Timeline for Does forcing a young child to smoke a cigarette discourage longer term use?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 17:26 | comment | added | UhlBelk | I have presented studies that make it doubtful (skeptical) that forcing a child to choke down a cigarette will keep them from smoking in the future and may even give them a head start toward addiction. Now, show me any studies or even stated empirical data that would show the opposite to be true or even likely. Without endangering children, the actual studies on the subject suggest that poisoning your child with nicotine to keep them from smoking is a bad idea. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 17:24 | comment | added | UhlBelk | "Suggesting a child without access to cigarettes" Where was that ever stated? Chances are if an adult forces a child to poison themselves as such it is because they got caught with their parents smokes in the first place. Or the child got it externally from a friend hence has access to the cancer sticks. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 17:02 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | "Logic then dictates" - we aren't big fans of informal logic here. It is often used by people who are wrong. Empirical data easily trumps it. Suggesting a child without access to cigarettes will get addicted is without much merit. Whether a picture is as effective as being forced to smoke a cigarette too young is the question being begged. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 8:11 | comment | added | UhlBelk | You fall off a bike and get banged up, we quickly forget the pain and get right back on. Naturally there are exceptions with any fear based incentive and individual personality. If Nicotine addiction can be immediate and adolescent brains are more susceptible to the effects, then it tells us even one cigarette can hook a child. Logic then dictates that forcing a child to smoke one or even a pack runs a higher risk of addiction then just showing a picture of someone with a breathing tube stuck in their throat. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 7:57 | comment | added | UhlBelk | I added the bit from abcnews that nicotine addiction can be immediate. Lets consider the question about "strongly negative initial experience" Smoking is freaking nasty! It tastes and smells bad until your used to it and even after you are addicted it still tastes and smells bad but its effects over power the discomfort. Time quickly eases that negative experience and before too long it is forgotten to the point that a young adult would still be overpowered by peer pressure or advertising as with anyone else Not forced to smoke one as a child. | |
| Apr 24, 2014 at 7:52 | history | edited | UhlBelk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Updated with abcnews story
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 23:39 | comment | added | Oddthinking♦ | This isn't a very convincing answer. There's little doubt that tobacco is addicting. The question is whether a strongly negative initial experience (with very low chance of addiction, because of no continuing availability) is enough to prevent children trying it when they are older (e.g. 14 or 15). | |
| Apr 23, 2014 at 21:48 | history | edited | UhlBelk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 683 characters in body
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 21:38 | comment | added | UhlBelk | Faced with modern research 50 some years after that myth was propagated, it is counter-intuitive to think that exposing a child to such an addictive substance would prevent them from becoming a smoker when there are Adults unable to quit with out much difficulty if at all. | |
| Apr 23, 2014 at 21:34 | history | answered | UhlBelk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |