Tobacco kills and does so in ruthless fashion. And although tobacco is consumed consequential to an
individual decision it also effects adjacent victims as well. No reasonable person would argue the use of tobacco
would ever encounter a situation in which the term 'net-gain could be applied. Even to those who seem to find
relief from symptoms attributable to a mental health issue have much less toxic interventions available to
address the very same symptoms.
Cigarettes are bad, bad ,bad
Cigarettes do not threaten the catastrophic environmental disruption and/or possible extinction.
Cigarettes are here to stay...
One way or another...
Consumption of fossil fuels is not.
At the present, our nation actually does give due
diligence to the toxic emissions of burning
substances. Many positive results have already
been witnessed. Despite early progress the
campaign for ongoing change in the direction of
eventual eradication continues unabated- just as
any campaign for change should.
There is only one problem…We have prioritized the targeting of addiction to a far
less threatening type of smoke. And of course that would be tobacco smoke given
priority over that produced
by the burning of fossil .
fuels. ‘Big Oil” executives assert it will be 50-75 years
before we can begin meaningful transition to alternative
sources of energy
With the presence of more giggling then found at
an adolescent slumber party, the interests of ‘Big
Oil’ surely stand in awe and incredulous gratitude
for the diversion provided by ‘Big Tobacco’
Few would deny that tobacco smoke is tremendously harmful. Millions of
people get sick and millions have died as a consequence to deliberate or
secondary exposure to tobacco smoke. There is great sorrow and great
loss attributable to tobacco. Many would find it absurd to suggest the
tobacco issue should be viewed as a secondary priority to any other known
scourge. Here goes anyway…