Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
So what's worse: being a smoker or being overweight/obese?
Options
ninerbuff
Posts: 48,578 Member
in Debate Club
An interesting debate two members of my gym. One who doesn't smoke and is very overweight and who smokes before and after the gym, but is pretty lean and fit (even though he smokes). The smoker claimed that he would likely out live the non smoker. So I had to see where this went. The smoker claimed that if you went to Europe, where public smoking in bars and restaurants are still prevalent, you can see many people in the normal weight range and that the death from lung cancer is LOWER than that of the US.
The non smoker debated that smoking would be the smokers demise and that he's not doing himself any favors working out and smoking because they counter act each other.
So out of curiosity I looked up some stats and here is what I found:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/lung-cancers/by-country
The US was at number 12 overall and at 35.04%. That out of 172 countries on the list with the majority of them "smoking" countries!
So then I had to think myself of a population of people in US who aren't obese who smoke regularly and don't have high death rates from lung cancer ...............US penitentiaries came to mind. Death rates are higher from old age and other illnesses than lung cancer.
So is weight risk higher than smoking risk when it actually comes to mortality rates?
Not condoning people to smoke, but this is good discussion about how IMO weight is a much bigger factor since smoking's usually bad outcome is lung cancer. Being overweight/obese can lead to many types of health issues along with cancer.
Discuss
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
The non smoker debated that smoking would be the smokers demise and that he's not doing himself any favors working out and smoking because they counter act each other.
So out of curiosity I looked up some stats and here is what I found:
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/lung-cancers/by-country
The US was at number 12 overall and at 35.04%. That out of 172 countries on the list with the majority of them "smoking" countries!
So then I had to think myself of a population of people in US who aren't obese who smoke regularly and don't have high death rates from lung cancer ...............US penitentiaries came to mind. Death rates are higher from old age and other illnesses than lung cancer.
So is weight risk higher than smoking risk when it actually comes to mortality rates?
Not condoning people to smoke, but this is good discussion about how IMO weight is a much bigger factor since smoking's usually bad outcome is lung cancer. Being overweight/obese can lead to many types of health issues along with cancer.
Discuss
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1
Replies
-
Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?36 -
Do you think folks in penitentiaries work out more because they have more time (oh a pun)?
And is there a difference between men/women in penitentiaries in terms of obesity/smoking?
3 -
Well, seeing both my mother (@ age 67) and my oldest sister (@ age 54) both die from lung related issues, and both being normal weight (actually sister was underweight at time of death), I will opt for smoking being more hazardous to overall health. Meanwhile, none of my sisters or father (who are/were overweight) died from being overweight. Plus smokers put those around them at risk with second hand smoke.
Plus everyone has to eat to survive, no one has to smoke.
BTW OP, my mother (lifelong smoker) emphysema.
Sister, lifelong smoker. Breast cancer @ 36. Brain, lung, adrenal cancer @ 54 died of pneumonia ultimately and no spare fat on her to help her survive longer.
No way will you convince me smoking is better for you than being over weight.
PS OP, have you ever watched a loved one die, struggling for every breath?5 -
Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.2 -
I would think obesity would be the bigger problem - carrying around added weight puts added stress on so many bodily systems. If you have any weaknesses in any of those systems (genetic or otherwise derived), obesity is likely to exacerbate it. Many of the issues that obesity exacerbates fly under the radar. I don't see many stats for increase in mortality from obesity that factor in less direct effects like the increased risk of becoming bedridden or wheelchair bound, though that definitely affects mortality rates.
Smoking stresses fewer systems but is more straightforward in it's effects.
Also, there's been a big uptick in lung cancer in non-smokers in the US and UK in the last decade or so and it has a very high mortality rate because non-smokers are rarely checked for lung cancer. It's a non-small cell lung cancer and seems to be characterized by specific mutations that distinguish it from the non-small cell lung cancer that is seen in smokers. A family friend's wife died from it about 6-7 years ago. Nasty stuff. It had metastasized to multiple organs and her spine before she was diagnosed.4 -
I don't doubt it. And in prison, you need to sort of be physical fit to an extent because of the environment you live in.leanjogreen18 wrote: »Do you think folks in penitentiaries work out more because they have more time (oh a pun).
