Are you a member of the Society for Poisoning Cute Babies?

What is your position on smoking? 9

Food production and transportation have been popular topics of late thanks to numerous posts by new Gristmill contributor Tom Philpott, loyal Ask Umbra readers, and the fight over synthetic ingredients in organic foods. But regardless of which side you find yourself on the various issues, there is no denying we mere mortals need food to live. So how about taking a look at another type of crop we don't need to survive: tobacco.

According to one Ask Umbra article, where a reader seeks green reasons to quit smoking:

Smoking is horrid, and the harm you are doing to your own health is just the icing on the toxic tobacco cake. From seed to smokes, those little white sticks leave a swath of death in their wake. Pesticides, pesticides, pesticides -- no large-scale crop is grown without 'em, and you can bet your tobacco has been sprayed right up to the moment of harvest and beyond. Every time you purchase a pack, you are supporting the chemical companies that make the pesticides and contributing to water pollution, habitat destruction, and the pesticide poisoning of farm workers and their families.

And she doesn't stop there folks:

So if contemplating the ever-darker shade of your lungs isn't sufficient to deter you from smoking, try this: As you pull out that $6 for a pack of Camel Lights, think of the farmhand who comes home coated with chemicals and hugs her little daughter. Or think of the pesticide residue on her living room carpet, where baby Johnnie crawls around, stuffing his fingers and toes in his mouth at every opportunity. You might as well take that $6 and give it straight to the Society for Poisoning Cute Babies.

And if the innocent cute babies aren't reason enough:

Wait, that's not all! Other families, struggling to make ends meet in the global market, have converted valuable farmland to tobacco crops, taking it out of food production and leaving them dependent on expensive, imported food for their own diet. Moreover, tobacco must be cured so that you can have your delicious drag. The heat used to cure tobacco must be generated by fuel, and in developing nations, tobacco growers are cutting down precious trees to build and heat the tobacco-drying sheds or "flues." Not only does this increase global deforestation and erosion, it eats into a fuel source that otherwise would be used in cooking, which most folks would agree is more vital to human survival than drying tobacco.

And, yes, there is more:

Let's see, what else? Oh, yes, there're the cellophane wrappers, the cardboard packaging, the disgusting cigarette butts littered everywhere, the forest fires ... See? Smoking binds you to a vast community of repulsive polluters whose members think of nothing but their own cravings. You are a one-woman industrial smokestack. It's your choice to destroy your own lungs and inject yourself with mysterious additives and pesticide residue -- but it's another thing entirely to support an industry that harms human and environmental health, and to force your cigarette exhaust onto innocent civilians who wish to live long and happy lives.

So if everything Umbra says is true, and considering how huge the tobacco market is, why aren't more enviros being more vocal? Where's the green anti-smoking movement? I look forward to your comments.

Web Developer for PCC Natural Markets

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. Sarah K. Burkhalter's avatar

    Sarah K. Burkhalter Posted 9:55 am
    19 Oct 2005

    Even the Marlboro Man's anti-smokingAs of July, smoking has been disallowed in the building of the Chicago-based Leo Burnett ad agency, which represents Philip Morris and created the Marlboro Man. Some smokers think it's "kind of two-faced" that they can't smoke a cigarette while at their job of advertising cigarettes.
    Sure it's ironic, but I'm more surprised that there are still offices that allow indoor smoking! I'm sheltered in crazy green Seattle, I guess. Or are there smoky offices here, too? Anybody?
    You can read the article here if you register for the site, or in only slightly condensed form here.

    Permalink

  2. Sishongjerry Posted 2:25 am
    20 Oct 2005

    Ever hear of house cleaningGosh, I hope the tobacco farmer has a cleaner house than that, if he/she is just wandering around under the poison spray, and then bringing it home to the kids where it gets dropped and soaked into the carpet, I think their own personal hygiene is more of an issue than the people, like me, who smoke.
    I'm not poisoning cute babies, I bath, change my clothes, and clean my house regularly. I would assume, that after working where you see those poison labels all day, which seems to be the implication, I would bath and change before I go home, or at least as soon as I get home.
    The unhygienic worker is poisoning the babies, not me!

    Permalink

  3. Chris Schults Posted 2:59 am
    20 Oct 2005

    Poisoning cute babies, so is poisoning the EarthSishongjerry,
    The title "Are you a member of the Society for Poisoning Cute Babies?" was used just to get people's attention, and wasn't intended to be the focus of the post. Don't get me wrong, I think poisoning cute babies is bad, bad, bad. As is poisoning Planet Earth.
    I wonder if smokers consider the negative environmental impacts of the production and distribution of tobacco products, nevermind the negative health effects. Were you even aware of them before reading Umbra's thoughts on the matter?
    Considering the massive anti-smoking campaign, I would expect a major injection of support from enviros would only help snuff out the pervasiveness of smoking in our society.
    But perhaps support from greenies would only mobilize the opposition more.
    Chris

    Support Grist: http://www.grist.org/support

    Permalink

  4. Chris Schults Posted 3:10 am
    20 Oct 2005

    cigarette buttsTreehugger reminds us of another problem, cigarette butts:
    According to ButtsOut, the world annually discards about 4.3 trillion cigarette butts. By some estimates, 30% of all cigarettes smoked end up as litter, and although small in themselves, can create over 500,000 tonnes of pollution per year. Traditional butts are made of "synthetic polymer cellulose acetate" and never degrade, only breaking apart after roughly 12 years. Yet within an hour of contact with water, cigarette butts can begin leaching chemicals such as cadmium, lead and arsenic into the marine environment. And that's not counting for the fact they also end up in in the intestines of "fish, whales, birds and other marine animals".
    Read the whole post for some ideas for addressing this problem, such as the biodegradable butt and the portable ash tray.

    Support Grist: http://www.grist.org/support

    Permalink

  5. Sishongjerry Posted 3:20 am
    20 Oct 2005

    I play devils advocateI understand and agree that smoking does harm the environment in more ways than one. My comment was not based strictly on the negative impact on the environment, it was based on the way in which the idea was presented.
    The title grabbed attention and a response. It's that kind of extreme propaganda though that can hurt your arguement and generate a bigger negative response.
    Just like the ad campaign that said if you smoke weed you are a careless baby killing terrorist supporter, it only fueled the fire of those who were already so self righteous as to believe the propaganda, and angered and insulted those who may actually be casual smokers, I know that's another issue entirely, but the idea remains the same.
    Shock tactics should be left for the military and those in the business of scaring people straight, not in the pursuit of global welfare.
    Sometimes the being the devils advocate, while not glamorous, gets the job done.

    Permalink

  6. Chris Schults Posted 3:32 am
    20 Oct 2005

    oh, but ...But Sishongjerry, Grist is nothing without our shocking/punny titles! Have you checked out Daily Grist?

    Support Grist: http://www.grist.org/support

    Permalink

  7. LauraH Posted 5:42 pm
    20 Oct 2005

    organic tobaccoMaybe this is common knowledge - I'm not exposed to much advertising - but I was recently amazed to see an ad for "additive-free cigarettes" made with "organic tobacco."  Ummm... I guess it's less harmful to the cute babies...

    Permalink

  8. Corey McKrill's avatar

    Corey McKrill Posted 6:32 am
    21 Oct 2005

    'extreme' propagandaRegardless of the personal cleaning habits of tobacco farm laborers, and whether or not the tobacco is "organic," supporting the tobacco industry is still poisoning cute babies, addicting children to carcinogenic substances, and contributing to environmental degradation.

    http://grist.org/

    Permalink

  9. Sarah K. Burkhalter's avatar

    Sarah K. Burkhalter Posted 4:08 am
    05 Dec 2005

    Steps forwardFrom USA Today, the news that the Westin hotel chain will become indoor-smoke-free in January. Take your cute babies to the Westin!

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement