree

Regional lawmakers from across the Hudson Valley Friday morning discussed the importance of effectively preventing, treating, and eradicating cancer during a breakfast hosted by the American Cancer Society at the Kingston Holiday Inn.

The three topics of focus were the establishment of a Health Insurance Exchange, current legislation banning indoor tanning for minors, as well as legislation protecting children from flavored tobacco products and tobacco advertising.

Some of the flavored cigarettes are Kiss Super slims Menthol cigarettes, Eva Slims Menthol cigarettes.

State Senator William Larkin stressed the importance of making more funding available stating that we cannot fall behind on keeping our knowledge of cancer current.

“We ought to be able to say to Washington stop sending our tax dollars oversees and send it back to the United States of America so that they can make progress in programs such as cancer research,” he said.

Assemblyman Kevin Cahill said that in order for long term solutions to come to fruition it is necessary to change behavior as a government and as citizens.

Assemblyman Peter Lopez agreed saying part of the issue has been focusing on what is to be done from a preventative and well-care standpoint.

“Many of our groups are working on peer networking, educational outreach, seminars, and really changing the healthcare system to encourage people to take more ownership of their own personal healthcare,” he said.

This includes educating people on identifying symptoms so that they are able to report them to physicians early while treatment is most effective, said Lopez.

Ulster County Executive Michael Hein said the fight against cancer is a collective battle and individuals in the county can make a difference right now by eating a little better, being a little more active, committing a few dollars to research, and making sure that they help everyone around them do the same.

Lead Legislative Ambassador for the 22nd Congressional District Neil Eisenberg said it is “crucial we focus on the importance of continued funding for cancer research because the major advancements made in fighting cancer have been directly related to federally funded cancer research.”

Now, Pay $175 for Possessing Illegal Smokes in Ontario

In a bid to boost the number of non-smokers in the region, the government officials of Ontario have called for stricter measures on public smoking.

As per the new guideline that has been issued just this week, anyone found with contraband cigarettes in their possession will have to pay a hefty fine between $100 and $500.

Available at low costs, these cigarettes are a hit among young smokers. According to the findings of a recent study, these illegal contraband tobaccos account for more than 40% of those smoked by high schoolers.

Most of the times illegal cigarettes are being Marlboro brand or Winston cigarettes.

The proposal has been welcomed by the unions and the groups alike, with many feeling that the fine can prompt people to stop buying the illegal cigarettes.

The anti-smoking groups have supported the new legislation and have asserted that if a person will have to shell out $175 fine for a $15 cigarette, he will never again think of doing that.

It is, however, maintained that along with imposition of new rules and fines on the smokers, the government should also tight its grip on the cigar manufacturers.

Commending the decision, the Revenue Minister, Sophia Aggelonitis during a recent media briefing said: “Illegal tobacco is a complicated issue; it is an issue that is multi-ministerial, multi-jurisdictional. We're working with all our partners, and it is important for us to take this first step”.

SGA works on series of new bills

SGA is hoping to make campus safer, cleaner and more efficient for students. Enforcement of the no tobacco rule on campus, the Maintenance Entrance Note Act of 2011 and the Green Fee Committee are all projects on which SGA is currently working.

Tech has been a tobacco free campus for more than a year now, but many students who choose to use tobacco products break this rule on a daily basis and cause frustration to numerous students who choose not to use tobacco products.

"There's nothing really set in stone to enforce that policy because you really can't give a ticket to a student for smoking," said SGA President Sean Ochsenbein. "In that sense, there is no sole person that is out there among the group that is enforcing that policy."

SGA is now trying to come up with a cohesive and realistic way of approaching enforcement of no tobacco on campus. Ochsenbein has talked to students and come up with an idea that might be proposed to the administrative council in the next few weeks.

Another change that SGA hopes to make on campus is raising an awareness of maintenance workers entering residence halls and dorm rooms. During the March 1 meeting, SGA Senator Bo Murphy moved to accept the Maintenance Entrance Note Act of 2011. It was passed with friendly amendments.

The act requires that all maintenance workers must leave a note stating that they were in the room and the reason for their presence.

"It gives security to the student and a little bit of understanding of why someone was in the room," Ochsenbein said.

Yet another change that SGA is hoping to make on campus involves the Green Fee Committee. The committee is in charge of allocating the utilization of Green Fee money. The money comes from a fund that was the result of a bill that was approved Fall 2005, similar to the Student Organization Life Opportunity Fund that was created last year.

"There was a movement about five years ago in the state schools to find money to promote a green initiative on campuses," Ochsenbein said. "Of course, with state funding continually being reduced, students are paying more for their education than the state is, and there's not a lot of funding for those kinds of areas because most of it is going to the education.

"The money that is in that fund will be able to sustain a recycling program on campus that would be professional," Ochsenbein said.

The recycling plan includes putting recycling receptacles around campus in strategic locations where there is a high volume of traffic. The plan also involves having a service that will come to pick up the recycled materials and empty the recycling bins.

Ochsenbein expects all of these changes around campus to be put into effect within the next few weeks.

Menthol Cigarettes Pose No Added Lung Cancer Risk: Study

The risk of lung cancer for people who smoke menthol cigarettes is no greater than that of those who prefer regular cigarettes, researchers report.

The findings echo those of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisory panel that made headlines Friday when it said a ban on mentholated cigarettes might benefit the public health. While the panel concluded that menthols' minty flavor seems to help people take up smoking more readily, it added that there was no evidence menthols were any more dangerous than regular cigarettes in terms of risks for lung cancer or other respiratory ailments.

The new study, published online March 23 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, seems to agree with that notion. In fact, the researchers found that people who smoke menthol cigarettes might even have a somewhat lower risk of developing and dying from lung cancer than other smokers. a good example of Menthol cigs are Karelia menthol cigs.

But one expert said that no one should be misled by the findings into thinking menthols can keep lung cancer, emphysema and other respiratory diseases at bay.

"While this study finds no difference in lung cancer rates in smokers of menthol cigarettes versus non-menthol cigarettes, it is still inconveniently true that all cigarettes can cause lung cancer, as well as other cancers, heart disease, COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] and circulatory problems," said Dr. Len Horovitz, a pulmonary specialist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. "There is simply no safe smoking."

The U.S. team analyzed data from almost 86,000 people taking part in an ongoing multiracial study in 12 southern states. They identified 440 lung cancer patients and compared them with more than 2,200 healthy people.

Menthol cigarettes were associated with lower lung cancer incidence and fewer lung cancer deaths than regular cigarettes, according to the study. For example, among people who smoked 20 or more cigarettes a day, menthol cigarette smokers were about 12 times more likely to develop lung cancer than never-smokers while the risk was about 21 times higher for smokers of regular cigarettes.

Menthol cigarettes are no more, and perhaps less, harmful than regular cigarettes, concluded study author William J. Blot, of the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center in Nashville, Tenn., and the International Epidemiology Institute in Rockville, Md., and colleagues.

The study authors agreed with Horovitz, however, that there is no safe cigarette.

"Cigarette smoking remains the leading cause of premature death in the United States, but undue emphasis on reduction of menthol relative to other cigarettes may distract from the ultimate health prevention message that smoking of any cigarettes is injurious to health," Blot's team noted.

After looking over its advisory panel's report, the FDA will consider whether to ban or regulate menthol cigarettes. According to officials, the first response to the report is due from the agency within three months.

Room to raise state tobacco taxes

Amid the doom and gloom of budget shortfall talk, our legislators have an opportunity to offer some hope. Since 2004 or 2005 there hasn't been a tax hike on tobacco products in Alabama. As usual we find ourselves behind that tax as well.

Lawmakers can raise the current tax by 100 percent and still be behind the national average ($1.45) and behind 29 states, the District of Columbia and three territories which tax tobacco above $1.

Cigarettes have become more and more expensive and even the brands as Astra cigarettes or Beverlly cigarettes are too expensive now.

The increase would be a win-win situation. If people stop smoking, they will experience better health and the state would spend less on health care coverage and have fewer absentees from work due to smoking-related illnesses.

If not, the money could go toward stopping the educational bleeding caused by proration. It could provide books, supply money, lower pupil-teacher ratios, technology for the classroom and a solid investment in the future of our children. Lawmakers could also increase taxes on other recreational killers, such as alcohol. Anything else is illegal, but it is sold in Alabama.

