ARCO's Abolitionists - A Vegan Forum

Someone asked me recently if (as a smoker) I was aware that cigarettes are tested on animals, which has led to a lot of thinking.

When I went vegan I looked into the testing of cigarettes and found that the UK had a ban on this...possibly because I thought I'd found what I wanted to find, I didn't look any further or give it much more thought.

So, I thought I should look again and I found that it is correct that the UK has banned this (although it's clear that a company can conduct tests elsewhere) but also that the brand I smoke (Golden Virginia, made by Imperial Tobacco) isn't tested on animals nor does the company as a whole conduct or commission tests on animals. Again, for a few minutes I thought I had found what I wanted to find (although, to be honest it is luck that I've been smoking a brand that isn't tested and I appreciate that my research at the time I went vegan was deeply flawed ). I'm aware that I'm doing something dreadfully bad for me (and will get to the relevance of this shortly) but as any smokers (or non smokers) out there will know, it's not entirely rational being a smoker!

I wasn't sure if the person who brought the subject up had meant that all cigarettes are always tested all the time or that cigarettes are tested to discover the effects they have and to find remedies for these effects. I wondered if there was a difference anyway. I believe there is a difference...I know that if I had found that my tobacco is tested on animals as a matter of course and therefore that I was contributing money to these tests by buying the tobacco, I would have stopped. I know that, with that knowledge, I couldn't have done anything else.

I've thought on from there and now feel that I should stop even though the brand isn't tested. I've thought for a long time that receiving medical treatment that has been tested on animals would be problematic and am lucky in that I've not had the chance to see quite how problematic...I think that I would have a decision to make that most people I know wouldn't have, that is, to take the treatment or not. I think that, if it came to a life or death decision, I would (under most circumstances and situations) choose to live. Is there a difference with something that I have caused, such as damage from smoking? I guess that, again, I would choose to live but I must have a responsibility to not put myself in that situation. Like the slogan says, why should an animal suffer because I choose to smoke?

When I've spoken with some friends about this in the past few days they've asked me how far I would take this, would I not take part in a dangerous sport because if I were injured I would possibly need medical treatment? What about alcohol being tested for its effects? Does that make alcohol not vegan or consistent with animal rights? What if someone conducted a LD50 test with tofu!?! I think, like with so many things, it is unclear where to draw a line but (in the same way that, while we don't know Exactly which types of life are sentient, we Do know that the animals we use for food should certainly be on the same side of the line as people) something like smoking should certainly be on the 'don't do it' side of the line whereas rock climbing may be on the other side...

So the first result for me is that I have made my decision to no longer be a smoker...I am going to finish my pouch of tobacco and I have no doubt that I will not smoke again. It's something I should have stopped a long time ago but I have to say I liked it, it was a habit and it is an addiction that may give me some trouble but not enough trouble to quit quitting

Do vegans, abolitionists, or compassionate people have a duty to not put themselves at risk? At present there is no non-animal tested choice with conventional medicine and, while I would try any other option first I think that if one needs treatment where there is no such choice it isn't inconsistent with animal rights to accept that treatment, but taking a treatment for something that one has directly caused really is dragging an animal into a burning house and asking us to choose.
Cheers, and happy new year! Ben

Hi Ben!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences about this! I'm sending you a private e-mail in response. Let me know if you did not receive it.

Faunus

A follow-up here: I am an "on the way to quitting" smoker. I certainly don't need the criticism of others, only their encouragement and support, so no need here to reiterate the damage done to the body from particularly the additives used in cigarettes. In context to non-human animals, I never (ever, ever, ever) smoke in the house - and will beg others not to do so who have animals in their care. In the new year I am choosing to have the money I waste on smokes go to directly toward helping AR causes and to the gentle nonhumans in my care. The money wasted on one's personal bad habits adds-up! For me it is not food, illegal drugs, sex, gambling, or other common addictions - just cigarettes, by the way.

This past month I recorded every time I light-up to keep me fully aware of my habit. Awareness is a critical starter to ending habituation. (I average between 10 to 15 cigs a day). My intention was to decrease the levels of addicting nicotine in my body by decreasing one cig per day - precounted in the morning. Quitting all at once does work for some people, but apparently not for most - and certainly not for me. This decreasing nicotine levels was working quite well down to 8 per day, ummm... until I had 2 beers one evening. (Alchohol is not a habit for me). So now I know the easy to give-up occasional beer is my personal no-no. Others smokers will need to figure out what their "pairing" is regarding the uge to light up; there are lots of them.

The Philip Morris Company here in the U.S. is certainly not a company I want to give money to. They have done animal testing in the past, but there are other reasons why I don't want them to be getting part of my pay check. I'd rather use this money for non-human beings who have suffering imposed upon them through human ignorance, greed, and false views.

As of today, I'm down to 7 cigs per day - and it's still a fight. But it's the good fight.

First let me say WELL DONE. I am a 30 a day smoker, and have not been able to give them up at all. I've tried various methods, including the Alan Carr method, and failed to stop. I don't justify my indulgence, but am highly addicted, through no fault of my own as I was given cigarettes by my father at a young age.

