Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Leonard Nimoy: Smoking Is Illogical

timothy posted about 5 months ago | from the even-with-little-dollar-signs-on-the-tube dept.

Medicine 401

An anonymous reader writes "My boyhood hero, actor Leonard Nimoy, has developed lung disease. To those still smoking and in the grips of marketing induced denial, he says 'quit now.' Small acts of goodness make the universe a better place."

cancel ×

401 comments

Beta is illogical (-1, Offtopic)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 5 months ago | (#46200505)

Fuck Beta

Re:Beta is illogical (1, Insightful)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 5 months ago | (#46200509)

Also, Why so many short submissions? Is slashdot trying to dilute the FUCK BETA?

Re:Beta is illogical (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200799)

yup - they're diluting and modding down our efforts in an attempt to make the situation look less dire for the casual reader.
RIP slashdot.

Re:Beta is illogical (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200847)

Fuck Beta

Beta is like aids; you get it by being beta-fucked. Therefore being beta-fucked is illogical.

Re:Beta is illogical (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200913)

fuck beta.

Re:Beta is illogical (0, Offtopic)

Frobnicator (565869) | about 5 months ago | (#46200921)

I bet the /. beta team are all smokers.

It isn't logical to completely destroy the essence of a popular website just to try to extract some extra money from it, but destroy it in the process.

Kinda like killing the goose that lays the golden eggs just so you can try to extract the eggs quicker. Sorry, but you may find the essence of the site dies in the process.

Slashdot: Betas for bros, stuff that monetizes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200513)

Using the beta is illogical.

LOOKS LIKE ALICE COOPER CIRCA 1977 !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200523)

No More Mr Nice Guy !!

Entitlement (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200529)

GIVE DIRETIDE!

Sorry I mean: FUCK BETA!

You know what else is illogical? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200533)

Beta. Fuck it.

two spock quotes come to mind (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200541)

It is curious how often you humans manage to obtain that which you do not want.
--Spock in 'Errand of Mercy'

Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans.
--Spock in 'I, Mudd'

Re:two spock quotes come to mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200677)

"I Am Not Spock"

- Leonard Nimoy (Title of his autobiography, 1975)

Re: two spock quotes come to mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200741)

I am Spock, Leonard Nimoy, 1995

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/142335835X

Re:two spock quotes come to mind (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200899)

This is logical. A real world example is that somehow I'll manage to obtain beta although it is something of which I do not want.

Beta gave me lung disease. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200549)

Don't make the same mistake I did.

Seriously - GTFO (0, Troll)

sidevans (66118) | about 5 months ago | (#46200553)

How the hell is this even news?
Smoking causes lung cancer?
Do you think we're all that fucking retarded that we didn't know that?

However - My Grandfather died of lung cancer in his 80's, and he NEVER smoked.

As a smoker and 15 year user for Slashdot - let me just say you guys fucking suck hard these days - I've tried hard to not care with all the politics and beta shit going on - but this kind of story is just bullshit - I hope /. remembers its history one day...

Re:Seriously - GTFO (0)

fyngyrz (762201) | about 5 months ago | (#46200609)

The singular of "data" is not "anecdote."

Re: Seriously - GTFO (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200633)

I thought Mr. Data was single. Did he get married? I know he is fully functional but I didn't see a ring on his magic finger.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200815)

Fuck Data.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (4, Funny)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#46200663)

Exactly! Why would Slashdot ever carry a story about Leonard Nimoy? Wasn't he in some westerns, like Gunsmoke [youtube.com] and The Virginian [youtube.com] ? Anything else that we should know about? Did he ever travel? Any famous treks to relate that nerds would care about?

Re:Seriously - GTFO (4, Informative)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#46200671)

Better link for The Virginian [youtube.com] . The doctor with him looks familiar too, good old DeForest Kelly, another old hand in the Westerns.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 5 months ago | (#46200723)

I think the well is drying up, because people are sick of beta or the arguments about beta, nobody is submitting any real stories.
So they are left with these useless stories.

The social oriented market segment that Dice is seemingly courting seems to be the only segment left.
All the tech and nerd types have left the building.