Men's obesity isn't that prevalent versus women in penitentiaries. Not sure why, but I'm thinking that men's penitentiaries may likely be that what you get for food is all you get. With only 3 squares a day and all of it being portioned, it's not hard to see why the penitentiary population doesn't have a problem with obesity. And their food is very low quality at that, which is why I don't believe eating "clean" is needed to lose weight at all.And is there a difference between men/women in penitentiaries in terms of obesity/smoking?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 0 -
3rdof7sisters wrote: »Well, seeing both my mother (@ age 67) and my oldest sister (@ age 54) both die from lung related issues, and both being normal weight (actually sister was underweight at time of death), I will opt for smoking being more hazardous to overall health. Meanwhile, none of my sisters or father (who are/were overweight) died from being overweight. Plus smokers put those around them at risk with second hand smoke.
Plus everyone has to eat to survive, no one has to smoke.
BTW OP, my mother (lifelong smoker) emphysema.
Sister, lifelong smoker. Breast cancer @ 36. Brain, lung, adrenal cancer @ 54 died of pneumonia ultimately and no spare fat on her to help her survive longer.
No way will you convince me smoking is better for you than being over weight.
Just to give you an opposite view - my maternal grandfather died at the ripe old age of 95 and smoked pipes and un-filtered Camels his entire adult life (he died of old age - his body just finally wore out). My paternal grandfather died a week short of his 90th birthday and smoked King Edward Cigars his entire adult life (same cause of death - his body finally just wore out).
I am not going to argue that smoking is good for you - just a couple of counter examples of where it didn't seem to make a difference.1 -
Not gonna try to convince you. I'm just going off the statistics. And in the US we have a much bigger issue with weight correlated deaths than lung cancer. Again, not condoning smoking, but it's odd to see that something that everyone thinks is really bad, isn't killing us off as much as weight related issues. Again, those are the stats, not my opinion.3rdof7sisters wrote: »Well, seeing both my mother (@ age 67) and my oldest sister (@ age 54) both die from lung related issues, and both being normal weight (actually sister was underweight at time of death), I will opt for smoking being more hazardous to overall health. Meanwhile, none of my sisters or father (who are/were overweight) died from being overweight. Plus smokers put those around them at risk with second hand smoke.
Plus everyone has to eat to survive, no one has to smoke.
BTW OP, my mother (lifelong smoker) emphysema.
Sister, lifelong smoker. Breast cancer @ 36. Brain, lung, adrenal cancer @ 54 died of pneumonia ultimately and no spare fat on her to help her survive longer.
No way will you convince me smoking is better for you than being over weight.
PS OP, have you ever watched a loved one die, struggling for every breath?
I have had several relatives smoke throughout their life and not die from lung cancer, my grandmother being one of them.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1 -
Agreed. I don't see any benefit at all from smoking with the exception of possibly having a slightly higher metabolic rate (due to increasing your heart rate).Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 0 -
I don't doubt it. And in prison, you need to sort of be physical fit to an extent because of the environment you live in.leanjogreen18 wrote: »Do you think folks in penitentiaries work out more because they have more time (oh a pun).
Men's obesity isn't that prevalent versus women in penitentiaries. Not sure why, but I'm thinking that men's penitentiaries may likely be that what you get for food is all you get. With only 3 squares a day and all of it being portioned, it's not hard to see why the penitentiary population doesn't have a problem with obesity. And their food is very low quality at that, which is why I don't believe eating "clean" is needed to lose weight at all.And is there a difference between men/women in penitentiaries in terms of obesity/smoking?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
So this is probably again due to needing to work out more because of the environment for men vs women. Commissary food is available in most prisons though correct?
So it seems in terms of health perhaps the added exercise it what helps smokers in penitentiaries, because you would think a poor diet would have long term effects as well.
I honestly don't think I could say which is worse.
