Stay Curious

SIGN UP FOR OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER AND UNLOCK ONE MORE ARTICLE FOR FREE.

Sign Up

VIEW OUR Privacy Policy


Discover Magazine Logo

WANT MORE? KEEP READING FOR AS LOW AS $1.99!

Subscribe

ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER?

FIND MY SUBSCRIPTION
Advertisement

Poll Vaulting

Surprising research suggests cigarettes aren’t bad for you, but who really funds these studies? Discover the truth behind biased statistics.

Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Sign Up

Boy, was I relieved when I found out cigarettes aren’t bad for you!

It’s not as though I’ve had so much as a single whiff of tobacco in years, you understand. Nor am I even exposed to much secondhand smoke-- unless you count a sport jacket I used to wear during my tobacco-consuming days, which despite dozens of dry cleanings can still set off smoke detectors in three adjacent states. No, the problem is that my brand when I did smoke was Lark. In the gooey world of high-tar cigarettes, Larks were a virtual parking lot. Recognizing their product’s status as something less than a health food, the Lark manufacturers sought to capitalize on that shortcoming, providing proof-of-purchase seals that would allow smokers to send away for their own pulmonary embolism after their very first pack.

Given this, you can imagine my surprise when I discovered that despite all the ...

Stay Curious

JoinOur List

Sign up for our weekly science updates

View our Privacy Policy

SubscribeTo The Magazine

Save up to 40% off the cover price when you subscribe to Discover magazine.

Subscribe
Advertisement

0 Free Articles