What do you expect? (0)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about 5 months ago | (#46200841)

70% of the comments over the last few days have been nothing but 'Fuck Beta' or 'Slashcott' garbage. I'm mostly indifferent about the beta, but if all the 'Slashcott' idiots leave when the new layout is live to all, I welcome it. Fewer stupid comments.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200761)

Spoken like a true, angry drug addict confronted with reality (as all smokers are drug addicts).

My sister is just like you. Cancer-stick addicted and terribly angry if you even just suggest to get help to get rid if your/her addiction.

Get help.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200909)

Spoken like a true, angry drug addict confronted with reality (as all smokers are drug addicts).

My sister is just like you. Cancer-stick addicted and terribly angry if you even just suggest to get help to get rid if your/her addiction.

Get help.

Why should she? Freedom means free to make bad choices the one who needs help is you. Let people make their own decisions good or bad, Help only when asked and try to guide but Never! Never impose your ideals of whats right and wrong on another.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (1, Troll)

1s44c (552956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200967)

Why should she? Freedom means free to make bad choices the one who needs help is you. Let people make their own decisions good or bad, Help only when asked and try to guide but Never! Never impose your ideals of whats right and wrong on another.

Freedom doesn't mean the freedom to harm other people. Drug addicts do harm other people. This is why most drugs are illegal unless proscribed, because they harm far more people than just those taking them.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (2)

sumdumass (711423) | about 5 months ago | (#46200911)

You do realize that many people, while possibly addicted to smoking, continue to do so because they want to, they enjoy it. When you tell them to get help or to quit, you are actually telling them not to do something that is legal and they enjoy.

What I'm getting at is the anger is not from the conviction, it is likely from someone saying you can't do what you enjoy doing. Imagine if your family members constantly berated you over using the internet or whatever it is you enjoy because of hyped up claims about how bad it is for you despite no apparent signs of the damage until it some distant future. You would eventually get angry too.

Re: Seriously - GTFO (-1, Troll)

1s44c (552956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200985)

You do realize that many people, while possibly addicted to smoking, continue to do so because they want to, they enjoy it. When you tell them to get help or to quit, you are actually telling them not to do something that is legal and they enjoy.

It's a drug addiction with exceptionally serious heath effects. People don't enjoy drug addictions, they suffer them and only feel relief when they are high.

When a smoker enjoys smoking what they are enjoying is the withdrawal effects disappearing for a short while.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (3, Interesting)

Deathlizard (115856) | about 5 months ago | (#46200821)

Considering that he is sort of an icon to nerds and is dying of a recently announced disease, I would considering it newsworthy.

Although I doubt that smoking is the main reason he has COPD now considering he stopped smoking so long ago, but it may have been a contributing factor. He was an avid Photographer, and if he did a lot of darkroom work, he could have contracted the disease from breathing in the Caustic Developer Chemicals.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200895)

you can get lung cancer having never smoked and never been around anyone who has. Using lung cancer to say smoking is bad is like saying thinking or using beta causes brain cancer.

Do you think we are stupid?

Re:Seriously - GTFO (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200993)

you can get lung cancer having never smoked and never been around anyone who has. Using lung cancer to say smoking is bad is like saying thinking or using beta causes brain cancer.

Nimoy has COPD not lung cancer. Smoking isn't the sole cause of lung cancer, it's a HUGE risk factor but not the sole cause. Smoking also causes a bunch of other really debilitating diseases.

Do you think we are stupid?

Not sure. That argument sure is stupid.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200995)

you can get lung cancer having never smoked and never been around anyone who has. Using lung cancer to say smoking is bad is like saying thinking or using beta causes brain cancer.

Do you think we are stupid?

The probability of getting lung cancer having never smoked is way way way smaller than the probability of getting lung cancer having smoked for several years, a decade, or your entire life. So yes we can say that lung cancer is statistically speaking a consequence of smoking. Anyone who denies this is just plain fucking stupid (or paid by the tobacco industry).

Re:Seriously - GTFO (1)

hey! (33014) | about 5 months ago | (#46200935)

He does not, so far as we know, have cancer. Read the summary or the article. Nimoy has Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), one of the other bad things that can happen to you as a result of smoking.