I do know that I rarely see someone in their late 70's or early 80's that are obese, but I do see some that still smoke. Hows that for an answer:).2 -
Agreed. I don't see any benefit at all from smoking with the exception of possibly having a slightly higher metabolic rate (due to increasing your heart rate).Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Seriously? There is no benefit to smoking. NONE.
Plus you are putting others around you at risk because of your habit.
2 -
I note your opinion. It still doesn't negate that people who smoke actually burn more calories than non smokers eating the same amount. Just speaking on statistics.3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Agreed. I don't see any benefit at all from smoking with the exception of possibly having a slightly higher metabolic rate (due to increasing your heart rate).Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Seriously? There is no benefit to smoking. NONE.
I don't disagree here. No one should have to endure someone's smoking habit if they don't want to be around it. As a former smoker myself, I don't like to smell it or inhale it. If people want to smoke, there should be designated areas where it doesn't disturb others.Plus you are putting others around you at risk because of your habit.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
Yeah, I've looked at statistics like that before...mostly because I used to be both a smoker and obese. Statistically, there are more obesity related deaths and other issues than with smoking. That said, I wonder if it's a bit skewed considering the number of obese people has been on the rise for decades while smoking has been on the decline for decades.
I do think regular exercise mitigates risk of a variety of harmful things though.
IDK...I quit smoking and I quit being fat too.15 -
I note your opinion. It still doesn't negate that people who smoke actually burn more calories than non smokers eating the same amount. Just speaking on statistics.3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Agreed. I don't see any benefit at all from smoking with the exception of possibly having a slightly higher metabolic rate (due to increasing your heart rate).Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Seriously? There is no benefit to smoking. NONE.
I don't disagree here. No one should have to endure someone's smoking habit if they don't want to be around it. As a former smoker myself, I don't like to smell it or inhale it. If people want to smoke, there should be designated areas where it doesn't disturb others.Plus you are putting others around you at risk because of your habit.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
What about the children of smokers who don't have the choice? This is the epitome of selfishness, putting your children at risk. And yes, there are people who never smoke around their children, but there are plenty that do. In this day and age when the risks are know, and well documented, there simply is no excuse for even starting to smoke.
It is a filthy, expensive habit with no benefit at all except making tobacco companies richer.
Think about it, you are intentionally putting smoke into your lungs. How messed up is that?
1 -
An interesting debate two members of my gym. One who doesn't smoke and is very overweight and who smokes before and after the gym, but is pretty lean and fit (even though he smokes). The smoker claimed that he would likely out live the non smoker.
I got hit - very hard - by a car while I was riding my bike, doing hill repeats. There are too many variables to predict when people are going to die. Smoking shortens lifespan, so does obesity, both of those interact whit other things like exercise (you're in a gym after all) which probably mitigates a some of the harm both of these things do to people.
"What's worse" is a value call, it's subjective, everybody has their own answer. My grandparents smoked like chimneys when I was a kid, I still don't like the smell of it in a confined space like somebody's car.
Apparently obesity related illnesses have been more expensive for our health care system than smoking related ones for many years.1 -
Well with the US still being in the top 12 for lung cancer per capita, even with the reduction in smoking per person, that's still pretty high. What it doesn't say is how many obese smokers there are and if lung cancer was also a health issue along with anything else (IE Metabolic syndrome or diabetes).cwolfman13 wrote: »Yeah, I've looked at statistics like that before...mostly because I used to be both a smoker and obese. Statistically, there are more obesity related deaths and other issues than with smoking. That said, I wonder if it's a bit skewed considering the number of obese people has been on the rise for decades while smoking has been on the decline for decades.
I do think regular exercise mitigates risk of a variety of harmful things though.
IDK...I quit smoking and I quit being fat too.
One of my biggest regrets in life was being a smoker. My fitness could be better and I wasted a lot of money.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
Knowing that I was having a kid is why I quit cold turkey. Best decision I've made.3rdof7sisters wrote: »
I note your opinion. It still doesn't negate that people who smoke actually burn more calories than non smokers eating the same amount. Just speaking on statistics.3rdof7sisters wrote: »
Agreed. I don't see any benefit at all from smoking with the exception of possibly having a slightly higher metabolic rate (due to increasing your heart rate).Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Depends if you want to die of heart disease or airway disease (not just lung cancer ... copd, emphesma etc).