It is time to put education and children first in funding. If there must be cuts in education, let it be after all else has failed.
Mary Hooks
Tuskegee

Words of warning about cigarettes

One shows a mother blowing smoke into her child's face - "Tobacco smoke can harm your children," the warning says. Another one shows a man exhaling smoke through his neck - "Cigarettes are addictive," the picture warns.

There is no difference between cigarettes like Astra brand or Dunhill cigarettes as they all influence our health.

A few even show corpses - one of them dressed in his Sunday's best in a coffin and the other wearing a toe tag - with the strongest warning of all: "Smoking can kill you."
These new labels, which will cover half of a pack and a fifth of an advertisement, may not get the nearly 50 million Americans who smoke to change their habits, said University of Georgia advertising professor Dean Krugman. But they are a step in the right direction.
"I think these will be a marked improvement over what is currently in place," Krugman said. "I think the (Food and Drug Administration) made a wise choice."
The new Tobacco Control Act gives the FDA the power to regulate the warnings on cigarette cartons and advertisements starting in June. It will take another 15 months for the nine new health warnings to take effect.
Krugman has followed the development of the new warnings closely.
He started studying the effectiveness of cigarette warnings in the 1980s and worked with the American Cancer Society and the U.S. Department of Justice to see if they could be better.
Krugman found that the current black and white warning labels, which take up just 5 percent of tobacco ads, weren't very effective at all.
"What we found is that, with black and white warnings, people don't tend to look," he said.
"No matter what the warning says, it's not going to be effective."
The new warning labels are much different and in line with the same used in Canada and several European countries, Krugman said. The FDA settled on nine warnings with a mix of photo and animated graphics.
Gone are warnings like "Cigarette smoke contains carbon monoxide" or "Smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and may complicate pregnancy."
They are replaced by labels that read, "Cigarettes cause fatal lung disease," "Cigarettes cause cancer" and "Tobacco smoke causes fatal lung disease in nonsmokers."
"What we've learned is that there is no room for subtlety," Krugman said. "You need to be direct because you don't have that much time and space."
The FDA still faces an uphill battle. Tobacco companies continue to spend billions of dollars every year on marketing campaigns, Krugman said.
Teenagers and young smokers may not heed the new warnings because they aren't thinking of consequences that can be decades ahead of them.
The new labels may not have an immediate effect, he said. But they will make a difference.
"It's not a matter of cause; it's a matter of influence," he said. "I believe this will be a huge step forward."

Oregon Cigarette Sale, Tobacco Related Cancers Decrease

According to new data released this week, as cigarette sales statewide have decreased, tobacco-related cancer diagnoses and deaths have declined as well. Between 1996 and 2009, Oregon saw a 48% decrease in per-capita cigarette purchase. In Deschutes County, the percentage of adults that smoke has dropped from 19% to 14%. Deschutes County Tabacco Prevention Specialist David Visiko, was a guest Friday morning on Wake Up Bend!, said local public places, like Bend Parks, the County Fairgrounds and St. Charles Medical Center campus going smoke free has helped.

"The latest stat of I saw was about 70% of people who do smoke want to quit. So, when the environment helps to shape their behavior, they're more apt to say ‘OK, I can't smoke here, I can't smoke there, I've been wanting to quit anyway so here we go'."

The Department of Human Services adds second-hand smoke exposure has dropped in the workplace, and more people now report they do not allow smoking in their home.

Visiko said more needs to be done locally to lower that usage number. He said while decreasing, the number of middle school students that light up locally is still higher than the state average.

"I think we need to start changing environments so more people are encouraged to quit or avoid starting such as tobacco price increases, countering any of the tobacco industry advertising in the communities where some of this heavy marketing continues unabated."

Visiko said the state allocated $8 million to fight tobacco, while the tobacco industry spent $134 million in ads in 2006.

Altria Posts Strong Q4; Expects Challenging Year

Altria, producer of Marlboro cigarettes reported a 27 percent rise in profits for the fourth quarter of 2010 primarily due to higher operating companies income from cigarettes and smokeless products, according to the company. However, the company does expect 2011 to be another challenging year.

According to Marketwatch, the company’s revenue fell 1.4 percent to $5.93 billion as cigarette shipments dropped 7 percent to 33.6 billion smokes. However, smokeless-product volume rose 2.5 percent. Also, Altria’s flagship brand, Marlboro, increased its domestic market share to 42.3 percent from 41.7 percent.