It's your choice to smoke, of course, but COPD is an unpleasant disease and quitting would halve your chances of developing COPD and delay the onset of crippling symptoms if you do develop it.

Re:Seriously - GTFO (5, Informative)

1s44c (552956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200943)

Nimoy didn't get lung cancer, he got COPD.

Smoking does heavily increase your chance of getting lung cancer but it's not the sole cause of it. Smoking does make you far more likely to suffer from one or more of a very large array of nasty illnesses during your lifetime. It also reduces your life span significantly.

Quit smoking if you care at all about the risks of illness and disability that smoking causes. Or accept that you are a nicotine junkie and that you are lying to yourself about your habit because you can't face withdrawal.

Illogical (5, Insightful)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200555)

You're 82, Leonard. Holding yourself up as an example of the ravages of smoking after reaching the age of 82 is illogical. Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical. Go with grace.

Re:Illogical (2)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 5 months ago | (#46200567)

Implying he doesn't inject large sums of money into his veins to keep himself alive

Re:Illogical (-1, Troll)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200661)

Particularly considering that his claim to fame is that he lies convincingly when he is directed to do so. Actors belong in hell.

Re:Illogical (1)

MechaStreisand (585905) | about 5 months ago | (#46200929)

I hope everyone you know realizes what an awful person you are and you die alone and miserable.

Re:Illogical (1)

jafac (1449) | about 5 months ago | (#46200873)

COPD is actually pretty bad, and there isn't a whole lot that having a ton of money can do. Maybe a heart/lung transplant. But at 82, that's a pretty rough surgery.

Re:Illogical (1)

umdesch4 (3036737) | about 5 months ago | (#46200583)

Yeah, I think he's gotten both parts of "live long and prosper" done by now.

Re:Illogical (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200591)

Try telling that to my friend who is 46 and has the same condition as Spock. He needs oxygen 20 hours a day. He smoked from the age of 12 and like Mr Nimmoy, gave it up years ago but the damage has been done. He won't live to see the year out.

I see all those young people smoking (mostly women) and feel sad for them. They know it kills yet the don't care one iota and carry on.
I smoked for a year and gave it up to buy a new car. I never returned and boy am I thankful yet I have some damage to my lungs. I stopped more than 40 years ago.

Re:Illogical (-1, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200603)

Try telling that to my friend who is 46 and has the same condition as Spock. He needs oxygen 20 hours a day. He smoked from the age of 12 and like Mr Nimmoy, gave it up years ago but the damage has been done. He won't live to see the year out.

I see all those young people smoking (mostly women) and feel sad for them. They know it kills yet the don't care one iota and carry on.
I smoked for a year and gave it up to buy a new car. I never returned and boy am I thankful yet I have some damage to my lungs. I stopped more than 40 years ago.

Your friend is genetically defective. It's sad, it happens, the world turns.

Re:Illogical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200975)

Your friend is genetically defective. It's sad, it happens, the world turns.

I wouldn't say he is genetically defective if he started heavy smoking at 12 his lungs wouldn't even have even grown to full size. This combined with a high tolerance and large qualities of smoking would lead almost anyone to die young. My grandfather however started at 12 but he was only smoking maybe 2-3 cigars a week. He lived to 100 yrs. But he was never a heavy smoker. He also had a health diet.

Re:Illogical (4, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | about 5 months ago | (#46200601)

You're 82, Leonard. ... Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical. Go with grace.

Let's see if you feel the same way if and when you reach the age of 82.

Re:Illogical (0)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200625)

You're 82, Leonard. ... Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical. Go with grace.

Let's see if you feel the same way if and when you reach the age of 82.

If I can gaze upon my grandchildren and die with quiet dignity, that would be just perfect. Like my grandfather before me, who developed gangrene in his feet and decided to reject an amputation, and accept that his time had come in his 60s.

Too bad if your children are VHEMT members (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200679)

Deciding not to breed is the best decision any human can make. Grandiose sentiments be damned.

Re:Too bad if your children are VHEMT members (1, Flamebait)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200687)

Deciding not to breed is the best decision any human can make. Grandiose sentiments be damned.

I so wish I could cut your throat and watch you bleed out on the soil.

Re:Illogical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200689)

Gangrene at 60? Sounds like you have some defective genes in your family shrub.

Re:Illogical (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200699)

Gangrene at 60? Sounds like you have some defective genes in your family shrub.

Can't really see any point in sticking around any longer. Why would you want to?

Re:Illogical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200639)

I know I wont, even though I do now. But when I am 82 I will be illogical, it's called getting old.

Re:Illogical (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | about 5 months ago | (#46200647)

My mom did before 82.

For many, living just becomes increasingly miserable-- especially if you have a chronic condition as she did.

She was very orderly about it, maintained a "death" board, made sure her wishes for cremation- and who would inherit what was clear.

A lot of people are able to go. Perhaps Nimoy feels he still has more to say, he has money to do things with, he's not ready to go yet.

A lot depends on your general health, happiness, and even finances. And, of course, you religious outlook.

I'm not religious- but it brought my mom a lot of piece. And I honored that by having her firebrand of a baptist preacher at her wake.

I suspect I'll be ready. I already had cancer in 93 and I was ready then if it came to it. I was just very lucky- they discovered the cure for my type of cancer in 1991.

If your number is up, then it's time to go.

Re:Illogical (1)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about 5 months ago | (#46200849)

I dunno, I can kinda agree with going out with grace. When I'm 82, I want to go out by a method of my own choosing. COPD isn't exactly my first choice when picking how to exit this world.

Re:Illogical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200915)

Eh, all of my grandparents died at or before the age of 65; my best friend died at age 35. I have no desire to die, and know the pain the death of loved ones can cause, but when I see people treat mortality at an old age as anything other than an expected part of life -- much less a gift to have lived so long -- I have to think those people have been spoiled by their good fortune.

Re:Illogical (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about 5 months ago | (#46200939)

Let's see if you feel the same way if and when you reach the age of 82.

My mother was treated for cancer in her '80's. The cancer was (temporarily) defeated, but she lost her quality of life. Afterward, the cancer treatment, she regretted opting for treatment instead of palliative care. When the cancer came back, she opted for palliative care.

My father (approaching 100) told me years ago that he felt that he had done everything that we wanted to do and did not fear death.

Re:Illogical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200611)

WTF, I thought he was already dead for a few years?

Re:Illogical (0, Offtopic)

zidium (2550286) | about 5 months ago | (#46200641)

You should check out http://www.realityshifts.com/ [realityshifts.com] for a possible explanation.

Re:Illogical (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200617)

Refusing to accept that man wasn't meant to fly is illogical. Stay on the ground. How can the raging technophiles on Slashdot suddenly be such conservative anti-science luddites when it comes to lifespan? Yeah, all of a sudden you're all about limits. Why is that?

Shouldn't the entire species also go with grace when it reaches its limits? You know, as opposed to the grand visions of the species colonizing the universe and being forever an ape that lasts a few decades before completely falling apart?

No, no, that's different. Space is the Holy Manifest Destiny of the species, but only if we keep aging and dying like we did a thousand years ago. No technology must be developed to extend youth.

Uncomfortable yet? Or only your pithy little statements are the truth??

Re:Illogical (3, Interesting)

cold fjord (826450) | about 5 months ago | (#46200745)

You're 82, Leonard. Holding yourself up as an example of the ravages of smoking after reaching the age of 82 is illogical.

Refusing to acknowledge what science teaches us about disease is illogical and yet you are holding yourself up as an arbiter of logic.

Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical.

There is no logic to dying before necessary if he can still do productive work or enjoy life.

Go with grace.

What an interesting contract to your words in this post [slashdot.org] and this post [slashdot.org] . It is almost as if you don't really mean it. You seem to lack empathy. Isn't there a word for that?

Re:Illogical (1)

Bob Uhl (30977) | about 5 months ago | (#46200777)

Refusing to acknowledge what science teaches us about disease is illogical and yet you are holding yourself up as an arbiter of logic.

Who said anything about what science has discovered about disease? All science can say is, 'if you smoke, your risk of lung cancer is increased'; it cannot determine whether that risk is worthwhile.

I'd argue that the risk is worthwhile when it comes to cigars and pipes, and not when it comes to smoking a pack a day of cigarettes, jsut as the risk of eating grilled meat is well worth it.

Re:Illogical (4, Informative)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 5 months ago | (#46200857)

You're 82, Leonard. Holding yourself up as an example of the ravages of smoking after reaching the age of 82 is illogical. Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical. Go with grace.

His problem is that 'grace' isn't really one of the features of COPD. First the coughing starts. Then you begin to experience difficulty breathing and shortness of breath. These become more severe until you can't maintain adequate O2 saturation without supplemental oxygen. Then they become more severe until you can't maintain adequate O2 saturation with supplemental oxygen. Then you die. Available treatments are largely aimed at easing the symptoms, and rarely effective in halting the disease's progression.

It's hardly the worst (there's a lot of competition); but a long, futile, struggle to breath isn't a pretty exit. If he's really lucky, something else will kill him fast and first.

Re:Illogical (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 5 months ago | (#46200925)

If he's really lucky, something else will kill him fast and first.

But he shouldn't make it too obvious, or we'll crucify him for being a coward who took the easy way out.

Re:Illogical (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 5 months ago | (#46200997)

I'm given to understand that his intrinsic human worth and dignity require no less...

For someone who said "live long" (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200565)

not supporting life extension is also illogical. Space fans really need to get their priorities straight, it's highly unlikely that any Star Trek-level of technology will ever happen, so if you want to explore the immense void out there, you'll have to live longer, a LOT longer. So never mind just quitting smoking; we'll need a serious, global, universal project to really understand life processes and extend youth.

Some personal responsibility before you die? (1)

mi (197448) | about 5 months ago | (#46200595)

in the grips of marketing induced denial

It is not my fault! Marketing made me do it!

Re:Some personal responsibility before you die? (1)

zidium (2550286) | about 5 months ago | (#46200651)

What all these sites suiciding has taught me: Don't leave design in the hands of the faye!

Re:Some personal responsibility before you die? (2)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 5 months ago | (#46200657)

As if marketing don't exploit your brain. Ever hear of "supernormal stimuli"? This post has some interesting info for you: http://ciotti.quora.com/Was-Yo... [quora.com]

Is it even possible (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 5 months ago | (#46200659)

Is it even possible to be in 'marketing denial' at this point? Hasn't everyone had it pounded into them that smoking is bad, second hand smoke is bad, and now we even have third hand smoke? Is it really possible to live in the US and not understand the problems of smoking?

Re: Is it even possible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200751)

Yes a when a real well know person makes it real. That is also marketing.
No that smoking makes you sex it makes you dead.
Nice that he feels the needed to give back to the fans.

Re: Is it even possible (1)

narcc (412956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200981)

Gene Ray? Is that you?

When did marketing ever claim otherwise? (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 5 months ago | (#46200683)

Perhaps in the distant past smoking marketers claimed smoking was safe, but I never saw any sign of that... they simply make smoking glamorous while glossing over the dangers, but it's not like they actively hide the dangers.

Nor is it the case that any person who smokes does not know the danger at this point. There are millions of sources telling you smoking is bad. People do things they know are bad for them for whatever reason; that will never stop and it's unfair to blame marketing for human nature.

Re:When did marketing ever claim otherwise? (0, Redundant)

nbauman (624611) | about 5 months ago | (#46200785)

Perhaps in the distant past smoking marketers claimed smoking was safe, but I never saw any sign of that... they simply make smoking glamorous while glossing over the dangers, but it's not like they actively hide the dangers.

Was 1977 the distant past? I know lots of people who used to write for womens' magazines, such as Ms. They got half to 3/4 their advertising from cigarettes, and they wrote about every every cancer except lung cancer. They depicted women smoking cigarettes as glamorous. And Ms. magazine directed itself to teenage girls, and gave them a model of how to act.

Now, those same teenage girls who became addicted to cigarettes because Ms. magazine told them it was cool, are now getting lung cancer and all the other cigarette-caused diseases, like the COPD that Nimoy has.

