Talk:Chain smoking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not vote for this article to be moved to Wiktionary. A lot can be said about chain smoking—just think of how people's attitude to smoking has changed. Today, a true chain smoker will have to live the life of a recluse, whereas 50 years ago or so you were allowed to smoke in public buildings, cinemas, offices, classrooms, hospitals, taxis, restaurants, etc. etc. All this and a lot more should/could be added. <KF> 00:17, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

I entirely agree with you. Please don't move this to the Wikitionary. This is much more than a dictionary entry. Canjth 18:37 8 August 2006

Which country is this referring to? It's worded to suggest that the '20 minutes' is scientific! Davidjamesgill 01:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "smoking does not relieve stress"

I've cut this section from the article, as it's not really relevant to chain smoking specifically. If it's true, it'd be great in the cigarette article, or nicotine, or tobacco, but it's not necessary here. I'd also question the factual accuracy of it, as "relieving stress" can be pretty subjective, and that's a very unscientific technical explanation of nicotine in the bloodstream. The section as I cut it, and the section as it was initially written follow.

However, smoking does not actually relieve stress. Cigarette smoking is actually stressful for the body. The "relief" a smoker feels from smoking a cigarette after a stressful event is caused by replenishment of nicotine levels in the bloodstream. ^{[citation needed]} This replenishment is needed because stress results in nicotine being drawn from the blood at a quicker rate. ^{[citation needed]}

It should be noted that smoking does not relieve stress however, infact cigarette smoking is a stressful event on the body. The "Relief" a smoker feels from smoking a cigarette after a stressful event is in reality nicotine levels being replenished into the bloodstream because of the fact that the stressful event caused nicotine to be drawn from the blood at a faster rate.

icydid 18:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wiktionary

The above notwithstanding, this should be moved to Wiktionary. Much could be said here, but almost all of it would apply to cigarettes generally rather than chain smoking. Societal attitudes towards chain smoking are likely not that much different than those toward smoking. More importantly, the dearth of sources on this topic will make it virtually impossible to create a quality article, although a decent dictionary definition is possible. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 15:00, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure I completely agree with you there, Savidan—in fact, I think the article is a fine example of Wikipedia’s ability to shine the spotlight on minutiae, even as it stands. For example, I’ll step in to defend the paragraph on the gradual disappearance of chain smoking as Bloomberg laws come into effect; this doesn’t quite apply to smoking in general. Though as you say, the article could use some references, and as a whole it could probably be merged into a subsection of smoking.  —Banzai! (talk) @ 19:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have a fine ability to "shine the spotlight on the minutiae." However, what ultimatley differentiates the minutiae which become great articles from those which become cruft and original research-y is whether or not there exists a substantial base of literature from which to draw. Although "chain smoking" gets a few hundred hits on Google Scholar, it is used them almost exclusively as a term of art for someone who is a heavy smoker. Hence, the content here will become repetitive with the generic content on cigarettes. The only thing which is specific to "chain smoking" itself is the idea of lighting a new cigarette with an old one but there are not enough verifiable and notable facts to be stated about this practice itself which do not belong elsewhere instead.

The famous chain smokers paragraph is a good example. There really is not verifiable source which could confirm the fact that these people actually lit a cigarette with another cigaratte. List of smokers would be a more appropriate place for such a thing, although the very concept is prone to abuse from vanity and heresay. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 09:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)