[MonikaT]

Just so you all know, I don't smoke or use tobacco products of any kind, never have, never will, and I find it disgusting. I agree that it is accepted science that tobacco is bad for humans. I guess the question that is unanswered for me is if the studies used tobacco or if they used nicotine. There is a difference, just as there is a difference in forms of estrogen. The negative effects of Premarin are not, to my knowledge, seen in bio-identical estrogen therapy. Given that smoke contains very fine particles, it would not surprise me if the constant irritation caused by inhaling what amounts to very fine dust is an added component in the dangers of smoking.

Oh, and yes, I am aware that nicotine has been used historically as a pesticide. Given the US government subsidizes tobacco growers with one hand (USDA) and tells everyone not to smoke with another hand (Surgeon General), I've never understood why the use of nicotine as a pesticide isn't more widespread since it would avoid the economic impact of suddenly pulling subsidies from the tobacco growers, though I suppose it would hurt the petrochemical industry. Btw, the last I heard it is believed that nicotine-based pesticides may be a factor in colony collapse disorder in bee hives.

I never meant to imply tobacco use is safe. I'm just taking issue with the wholesale stance that all nicotine consumption is bad. It is the dose that makes the poison. Warfarin is a blood thinner that is used as rodent poison, and I'm aware its use is very closely monitored in humans because of the risk of hemorrhaging to death. I suspect most doctors would agree it is better to use nicotine gum or patches or the e-cigarette than it is to smoke or chew, but that ideally it is better not to consume nicotine at all.

Honestly, I don't really trust much of anything or anyone any more. Everyone has an agenda. We accept the views that support our own and reject the rest, regardless of the actual truth, whatever "truth" is.