Doctors smoking cigarettes

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

swifteagle43

Lover- not a fighter
15+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
916
Reaction score
3
Is it me or do a lot of physicians smoke? Or atleast a significant amount?

Aren't we supposed to be health freaks?

Members don't see this ad.
 
swifteagle43 said:
Is it me or do a lot of physicians smoke? Or atleast a significant amount?

Aren't we supposed to be health freaks?


Yep, I know a good number of med students that smoke and get mad drunk on weekends...go figure :laugh:
 
a lot of stress... cigs help I guess???
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The HMO which runs the hospital I work at won't hire anyone (including employed physicians) if they smoke. It was funny today because my boss was interviewing job candidates today and one of the interviewees was smoking up a storm outside the front door before she came in for her interview. Needless to say, she wasn't asked many questions in her interview before she was shown the door.
 
I don't care if people smoke, away from me. But I do wish the didn't smell like smoke after they do it. I'm pretty sure I like the smell of feces more than I do old smoke. :eek:

Well, I guess I'd prefer physicians smoked if the alternative, for stress relief, was mind-altering drugs (which they obviously have easy access to). Think of it as them doing something for you (the patient): they de-stress, and are still competent to treat you. Their cancer is to your benefit. :eek:
 
From what I've heard, a lot of physicians smoke and drink to relieve stress, which is fairly ironic considering that their career condemns such activities.

In fact, I heard a myth/story about a guy who had just been admitted into UC Davis SOM on his 21st birthday, so in order to celebrate, he drank one shot for every person who attended his party (which was probably a lot) and he died of alcohol poisoning.

Health doesn't stop when you take off the lab coat...use your head!
 
There is a concept in martial arts called "white belt's disease." That is when a newbie learns a few kicks and punches and thinks he is Chuck Norris.

I knew a med student that abused drugs, and so did many of his classmates. I asked him why he and his fellow students did so, and after thinking for a moment, he said that they all thought that as med students they had a good grasp on the dangers of the drugs, and so could handle them better than other people. Oh my God! :eek: The medical student equivalent of white belt's disease - is that short white coat disease?

Maybe doctors view smoking in the same way.
 
dajimmers said:
I don't care if people smoke, away from me. But I do wish the didn't smell like smoke after they do it. I'm pretty sure I like the smell of feces more than I do old smoke. :eek:

Well, I guess I'd prefer physicians smoked if the alternative, for stress relief, was mind-altering drugs (which they obviously have easy access to). Think of it as them doing something for you (the patient): they de-stress, and are still competent to treat you. Their cancer is to your benefit. :eek:
Actually, it's the smoke that's the worst for you (it contains nicotine + 4000 other chemicals), not to mention that it makes other people "second hand smoke." If people just chewed the gum, ate the mints, put on the patch, or injected themselves with nicotine, it's not that bad.
 
My father-in-law works for the state medical board monitoring doctors with drug and alcohol problems. There are more docs with addiction problems than you might think... They usually just go to cushy rehab programs instead of jail. :rolleyes:
 
BooMed said:
My father-in-law works for the state medical board monitoring doctors with drug and alcohol problems. There are more docs with addiction problems than you might think... They usually just go to cushy rehab programs instead of jail. :rolleyes:
Yeah, right now I'm already starting to think about to what I should get addicted. There are just too many choices! Help! :laugh:
 
On a bang-for-your-buck basis, you can't beat crack cocaine. It's effective, affordable, and highly addictive. The poor man's heroin. If we started on crack in med school, we all should be able to graduate to heroin by the time we make some real bucks.
 
Depakote said:
Fine. Let's just discriminate against everybody.

Are we going to not hire doctors that eat cheese because Heart Disease is so prevalent in our society?

(stolen directly from Thank You For Smoking)

:thumbup: to this post. While I hate smoking and do not want it near me, what people do in their own time is their business, as long as it's legal.

My mom is a doc and smokes (and has since the age of 15). She tries to hide it from the public though and only smokes at home (outside) or in her car.

Seriously, so what if a doctor smokes? They're not gods, they're human. Yeah, it's hypocritical for a smoker/drinker to tell someone else to stop, but so what? Doing something in the best interest of others is different than doing it for yourself.

I'd love to see the world stop smoking, but I think there are more important things to worry about right now. :rolleyes:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Depakote said:
Fine. Let's just discriminate against everybody.

Are we going to not hire doctors that eat cheese because Heart Disease is so prevalent in our society?

(stolen directly from Thank You For Smoking)


Makes sense to me. If we condenm docs for smoking, we should condemn docs for being overweight--both are health risks. I've seen plenty of both.

As for smoking, I perceive a higher prevalence of smoking in the nursing profession than among physicians.
 
BooMed said:
My father-in-law works for the state medical board monitoring doctors with drug and alcohol problems. There are more docs with addiction problems than you might think... They usually just go to cushy rehab programs instead of jail. :rolleyes:

And by that statement you are implying that other populations don't. I know more people than I would like to admit who have struggled with addiction and almost all of them have avoided legal trouble and gone to "cushy rehab programs" or slightly less cushy rehab programs. For many doctors, non-prosecution and "cushy rehab programs" may be required if the doctor volunteers that he or she has an addiction because it could be considered occupational addiction.

What good does throwing a person with an addiction in jail do?
 
socuteMD said:
And by that statement you are implying that other populations don't. I know more people than I would like to admit who have struggled with addiction and almost all of them have avoided legal trouble and gone to "cushy rehab programs" or slightly less cushy rehab programs. For many doctors, non-prosecution and "cushy rehab programs" may be required if the doctor volunteers that he or she has an addiction because it could be considered occupational addiction.

What good does throwing a person with an addiction in jail do?

Sorry, I guess I didn't make the point of my post clear. I think it's totally ridiculous to put any drug addicts in jail. It's a health problem, not a criminal issue.

I just think it's unfortunate that ones income level determines whether they get help for their addiction or just a jail sentence.
 
megboo said:
:
Seriously, so what if a doctor smokes? They're not gods, they're human. Yeah, it's hypocritical for a smoker/drinker to tell someone else to stop, but so what? Doing something in the best interest of others is different than doing it for yourself.

I'd love to see the world stop smoking, but I think there are more important things to worry about right now. :rolleyes:

Except that it destroys a physician's credibility (to some degree) if a patient knows this. There are enough obstacles in the public health/education aspect, especially for young people, of smoking prevention/cessation; it doesn't help the cause when "health authorities" smoke.

Of course, I'm not a smoker, so it's easy for me to say this! :)
 
BostonDO said:
Except that it destroys a physician's credibility (to some degree) if a patient knows this. There are enough obstacles in the public health/education aspect, especially for young people, of smoking prevention/cessation; it doesn't help the cause when "health authorities" smoke.

Of course, I'm not a smoker, so it's easy for me to say this! :)

I can tell you that I don't know if the doctor I see smokes or not. Unless I ran into him/her at a bar, I probably would never know.

Even to have someone smell like smoke is misleading. I go into many places where people smoke (I don't) and come out smelling like I just lit up a pack.

There are worse things for a doctor to do. If they smoke, I'm not going to listen to them any less, and most people don't really care.

I want to see what happens when someone tries to tell the orthopedic surgeon, after a 12-hour surgery, that he better not light up.

Like I said, as long as it's legal and doesn't bother me - fine.
 
I think the worst is seeing thoracic surgical oncologists smoke. Lung cancer - precisely what these docs are treating - is pretty tough to get without smoking a whole lot. I can't for the life of me understand how they can see and treat people who are truly suffering from these aggressive cancers while they are potentially bringing it on themselves in the process.

But, oh well.

To me, smoking is different from being overweight or having heart disease, for example. The latter two have a large and established genetic component, while the former is mostly a lifestyle choice, at least at the beginning, although obviously there is a lot of overlap there. Also, the effects of smoking are reversible to some degree, while the risks associated with a family history of obesity and heart disease are very difficult to avoid. Interpret that however you want...I'm just throwing it out there.
 
nosugrefneb said:
To me, smoking is different from being overweight or having heart disease, for example. The latter two have a large and established genetic component, while the former is mostly a lifestyle choice, at least at the beginning, although obviously there is a lot of overlap there. Also, the effects of smoking are reversible to some degree, while the risks associated with a family history of obesity and heart disease are very difficult to avoid. Interpret that however you want...I'm just throwing it out there.

Did you know that there are actually genes that determine how likely you are to be addicted to smoking? (Of course you have to try it first.)

One group will never enjoy smoking and will never get hooked.

One group enjoys smoking and gets addicted, but has a pretty easy time quitting. Once they stop they don't want to smoke anymore.

The other group gets addicted to cigarettes extremely fast, finds it incredibly difficult to stop and will think about smoking for the rest of their lives.

Isn't that interesting?
 
BooMed said:
Did you know that there are actually genes that determine how likely you are to be addicted to smoking? (Of course you have to try it first.)

One group will never enjoy smoking and will never get hooked.

One group enjoys smoking and gets addicted, but has a pretty easy time quitting. Once they stop they don't want to smoke anymore.

The other group gets addicted to cigarettes extremely fast, finds it incredibly difficult to stop and will think about smoking for the rest of their lives.

Isn't that interesting?

Here's my fluff contribution to this thread:

I belong to the third group. I think about smoking all the time, but I've never tried it-- specifically because I know I'd get hooked. I'm a phantom smoker. In conversation (arguments especially), I even pause to inhale an imaginary cigarette. And when I'm nervous or stressed, my right hand likes to find its way up to my lips. So odd. (I'm not joking or trying to be clever, by the way).

Do you think the media is that powerful that it's made me a phantom smoker? Perhaps I was a smoker in my previous life. So odd. So odd.
 
nosugrefneb said:
I think the worst is seeing thoracic surgical oncologists smoke. Lung cancer - precisely what these docs are treating - is pretty tough to get without smoking a whole lot. I can't for the life of me understand how they can see and treat people who are truly suffering from these aggressive cancers while they are potentially bringing it on themselves in the process.

But, oh well.

To me, smoking is different from being overweight or having heart disease, for example. The latter two have a large and established genetic component, while the former is mostly a lifestyle choice, at least at the beginning, although obviously there is a lot of overlap there. Also, the effects of smoking are reversible to some degree, while the risks associated with a family history of obesity and heart disease are very difficult to avoid. Interpret that however you want...I'm just throwing it out there.

I'm sorry, you're family shows a history of heart disease, diabetes and obesity. We're going to be unable to hire you based on that.

o_O
 
smoking is analogous to when doctors are morbidly obese and tell their patients that they need to lose weight. a 320 pound orthopod told my mom that she should lose 5 pounds. :rolleyes:
 
Everyone dies of something ...

Its not good for you but don't judge someone for what they do. I do applaud industries/businesses that prefer non-smokers. Such as one of the medical school campuses here you can no smoke "on campus" so people go across the street. And I can tell you , I don't see many students across the street with faculty smoking. Additionally my previous employer had the same policy. Since health care policies are also taking note if you are a smoker or not, people will start to learn.

Addiction is a hard thing to deal with especially over long periods of time. One could say the same about alcohol too. With the amount of doctors whom I know who are heavy drinkers yet they preach to their liver patients about staying out of the bottle.

I let people live their own lives but that is the #1 most frustrating thing most of those I know in the profession deal with. Whether they are smokers, drinkers, crack addicts, obese ... they won't change unless they want. You have to make them aware. It may not save everyone but even if it works for a few then its a start.
 
docmd2010 said:
smoking is analogous to when doctors are morbidly obese and tell their patients that they need to lose weight. a 320 pound orthopod told my mom that she should lose 5 pounds. :rolleyes:

The difference being that I doubt a doc will be chain smoking when telling someone to stop smoking. :)
 
Depakote said:
Fine. Let's just discriminate against everybody.

Are we going to not hire doctors that eat cheese because Heart Disease is so prevalent in our society?

(stolen directly from Thank You For Smoking)


You can't be serious. Smoking and eating cheese are 2 wholly different scenarios.

There are NO positive effects of smoking, save curbing hunger and "taking the edge off."

Cheese, a type of food, provides nourishment. The problem occurs when people don't exercise and eat too much. (this is pretty self-explanatory, but you never know...)

Even if you don’t accept that argument on the basis that smoking is a personal decision, fine. But you cannot argue with the effects of smoking on other people. Second hand smoke kills, its a well known and established fact. Eating cheese and "risky behaviors" don't directly affect the health of those around them.

Having to write this is absurd, but there are still people who don't see through it. From a personal perspective, public smoking bans and hospitals not hiring smokers are excellent perspectives. Only when we start to tie financial incentives to peoples smoking habits, will they stop. Hospitals have every right to deny employment to smokers. Doctors should be setting examples and keeping those around them healthy -- not actively destroying others health.
 
