Good for you!Dadface said:After more than fourty years of smoking I gave it up.I'm now on day 28 and feeling good.Sorry,I just popped into boast.
If smoking weren't bad for you, there would likely be no health benefits. Tobacco smoke contains thousands of chemicals, many of which are harmful and can lead to serious health problems such as lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke. Even without these harmful chemicals, inhaling smoke into your lungs can still cause damage and irritation.
No, even if smoking weren't bad for you, it would not be considered a healthy habit. Smoking involves inhaling smoke into your lungs, which can damage your respiratory system and increase your risk for various health issues. Additionally, smoking can lead to addiction and dependence, which can negatively impact your overall well-being.
If smoking weren't bad for you, the tobacco industry would likely still exist, but it would likely face significant changes. Without the negative health effects associated with smoking, there would likely be less regulation and restrictions on tobacco products. However, the industry would also face challenges in marketing and promoting their products as a healthy choice.
Even if smoking weren't bad for you, secondhand smoke would still be harmful to those around you. Secondhand smoke contains many of the same chemicals and toxins as firsthand smoke, and can still lead to various health issues, particularly for those with respiratory conditions.
If smoking weren't bad for you, society's perception of smoking would likely be very different. It may not be seen as a harmful or negative habit, and there may not be as much stigma surrounding it. However, there would likely still be concerns about the addictive nature of smoking and its impact on public health and the environment.