I gotta ask, you're anticipating getting lung cancer? Like, this is a life event you're budgeting for?

I'm not trying to judge your choices (I've smoked cigarettes at times), I'm just taken aback.

I mean, I hope not. But I'd be a fool not to plan for the worst.

[edit: you can phrase your question differently. I won't be offended and I'm happy to explain my view on it.]

"If it doesn't hurt anyone else, e.g. I'm not robbing people for meth or ruining anyone else's lungs or raiding my kid's college fund, etc, I'm okay with it"

"foie gras are a few of the things that make it worth living"

... you know what they do to the duck to make your foie gras, right?

There are ethical ways to produce foie gras without force feeding. Anyway no, I don't think animals should suffer but this is beside the point about tobacco. It does line up nicely with my theory that a huge portion of the population enjoys feeling superior to others based on an off-the-rack set of identity politics masquerading as ethics, which hasn't changed much from the religiosity that preceded it.

> It does line up nicely with my theory that a huge portion of the population enjoys feeling superior to others based on an off-the-rack set of identity politics masquerading as ethics, which hasn't changed much from the religiosity that preceded it.

Worrying about that makes you a victim of the same fallacy.

You don't need to point out a vaguely defined group as bad or wrong. The same way "they" do it to look down on "you", that statement is "you" looking down on "them".

In both cases, it's a moot observation.

It's not a worry, that most people are trying to prove their moral superiority (religious or secular). It's what I take into account when I choose to forgive them. Nor is it moot. Choosing to overlook their zeal is a conscious decision, because I know they aren't thinking for themselves and it's not entirely their fault.

On what basis do you believe any given person is "trying to prove their moral superiority" versus some other motivation?

If it's because of some objective observation about that specific individual displayed over the course of the discussion, then your musings about some greater pattern or group are moot. If it's anything else, then you're the one not engaged in a good faith conversation.

I do understand a lot of that. I agree that many people have weird ideas about cumulative risk, in that they don't seem to believe in it. They seem to believe that the risk of a set of activities is the maximum rather than the sum.

And I do see how, if you've committed to being a smoker, reducing your risk and planning for the worst makes total sense. "I don't need to live past age 60" does sound a lot like passive suicidal ideation, and it may be worth speaking to a professional about it, but that's all I'll say on the matter, I don't want to be intrusive.

[I want to disclaim this as jawboning, I end up quiting smoking weed in this story, but I don't mean to imply anything by it and I understand quitting weed and quitting tobacco are worlds apart anyhow.]

I don't smoke tobacco anymore, but gosh I do love to smoke cannabis. I love the ritual of it, I love passing a bowl around with friends and listening to music, I love the texture of smoke, I love blowing smoke rings. It also helped to manage my anxiety. If I was having a panic attack, I could reliably terminate it by smoking. And it turned down the volume on the the anxious thoughts that I have bouncing around my brain.

Recently I've had episodes of terrible GI symptoms. Enough to briefly put me in the hospital. I'm not entirely sure, because many of the symptoms don't fit, but I think I've developed Cannaboid Hyperemesis Syndrome with an unusual presentation, the only cure for which is to quit using cannabis.

But I'm okay with it. By the time I came to this conclusion, I was making sure my will was in order, I just didn't know what was happening to me. So I was just happy that the best hypothesis seemed to be something curable.

So far, I haven't had an episode in a few days, the last episode I did have was milder. I'm starting to have more energy and feel like I just be thinking more clearly. The anxious thoughts that I smoke weed to treat are coming back strong, which has been difficult, but I'll find some other way to manage them.

I'll miss cannabis dearly, it served me well for a long time. I'm hoping I can smoke once a year at least. But man, I will do anything not to have an episode like that again.

Here's to the gift of life.

Gee I hope you don't have that. The thing I feel the most sorry for with my friend who's stage 3 is that he can't smoke pot or eat a decent meal. I enjoy weed - it's a go-to when I want to stop drinking, smoke less and sleep better. I'm also emetophobic as hell, and I've been scared of ever developing a reaction to it, so I smoke it sparingly.

My friend who had terrible eating habits before (fried fish and chips daily) has discovered making his own pot edibles and the enjoyment of growing his own arugula salads. I think we work with what we've got, and we've got less to work with as we get older. There's no contradiction between wanting to live and wanting to enjoy life. Wanting to smoke or not caring if I live past 60 isn't a death wish - it's an affirmation to myself that I'm alive in the moment and not living in fear of age or death.

> I don't see how morality comes into it when it's a choice made by adults

It's not black and white. Morality is a continuum of cause and effect.

Shooting someone is bad. Shooting bullets recklessly and accidentally hitting someone is bad, but less so. Shooting a bunch of bullets safely but leaving the lead in the ground to leach into a neighboring properties well is bad, but lesser still. Etc.

There are moral consequences to literally everything you do, it's just a matter of each individual's threshold for caring, and the social contract formed when people become part of a group. Some people care about the first and second order effects of smoking (increased burden on healthcare, land use competition, agricultural pollution, microplastic pollution, etc.) and some don't.

> I don't see how morality comes into it when it's a choice made by adults

Does morality not apply to adults? Are adults immune to human psychology?