They were trying to make a point. They weren't serious ... well at least I didn't take it in the manner you did.

obesity also has no positive factors which I believe they were refering too ...
 
mshheaddoc said:
They were trying to make a point. They weren't serious ... well at least I didn't take it in the manner you did.

obesity also has no positive factors which I believe they were refering too ...

I understand the whole premise of the movie, but from other people post it seemed as though they were taking it to heart. I wasn't going to write anything at first, but then people kept posting that they agreed with the post.

Obesity...yes it has no redeeming qualities, BUT an individual being obese doesn't affect another random bystanders health. I also agree, that there is something odd about an obese doctor telling patient to live healthier lives.
 
Second-hand smoke over a long period of time has negative effects ie having a parent or spouse smoke in the house, car etc. I dont think someone smoking outside a hospital or any builiding can be shown to endanger the health of others. Esp if it is away from an area of heavy traffic. Not hiring someone who smokes is discrimination. period.

I see no problem or irony in a doc telling a patient to quit smoking even though they are a smoker. There are plenty of things doctors tell patients to do and in no way does that oblige the doctor to do the same. I do agree that a patient may be less inclined to take a doctor's advice if they knew they smoked but why would a patient even know this about thier doctor. As long is docs smoke in an appropriate place, it does not affect thier work performance, and they make sure to wash thier hands carefully afterwards it is fine with me.

The negative attitude towards smoking in this country is ridicoulous.
 
ColbyGuy said:
Second-hand smoke over a long period of time has negative effects ie having a parent or spouse smoke in the house, car etc. I dont think someone smoking outside a hospital or any builiding can be shown to endanger the health of others. Esp if it is away from an area of heavy traffic. Not hiring someone who smokes is discrimination. period.

I see no problem or irony in a doc telling a patient to quit smoking even though they are a smoker. There are plenty of things doctors tell patients to do and in no way does that oblige the doctor to do the same. I do agree that a patient may be less inclined to take a doctor's advice if they knew they smoked but why would a patient even know this about thier doctor. As long is docs smoke in an appropriate place, it does not affect thier work performance, and they make sure to wash thier hands carefully afterwards it is fine with me.

The negative attitude towards smoking in this country is ridicoulous.

I think the not-hiring for smoking thing has a lot to do with not wanting to pay for their health insurance. If they could descriminate against fat people (openly) in the same way they would. Remember how a few months ago Walmart had those memos leaked encouraging their stores to hire younger, thinner people? It's all about the money.
 
Doesnt mean its not discrimination. Does that mean they shouldn't hire diabetics too? Plus how do employers even know when people smoke. Certianly not something that wouild come up in an interview.
 
Jesus people. Live and let live. I wonder if you'd all sound so smug if you were talking to a doctor who smoked.
 
Yea a lot of people smoke including doctors, hell most of the nurses at my school smoke. Do I care if they smoke no if someone wants to smoke go ahead noone stoping them. However cigars are ok I smoke a cigar now and then.
 
Anyone see the Hybrid car episode of SouthPark? Yea..........
 
megboo said:
The difference being that I doubt a doc will be chain smoking when telling someone to stop smoking. :)

I think its F'n ridiculous. Youre "forced" (in a smokers situation) to know about the consequences in medical school.

"Its like stealing cookies from the cookie jar, but d*mn they taste good."

anyone that smokes can get the F away from me. My lungs are god-sent. :laugh: :thumbup:
 
We're doctors, not saints. I don't smoke, so in perspective of something like, say, alcohol use, I wouldn't think twice about telling someone to stop/cut down on their drinking, even if it is the guy sitting next to me at the bar. It's our jobs to do so.

On the other hand, that guy is probably not going to listen to me as I chug down that last pint. And if the patient loses faith in you, then he won't be compliant, and you can't do your job. Numerous resdiency programs have stipulations in the dress code that you CAN NOT at any time be on the wards and smell like smoke.

So don't smoke/drink at work, what you do with your (very little) private time is your own business.
 
I am a smoking cessation counselor at the VA. I'v e been doing this for about 3 years. I would find it quite hypocritical counseling patients to quit smoking if I were a current smoker.( being an ex-smoker would be okay). But a Doc who smokes telling a patient to quit...fine with me. It is a doctor's job to inform a patient of his/her health status and any contributing factors to said status.
My feelings are to each his own, if you want to smoke, then smoke. I just hate being in situation where I am forced to smoke due to someone else's selfishness (ex being stuck in a line with a smoker ahead of you, that drives me nuts). so I have to say something and look like the bitchy non-smoker...it's just sucks. :mad:
 
FenderHM said:
a lot of stress... cigs help I guess???

working in a building full of morphine and other narcotics, i'm not sure cigarettes are the most efficient way to deal with stress... :idea:
 
ShyD33 said:
I think its F'n ridiculous. Youre "forced" (in a smokers situation) to know about the consequences in medical school.

"Its like stealing cookies from the cookie jar, but d*mn they taste good."

anyone that smokes can get the F away from me. My lungs are god-sent. :laugh: :thumbup:

Dangers of obesity are learned in med school, too.
 
My dad is a doctor that used to smoke (usually a pipe)...but that was back in the day when it was standard for everyone to do it. Also a lot of the xray techs that worked with him, including my mom smoked..at the time it was just the thing to do. They both quite and have a disgust for it now but I find it just kind of funny now. I mean...my dad said he didn't care about pot as long as I didn't "smoke myself stupid" or get caught.......which I still haven't tried it but when your parents say they don't care it is kind of hard to not at least be curious to try.....I am a personal fan of the cardiologist we're friends with who I know eats nothing but fried food and bacon all the time, smokes, and probably hasn't exercised in the last 20 years. Got to love the do what I say and not what I do type thing...by the way...hey all since this is my second post and I'm new to the boards.. :cool:
 
ColbyGuy said:
Second-hand smoke over a long period of time has negative effects ie having a parent or spouse smoke in the house, car etc. I dont think someone smoking outside a hospital or any builiding can be shown to endanger the health of others. Esp if it is away from an area of heavy traffic. Not hiring someone who smokes is discrimination. period.

I see no problem or irony in a doc telling a patient to quit smoking even though they are a smoker. There are plenty of things doctors tell patients to do and in no way does that oblige the doctor to do the same. I do agree that a patient may be less inclined to take a doctor's advice if they knew they smoked but why would a patient even know this about thier doctor. As long is docs smoke in an appropriate place, it does not affect thier work performance, and they make sure to wash thier hands carefully afterwards it is fine with me.

The negative attitude towards smoking in this country is ridicoulous.

I'm not disagreeing with the statement that not hiring someone who smokes is discrimination, but I wonder how far you'd be willing to take it. Is it discrimination to not hire someone who smokes pot? How about crack? What about the heroin addict? Or the child pornographist? Now of course we're assuming that these people only get stoned when it won't affect their work (and yes I know some of those drugs are too highly addictive for that to be the case, but I'm making a point here). If you wouldn't hire the person addicted to 'hard' drugs, why not?

I'm calling foul if anyone mentions the law as a reason. There's no legal requirement not to hire an addict, and as long as they aren't committing illegal acts on the job, it's not the employers problem. Also, if you use violations of the law to preclude employment, well, speeding tickets would cost you your job. Heck, in some states there are certain sexual acts (between consenting adults) that are illegal. That doesn't make it a good reason to pry into employees bedrooms. There's gotta be a legitimate reason to not hire an individual.

My own opinion is that people should be able to do what they want to do in their personal lives, as long as it isn't interfering with anyone else's liberties. So, I think people should be able to smoke, but not necessarily while standing in line at Chuck E Cheese. However, discrimination isn't necessarily wrong just because it's discrimination. If an employer thinks that certain attributes or qualifications are necessary to perform a certain job effectively, that employer is free to not hire people who don't meet those quals. It's discrimination, but there's nothing wrong with that. The HMO in question may be doing what they're doing just to cut insurance costs, but perhaps they're doing it because they believe that health care providers who smoke would be unable to convince patients to quit, thus failing at an important part of their jobs.

Sorry for the rambling post, I agree that people should have the right to do as they wish to their own bodies, but I also believe an employer has the right to hire the best person for the job.
 
Welcome to online tobacco shop!
Good taste and low price!
Marlboro, Winston, Camel, Benson&Hedges are only $9.95
Many other brands are available as well!
Visit us at -- www.top-cigarettes.com
 
Top