Treated like a Queen FOR Smoking at Office Christmas Party

[BellaKos]

160. Smoker here

Alcohol is far worse than cigarettes. Not only is there a danger when impaired while driving or even bar hopping, but also alcoholism kills. I've seen the damage from alcohol consumption in my own family. The disease ranges from psychological dysfunction to brain damage and causes the more familiar physical conditions like liver impairment.

There are two types of people who become afflicted. The first is the one with a genetic predisposition to become addicted almost immediately. The other is the one who gradually becomes addicted after a number of years (varies) of "social drinking." Neither type considers drinking to be a problem. Both deny their impairment, regardless of degree.
And there are three stages of alcoholism. So, if you are the person who looks forward to "partying" on the weekend a little more than one who doesn''t drink, then you're probably in Stage One. (Think about your plans for New Year's Eve or the Super Bowl.) Stage Two -- You miss a Monday at work because of a hangover -- which gradually progresses to Stage Three when an intervention with immediate hospitalization at a Rehab facility is the only solution. Even then, the alcoholic will resist until he is shamed or forced to go -- or he winds up destitute on the streets.

Ironically, no studies about the damage alcoholism does to people (and their families) physically and psychologically or stats about the cost in regard to lost productivity, long-term health issues, or even the danger on the highways has been put forward to the public to the same *extent* as smoking. Consequently, non-smoking drinkers sit back in their bubbles of self-righteous delusion -- happily criticizing, denigrating, and shunning smokers. They are not apt to realize that their lifestyle of bourbon and steak or beer and barbeque is bound to cause infirmity in their old age. They, the self-righteous, don't realize that even statistics can't reveal the future, much less guarantee outcomes.

At the same time, I have not seen people damaged by smoking in my family. My grandfathers died at ages 87 and 93, respectively. Both smoked. One of my aunts also died at age 87 -- peacefully, with no overt health problems. She smoked Kents most of her life. Interestingly, another aunt died at age 87. She never smoked -- or drank -- or even ate the "wrong" foods. Maybe, an objective observer might say, as Lewis Black has said, that people are like snow-flakes. No two are alike. Or as a doctor from Greece told me once: Statistics are not meant to be applied en masse. And that's especially pertinent when prescribing medication. (Think about that.)

So ... I am of two minds. It would be more convenient, more socially acceptable, and less costly to quit smoking, but I enjoy it. It helps me think. On the other hand, if I didn't smoke, I might just start-- just to piss off The Smug" in this world. I would enjoy that, too.