Not to mention BOTH are risk factors for a bunch of stuff.
It's kinda like asking which is worse, swimming with sharks or cocodiles?
I agree with this. Both raise risk factors for a number of chronic or fatal illnesses. And a lot of it comes down to genetics or luck. I personally know of many examples that would argue for either side.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Seriously? There is no benefit to smoking. NONE.
I don't disagree here. No one should have to endure someone's smoking habit if they don't want to be around it. As a former smoker myself, I don't like to smell it or inhale it. If people want to smoke, there should be designated areas where it doesn't disturb others.Plus you are putting others around you at risk because of your habit.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
What about the children of smokers who don't have the choice? This is the epitome of selfishness, putting your children at risk. And yes, there are people who never smoke around their children, but there are plenty that do. In this day and age when the risks are know, and well documented, there simply is no excuse for even starting to smoke.
Agree with everything except with the STATISTICAL benefit of a higher metabolic rate. Not saying that one should smoke to increase metabolism, but it's still a fact that it does. It'd be a dumb way to do it.It is a filthy, expensive habit with no benefit at all except making tobacco companies richer.
Well not to go off course here, but people intentionally do really stupid stuff that not only endanger them, but others as well. Texting while driving, drunk driving, etc. are good examples.Think about it, you are intentionally putting smoke into your lungs. How messed up is that?
BTW, how do you feel about marijuana smoking, especially for medical reasons?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
2 -
Well with the US still being in the top 12 for lung cancer per capita, even with the reduction in smoking per person, that's still pretty high. What it doesn't say is how many obese smokers there are and if lung cancer was also a health issue along with anything else (IE Metabolic syndrome or diabetes).cwolfman13 wrote: »Yeah, I've looked at statistics like that before...mostly because I used to be both a smoker and obese. Statistically, there are more obesity related deaths and other issues than with smoking. That said, I wonder if it's a bit skewed considering the number of obese people has been on the rise for decades while smoking has been on the decline for decades.
I do think regular exercise mitigates risk of a variety of harmful things though.
IDK...I quit smoking and I quit being fat too.
One of my biggest regrets in life was being a smoker. My fitness could be better and I wasted a lot of money.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yeah, that was dumb on my part too...0 -
I guess the value would depend on whom it affects. People dying close to you suffering from one or the other may have them leaning more to that side.NorthCascades wrote: »An interesting debate two members of my gym. One who doesn't smoke and is very overweight and who smokes before and after the gym, but is pretty lean and fit (even though he smokes). The smoker claimed that he would likely out live the non smoker.
I got hit - very hard - by a car while I was riding my bike, doing hill repeats. There are too many variables to predict when people are going to die. Smoking shortens lifespan, so does obesity, both of those interact whit other things like exercise (you're in a gym after all) which probably mitigates a some of the harm both of these things do to people.
"What's worse" is a value call, it's subjective, everybody has their own answer. My grandparents smoked like chimneys when I was a kid, I still don't like the smell of it in a confined space like somebody's car.
Apparently obesity related illnesses have been more expensive for our health care system than smoking related ones for many years.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
My dad has adult onset diabetes and COPD. He got his diet under control and quit smoking years ago. The COPD will kill him.
When I lost significant weight I re-ran my risk factors in to a mortality algorithm and my improved weight added a decade to my life expectancy; a pleasant surprise. I'm a lifetime non-smoker and at this late date I don't intend to turn myself in to an n=1 trial. I'll skip the smoking.
I think another worthwhile question is whether quitting smoking, losing significant weight, or good dental hygiene improves your quality of life more.
Smokers take more regular work breaks.
Too much weight takes a toll on all the joints. Losing mobility is truly miserable.
Bad teeth, well, can be a one way ticket to a heart attack.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 937 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions