1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Should the FDA regulate tobacco?

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by PLC1, Apr 3, 2009.

  1. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    493
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    House votes to put tobacco under FDA control

    How do you feel about this one?

    Is tobacco a drug?

    Should it be regulated as a drug?

    What do you think?
     
  2. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Just more fascist nanny statism....

    Gone are the days of "Live and let live"...

    Now its "Live as we tell you to live"

    Where are all the freedom loving people of America?
     
  3. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The primary operative drug in tobacco is nicotine.

    Nicotine is a primary agonist of one of the more common neurotransmitter chemicals: acetylcholine. That means that nicotine stimulates acetylcholine production in the brain.

    People simply would not smoke if nicotine did not have this drug-effect.

    Nicotine is highly addictive, owing to the fact that the acetylcholine receptors in the brain are so very plentiful.

    Neurotransmitters can be in low supply in the brain, and acetylcholine deficiencies afflict millions of people.

    Brain chemical imbalances are often due to unresolved damage inculcated in family-of-origin dysfunctional families.

    When acetylcholine is one of the neurotransmitters in resultant low levels, depression is experienced.

    People simply endure this depression, not realizing they suffer from it, thinking the way they feel is normal ... until they encounter their first cigarette ... and then they find the lift it gives them can sometimes be simply euphoric.

    From then on, they're hooked.

    The more severe the acetycholine deficiency, the stronger the addiction to cigarettes will become.

    Unlike with pot, heroin, and other damaging and deadly drugs, with the very serious exception of cancer-causing second-hand smoke, nicotine addicts aren't the same kind of threats to others that pot and heroin, etc., drug users are, and the fact that they get a "lift" from their nicotine addiction actually helps them "rise" from their depression for a bit and thus makes them more capable of relating well with others.

    But, that's because the nicotine functions to give them a temporary lift from their actylcholine depression ... a lift that subsides not long after the cigaretter has been smoked.

    So are cigarettes a drug that needs to be controlled?

    Absolutely!

    It's a self-medicating anti-depressant, and thus it really belongs under FDA control.

    Indeed, the damage done from overdosing on nicotine is blood vessel constriction leading straightway to heart attack and stroke, and most pack-a-day smokers are indeed in overdose mode.

    And, of course, the delivery system of nicotene includes tobacco tars that lead directly to lung cancer and brain tumors, as well as throat and mouth cancers for those who chew it.

    Those suffering acetycholine depression will be much better served giving up their cancer-causing cigarettes and receiving a prescription and therapy for their depression to actually effect an end to the depression rather than just coping with it with cigarettes, such coping that really makes their depression worse as cigaretter tolerance builds.

    The medical professional, including a psychiatrist, can examine the patient, including a bloodtest, and thereby determine the right anti-depressant to prescribe for the patient.

    And, because all anti-depressants -- just like the tobacco kind -- have side-effects that require monitoring, the prescribing medical professional can monitor the patient on a regular basis to make sure no damage is done by the side-effects, side-effects which, nowadays in more modern medicines, have been greatly reduced anyway.

    Yes, it's high time that tobacco was regulated -- indeed, unless there is some additional benefits to tobacco that offset its damaging and deadly side-effects to the user, it should indeed be pulled off the market entirely, and relegated to manufacturing uses to extract whatever is of value from it.

    This will help protect our children from damaging and deadly cancers, heart attack and stroke that awaits them all too early in life after they've started smoking ... when they're eight years old. :(

    Regulation of tobacco is a good thing.

    That such regulation is now beginning, hopefully one day to end the existence of cigarettes, is evidence that society is truly progressing in a healthy manner.
     
  4. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Your "progress" seems to always be the elimination of individual rights and the elimination of personal choice...

    I prefer Freedom over "Progress"
     
  5. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Freedom is indeed a human right. I support freedom.

    Security is also a human right, which I also support.

    Life is the foundational human right, which I most foundationally support.

    If it all came right down to it, I would be sad that people aren't treating their acetylcholine depression most appropriately, choosing instead to treat it with the comparatively gross drug of nicotine via damaging and deadly cigarette delivery system.

    But, as long as people don't smoke around non-smokers and damage them with proven-to-do-damage second-hand smoke, I suppose they have the freedom at present to do so.

