This thread has been infuriating to read through.
I'm totally on the "weed is a lot better" side of the fence, and I totally believe that cigarettes are death to your body in many ways and that they contain all kinds of shit, but everything seemed to get derailed by a simple request for a citation.
How can you not see that citations or other kinds of proof are important? It's as if people here are trying to say that if the common belief is that weed is better, then proof is unnecessary.
It is always necessary to back up your claims. Nothing is ever 'just common knowledge'.
I can't claim to know anything about this, but judging from the links that have actually been posted, it's almost like nobody really knows how much shit there is in cigarettes.
The list of 599 chemicals seems fairly reliable to me, while nobody has been able to support the claim that there are 4000 dangerous chemicals in it.
So next time, why not just... Y'know... Say 599 instead of 4000? 599 is still pretty god damn bad, so there's no need to make a claim you can't back up.
also vapor everything, no smoke