immi101: contrary to popular belief there are no Europeans :p, and smoking habits vary wildly depending on where exactly you are( 8% - 27%)
Of course there "are" Europeans. Just as there are Bulgarians (35% smokers), French (28%), Danes (18%), Germans (25%), or Greeks (37%, the highest percentage in all of Europe). It just irks us when someone lumps 50 countries together in order to make broad generalizing (and sometimes false) statements about 750 million people. Yet statements about 220 million "Americans", which are spread amongst a country just as spacious as Europe, are hardly less generalizing. The West Virginians hit 24.8% smokers in their population, Utah only 10.6%. A comparison between Europe and the US can still explain the huge drop of smoking prevalence across the ocean – as well as the still higher mortality in the US despite absurd per capita health care spendings. These statistics can provide an answer to the question Alaric has asked, though the question was of course neither asked in good faith, nor will he like the answer or to have his false presuppositions corrected. :|
Still, I'd love to know what European country or even city Alaric has visited. There's a marked spike in consumption towards Eastern Europe. The data on e.g. Serbia and Russia is just OMG.
rtcvb32: Are they on fire? [...]
More seriously the tobacco isn't going to be THAT bad for you, no it's all the other additives. I also have a theory smoking was picked up long ago in order to act as a bug repellent (
bugs hate smoke and they hate tobacco).
Man, YOU'RE on fire these days. Seriously, it's incredible how you're pooping pseudo-scientific nonsense and hilarious conspiracy stuff into every single thread. It's really, really impressive how you sometimes even make up those "theories" yourself without even once checking the facts.
First of all, a cigarette that says "100% additive free" on the package is still made with additives (oddly fitting they call the most heinously misleading brand of cigarettes in the US
"Natural American Spirit"). Second, home grown tobacco which definitely has no chemical additives still has 40+ known carcinogens. Statistically, the "all natural" stuff does not even pose a marginally lower risk. Totally, absolutely, without doubt, all evidence says, it can not be denied that YES,
the tobacco itself IS going to be THAT bad for you.
Evidence for your "theory" does not exist. All animals "hate smoke"
because it means fire for them. We've been trained to ignore that direct connection to imminent danger by smoking (but we still trick our brain when we light a match after pooping. We tell ourselves we "light up" the methane when in fact we're just introducing a new smell that simply blocks out the fecal odor because it ranks highest on the brain's list of olfactory warning signs). The amount of smoke you have to generate to actually make bugs flee is of course tremendous. Think forest fire, not cigarette smoke. As to the idea that bugs hate tobacco itself, well, tell that to the tobacco budworms, tobacco hornworms, tobacco flea beetles, granulate cutworms, stink bugs, cabbage loopers, mole crickets, whitefringed beetles and all the other insects who feed on tobacco leaves.
Smoking was picked up 4000-5000 years ago in shamanistic and other rituals for its intoxicating effects. It spread because it is addictive as fuck.
