Slashdot Mirror
Young Men Who Smoke Have Lower IQs
Hugh Pickens writes "Science Daily reports on a study that has determined that young men who smoke are likely to have lower IQs than their non-smoking peers. In the study, conducted with 20,000 Israeli Army recruits and veterans, the average IQ for a non-smoker was about 101, while the smokers' average was more than seven IQ points lower at about 94, and the IQs of young men who smoked more than a pack a day were lower still, at about 90. (These IQs all fall within the normal range.) 'In the health profession, we've generally thought that smokers are most likely the kind of people to have grown up in difficult neighborhoods, or who've been given less education at good schools,' says Prof. Mark Weiser of Tel Aviv University's Department of Psychiatry, whose study was reported in a recent version of the journal Addiction. 'Because our study included subjects with diverse socio-economic backgrounds, we've been able to rule out socio-economics as a major factor. The government might want to rethink how it allocates its educational resources on smoking.' Prof. Weiser says that the study illuminates a general trend in epidemiological studies. 'People on the lower end of the average IQ tend to display poorer overall decision-making skills when it comes to their health,' says Weiser. 'Schoolchildren who have been found to have a lower IQ can be considered at risk to begin the habit, and can be targeted with special education and therapy to prevent them from starting or to break the habit after it sets in.'"
Smarter people know its not a good idea to start smoking.
what are these 'women' you are talking about?
You can't handle the truth.
A bit offtopic but I enjoyed the overtly blue-collar ill lit picture that a site called Science Daily employed.
An unshaven sun-reddened face focuses all its concentration on a cigarette protruding directly in front of his nose. His lips are pursed as if to indicate that connecting the tip of that cigarette with that flame requires all of his concentration. If his eyes weren't hidden to prevent us from identifying him (or to keep us from identifying with the subject) we might see them as cross-eyed staring down his nose intent to satiate his addiction. His shirt (which is plain white) and knuckles are smeared haphazardly with grease and his skin glistens with a workingman's sweat. Whatever iconography that hangs from his neck (Isreali dog tags? a Star of David?) can only afford a cheap black cord. The subject is off center to the right with the background as a pitch black. Nothing but a single source of light coming from the left.
It amuses me that the site employs such a suggestive picture of smoking so that it almost screams to be a blue collar, unintelligent, near evil addiction. I understand this image adds to the effect of the article but if ever there was anti-marketing for smoking here it is at a site that claims to be objective in its name. Movies of yore portrayed the beautiful, the rich and the strong smoking. I can walk outside my office building and see well paid people smoking. It's disingenuous to portray it as only a blue collar problem no matter what statistics about IQ say. This only tells me that, on average, low IQs are more likely to succumb to well funded advertising or lack information about smoking. Not that they are any less powerful at breaking an addiction.
I find smoking abhorrent and disgusting but I also think that it detracts from your goals to say that smoking destroys your beauty when young people can see beautiful celebrities smoking. And I also think that a "Science" site shouldn't have such goals or propaganda baked into its articles (one way or the other).
My work here is dung.
>Make cigarettes more damaging to health, and let Darwin sort em out!
My parents used to smoke Kent cigarettes a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. I remembered as a kid that it advertised the cigs had the "Micronite Filter" on each pack.
Years later, I found out that the "Micronite" was blue asbestos.
Yep.
--
BMO
I think he means the people whose name end in ".jpg".
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
When I was in the military, especially on combat tours, I ended up smoking an unhealthy amount to help me cope. When I got off the plane this last time, I quit cold turkey, and now when I smell regular cigarette smoke I can barely stand it. (Which just now made me realize maybe I associate it with bad things and its not just the smoke itself) , I now have moved to pipe tobacco that is all natural with no chemicals, and smoke about once a week for enjoyment while drinking a cognac or brandy. I feel it is much more enjoyable (longer lasting, smells better) and is slightly better for my health (mouth cancer yes, lung cancer no), but I digress, I got into pipe tobacco when I joined the university scene and ended hanging out with professors and philosophy students, of whom a large amount smoke pipes. Ok now I have no idea what the point of the post was, mmm, maybe I just have a low IQ. Oh mondays mornings, I loathe you. On a side note, as a formally staunch anti-weed guy (couldn't hold security clearance if you smoked) I now have had amazing success with my PTSD using weed instead of alcohol to self-medicate.
"It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"