Truth? Or Non-Truth?

[Robusto]

Firstly - Sorry.
I have no functioning scanner so am loading this printed document iPhone photo frame by jpeg.

I read this cigar warning trauma-lit document with interest.

My wife brought it home from the cancer unit where she works. I'm very lucky to be with someone who accepts that moderation in cigar consumption is very likely to keep a cigar pervert away from the dangers listed here. (She never moans except when fussy candles don't quite kill the honk the next morning).

Most cigar smokers DO inhale, for example.
Hmmmm... Bullshit, methinks...

I dunno. I'm a big boy who adores a bit of Cuban pleasure and I don't overdo it so WHATEVER.

I like the way they're tried to make the document a bit cigarboxesque.

I'd be interested in any thoughts but I ordered my brown lengths for Christmas online yesterday despite stroking the catchy surface of this glossy mag with my squeaking fingers repeatedly like a weirdo.

Here's the sex:

















BTW.
Me and one of my best friends were bothered this much yesterday about this shock doc in my garden-bottom shack...

[Habana-Habanos]

Very entertaining post, that leaflet however is biased and contains many assumptions within.. Smoking 5 cigars a day? I smoke one every 2 weeks lol...

[Robusto]

Second-hand cigar smoke may be more 'dangerous' than second-hand cigarette smoke BUT second-hand FINE cigar smoke can be highly sexual whereas second-hand cigarette smoke is what you have to walk through outside Asda, Homebase and Comet.

[Robusto]

I think much of it is rubbish.

[EugeneSax]

I think the major error of the pamphlet is treating two largely diverse types of cigar smokers as one group - those who enjoy puros almost exclusively & those (probably mainly ex-fag smokers) who smoke multiple machine-mades. I believe the latter inhale far far more frequently than the former.

By mixing the dangers of the bigger puros with the habits of the smaller stick smokers, they are portraying a falsehood. I'm not sure whether this was done as deliberate spin, through ignorance of cigar smoking patterns, or as a result of trying to generalise & over-simplify.

Inhillation is THE major factor, after frequency, affecting most (but not all) of the dangers. Yes nicotine from cigars is absorbed through the buccal cavity, but it appears that Carbon Monoxide isn't to any significant extent (see: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3809219).

I have also read that orally absorbed nictone might be less addictive than that absorbed through the lungs, quite possibly due to slower absorbtion rates. My own personal experience certainlty supports that: as a previously addicted cigarette smoker for just over 10 years I can honestly say the intensity of my desire for a cigar has never reached anywhere near the levels of the almost constant cravings I used to have for ciggies. And I am sure those desires stem totally, or at least very largely, from a wish for pleasure rather than a need for a drug.

[rokkitsci]

Can't help but think of "Reefer Madness."

S'funny, but after nearly a hundred years of investigation and research, the only conclusive determination they could make regarding marijuana was that it made you feel good. All other alleged consequences are hearsay.

Seems like someone doesn't like cigars very much and has come up with a bunch of factoids to try to scare off the unwashed masses.

[Robusto]

I agree, Rok. I agree, Huge.

Nice little brown-hued pamphlet.
Big nonsense.

I'll see if my wife can find a hemp scarer in the same series.

[Simon Bolivar]

Very interesting thread Robusto, thanks for sharing it. 5 day habit!? I think I may have manged that once or twice but I have smoked the tobacco eqivilent of one churchill a week for the last 5 yrs. When I took out my life insurance I told them how much I smoked (admittedly one a month that far back) & they put me down as a non-smoker.
I have dealt with a lot of smoking related ill health in hospitals over the last 30yrs & I never came acorss one that only smoked cigars, let alone one that didn't inhale. That's not to say they aren't any but they must be a very tiny minority. My father didn't drink alcohol or smoke or paint & got bladder cancer at 65. The vast majority of cases are caused by alcohol, smoking & using industrial paints. 3% of lung cancers are sustained you those who don't smoke.
To you pays your money, you takes your chances. Then listen to your body, if you know it's not doing you any good then you choose whether to give it up or not. Remember Eastender's Lofty the asthmatic? I have met plenty of patients like that.

[larrysputnik]

Keep in mind that all of the statistics that rate cigar smoking as equally as dangerous as cigarette smoking, or more dangerous, are concerning cigar smokers who smoke 5 or more cigars a day... and even then the dangers are still based on hypothetical scenarios. I guess that they are assuming that cigars could be worse than cigarettes...as long as you smoke more than 5 a day, inhale and were at one time a longtime cigarette smoker first. Haha! I bet the cigarettes already did the damage...

Also, I smoked cigarettes for years before becoming a cigar smoker. I never inhale cigar smoke.

[shuckins]

i need to see the cigars under the warning page before i can make a decision...lol

[whisky77]

5 a day!

Nice find Robusto. The part about premium cigars made me laugh. I only wish I could smoke 5 premium cigars per day.