egafd.com

I only smoke when I have a beer, which is no more than three evenings a week. I moved from B&H to Marlboro Lights (although they are officially now called Marlboro Gold) a few years ago. I am now thinking of moving onto the even lower nicotone and tar of the Silk Cut range. As you will see below Marlboro Gold are lower in all the shit that is contained in other cigarettes, and Silk Cuts are even lower still:

BRAND: NICOTINE CONTENT: TAR CONTENT:

Marlboro Gold 0.5 mg 6 mg
Silk Cut Blue 0.3 mg 3 mg
Silk Cut Silver 0.1 mg 1 mg
Silk Cut White 0.01 mg 0.5 mg

As you can see some of the Silk Cut cigarettes have almost nothing in them at all (yes, the zeros and the decimal points ARE in the right places). Silk Cut are said to not have any less nicotine in them but the filters are designed differntly meaning the 'ventilation holes' are larger, more air is mixed in, so you inhale less of the nicotine and other rubbish. The other bad thing in cigarettes is of course carbon monoxide but I couldn't find the stats on that for these fags.

Can someone tell me whether smoking one of these cigarettes, that has MUCH less of all of the things going into your body, is actually so much less harmful that it is more or less ok to smoke it? I smoke about 30 Marlboro Gold (Lights) per week, if I move onto one of these lesser Silk Cut fags will it be like hardly smoking at all? If I was to smoke 30 of them in a week would that basically be the same as smoking about 2 or 3 (per week) of the ones that I presently smoke?

Reggie, thanks. I obviously was aware that even the fags that contain less bad things still contain a lot of other bad things in them but I was wondering if the amount of bad stuff was such that it probably would not harm you too much. I mean living in London, in Zone 2 on the Tube (so about 2 miles from the absolute centre) means I breathe in so much crap every day in car fumes and I imagine I could live here and do that every day for ever more, and even though I am breathing in a lot of bad stuff it wouldn't actually kill me. As I mentioned I only smoke about 30 (thirty) ciggy's a WEEK. Some people smoke that many a DAY. So if I opt for the ones with less Nicotine, less tar, probably less carbon monoxide, but still having all the other stuff you listed, then just 30 a week would be not harmful (possibly). I would like to keep smoking 10 each time I go to the pub (3 times a week) cos it is something I enjoy (smoking outside the pub obviously).

Like most people, when it comes to low tar/nicotine/fat/sugar/alcohol food/drink/cigs they end up doubling their intake, negating any benefits they may have gained by the switch.

Also, if you don't smoke much then you less of an addiction which means less of an excuse to carry on.

An excellent analysis : -)

I really MUST give up.

they are better for you in the same sense that jumping out of a 50th floor window is better for you than jumping out of the 100th

Succinct, and true.

I agree that any smoking is bad smoking but let's say someone smoked just FIVE ordinary fags a week. You would probably be able to do that for ever more and no harm would come to you. Therefore if I smoked 30 (low everything) fags a week and that would be the equivalant of 5 ordinary ones in terms of the crap that was in them, then basically you are doing no harm to yourself - not a degree of harm that would matter anyway. Although I do take Reggie's point that even the low-everything fags still contain the same amount of shit (chemicals and things that are not listed on the pack) that is not good for you anyway.

Max,smoking is bad for you...pass it on...

5 a week wouldn't trigger the addiction-response in the brain.
30 would. That's the effective difference.