4 ms·

Smoking is bad for you because it deposits tar and other toxic substances in your lungs. As far as I'm aware, comparing that to smoked meat is apples to oranges

Smoking is bad for you because it deposits tar and other toxic substances in your lungs. As far as I'm aware, comparing that to smoked meat is apples to oranges.

seibelj 5y ago
If smoke is bad for your lungs, then putting meat into a smoke house for a long time, infusing all of the food with smoke, and having that carcinogen-infused product pass through your entire digestive system seems… also risky. Just logic to me.
- sjg007 5y ago
  You are not wrong. Basically everything in moderation.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  Nope, otherwise you’d get asthma from eating bread, since inhaled flour can irritate alveoli, and so therefore consumed flour can, too. (To head off the usual argument about allergies, you can replace flour in the above statement with any neutral powder, such as cornstarch or potato starch or baking soda or sugar or salt.) It’s valid to consider systemic toxins, but if this was a systemic toxin issue, it wouldn’t only be their colon that’s affected, it would also be affecting their lungs, even if they only consumed it.
- Mouse47 5y ago
  If water is bad for your lungs, then surely having liters of water pass through your entire digestive system seems...also risky. Just logic to me.
  - seibelj 5y ago
    Are you arguing that smoke is harmless? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. No one would cook meat with car exhaust and expect it to be safe. Burning charcoal or wood to cook meat using pure smoke cannot possibly be harmless.
    - cko 5y ago
      No, they are arguing with the heuristic 'if it's bad to inhale, it's probably bad to ingest.' They provided examples in which this wasn't the case. No one is saying smoke inhalation is harmless. But to conclude it shouldn't be ingested based on this fact alone is dubious.
      - seibelj 5y ago
        Put it this way - smoke is clearly bad for you and proven to cause cancer. I believe what I eat is absorbed by my body and can affect it, like medicine affects my body when absorbed. Therefore I think it’s fairly likely that eating a lot of food infused with smoke and carcinogens is a strong risk. It would be quite odd if it turned out smoke-food had absolutely 0% effect on your body, and especially making it a routine piece of food you eat would be worse than a “once in a while” thing. So that’s my point - if you think smoke is bad for your lungs, it’s probably bad for your colon too!
      - motioncuty 5y ago
        Combustion creates all sorts of carcinogens. Even wood. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.iaff.org/wp-content/uploads/FFCancer_Exposure.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiEsPPeurnxAhVGGFkFHRzqD-cQFjAOegQIDhAC&usg=AOvVaw07Ls4MLhdKn4aHzHUspWW2 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...
      - ideamotor 5y ago
        Yep. Typical arguments based on intentional literal misinterpretation.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Much of the harm to lungs from smoke is from the particulates. That won't be quite the same issue for things you eat. And then a bunch of the compounds present in the smoke, that would get absorbed in the lungs, are not going to concentrate in the meat (anything with a low vapor pressure will mostly be driven off and exhausted out of the grill/smoker/etc).
  - seibelj 5y ago
    You can get mouth cancer from tobacco, as well as many other cancers. Lungs are just one.

Smoking is bad for you because it deposits tar and other toxic substances in your lungs. As far as I'm aware, comparing that to smoked meat is apples to oranges.

seibelj 5y ago

If smoke is bad for your lungs, then putting meat into a smoke house for a long time, infusing all of the food with smoke, and having that carcinogen-infused product pass through your entire digestive system seems… also risky. Just logic to me.

sjg007 5y ago
You are not wrong. Basically everything in moderation.
floatingatoll 5y ago
Nope, otherwise you’d get asthma from eating bread, since inhaled flour can irritate alveoli, and so therefore consumed flour can, too. (To head off the usual argument about allergies, you can replace flour in the above statement with any neutral powder, such as cornstarch or potato starch or baking soda or sugar or salt.) It’s valid to consider systemic toxins, but if this was a systemic toxin issue, it wouldn’t only be their colon that’s affected, it would also be affecting their lungs, even if they only consumed it.
Mouse47 5y ago
If water is bad for your lungs, then surely having liters of water pass through your entire digestive system seems...also risky. Just logic to me.
- seibelj 5y ago
  Are you arguing that smoke is harmless? I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. No one would cook meat with car exhaust and expect it to be safe. Burning charcoal or wood to cook meat using pure smoke cannot possibly be harmless.
  - cko 5y ago
    No, they are arguing with the heuristic 'if it's bad to inhale, it's probably bad to ingest.' They provided examples in which this wasn't the case. No one is saying smoke inhalation is harmless. But to conclude it shouldn't be ingested based on this fact alone is dubious.
    - seibelj 5y ago
      Put it this way - smoke is clearly bad for you and proven to cause cancer. I believe what I eat is absorbed by my body and can affect it, like medicine affects my body when absorbed. Therefore I think it’s fairly likely that eating a lot of food infused with smoke and carcinogens is a strong risk. It would be quite odd if it turned out smoke-food had absolutely 0% effect on your body, and especially making it a routine piece of food you eat would be worse than a “once in a while” thing. So that’s my point - if you think smoke is bad for your lungs, it’s probably bad for your colon too!
    - motioncuty 5y ago
      Combustion creates all sorts of carcinogens. Even wood. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.iaff.org/wp-content/uploads/FFCancer_Exposure.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiEsPPeurnxAhVGGFkFHRzqD-cQFjAOegQIDhAC&usg=AOvVaw07Ls4MLhdKn4aHzHUspWW2 https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/...
    - ideamotor 5y ago
      Yep. Typical arguments based on intentional literal misinterpretation.
maxerickson 5y ago
Much of the harm to lungs from smoke is from the particulates. That won't be quite the same issue for things you eat. And then a bunch of the compounds present in the smoke, that would get absorbed in the lungs, are not going to concentrate in the meat (anything with a low vapor pressure will mostly be driven off and exhausted out of the grill/smoker/etc).
- seibelj 5y ago
  You can get mouth cancer from tobacco, as well as many other cancers. Lungs are just one.