    I just realize that if given a choice between an end to the acetylcholine depression they suffer (which they probably don't even know that's what they suffer from when they're hooked on cigarettes with which to cope), as opposed to eventually dying from cancer, heart attack, or stroke, never really ending their depression, I just think they would rather choose the former, if they're intelligent, that is.

    So should the ignorant or lazily self-destructive be allowed to continue to smoke?

    Well, that depends on how you feel about drug abuse.

    There's the drug abuse that hurts one's self and not so much others (cigarette usage isolated from non-smokers) ...

    ... And there's the drug abuse that hurts one's self and others the druggie comes in contact with (pot-heads driving while stoned).

    Definitely the latter situation requires those drugs to remain banned.

    But only more of a pro-lifer, like myself, would see great benefit in ending addiction period ... and thus I support the regulation of tobacco and the banning of cigarettes.

    If that means one loses ones freedom to ignorantly self-destruct, well ...

    ... Hopefully in a more enlightened society, a healthy life-affirming society, people who would otherwise have died a premature death caused by their cigaretter addiction would thank society for having the foresight to ban such self-damaging and deadly so-called "freedoms".
     
  6. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    493
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Does that mean you would support the legalization of other drugs as well?

    Why should tobacco get a pass?
     
  7. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Absolutely.
     
  8. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    tobacco would not be a drug, but if you looked at some of the crap that's also in there, I think you would find stuff that they could. Nicotine would be the drug , it just happens to be in tobacco. If people are going to smoke so be it, but I think they should pay huge costs on medical care and I do support rules about were they can smoke, as just becuse you are free to smoke..does not me you should be free to smoke out the rest of the place. I have to breath that air in as well, and so does evry non smoker on that place.
     
  9. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Should the FDA regulate tobacco?

    Sure. We don't have nearly enough Federal regulation in this country, and we need more.

    (Just the fact that someone can ask that question, shows you how bad shape we're in.)
     
  10. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    493
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Isn't saying that tobacco is not a drug, but nicotine is, the same as saying that marijuana is not a drug, but TCH is?

    Otherwise, I'll agree with you 100%.

    What you are saying about tobacco could also be said about pot, so let's legalize it, tax it, and regulate it.
     
  11. PLC1

    PLC1 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Messages:
    9,924
    Likes Received:
    493
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The Golden State
    Have you checked your conservative card lately? You just might find it really says "Libertarian."

    Isn't legalizing pot one of those issues where "liberals" are pro, while "conservatives" are con?
     
  12. Ronaldus Magnus

    Ronaldus Magnus New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    How many people strung out on "evil cigarettes" have gone out and murdered, gone over the yellow line, overdosed partying one night, or sold their body to get a fix? Tobacco is a scape goat. Many of you get on here talking about what the government has killed in your particular state? Well let me tell you, Liberals in the government have killed tobacco, and thus they have killed the agriculture economy in much of the south!
     
  13. GenSeneca

    GenSeneca Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    6,245
    Likes Received:
    501
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    ={CaLiCo}= HQ
    Did you forget that CaLiCo stands for Capitalist, LIBERTARIAN, Conservative?

    Don't you find it incredibly hipocritical that "Liberals" want to ban tobacco but legalize Pot? Then they have the temerity to claim one causes cancer while the other cures it?

    And what's with all you Tax-Nazi's anyway? I say again... if you think taxing activities and products you disapprove of is acceptable, then I hope activities and products you enjoy become so heavily taxed that you can no longer participate in them. We can all live like slaves during the 1700's under environazi rule.

    But that's the endgame for the Tax-Nazi isn't it? To eliminate personal freedom and individual choice without having to directly ban things. Force people into lifestyles and choices that you agree with because they are too stupid to make decisions for themselves.

    I remember when America was the land of the free, I miss those days.
     
  14. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    I would say that yes that would be true, and I am in favor of that as well. But if we are going to pass laws and regulations, we need to be accurate about what in fact is the drug...because Tobacco is not in fact a drug...If they removed some of the chemicals from cigs, like nicotine, most likey they would end up with no or less need for any regs.
     
  15. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    actually no, because if you are a true conservative and worried about the power over government over the people, and our rights, you would know the drug war was the pre 911 way we where losing our rights. You could do anything you wanted, because if you said no, they attacked you as soft on drugs.
     
Loading...

Share This Page