What is the logical point of putting so many chemicals in cigarettes?
543497
The tobacco companies are NOT ADDING these chemicals.  The chemicals are simply by products of the chemical process involved in burning anything....\n\n"truth.com" tv ads seem to leave out that part, I belive they chould be called "half-truth.com" because they give just enough information to make tobacco look evil, and leave out the fact that this is a natural occurance of the burning process.\n\nPlease do some unbiased research (forces.org)...then take a look at why they are doing this....
729641
Lots of smoke.\n\nThe chemical results include nigrogen gas and various forms of burned carbon. Sucrose is such a complecated molocule that it is impractical to determine the products.\n\nWhat you are probably asking is whether or not this is poisones. The answer is no, it will not hurt you, I have tried it. Maybe don't purposefully inhale it... But its okay to be in the smoke.
198270
Probably for the same reasons people throw pop cans, beer cans, dirty diapers, food wrappers etc. on the ground..........because they are lazy or because there was no other place to put the cigarette butt. As far as the dangers involved in cigarette smoke, people have more to worry about as far as factory emissions and vehicle emissions than they do from a cigarette. Smoke rises! Go into a smoker's house and see where the stains from the cigarette smoke is found. It is found at the ceiling level. There are also more health risks from people urinating outside or pets urinating outside, than there are from a cigarette butt left on the ground. As far as the toxins from the cigarette leeching into the ground or getting into our water supply, the risks are far smaller than the chemicals that people use in their gardens and vehicles every day. I would be willing to bet that there are just as many beer cans and alcohol bottles thrown down on the ground each day as cigarette butts.  Look around and you will notice ALL the trash that is thrown down. It's disgusting no matter what the litter happens to be. Personally, I find it disgusting to see parents toss their child's dirty diaper onto the ground, just so they don't have to ride home in their car with the smelly diaper! They chose to have the child and anything that comes out of that child belongs to them! I hate when people allow their pets to roam around and use parks, other people's yards etc. for their bathroom. That is MOST disgusting!  I do have a concern about cigarette butts though, the cigarette butt can be toxic to children and animals, and a lit cigarette carries the danger of starting a fire. For those reasons I wish people wouldn't throw their cigarette butts on the ground and out their car windows. Littering of ANY kind is wrong and should carry a stiff fine. Unfortunately very few people who litter (any kind of litter) get caught. The reason it is overlooked by authorities is for the same reason other littering is overlooked. There just isn't enough manpower to deal with the situation. Police have more important things to deal with than drive around looking for litterbugs. I do think targeting one group of people for littering is wrong. If you want to protest against ALL littering that is fine, but to just have a problem with cigarette butts is ridiculous. The littering problem is not just cigarette butts. ALL littering needs to be stopped.\n\n\nResponse\n\nThank you Kenlas, I wasn't trying to say that there was no smoke down lower. People talk about the danger of second hand smoke even when they are outside. My point was that the little trail of smoke from a cigarette in comparison to everything the factories and vehicles spew out every day would not really be much of an issue. The majority of cigarette smoke rises almost immediately, leaving very little for others to be concerned about. I was using the ceiling in a smoker's house as an example of smoke rising. People want to believe that smoking and second hand smoke are the only causes of lung cancer, but researchers have NO way of proving that people who have never smoked developed lung cancer from second hand smoke. When they do their so called tests, they use HIGHLY concentrated amounts of cigarette smoke to try and prove their case. They know that the factories and vehicles spew out the same and worse toxins, in far larger quantities, than a cigarette, but because of the expense of forcing those two things to be made safer, they choose to ignore them for the most part and concentrate on a relatively small part of the population. Plus they can pass bills to outrageously raise taxes on cigarettes to help generate money whenever they need more money. I haven't seen them raising taxes on ALL alcohol to help generate more money, even though hundreds of people die due to drunk drivers each year. I don't see them banning alcohol in all public places to help reduce the amount
1031851
I so totally agree with you that cigarette butts are litter, and furthermore, dangerous to small children and pets if swallowed! We just got back from a camping trip to the beach and our campsite had cigarette butts all over the ground and even in the outdoor grill!  It was full of butts - we did not BBQ because there were SO many butts we preferred not to deal with their disposal.  The kids picked up all the butts around the site and believe it or not - they 1/2 filled a plastic WalMart bag with the butts.  Isn't that disgusting?
