Researchers ID chemical in cigarette smoke linked to lowered levels of 'good' cholesterol

(Medical Xpress)—Cigarette smoking's association with heart disease has been known for decades, but researchers are still not certain what chemicals or molecular processes in the body form the basis of that link. Now University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville researchers have unlocked some of the specifics, finding that a toxic compound in cigarette smoke called benzo(a)pyrene slows the production of "good" cholesterol, also known as high-density lipoprotein, or HDL.

The findings were published in the July edition of the journal Life Sciences.

"Smoking-related health hazards are well-recognized, and the role of smoking in promoting premature is widely appreciated," said Dr. Arshag D. Mooradian, senior author of the study and a professor and chair of the department of medicine at the UF College of Medicine-Jacksonville. "The novelty in our study is the finding of yet another mechanism by which smoking can accelerate heart disease through reduction of the 'good' cholesterol that normally protects the heart."

The findings can help inform aimed at reducing health risks associated with cigarette smoking. In addition, the implications could go beyond cigarette smoking, because the chemical benzo(a)pyrene, or BaP, that is found in cigarettes is also prevalent in wildfire smoke that periodically engulfs many parts of the country, including Florida.

Smoking is a major risk factor for heart disease, contributing to more than one-third of deaths from heart disease annually, according to a 2008 estimate from the . The same report found that adverse cardiovascular health effects were present in people who smoked as few as five cigarettes per day, but that the risk for a heart attack drops within a year of kicking the habit.

Smoking increases blood pressure, decreases a person's tolerance for exercise and increases the likelihood of blood clotting, according to the . In addition, smokers consistently have lower HDL levels than nonsmokers. Low HDL or high LDL, or "bad" cholesterol, puts people at a higher risk for the hardening of the arteries that leads to heart attacks.

The UF researchers went looking for the scientific reason for lower HDL in smokers.

An early experiment looked at the effect of nicotine on fats in the body, but that yielded no clues. So the team went back to the drawing board, thinking about other elements of tobacco smoke that could be the culprit. They decided to test the chemical BaP, which is also linked to lung cancer.

Cell culture studies showed that the chemical was directly tied to low HDL production. Further studies revealed that it affects the genes that regulate production of a protein that binds to cholesterol and carries it through the blood to the liver for disposal. High levels of BaP in the blood block production of that protein, known as apolipoprotein A-1, or apo A-1.

"The public health implication is that cigarette smoking not only affects your breathing and your lungs, but it affects your cholesterol," said study co-author Michael J. Haas, a research associate professor of medicine at the UF College of Medicine-Jacksonville.

The researchers suspect that other compounds in cigarette and environmental smoke may have a similar effect. They plan to expand their studies to testing in mice, which would give additional clues about how the findings might apply in humans.

"I think it's very important that we determine the relevance to human health and welfare," Haas said.

The findings are valuable because they reveal mechanisms through which cigarette smoking is hazardous for the heart, said Dr. George T. Griffing, an internal medicine professor at the Saint Louis University School of Medicine who was not involved in the study.

"The importance of this study is twofold: first, to understand and perhaps intervene on the heart-toxic effects of cigarette smoking," said Griffing, who has researched apo A-1 for decades. "But second, and more importantly, to better understand the regulation of HDL levels with the goal of developing a strategy of raising HDL levels to combat heart disease."

Related Stories

Heart attack risk from smoking due to genetics

Dec 19, 2007

Heart attacks among cigarette smokers may have less to do with tobacco than genetics. A common defect in a gene controlling cholesterol metabolism boosts smokers’ risk of an early heart attack, according to a new study ...

Recommended for you

Stem cells from nerves form teeth

47 minutes ago

Researchers at Karolinska Institutet in Sweden have discovered that stem cells inside the soft tissues of the tooth come from an unexpected source, namely nerves. These findings are now being published in the journal Nature and co ...

Human brain has coping mechanism for dehydration

14 hours ago

(HealthDay)—Although dehydration significantly reduces blood flow to the brain, researchers in England have found that the brain compensates by increasing the amount of oxygen it extracts from the blood. ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

dogbert
2.3 / 5 (16) Aug 31, 2012
A very good statement against smoking. Of course, it ignores the fact that regulation of cholesterol has never been shown by any valid study to increase health or extend life.

Though tobacco consumption does have some beneficial effects, the detrimental effects probably exceed the beneficial effects. Sorting out the beneficial vs harmful effects and quantifying them would be a useful effort.

Continuing to teach people that cholesterol is bad does is not useful.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Aug 31, 2012
A very good statement against smoking.
It gives smokers the impression that the dirt they are addicted to can somehow be modified to make it better. This is a lie.

Smokers cannot exercise and their sedentary lifestyle contributes more to their sickly condition than some trace chemical yes?
Though tobacco consumption does have some beneficial effects
Breathing dirt and coating your lungs with crud has no beneficial effects whatsoever.
the detrimental effects probably exceed the beneficial effects. Sorting out the beneficial vs harmful effects and quantifying them would be a useful effort.
Why? To buy tobacco companies time to sell more product and kill more people on the lie that science can maybe someday make breathing DIRT healthy?

You're out burning leaves in your backyard and the wind blows smoke in your face. Right away your body tells you to move. Your body knows what is better for you than you do. What is it screaming at you every time you have to light up?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Aug 31, 2012
Another lie - the 'drug' tobacco imparts some druglike euphoric or analgesic effect. In reality the only positive effect tobacco has, is it relieves your withdrawal from your last cigarette. That's ALL it does. If it did anything else there would be warning labels like 'dont operate machinery' or 'dont take with other drugs'.

Smokers may remember how sick they felt from their first cigarette. This is the effect tobacco has. Once their bodies acclimate, smokers smoke only to relieve the pain and misery of withdrawal, which are SIGNIFICANT and debilitating.

So this makes tobacco about the most worthless 'drug' in existence yes? And yet the company scientists sell the lie that it has some net positive effects, and so it must have SOME value.

To smokers withdrawal is their normal state and so of course to them, smoking has significant positive effects. But smoking CAUSES the pain that it cures. If they quit they would feel the same as they do after their last cigarette, ALL the time.
dogbert
2.3 / 5 (18) Aug 31, 2012
Ghosty,

Do you comment on nicotine addiction because you know about it from having been addicted or are you blowing your usual smoke?

There are benefits to nicotine:

Reduced incidence of Parkinson's disease, a serious and debilitating disease.

Reduced susceptibility to sepsis. Every year about 750000 Americans get sepsis and half of them will die from sepsis.
Estevan57
2 / 5 (33) Aug 31, 2012
Some smokers excercise regularly. I would smoke before playing racketball and basketball.
Smoking does have euphoric effect. Look stuff up Ya Idjit.
Try NICOTINE on WIKI.
Not everyone feels sick from their first smoke. I didn't.
I smoked for 8 years, a pack a day, gave it up cold turkey, not a problem.
It's not heroin dumbass. Spiro Agnew
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (26) Aug 31, 2012
Reduced incidence of Parkinson's disease, a serious and debilitating disease. Reduced susceptibility to sepsis. Every year about 750000 Americans get sepsis and half of them will die from sepsis.
No, some chemical in tobacco may provide benefit. Can you imagine some doctor saying 'Sepsis! Quick, get this man a cigarette!'
Some smokers excercise regularly. I would smoke before playing racketball and basketball.
And you would suck as a result. You smoke because you are a dumbass. Weve already established this.
Smoking does have euphoric effect. Look stuff up Ya Idjit.
Like I say many 'studies' are initiated by and for tobacco companies with the intent of deceiving weak-willed people like yourself, into thinking that tobacco is something other than what it is. And securing grant money.

I suppose there are some benefits to eating moss or sucking on a tailpipe. Do you think it is worth researching to find out what they are?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Aug 31, 2012
It's not heroin dumbass.
No, heroin actually offers a net plus. which is why you get a ticket if you are caught driving while high on it. And the withdrawal from heroin is not nearly severe nor as prolongued, as with tobacco.

Note how NYT even includes lies in their stories:

"even produce some ''good'' effects, such as improved performance on intellectual, computational and stressful tasks."

-Yes because withdrawal degrades performance and smoking relieves withdrawal. Were nonsmokers given nicotine in these studies?

NYT included the above tidbit in a story which says:

"'Heroin addicts say it is easier to give up dope than it is to give up smoking,' says Dr. Sharon Hall, a psychology professor whose research at the University of California's San Francisco medical school centers on methods of curtailing drug abuse."

"'The popular media have exaggerated the withdrawal from opiates and downplayed the withdrawal from tobacco,' says Dr. Neal Benowitz"
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (26) Aug 31, 2012
The NYT article is full of lies:

"One astonishing property of nicotine is that it acts both as a stimulant and sedative"

-No, it treats withdrawal as the article itself states:

"Nicotine withdrawal often includes anxiety, irritability, difficulty concentrating, restlessness, craving for tobacco, gastrointestinal problems, headaches, drowsiness"

Heres a good one:

"Unlike other drugs, nicotine does not interfere with normal activity."

-Withdrawal does indeed interfere with normal activity. It affects mood, concentration, temper. A smoker will pattern his daily activities around the need to smoke and to buy tobacco.

Smoking causes depression and destroys very specific areas of the brain involved with compulsion. It disrupts sleep:
http://www.chestn...urbances

-It retards normal mental development in children, and kills them in the womb. These all significantly affect behavior.

This was written in 1987 which is when esai formed his opinion
dogbert
2.3 / 5 (15) Aug 31, 2012
Ghosty,

Let me ask this again:
Do you comment on nicotine addiction because you know about it from having been addicted or are you blowing your usual smoke?

TheGhostofOtto1923
2.9 / 5 (25) Aug 31, 2012
Ghosty,

Let me ask this again:
Do you comment on nicotine addiction because you know about it from having been addicted or are you blowing your usual smoke?

Are addiction researchers who arent smokers qualified to comment on addiction?

What makes you think that a dirt addict has any more insight into his disease than someone who is not addicted and might have a better perspective?

The fact that you even asked that question makes me think you are in the throes of addiction, or else you wouldnt have asked it. Addiction is a disease not a disgrace.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (32) Aug 31, 2012
Actually I made the state finals in racketball for my age at the time (25) while still a smoker. A sedentary lifestyle would contribute more to being out of shape than just the smoking habit alone. Smoking does make it harder to exercise, not impossible.

Hey fool, ever have a cup of coffee?
Its a stimulant, yet it is calming at the same time. It allows greater concetration and focus, and is addictive, just like nicotine. Yes, I know, not as addictive and bad for you.

I am not advocating that anyone take up smoking, I'm just giving a more realistic view of it based on actual experience.

Wow! you cite an article, say that it includes lies, and yet don't provide a link to it? What would Antialias say?

Mr. Dogbert, I believe Ghosty is blowing smoke, and I have a good idea where from... ...from Spiro Agnew.

`
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (34) Aug 31, 2012
Mr Otto, This is from 1987? (NORTHBROOK, IL, February 4, 2008) - your source.
Get it right next time maybe..
How would a nicotine researcher know of the stupid things you say about smoking on this forum?
That is the crux of the biscuit here. Your opinions, not the facts and research of others.
Are you qualified to speak for every individual smokers experience? Or your own? Did your first cigarette make you sick? Mine didn't. And quitting was easy.
All those millions of smokers, and they are all different.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (29) Aug 31, 2012
Mr Otto, This is from 1987? (NORTHBROOK, IL, February 4, 2008) - your source.
Get it right next time maybe
Uh no dumbass this one:
http://www.nytime...p;src=pm

-If you had read either you wouldn't have asked.
Actually I made the state finals in racketball for my age at the time (25) while still a smoker.
Yeah well we have already established that you're a liar. This becomes easier to discern when you continue to post made-up personal info.
That is the crux of the biscuit here. Your opinions, not the facts and research of others.
But I post research. You post lies and made-personal info. Go ducks.
Are you qualified to speak for every individual smokers experience?
I posted info on how smokers are similar. Why don't you try a little research yourself? Smokers are ALL idiots. Luckily it is curable.
Mine didn't. And quitting was easy.
Except - you're still an idiot. You did it wrong?
Estevan57
2 / 5 (34) Sep 01, 2012
"Smokers are ALL idiots." - Otto

"Many smokers are highly intelligent people with impressive levels of control over institutions, budgets, employees and political affairs. Yet, after repeated attempts to give up smoking, they find that they cannot control this one, seemingly uncomplicated, aspect of their behavior."
From your (finally) posted source.
http://www.nytime...p;src=pm

I smell a dumbass. Perhaps you shouldn't make statements that are totally contradictory than your sources. Have a pleasant night.
You EVER gonna figure out the Spiro Agnew?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 01, 2012
"Many smokers are highly intelligent people with impressive levels of control over institutions, budgets, employees and political affairs. Yet, after repeated attempts to give up smoking, they find that they cannot control this one, seemingly uncomplicated, aspect of their behavior."
Yeah and as I pointed out the article is FULL of misinfo designed to encourage smokers to keep on smoking. Has the NYT ever been a shill for big business/govt?

Smoking serves a far Greater Purpose to civilization, than stupifying and sickening the weak. It BINDS smokers to it like nothing else. They HAVE to smoke; ergo they HAVE to work, support the govt that guarantees their supply, provide the healthcare their sickly state requires, and etc.

We can expect Service Institutions like NYT to be actively promoting things of this sort. That is why they were Created and imbued with High Authority yes?

"A man has as many masters as he has vices." -St Augustine
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 01, 2012
From your (finally) posted source.
So sorry you haven't learned yet how to copy/paste quotes into google. Maybe smoking while playing state-level squash has popped a few too many brain cells?
dogbert
2.5 / 5 (16) Sep 01, 2012
Ghosty,

You obviously do not speak from experience and are indeed blowing smoke.

Like a dog which barks whenever the doorbell rings, not knowing what a doorbell is, you spout invective in a dogmatic response.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 01, 2012
Empty invective:
You obviously do not speak from experience and are indeed blowing smoke
Why Smokers are Idiots (all of them)

1) Today smokers are aware that they only smoke to relieve the withdrawal symptoms from their last cigarette.
2) They know that smoking does nothing else but make them weak, sickly, and poor.
3) They know that this disease WILL kill them, and probably the unfortunates who live with them, in the most prolonged and horrible of ways, no matter how hard they pray.
4) They must realize that they have structured their lives around procuring and breathing this dirt. They choose friends and jobs which are compatible.
5) The religionist ones who know they are killing themselves, also know that god WILL NOT FORGIVE THEM for not saving themselves, which they can certainly do; no matter how hard they pray.
6) They know that by smoking they are encouraging others to continue to smoke, and young people to start.

-And yet they continue to smoke. Ergo, they are idiots.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 01, 2012
Forgot one

7) Smokers must know that they annoy the vast majority of people they come in contact with; friends, family, coworkers, clients.

-Smokers: Either they don't realize they are annoying people, or they know and they don't care, or they actually enjoy annoying people. Any way you look at it, they're assholes.

Just yesterday one such asshole pulled up next to me while I was eating lunch, rolled down his windows, and lit up. He got a whole lot of abuse and a front seat full of doritos. One by one..

Smokers don't give a shit about anybody but themselves, of necessity.
dogbert
2.6 / 5 (20) Sep 01, 2012
You are full of hate, Otto.
Let's examine just one of your above statements:
They know that this disease WILL kill them ...


Simply not true. Many people use tobacco products their whole lives with no ill effects.

Statements which can be shown to be wrong are not only ineffective at stopping someone from using tobacco products, your statements may actually encourage tobacco use.

Hate and prejudice never accomplish anything good.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 01, 2012
Otto - You make it up in one post, can't support it with fact, then use it as fact in another post, ergo, you are an idiot. Spiro Agnew.
Smashin_Z_1885
1.6 / 5 (7) Sep 01, 2012
What the article failed to state, is that Smoking has NO benefits whatsoever, but, Nicotine by itself (without being burned in a cigarette for example), does in fact have many significant benefits to the chemistry of the brain. I am not aware of any "health" benefits to the body itself, but it is a proven fact that nicotine provides very specific neurological benefits within the brain, especially protective and "normalizing" properties within the brain chemistry. It is a psychologically addictive alkaloid, so that point must also be contemplated.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (29) Sep 02, 2012
"For men who currently smoke, the chance of dying from heart disease exceeds the chance of dying from each of the other causes until age 60, when it is surpassed by the chance of dying from lung cancer. After age 50, the chance of dying from lung cancer exceeds the chance of dying from colon or prostate cancer by a factor of about 10." -Is this wrong?
Simply not true. Many people use tobacco products their whole lives with no ill effects.
Dog likes to gamble with his life. Next time you see a little old man sitting on a park bench smoking, ask him what happened to all his friends. Ask him what his wife died from. Ask him what his health problems are.

Your god does not like it when people gamble with their lives. Or when they LIE to themselves in order to justify it. You will burn for your self-destruction.
You are full of hate, Otto.
I hate what tobacco did to my family and to myself as a kid. Moms aren't supposed to smell like dumpsters are they?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 02, 2012
Nicotine by itself (without being burned in a cigarette for example), does in fact have many significant benefits to the chemistry of the brain.
Uh huh. Are sure about this? How do these 'benefits' compare to those from regular drugs or from things like supplements and good nutrition? You sure these 'benefits' aren't just more hype from tobacco-funded research groups? Directly or indirectly?
but it is a proven fact that nicotine provides very specific neurological benefits within the brain, especially protective and "normalizing" properties within the brain chemistry
Please provide a link to this crap, as well as one comparing nicotine to other things.
Hate and prejudice never accomplish anything good.
'There is a Time to love and a Time to hate.' ecc3 Hate wins wars and creates change. That's why it is written into your holy books.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 02, 2012
Fetal tobacco syndrome. That's something to hate isn't it?
http://medical-di...rd=fetal tobacco syndrome

-Also miscarriage, cribdeath, underweight, cognitively-impaired, children? Your indulgence enables these things to happen.
Statements which can be shown to be wrong are not only ineffective at stopping someone from using tobacco products, your statements may actually encourage tobacco use.
But addicts tend to disregard the facts which might cause them to quit. You are obviously ignoring the great preponderance of evidence which should convince you that tobacco has ruined your life and is killing you even now.

Try something. Take a great deep breath and hold it. What happens? What is your BODY telling you about your disease? What does it FEEL like dog? What does it feel like to draw that dirt deep into your lungs, disregarding the relief it gives you from that crawling, itching withdrawal? What does dirt in your lungs FEEL like?
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 02, 2012
Otto - You make it up in one post, can't support it with fact, then use it as fact in another post, ergo, you are an idiot. Spiro Agnew.
You should try to be more specific spirochete. I made nothing up and justified everything I said. Unlike you who tried to argue themselves out of 'Spain is on the equator' and 'zero growth requires zero birth'. What an idiot.

I can understand your reluctance to argue as you risk exposing your debility, but fair is fair. Give it a try. I cannot promise not to make fun of you though.

Fair is fair pussycat_lies.
dogbert
2.6 / 5 (18) Sep 02, 2012
Ghosty,

You seem to think I smoke. You seem to think that makes a difference in your vacuous arguments.

I don't use tobacco products.

I did, but I quit using them.

My use or failure to use tobacco does not make your arguments useful or meaningful.

Hate is not a useful argument. Think about it, you hate people for behaviors which do not affect you in any way whatsoever.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (29) Sep 02, 2012
I did, but I quit using them.
You mean just since posting in this thread? Hallujiahai! Otto save another soul. But you still arent going to heaven dog as it doesnt exist. Hallihijulia.
My use or failure to use tobacco does not make your arguments useful or meaningful.
Ditto. But facts DO make mine useful or meaningful. Facts as presented by researchers and experts in their respective fields. I bet some of them even smoke.

Got any?

"Its not the violence that sets men apart..." but the gullibility of those who fall for tobacco commercials such as these:
http://www.youtub...7S1LaPMU

-See Shia LeBeouf in his first smoking role!
dogbert
2.8 / 5 (18) Sep 02, 2012
I did, but I quit using them.


You mean just since posting in this thread?


About 4.5 years ago.

Again, my status as a smoker or non-smoker does not relate to my discussion about tobacco products. Neither should your status.

Note how you continue to hate even when informed that I do not smoke?

As I said earlier, you are full of hate.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 02, 2012
Again, my status as a smoker or non-smoker does not relate to my discussion about tobacco products. Neither should your status.
Ahaahaahahaa so why'd you bring it up dufuss?
dogbert
2.6 / 5 (17) Sep 02, 2012
Ahaahaahahaa so why'd you bring it up


I dislike articles [and comments] which present broad, unsubstantiated and/or incorrect statements as if they were true or scientifically accurate.

For example, the article states that "Smoking increases blood pressure ...". This may be true sometimes for some people, but it is not broadly true. A few weeks after I quit smoking, a visit to the doctor revealed that my blood pressure had risen to 220/170. I had to either resume smoking or take medication. I decided to take medication.

Your untrue statements have already been addressed multiple times by me and by others.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 02, 2012
Otto - Because the things you present as "facts" are in fact, your bullshit opinion. Unsupported by anything but the usual valid but not pertinant "smoking is bad" information.
You are a bullshitter, have always been a bullshitter, and will always be a bullshitter.
Your opinions smell like the ashtray you were raised in.

You state 7 points, but factually back none of them. None.
That is the crux of the biscuit here. Your opinions, not the facts and research of others.

Your original "Smokers are all idiots" was refuted BY YOUR OWN SOURCE! That must have stung. Ow. Ow. Ow.

How would you know what millions of people "must know"? Are you a mind reader? It may be true. You just might be able to read minds. But only half of the minds for you are a halfwit.

Posting quotes from PussyCatEyes as part of your post and hoping in vain for me to "incriminate" myself by responding to them is just damn funny. You just don't get it.
Spiro Agnew. Spiro Agnew. Spiro Agnew.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (26) Sep 02, 2012
the article states that "Smoking increases blood pressure ...". This may be true sometimes for some people, but it is not broadly true.
Well I do believe it does state that this is in fact broadly true but not true in every case. But addicts will fix on the misconception that studies say these things happen ALL the time, when they don't. Scientists don't talk that way (usually) - haven't you learned that yet?
A few weeks after I quit smoking, a visit to the doctor revealed that my blood pressure had risen to 220/170. I had to either resume smoking or take medication. I decided to take medication.
Well then please provide a link to a source stating that cessation raises bp in some cases. Or I will have to discount your anecdote.
You state 7 points, but factually back none of them. None.
I think you actually meant 'all of them...all. Either directly by the links I posted, or from what we can infer from what we now know about the disease. Including of course the god shit.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.5 / 5 (26) Sep 02, 2012
Your original "Smokers are all idiots" was refuted BY YOUR OWN SOURCE! That must have stung. Ow. Ow. Ow.
Not at all. Many idiots are also very intelligent and capable people. Alas it seems that you are neither, in part because you foist broken logic such as this. Oyoyoyoy.

Developed intellects can actually be a hinderance as addicts will try to 'think their way' out of an addiction. Di you know this?
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 02, 2012
"Many idiots are also very intelligent and capable people." - Otto
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ah good one.
Quite the corner you painted yourself into.

By your logic if an intelligent person smokes, and you (totally unsupported still) say smokers are idiots, then intelligent people are idiots? Change the definition of words and adjectives to suit your own demented rant? Groovy baby.

Do you mean to say that even intelligent and capable people can can make bad decisions, for example, smoking?

Use your big boy words Otto, you can do it. Or maybe not.

I say the offspring of smokers are fish. You stated you were the offspring of a smoker, therefore: .... Wait for it....

You are a fish.
With a penis on your head.
Or none at all.
Spiro Agnew. This an anagram, work it out sometime. {smooch}
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 02, 2012
if an intelligent person smokes, and you (totally unsupported still) say smokers are idiots, then intelligent people are idiots?
Hmm lets see...

Intelligent people who smoke are a (small) subset of all intelligent people. Intelligent people who believe in god are a (small) subset of all intelligent people. Intelligent people who think Kant ever said anything relevant whatsoever, are a (small) subset of all intelligent people.

These subsets, which may or may not overlap, are, according to me, IDIOTS, among many other things. There are others. In addition there are similar subsets in other segments of the population. Many imbeciles are idiots for example. Like yourself.

But these observations in no way imply that all intelligent people, are idiots. How's that? Make sense spirochete? You may have to turn off your cartoons and give this your full attention, in order to understand it.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 02, 2012
You apparently don't know the difference between an idiot and a fool. Even der Wiki can get it right. Yes?
http://en.wikiped...ki/Idiot

"An idiot differs from a fool (who is unwise) and an ignoramus (who is uneducated/an ignorant), neither of which refers to someone with low intelligence."

You have been using the incorrect word all along, how pitiful.
Spiro Agnew.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 02, 2012
For dogs's sake Otto, please don't breed. One is enough.

My work with you is mostly done. I had a couple of friends that wanted to join in the comments without your invective laden spewage following them around, so I led you on a merry little chase.
They decided not to use the section, but will continue to read the articles and vote on them.

I have learned a good deal of the history of the comments section, and I must say, it is not pretty.

You have been used, totally used. Like the tool you are, you have been taken and redirected, so a real feel for the comments could be had.
And it was really enjoyable.

You probably still think I am people from the past.
That is your fear, and it rules you.

When you add a few years, and perhaps a little much needed wisdom, you may be able gain a better understanding of real people and ideas.
Have a pleasant night, sweet Otto.
Estevan57
1.9 / 5 (36) Sep 03, 2012
http://sportsillu...ml#recap

Go Ducks!
By the way, Spiro Agnew is an anagram for Grow A Penis.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.8 / 5 (27) Sep 03, 2012
For dogs's sake Otto, please don't breed. One is enough.

My work with you is mostly done. I had a couple of friends that wanted to join in the comments without your invective laden spewage following them around, so I led you on a merry little chase.
They decided not to use the section, but will continue to read the articles and vote on them.

I have learned a good deal of the history of the comments section, and I must say, it is not pretty.

You have been used, totally used. Like the tool you are, you have been taken and redirected, so a real feel for the comments could be had.
And it was really enjoyable.

You probably still think I am people from the past.
That is your fear, and it rules you.

When you add a few years, and perhaps a little much needed wisdom, you may be able gain a better understanding of real people and ideas.
Have a pleasant night, sweet Otto.
But as we have established that you are a liar, none of this is probably true.
TheGhostofOtto1923
2.7 / 5 (28) Sep 03, 2012
http://sportsillu...ml#recap

Go Ducks!
By the way, Spiro Agnew is an anagram for Grow A Penis.
And only pirouette/Ritchieguy/russkiye/pussycat_lies/Obama_socks/estevan the fake ufologist/farmer/nurse/russian/gay porn afficianado/NASA worker/windmill owner would think this was clever.

And only you would think that your previous post made any sense at all. I read what I want to read and post where I want to post. Obviously. And your friends are obviously all you. Obviously. You sick, ignorant, lying imbecile.
DarkHorse66
1.5 / 5 (8) Sep 04, 2012
This does not justify smoking, but I'm not interested in debating whether someone is intelligent or not, based on their personal habits. I would rather discuss the impacts of smoking in neutral and factual terms. So, speaking on a purely neuro-chemical level, nicotine is a choline agonist. It acts on the nicotinic receptors in the brain:
http://en.wikiped...linergic
Nicotine assists in the release of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Acetylcholine is responsible for memory formation and learning. Nicotine also acts on a number of other neurotransmitters:
http://en.wikiped...lcholine
http://en.wikiped...Nicotine
It's a lot of reading, but it does shed some light on the complexities of the mechanisms involved.
Best Regards, DH66
TheOtherGhost ofOtto
2.7 / 5 (21) Sep 04, 2012
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/gameflash/2012/09/01/49645/index.html#recap

Go Ducks!
By the way, Spiro Agnew is an anagram for Grow A Penis.


LULZ - pretty damn funny to me. This guy rules you Oddo.
He made you his bitch.
Your smoking mom is an idiot.
And you are a fool.
He made you a fool.
Because he rules you.
Kisses and god bless you.