A very strange question

Associate
Joined
6 Jan 2009
Posts
1,670
Location
England
I guess you can see it either way.

There lungs would be more used to smoke than a non-smoker therefore can cope with it better.

But... fire smoke is normally really thick black smoke so will wtfpwn anyone good lungs or not
 
Soldato
Joined
26 Feb 2009
Posts
14,814
Location
Exeter
Neither, I wouldnt imagine. The toxins from smoke in a fire will be different from smoking, but most if it is probably asphyxiation anyway
 

Mat

Mat

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
13,928
What a remalkable question indeed. I suppose it might have something to do with what the smoke comprises of. Are cigarette smoke particles smaller than for other types of fire?
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Apr 2003
Posts
4,328
Or, if the fumes were toxic (old foam sofa, etc) and a smoker was so used to it he or she didn't cough and splutter - it might mean more inhalation of very dangerous substances.
 

4T5

4T5

Man of Honour
Joined
30 Aug 2004
Posts
27,739
Location
Middle of England
I would just breath in heavily & clear the air for you weak non smokers, Don't worry yourselves :D

Can't wait for the Zombie horde attacks when i am slinging Mollys about setting fire to everything, You non smokers will get pawned :D
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Nov 2005
Posts
8,064
Location
MK45
I think the issue with smoke inhalation is often the heat rather than the smoke per-se (correct me if I'm wrong) and the heat would bake both sets of lungs equally.
 
Top