"Altria successfully navigated a challenging economic environment in 2010 and delivered strong results to our shareholders," said Michael E. Szymanczyk, chairman and chief executive officer for Altria, in a company release. "Altria grew its adjusted diluted earnings per share by nearly 9 percent in 2010, and increased its quarterly dividend rate by 11.8 percent, reflecting the underlying financial strength of our business. Altria’s total shareholder return in 2010 was 32.9 percent, outpacing the S&P 500’s total return of 14.8 percent for the 11th straight year."

Looking forward, the company said in its earnings release "the business environment for this year will likely remain challenging as adult consumers remain under economic pressure and face high unemployment. In the cigarettes segment, [Philip Morris USA] is continuing to see significant competitive activity and is cautious about the outlook for state excise tax increases."

As for its smokeless tobacco segment, the company said, "USSTC is just beginning to execute its plans for Skoal and, in the cigars segment, John Middleton Co. faces an especially challenging business environment."

Arizona bill targets minors who buy tobacco with fake ID

A Republican senator is looking to stiffen penalties for youths trying to use fake identification to buy tobacco products.

The measure, sponsored by Sen. Michele Reagan, R-Scottsdale, would upgrade buying tobacco products from a petty offense to a Class 3 misdemeanor if the buyer uses a fake ID, taking the fine from a maximum of $300 to a maximum of $500 with a possible 30 days jail time.

Several lobbyists said that the punishment when children illegally purchase tobacco products usually falls on businesses for accepting the false IDs. Retailers can face fines up to $1,000 if they're caught selling to underage customers.


"If a minor has gone to the extent to get a fake ID, then they know they shouldn't be buying tobacco" said Michelle Ahlmer, president of the Arizona Retailers Association. "For a long time, it's been the clerk who's subject to penalties for selling to a minor, and that isn't fair."

SB 1086, under consideration by the Committee on Commerce and Energy, also would ban tobacco wraps that are used to roll cigars. Those so-called blunt wraps are commonly used to roll marijuana cigarettes.

The move to increase fines for minors would level the playing field in an age when fake IDs have gotten more sophisticated and clerks can't always pick them out, Ahlmer said.

Norman Moore, a lobbyist for tobacco manufacturer Reynolds American and the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association, said both groups have an interest in preventing tobacco sales to minors.

While a minor buying alcohol with a fake ID in Arizona faces a Class 1 misdemeanor that includes a hefty fine and possible jail time, there's no such matching law for tobacco products.

"This enhanced penalty for a minor would continue to increase the ability of law enforcement to go after and protect youth," Moore said.

A 2010 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tobacco report found that 10.6 percent of Arizona youths age 12 to 17 smoke, compared to the 10.1 percent national average.

"Because Arizona is still above the national average, we have some other work to do," Moore said, adding that the only job loss associated with introducing the penalties would be to the people or businesses supplying children with fake IDs.

Michael Kinnaird, 46, the owner of 70's Shop and Hookah Lounge in Phoenix, said he regularly turns away minors using fake IDs. At least five times a day, he said, youths try to be served without having any ID.

"They try to catch you when you're busy thinking you won't check," Kinnaird said. "I'm not going to risk my business over a $10 sale."

Fake IDs have become more sophisticated, and it can be difficult for employees to tell, he said. In some cases, Kinnaird didn't realize customers' IDs were fake until years later when they got real ones.

"I don't want to be penalized for some kid bringing in a fake ID when I can't even tell," Kinnaird said, adding that the bill would be an improvement for small businesses in Arizona.

The bill was put on hold Tuesday so legislators could meet with stakeholders about the second portion of the bill dealing with blunt wraps. Sen. Al Melvin, R-Tucson, chairman of the Commerce and Energy Committee, moved to strike that portion of the bill.

Tobacco industry lobbyists argued that the bill would ban a legitimate product used to roll cigars. Lobbyists for cigar associations pushed for the bill, saying the wraps are imposters in the cigar business.

"This bill is going to go forward no matter what, but the cigar people are going to have to come to some agreement or their portion will be taken out," Reagan said.

Discarded cigarettes caused St. Paul fatal fire

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - Carelessly discarded cigarettes are being blamed for a house fire that killed a University of St. Thomas student and injured three others last month. Cigarettes can affect us seriously in many other way , it can damage our health in example.