The best I can do is to stop others from starting to smoke. I've no children of my own to 'educate' about cigarettes or veganism etc.. This will be a GREAT help to all other humans descendants. Bear in mind that ALL other people's descendants will be struggling for resources on this earth. My 'non-descendants' will not have to 'fight' for future resources, and I've left room for others' descendants to share all that mine would have wanted. My departing this earth early, through cancer (maybe), will be of BENEFIT to others, as I won't be using valuable resources when dead. THEREFORE, in my opinion, you're better off not having sex and children than giving up ciggies.

I also chose not to have an operation on my spine, because the op wouldn't be 'vegan', and therefore I am now disabled. I wonder how many others would take that option?

So Ben how is it going?

It's going well so far cheers...haven't had any trouble other than hands reaching for pockets before I think 'ahhh, I don't do that anymore!' but I don't miss it and I'm not too grumpy I don't think

I think the whole subject of accepting medicine or treatments that are tested on animals is difficult...I can see why it can come across as hypocritical but I'm not sure that it is...I think the fact that there is often no choice makes a difference but I think it's still a hard choice...

ben1971 wrote:It's going well so far cheers...haven't had any trouble other than hands reaching for pockets before I think 'ahhh, I don't do that anymore!' but I don't miss it and I'm not too grumpy I don't think

glad to hear it, although we'd need to hear from a roommate or significant other to see if the non-grumpy part is true!

yes, the conventional medical treatment question is confounded by the fact that everything is tested on animals even if it tells us nothing about its efficacy on humans. To demand that ARA's abstain from anything that was animal-tested would be kind of like saying, "you can have any cookies that aren't mine," and then going and licking all of the cookies! Not a well-thought out analogy - it just popped into my head.

catawba, that's a pretty extreme stance - did anyone at all support you in that decision? I had a Harrington rod inserted in my spine 20-odd years ago - I was in 11th grade and never considered, or was presented with, any alternative. I'll bet that if I had been introduced to yoga and had a chiropractor, I'd be in much better shape than I am now. My spine is still all twisted (I didn't realize how much until I went to a chiropractor and took an X-ray), but permanently so - I have no way to strengthen certain muscles and try to adjust things organically.

can I ask, was it just the idea of any surgery relying on drugs & procedures that had been animal-tested that put you off?

and btw, wasn't the artificial hip developed by a doctor who refused to use animals? So did they subsequently test it on them anyway? because maybe my earlier statement is wrong, about everything being tested. anybody know?

Cigarettes, coffee, fruit drinks, chocolate, vitamins, you name it, there is some substance in it that is tested on animals. If we refused to use any product tested on animals we would all be dead a long time ago, and we certainly wouldn't be able to discuss this together as we would not have access to the internet, as the ink on our keyboards has been tested on animals.

Even the effects of SOJA are tested on animals. Does this mean that vegans cannot have their tofu anymore?

Toxological tests need to be made for practically every damn thing that is sold to the public, whether it is direct or indirect.

(I am a light smoker, by the way. I do enjoy smoking very much, and the cigarettes I smoke are pure tobacco without additives and I cannot imagine my life without cigarettes, although I did stop at one time, falling ill in the process as I have probably the only disease in the world which is a disease of mainly non-smokers... the symptoms have fortunately lessened since I took up cigarettes again. But even when I had quit, I considered myself to be a smoker... except that I was a smoker who didn't smoke.)

In a world extremely anthropocentric and speciesist, a Vegan is often regarded as an “extremist” and people usually tries to discredit it by any means. And there are so much “myths” and “prejudices” about veganism, especially involving our diet, that every non-vegan is expecting the tiniest thing to “prove” us wrong. You get the flu, then it is because of your vegan diet -nevermind that who´s telling you that gets the flu 4 times a year-. You go anemic? Good lord, you´d better get some heavenly help. I bet that many people would accuse our vegan diet if we get hit by a car!
Even if there are tons of scientific studies stating that a vegan diet is absolutely healthy, it is still OUR responsibility to vanish those prejudices in the common public.

But how are we going to tell people to go Vegan, if we´re sick, weak, anemic or whatever? I think it is an essential part for any Animal Rights activist, to be a healthy Vegan. Eat well, drink well, exercise our bodies and minds, etc. Otherwise, we`d be closing people´s mind towards Veganism.

This is why I think we should avoid cigarettes, or alcohol, or whatever might not be healthy for us. Am I an "extremist"? In this world today, I love to be an "extremist" yeah!

I have avoided educating others about veganism as a "diet thing", although because of their health concerns, I have put a bit of emphasis on it inadvertently because of their narcissistic concerns. But lately, it is now more common for me to ask them for evidence that eating animal flesh, eggs, milk etc. are essential for human health rather than voice assertions of it being unhealthy. Because I let them make the statement that eating animal carnage is essential, while preferring to focus on speciesism, the burden of evidence rests on their shoulders - not mine. I'm changing my approach. Reality dictates that I do. However, I usually find them speechless when asking them do defend their argument.

Faunus