Nor is it the case that any person who smokes does not know the danger at this point. There are millions of sources telling you smoking is bad. People do things they know are bad for them for whatever reason; that will never stop and it's unfair to blame marketing for human nature.

When you have people in cigarette marketing who spend millions of dollars trying to figure out how to get people to smoke cigarettes even though it's bad for them, and succeed, then I think it's fair to blame them for getting people addicted on cigarettes.

Re:When did marketing ever claim otherwise? (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 5 months ago | (#46200833)

Was 1977 the distant past?

Still didn't claim it was safe, just didn't tell you it was dangerous.

I sure knew at that point smoking was bad, which was why I never even tried it.

When you have people in cigarette marketing who spend millions of dollars trying to figure out how to get people to smoke cigarettes even though it's bad for them, and succeed

I think it's reaching to claim marketing has succeeded in that regard. You have no idea if that person would have smoked anyway without the marketing; it seems very likely to me that MOST smokers would have been smokers without marketing simply because most are introduced to (or pushed into) smoking by friends.

Re:When did marketing ever claim otherwise? (2)

sjames (1099) | about 5 months ago | (#46200883)

Until forced to stop, they not only claimed that it was safe, they claimed it was good for you. It reduced stress and improved digestion you see.

That was some time ago, but Nimoy is 82, so...

Re:When did marketing ever claim otherwise? (1)

narcc (412956) | about 5 months ago | (#46200999)

they claimed it was good for you. It reduced stress and improved digestion you see.

I've run across those ads before. So ... were those claims true or not?

Not logical to ignore the warnings... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200701)

Why would someone ignore all the warning signs and stumble blindly ahead on a path to certain doom?
When others who did the same all shared the same fate?
When trusted community members spoke up and said "were asking you to stop because we care?"

Why would anyone ignore all of the clear warning signs of impending death?

Re: Not logical to ignore the warnings... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200789)

Because 90% of humans are stupid + 9% retarded void of any logic and mentally very weak.

Because cancer-sticks are just like any other drug. (And much worse than MJ or alcohol)

Re:Not logical to ignore the warnings... (1)

nbauman (624611) | about 5 months ago | (#46200793)

Why would someone ignore all the warning signs and stumble blindly ahead on a path to certain doom?

Because nicotine is addicting.

Just like heroin or cocaine, except more so.

Re:Not logical to ignore the warnings... (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200877)

Why would someone ignore all the warning signs and stumble blindly ahead on a path to certain doom?
When others who did the same all shared the same fate?
When trusted community members spoke up and said "were asking you to stop because we care?"

Why would anyone ignore all of the clear warning signs of impending death?

Cigarettes are either a stimulant, or a depressant, depending on dosage. Which means, if you're tired or depressed, it will fix that, and if you're anxious and upset, it will fix that too. It will increase your emotional equilibrium, and make you cool.

Cigarettes increase the quality of life of those that smoke them. That's why people do it.

If you don't understand now, it's because you're refusing to do so.

Re:Not logical to ignore the warnings... (1)

ShieldW0lf (601553) | about 5 months ago | (#46200885)

Oh, and they help keep you from getting fat too.

Re: Not logical to ignore the warnings... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200901)

Wrong. Cigarettes don't do that. You (as an addict) THINK they do that when in reality you need them to feel normal. Just like a heroin addict needs its next injection to feel normal and not anxious.

Re: Not logical to ignore the warnings... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200953)

Disagree. I've tried to take up smoking several times in my life, and have never experienced the stimulant, depressant, or emotional equilibrium effect. Cigs are an absolute waste of time, and the only psychological effect I noticed was that they piss off everyone who is unfortunate enough to be able to smell them.

Spock was a smoker? (1)

erroneus (253617) | about 5 months ago | (#46200729)

Was he out of his vulcan mind?!

82 years old (3, Interesting)

Kohath (38547) | about 5 months ago | (#46200731)

Leonard Nimoy is 82 and he probably has a few more years ahead of him. Was he planning on living to be 1000 years old?

Smoking has pluses and minuses. News flash: people like to smoke, just like they like drinking alcohol and using other substances. Ask a heroin user whether he likes heroin -- he loves it. So it's not illogical to take heroin, but it's a choice that can have a negative long-term effect.

If you're already 82, like Leonard Nimoy, you might want to try smoking. Or heroin. The benefits are immediate. And you probably won't live to experience the consequences.

Re:82 years old (1)

CheezburgerBrown . (3417019) | about 5 months ago | (#46200775)

So, I'll see you and Leonard at the Dumpsters behind Comic Con then?

+1 Funny (1)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about 5 months ago | (#46200869)

I wish I had mod points for this.

Re:82 years old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200783)

SMOKING HAS PLUSSES????????

Seriously? You truly are fucking dumb. Slashdot Beta dumb. Smoking has no positives at all.

Re:82 years old (1)

nbauman (624611) | about 5 months ago | (#46200801)

Leonard Nimoy is 82 and he probably has a few more years ahead of him. Was he planning on living to be 1000 years old?

Smoking has pluses and minuses.

If he didn't have COPD, he'd probably live another 5 or 10 years longer than whatever he's got.

COPD is one of the more painful ways to die. It's like breathing through a straw.

Re:82 years old (1)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about 5 months ago | (#46200875)

He's already at the point where he can't walk distances. So this diagnosis is really really late in the game for him.

Re: 82 years old (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200823)

Smoking has nothing positive whatsoever. Smokers have to smoke to feel like non-smokers do 24/7.

Re:82 years old (5, Funny)

EvilSS (557649) | about 5 months ago | (#46200825)

Smoking has pluses and minuses.

Such as???

Re:82 years old (5, Interesting)

Kohath (38547) | about 5 months ago | (#46200959)

People have been smoking tobacco for about 1000 years now. Why do you think they started doing that? How far up your own ass would you have to be to deny even the possibility of a pleasant neurochemical effect?

Here's a quote an article [livestrong.com] :

This chemical enters the blood and after about seven seconds, it enters the brain, affecting exactly the same dopamine receptors, giving the brain the message that a rewarding activity has just been performed. Smokers report a feeling of calmness and mild euphoria when they have a puff of a cigarette.

Re:82 years old (1)

hey! (33014) | about 5 months ago | (#46200955)

If you've already developed COPD, as Mr. Nimoy has, then you *will* experience the costs of continuing to smoke, even at the age of 82. So there are negatives.

Also, at the age of 82 you probably don't give a damn about looking cool any more, so the biggest plus for a teenager doesn't apply.

Yeah Yeah (3, Funny)

Greyfox (87712) | about 5 months ago | (#46200813)

We got this from Yul Brynner in 1989. Should have listened to him then, Skippy. Anyway, like the South Park cheerful smoking song goes, "If it gives me cancer when I'm 80 I don't care, who the hell wants to be 90 anyway?" I guess the answer to that one must be "Leonard Nimoy."

escape fatality (1)

sixtuslab (1130675) | about 5 months ago | (#46200817)

I switched to ce4, stopped my asphyxia + I can smell again === =)

Vaping (1)

Sable Drakon (831800) | about 5 months ago | (#46200881)

Yeah, a lot of people are moving to personal vaporizers as cigarette replacements. A a nic-free vaper myself, it's something I actively encourage agreeable smokers that I see to do. It's a lot healthier and far cheaper in the long run.

We hear you... sure... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200835)

So why is it when I open up Slashdot, I get the Beta page?

Clearly we need to take this to EVERY OTHER DICE PROPERTY UNTIL THEY STOP PUSHING THIS CRAP OUT.

Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200927)

Becoming addicted to a drug that doesn't even get you high and whose only effect is to annoy everyone around you is pathetic.

Electronic cigarettes (2)

Frankie70 (803801) | about 5 months ago | (#46200949)

I use something like this -> http://i.imgur.com/ciomNzs.jpg [imgur.com]

Only nicotine - none of the tar or any other 500 chemicals which burn in a cigarette.

82 (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about 5 months ago | (#46200965)

If you gonna live till 82, you gonna develop any disease you can possibly develop.

Marketing Denial!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46200977)

Anyone who blames their smoking habit on marketing is a blithering moron. Blithering. Moron.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...