<p>There’s no such thing as “nicotine” receptors though. Nicotine is a D1/D2 receptor agonist. (In the PNS you have nicotinic and muscarinic receptors)</p>
<p>Acetocholine receptors then, but you know that the niccotine is transported to receptors in the brain which gives a “buzz” which in some ways is similar to the “buzz” folks can get from endorphins when exercising. It DOES alter the brain anatomy when you smoke, especially over time. For many of us, that is not a welcome thought.</p>
<p>I’ve been around many folks dying slowly and uncomfortably from COPD. It’s not a pretty thing. It’s slow, expensive and gasping. Similarly, folks afflicted with and dying from lung and other cancers as well as heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease. Expensive and very nasty.</p>
<p>No, what it does is activate the receptors so that more dopamine is released (Hence why its an agonist). It’s that flood of dopamine that makes you feel good. Most people get addicted because over time they grow accustomed to the elevated dopaminergic levels in their brain due to their nicotine use. When they go cold turkey (or try to quit), the levels plummet and that’s when they start going through withdrawal. I’ve never heard of nicotine altering your brain chemistry permanently tbh. I’m not sure that’s possible.</p>
<p>[WhyQuit.com</a> on youth smoking](<a href=“http://whyquit.com/Youth/Messages/Canada.html]WhyQuit.com”>Canda's cigarette pack addiction warning label)</p>
<p>BTW, over 90% of all smokers started as teens. I was sure I could quit anytime I wanted to in college. I did quit, thirty-six years later.</p>
<p>
Do you have any studies to support the idea that smelling 15-minute old smoke on somebody’s clothes is any worse for you than, say, walking along a street with moderate traffic, cleaning the bathroom with harsh chemicals, or laying out in a grassy field on a clear Summer afternoon, exposed to environmental air pollution? No, really. If so, I’d love to see it.</p>
<p>Cigarette smoke cannot be compared to pollution. Pollution is a public negative externality that just can’t be avoided. 2nd hand cigarette smoke on the other hand is not a public negative externality. It is caused by individuals who have a choice on whether to smoke in public or not.</p>
<p>^ False dichotomy.</p>
<p>Smoking is a bad and ugly habit.</p>
<p>No, it isn’t. I just finished a BA in Economics and I’m certain that what I stated is correct.</p>
<p>
How can you be certain of anything? What do human beings really know?</p>
<p>Let’s look at this logically. We could avoid all pollution, if we wanted to. And we could avoid individuals smoking, if we wanted to. We choose not to do the former, since the benefits (to society?) outweigh the drawbacks. The question is whether we should treat individuals’ smoking the same way.</p>
<p>You can never avoid pollution. Even sun exposure can be considered pollution due to the UV rays. It is pretty much all-pervasive in society today. Public utilities (Such as electricity and water) cause pollution that is absorbed by all the people that use their services. EM radiation for cell phones? That is also considered pollution. </p>
<p>It can’t be avoided. You can’t say the same of 2nd hand smoke.</p>
<p>Sure it can be avoided; if not entirely, it can be avoided to a large extent. Let’s get rid of utilities and go live in mud huts and be hunter-gatherers. We can eat food raw. We could even live underground and come out at night, to help avoid the sun.</p>
<p>More practically, we could at least issue gas masks or something, or make them available and encourage their use. Can gas masks filter out any air pollution? I bet they can, but I don’t really know. I do know there is gear you can use to block out UV rays from the sun.</p>
<p>Oh, and by the way, where’s my $1,000?</p>
<p>@aegrisomnia: What are the benefits to smoking? I’m not trying to sound condescending, I’m just curious if there’s anything tangible (not that it’s “fun” or “looks cool”).</p>
<p>@Acuraman93:
If you’re really interested, some information can be found at "<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/1167315-risks-occasional-smoking.html">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parent-cafe/1167315-risks-occasional-smoking.html</a>" at the bottom of the first page of the thread.</p>
<p>That being said, you should not smoke to achieve health benefits. I don’t think any reasonable person would (seriously, without tongue in cheek) say that smoking is a healthy activity. The human body is, from what I understand, a very complex system, and dogmatic claims such as “X has only negative effects” are bound to be wrong in at least one instance.</p>
<p>The nicotine buzz is the main benefit. The same reason why people dip.</p>
<p>^ That’s what I’ve been saying all along. You don’t go to the movies because walking to the theater from the parking lot is good exercise… and you don’t get the popcorn because you need more protein or sodium in your diet… it’s clear why people go to the movies and get concessions. Life is about more than simply sustaining life.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>People shouldn’t wear so much perfume that everyone in the entire subway car has to smell it. Unfortunately, neither they nor smokers with ashtray smells embedded in their clothing seem to know how awful they smell to passerby.</p>
<p>^ Fair enough. Perhaps we should be asking how to reduce the lingering odor of cigarette smoke? Maybe reversible smoking jackets?</p>
<p>Given that dying younger may be cheaper for society than dying older I think the economic case against smoking is dubious. Also the claim that it is all that tough to quit is somewhat disproven by the fact that many many millions have quit. Maybe half or more. The claim that secondhand smoke is annoying is true. Even to former smokers. That alone is a fine reason to ban it from most public places.</p>
<p>^ Are we going to start handing out tickets for too much perfume, then?</p>