409252
From what I've read, it's a bit of a weird one. In summary:\n\n1. Smoking anything is bad for you, even weed. This has to do with all the weird gases and poisons given off when you burn plant matter.\n2. The chemicals in weed can actually help your body fight cancer.\n3. For some reason, smoking weed on it's own is less carcenogenic (or however you spell it) than tobacco on it's own, but when you smoke them both together, you get something which is MORE carcenogenic than tobacco on it's own.
1125883
Cigarettes contain more than 4000 chemical compounds and at least 400 toxic substances.\n\nWhen you inhale, a cigarette burns at 700°C at the tip and around 60°C in the core. This heat breaks down the tobacco to produce various toxins.\n\nAs a cigarette burns, the residues are concentrated towards the butt.\n\nThe products that are most damaging are:\n\n    * tar, a carcinogen (substance that causes cancer)\n\n    * nicotine is addictive and increases cholesterol levels in your body\n\n    * carbon monoxide reduces oxygen in the body\n\n    * components of the gas and particulate phases cause chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD).\n\nThe damage caused by smoking is influenced by:\n\n    * the number of cigarettes smoked\n\n    * whether the cigarette has a filter\n\n    * how the tobacco has been prepared.
884801
I guess so, theres a lot of nasty chemicals in them....:D
112575
This is funny, cause ever since I was little ...That's how I wanted to die. I want to be one of those people you see on TV sitting in their easy chairs with nothing left but their boots and a large smoldering hole in the seat. So, since I haven't been able to achieve this yet...I guess the answer to your question is to not smoke cigarettes while doused in gasoline, and sitting in your favorite chair!
950066
This site has a list of 299 additives and carcinogens in cigarettes which are approved by the US.
59910
Billions of Dollars is spent worldwide to treat people with mental disabilities and cancer and other diseases caused by drugs. What is the point in legalizing them and kill more people?? Even drug addiction affects the offsprings or your children and their children.\n\nAlso the smoking cigarettes, cigars; I would recommend to be banned.
434442
Smoking is addictive.  Cigarettes have many different chemicals in them along with tobacco - stuff like Ammonia, Benzene, Formaldehyde, Arsenic to name a few of the worst.  The longer you smoke the harder it is to give it up and when someone does it is usually because of a major health crises.  I know because I have seen.  I have never smoked but both my parents did.  My father had to give it up when he needed a bypass and his chances were given less than a 50% survival not because of his heart but because of the shape his lungs were in.  Smoking had done so much damage that no doctor was sure he would be able to make it out from under the anesthesia. Luckily he did and hasn't smoked since.  He also used to tell my brother and myself not to smoke because even though he knew the dangers he could not at the time quit.
26453
One of the best questions I have seen on here yet,  My opinion, because the government makes money off of them. For each pack of cigarettes sold, the government gets about $1.00 (probably more now) If they were considered a drug it stands to reason that they would be an illegal drug and the government cannot make money off illegal drugs. (We could argue seizures of such but it still wouldn't balance the scales)
58416
carbon monoxide, fumes of amalgam, nicotine, sulphur, and many many more
923613
Because the government makes a lot of money from them. Alchohol actually has some health benefits in moderation. Tobacco is just a big money maker
979927
to protect your lungs. sound a little bizarrie doesnt it
54510
Not really, they are safer then cigarettes, and some recent studies suggest it can help you survive a heart attack. Most of the commercials you see on TV are just propaganda.
1124497
Because it is not. Smoking is not healthy yet how many people smoke? Choice and the consequences that go along with it. Peace.