The quoted post referef to a Forbes article based on that journal. There have been plenty of research studies that prove a link. I have linked them above.
Pipe Smoking and Mental Health
- Thread starter futureman
- Start date
Granted, and agree is a 'vice.'
and oops, posted wrong link (2nd hand smoke not what I meant to link).
Item 7 here refers to the 3 years longer lifespan:
Reducing Risks - Seattle Pipe Club - https://www.seattlepipeclub.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=969877&module_id=17020
citing a US Surgeon General Report. Valid?
"Trust the Science" lost a lot of trust in the last couple years.
Harvard Teaching Hospital Seeks Retraction of Six Papers by Top Researchers
(after Harvard's president got the boot for plagiarism)
Dr. Henri Gaboriau is a great source as an Otolaryngologist. I thought you were referring to secondhand smoking, which does cause cancers.
I'm a trauma surgeon and pipe smokers have clearer lungs that most people who have had pneumonia (bacterial). That I know from experience doing thoracotomies. Funny side note: I've found more than one pipe in the anal cavity.
How the hell did they manage to swallow THAT
Doc! What happened to doctor/patient confidentiality! I told you I slipped and fell on it!
Ohhhh it wasn't swallowed.How the hell did they manage to swallow THAT
As long as the patient remains anonymous, I can discuss case files. Your fault for owning up to is
Ohhhh it wasn't swallowed.
As long as the patient remains anonymous, I can discuss case files. Your fault for owning up to is
I have to admit it was a painful extraction.
I respect the fact that you are a surgeon, but I just can’t take anyone seriously that encourages recreational drug use as I have heard some “professionals” recommend to veterans groups.
I’ve read the studies and know that science isn’t always pure. What specifically are you recommending?
Let's keep this light, please, and free from irritations by anyone and everyone.
What? You don’t want irritation and argumentation in a thread about mental health? Really??? 
If you followed the link I provided, you would have seen that I was referencing the original journal article, not the Forbes react piece.
I often say to people that pipe smoking is both more pleasurable and relaxing then it frankly has any right to be. I also think about the Zen Tea Ceremony when I think about pipes. Practioners always say it's not the tea it's the ceremonial act of slowing down and really taking something in. I disagree it's the tea (the sytle of tea they use matcha has higher levels of l-theanine then other teas, and that amino acid helps people calm down caffeine helps people focus, nicotine does both of those things. And in both pipe smoking and the tea ceremony both the chemical aid and the slowing down and focusing on a simple task is what I think contributes to the over all effect and isn't one or the other but a multiplication of everything involved.
And I have to admit my first thought from historyguy having work related PTSD is yeah some shocking things have happened through out human history. It's wonderful though that anything can help.
If this were a meerschaum coloring thread there'd be no chance. But since this is merely a debate about mental health, getting pipes stuck in your ass, and whether or not pipe smoking is a vice, we might be ok. Again, no guarantees.
I've also removed shampoo bottles and light bulbs. The latter I don't know how they got it up there without breaking it.If this were a meerschaum coloring thread there'd be no chance. But since this is merely a debate about mental health, getting pipes stuck in your ass, and whether or not pipe smoking is a vice, we might be ok. Again, no guarantees.
It was broken.
“We don’t want people to conclude that passive smoking has no effect on lung cancer,” she said. “We think the message is, this analysis doesn’t tell us what the risk is, or even if there is a risk.”
This is not conclusive in the least. My links that I previously posted are not only the standard in care, but also not out of date. This study included only women and the study cannot find a genetic link to the affects of secondhand smoke. Make sure you have the most recent information before you pick one that fits your narrative.
I wasn't picking anything that fits "my narrative". I don't have a "narrative", or a dog in your fight. I was simply highlighting the fact you missed the link to the study that someone else posted, that you said was "not from a medical institution", which it is. I also previously noted (and you also failed to notice) that the study was ten years old.
You seem to browse instead of actually reading. That's can't be good news for your patients.
I noticed it was 10 years old even from the Forbes article. I've read all the studies I've posted, yet you failed to realize that my links discredit said study. Don't infer anything about my patients. Good day sir.