Bernd is retarded

that's what im sayin jews be hatin on tobacco

if they actually gave cancer and killed you it would be good for the government since they wouldnt have to pay during retirement so there must be a secret reason

Youre inhaling smoke. Its bad for you.

>>25545783 Nicotine raises IQ and boosts testosterone. If this was just about cigarettes, they would attack that only. Ask yourself though why a. nicotine gum is deliberately expensive and b. why nicotine products like sinus are also banned or expensive Think back to when Europe ruled -- every man smoked. Think to now when when we don't -- we're weaker, listless, and far more stupid.

>>25545828 >>25545787 there is a special type of contrianism on kc where bernd will anticipate what other berds might say and say the opposite of that so they one up those bernds, making it seem like they are reasonable people, but don't be fooled, they are just super contrarians also known as kohltrarians.

The idea is right, it's weird that they lobby so hard against cigarettes but go really soft on unhealthy food. Why not print pictures of diabetes legs on packages of sweets? But thinking that cigarettes might not be bad for your health is retarded.

I've thought this a few times

>government doesnt care for health of people It does. but health as whole population so you can milk it for longer. Caring for individual health issues benefit no-one.

So you believe that the government actually cares about you? Do you have some evidence for that?

The government used to say cigs are good for you but now that it's out they do the opposite to keep people's trust

Right now my gov says weed is good for me. I'd be a fool to trust them. Drugs are bad.

>>25545840 No. First world war made cigs popular. Cigs were literally recycled cigar stumps.

Yes, people are permitted to have opinions that go against the commonly accepted truth. While I do believe tobacco can cause cancer and cardiovascular issues I do not believe that is due to the nicotine. The issue lies in the method of ingestion as well as the mountain of various chemicals processed tobacco is covered in. Chemicals and tar that they do not need to be covered in. There's even the possibility that the filters could be causing issues. As >>25545840 points out, nicotine has rather staggering benefits. Yet tobacco products are stigmatized on a level that borders on hardcore drugs. There is no such demonization of alcohol, and a smoker is many many times less likely to piss on your leg after partaking in their vice. Weed smells even worse as well as spreads its stench even further and when you compare the productivity of someone who smoked a blunt in the past hour and another who had a cigarette there is a clear difference. Weed has been legalized and destigmatized all over the place in the last 15 years. So, why are there no efforts to develop safe(r) methods of ingestion instead of taxing addicts to poverty? It is the impoverished who need the greatest amount of government aid when ill. Governments around the world damn near forced a DNA altering vaccine onto their people just a few years ago. What would be wrong with, say, a voluntary bacteria that lives in your pits and converts sweat to nicotine? Could even solve the BO issue at the same time as people reap the benefits of nicotine.

>>25546081 > I believe we know, bernd, we know >rather staggering benefits indian tier not really gonna bother arguing, how about we just get rid of poor people

>Inhaling burning smoke of leafs into your lungs can't be damaging for you Maybe you should try inhaling pure burning rubber

You injected rubbing alcohol into your balls though.

>>25546143 not nancy

>>25545783 Well, she is correct.. at least partially. There are also beneficial effects of smoking which are deliberately ignored when propagandizing against tobacco.

Government is propagandizing against fags? LOL lmao even This shit literally causes cancer straight away and the governments still don't ban it It's telltale sigh of being paid for shilling

>>25546161 lot of things cause cancer

Tobacco undoes mRNA vaccine damage Tobacco raises testosterone Tobacco raises IQ

The ulterior motive is campaign donations from anti-smoking lobby groups. If they cared about our health, they wouldn't have placed all these restrictions on vaping or marijuana use.

>>25545840 I will also point out that White zoomers, most of who are very based, all vape. Compare them to my generation -- Millennials, the first smoke free generation since the 17th century -- and you see a clear difference. Millennials have boomer tier politics, smoke weed, and are cuckolds. The only good fellow Millennials I've ever met smoke tobacco or vape.

>>25546161 And note how overtaxed and inaccessible alternatives like vaping have become. You pay tobacco tax on glycerine and herbal blends that don't even contain nicotine, might as well tax tea because one might get the idea of inhaling its vapors. And they tell you the govt wants you to stop smoking, lol.

well that one is pretty obvious because nicotine raises testosterone

by the way raising testosterone across the population is not necessarily a good thing because testosterone makes women promiscuous and stops bone elongation in children, producing manlets so nicotine products should be legal for men, but illegal for women and children

I can believe cigarettes are bad for you t. 15 year smoker

That is correct Consider the psyop against tobacco came together with the psyop in favor of marijuana. Well, if there was a legitimate worry about the health of the masses, attempts of popularizing marijuana would be curbed. But that was not the case, because the aim is to replace one vice, that is energizing and masculinizing, with another, that is depressing and feminizing.

>>25549118 >energizing and masculinizing It isn't. It lowers test long term.

>>25546656 Nicotine does not increase test long term but the opposite

nicotine is good for many things it actually blocks viruses that attack nerve system by occupying the receptors the virus need to dock.

Nicotine decreases both estrogen and testosterone production. It's unhealthy. It just makes you into a sexless subhuman.

>>25552030 I'm sure those receptors that the nicotine destroys were used for nothing but absorbing viruses.

>>25552037 globo on record dips cigarettes in 250 chemicals to give you cancer instead

>>25552040 Chop of your legs. That way you'll never, get fungus on the toes. I'm not goeing to discuss which drugs are less bad. They are all bad.

>>25552043 globo just got you in the bag nicotine is a nutrient

>>25552048 You literally said it blocks receptors of your nervous system preventing your body from functioning correctly.

>>25552043 The fact that the authorities oppose tobacco is enough proof it is good, simple as

>>25552053 If I start telling you to not jump off the cliff, you're going to.

>>25552060 Do the authorities oppose weed? Do they oppose chopping your dick of? No, they oppose traditional gender roles and red meat If our overlords are against it, it has something good about it

>>25552070 Third Reich opposed smoking.

>>25552075 Hitler's personal preference

MAGAbernds love contrarianism without any supporting logic. Also moral relativism.

>>25552076 In the 50s they massively shilled smoking after ke lost the war and declared it as healthy. The truth is simply obvious now, so they did a 180 and sell you a new drug just as unhealthy.

In post-war Germany, cigarettes became a second currency due to the complete collapse of the economy and monetary transactions, and cigarette smuggling flourished. The measures against smoking came to a temporary end. Many of the studies that are still valid today (for example those of the Scientific Institute for Research into the Dangers of Tobacco from the National Socialist era) were lost and smoking became sexy. In the 1950s, smoking at the wheel was considered medically advisable because nicotine kept you awake and therefore contributed to road safety. In 1952, ADAC Motorwelt reported on an English study according to which “drivers under the influence of nicotine were less likely to suffer alcohol-related impairment of their driving performance” than without. Drivers who smoked were safer when drunk. The ADAC saw one of its main tasks as ensuring “ongoing cooperation between the tobacco and motorists' associations.”[4] The image of the “cool smoker” was to persist into the 1980s, with stars and politicians smoking on talk shows and in films. French films from the late sixties and early seventies, for example, provide vivid examples of almost permanent tobacco consumption on screen: Michel Piccoli in Sautet's film The Things of Life, for example, only does not smoke in the shots in which he is shown as a dying It was only with the deaths (due to smoking) of many prominent smokers such as H

The picture only changed with the deaths (due to smoking) of many prominent smokers such as Humphrey Bogart (esophageal cancer), Gary Cooper, Steve McQueen and Yul Brynner, as well as the Marlboro cowboy Wayne McLaren from cinema advertising.

I defend the right of dumb people to say dumb stuff. While I don't agree with her views I agree with her right to say it.

I do want to start smoking just because. I smelled a cigar when I was a kid (my grandpa smoked them) and now I want a puff, just a puff A little bit, maybe it's good, maybe it's fun