St. Paul Fire Marshal Steve Zaccard says there were two containers on the front porch to put cigarette butts in and one was plastic. That container started on fire, which spread throughout the home.

Zaccard tells WCCO-TV it took investigators awhile to determine the exact cause because other possibilities needed to be ruled out.

The Dec. 11 fire killed 20-year-old Michael Larson, who was sleeping on a couch on the main floor.

Three people at the home awoke to smoke detectors and jumped out of second-story windows. They were treated for smoke inhalation and taken to Regions Hospital.

All four victims were students at St. Thomas.

Autism Study Fraud, Tobacco Laws

AUTISM STUDY DOC FRAUD: This is the study that created the fear of vaccines causing autism. It was published in the prestigious British Medical Journal in 1998 by a doctor named Andrew Wakefield. The doctor is now being accused of "deliberate and elaborate fraud" for creating false information. The British Medical Journal officially retracted the article last year. An investigation continued. The new findings say five of the 12 children in the study had previously documented developmental problems before getting the MMR shot.

TIGHTER TOBACCO LAWS: Tighter regulations for tobacco are going into effect. Any product that was introduced or altered since February 2007 must now be reviewed by the FDA in order to remain on the market. The law applies to cigarettes, roll-your-own tobacco and all smokeless products. More than 200 new tobacco products are introduced every year.

LETTER: Hospitals should also ban bad foods

As a non-smoker, I am in full support of the ban on tobacco at five East Tennessee Hospital campuses. (DNJ, Jan. 2)

I do not have actual statistics to quote, but we all know the dangers involved with the consumption of tobacco products. Unfortunately for those users, the tobacco manufacturers have done everything within their powers to keep them addicted.

With all of that said, I feel the hospitals are headed in the right direction, but should take it another step further. We are also aware of the health risks associated with obesity and unhealthy eating habits. Unwholesome foods and drinks of all kinds should be removed from the facilities too. I realize this opens the debate of what is and is not healthy. But if a hospital is going to the extremes of eliminating all uses of tobacco by its employees and patrons, then this would be the next logical action to take.

Susanna Cline

Campfire Drive

Why Are Cigarettes Legal?

I believe cigarettes are a silent killer. If you think your fine and you can just smoke however many cigarettes you want without anything ever happening, your wrong. This is where I get confused. Why is Marijuana illegal?

Alcohol messes with the mind way worse than marijuana. Even cigarettes are worse than marijuana. There has never been a reported death of a marijuana (cannabis) overdose. It is now being used medically, religiously, and for recreational use. Marijuana's main ingredient is tetrahydrocannabinol or THC. Cannabis has been found to prevent from excitotoxicity. Excitotoxicity is when neurons are damaged or killed. When a person smokes marijuana they may feel a bit nervous but depending on how much they smoke they may not feel that way. Smokers choose to smoke strong or not so strong cigarettes, like Pall Mall cigarettes or MT cigarettes.

If a person has been smoking for a long time they may only feel happy, giggly, slow, and hungry. I mean smoking marijuana is not for someone who needs to write a three page paper. Nor is it for driving around smoking it. It distorts your ming somewhat but not so much that if something happened you couldn't think logically. If you have never smoked weed you don't know so you shouldn't judge people because they do. People who use it regularly might use it just o relax at night. So tell me, if there are so many deaths accompanied with alcohol and cigarettes than why is marijuana illegal? Alcohol intoxicates a person and distorts their minds way more than marijuana could so why is it legal? Just because drinking is popular? Well marijuana is popular too and doesn't come with all the deaths that alcohol and cigarettes come with.

Personally I believe the government needs to rethink their choices because they don't make sense. Why would something that could kill you be legal? On another note there are some bad things that occur due to marijuana. Smoking marijuana can cause memory loss, increased heartrate, severe headaches, nasuea, vomiting, and difficulty thinking. That usually only occurs when a person smokes too much. Marijuana can also be ingested. People have been known to put marijuana in brownies, cookies, tea, cake, etc. A good majority of marijuana users smoke it. There are many ways to smoke it. You can use papers, blunts, dutches, wraps, bowls, pipes, bongs, apples, etc. Todays generation mainly focuses on bowls and blunts. Back in the 70's joints were the most popular. Even to this day older marijuana users prefer papers over anything else.