check out this news article...

[Roketsloth]

[url="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=97&ncid=97&e=1&u=/hsn/20041204/hl_hsn/moreamericansgettinghookedonhookahs"] [url="http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=97&n"]http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=97&n[/url][/url] cid=97&e=1&u=/hsn/20041204/hl_hsn/moreamericansgetti nghookedonhookahs
i saw this on yahoo's news section...interesting and irritating.  what do you guys think?

[Mathazar]

Yep,  that IS a bit alarming,  but I already pretty much had
an idea that hookah smoking wasn't as safe as the distributors would
like us to believe.  I"m smoking right now,  and that article
as disturbing as it is will probably not alter my smoking habits. 
I don't smoke cigarettes,  but I do smoke a great deal of maasell
up to about 10 bowls a day.  I realise that I've acquired a bad
habit in the amount that I smoke and should slow it down a bit, 
but I can't imagine going thru an entire day without smoking my
hookah,  it' unfathomable 

[NERV]

thats just stupid, 1 how could it have tar when its just tobacco,
honey, and flavor? 2, if your smoking it properly the tobacco never
actually burns so how could it have as much carbon monoxide if it isnt
burning like cigarettes?

[NERV]

think of it this way, you know both the tobacco companies and the
anti-smoking ppl are both gonna put out propaganda, the hookahs have
been used for centuries, obviously a perosn isnt supposed to inhale
smoke and it probly will cut ur lifespan cant be sure how muhc, its
just a choice to be made, and bullsh*t about hookah leading to
cigarettes is ridiculous tho, thats like saying that eating ravioli
will lead to lo mein, theya re similar but completely different

[Highpockets]

"thats like saying that eating ravioli will lead to lo mein"
 
Hahahaha
So funny, but so true. I have no desire to smoke cigarettes.

[King Mo]

you guys are being a bit biased. Shisha got me into cigarettes, and not because I am a naive little boy. It's simply because I found smoking enjoyable, and then started smoking ciggies socially with friends, and then moved on to all the time.
 
it's a natural cycle. Not with everyone, but for many.
I've always believed that smoking shisha is bad for your health. I also find as an active person who does sports, shisha destroys my fitness far more than cigarettes.
After a few cigarettes I'm usually ok. After a couple of hours of shisha, my fitness drops drastically.
I'm certain it's the moisture which messes things up in it. As well as the obvious lack of refinement that you get with Cigarettes, which go through dozens of quality checks.
I still love it though, and believe that in moderation they are ok (contrary to science), but these type of habits are tough to moderate

[King Mo]

*correction - above I mean it's the cigarettes which go through more quality checks, as oppose to Shisha which is essentially, rotten apples mixed with tobacco

[HookahCulture]

That article is propaganda.
[b]"The real danger, according to Eissenberg, is that hookahs may be getting many young, new users hooked on nicotine."[/b]
OH PLEASE. Can't we have a neutral study to see how much nicotine is ACTUALLY FLOWING through the hose? They must think we're burning the stuff.
[b]"Legal restrictions might be in order, too, he said. "I suspect that we need to discourage the renting of water pipes, especially to underage individuals. They should be controlled in the same way that cigarettes are controlled."[/b]
Restrictions are ALREADY in place! Snitches stake out hookah bars regularly, and signs are posted 18 and over only.
[b]"While traditional Middle Eastern hookah users tended to favor harsher, dryer tobacco, American users prefer maassel -- sweetened tobacco with tempting flavors like apple, watermelon, and licorice."[/b]
Well at least they printed a fact right. Even got the nomenclature correct!
[b]"So if somebody begins to find a water pipe and tobacco pleasurable, but they don't have a lot of time, what are they going to do? They're going to pick up cigarettes. "[/b]
That's SUCH a wide-open assumption! Alarmist American media at work, ONCE AGAIN.

[HookahCulture]

Also I'm wondering what kind of coals they used in the experiments!
I bet they used Syrian quick-lites, haha. Anyway, I'd sure like to see the data and methodology...
[b]Thomas Eissenberg, a researcher at the Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies at Virginia Commonwealth University.[/b]

 

[entrailsgalore]

LOL that article made me laugh. Yeah people who want to smoke hookah
but dont have time are just going to pick up ciggarretes.....because
hookah and cigarretes are just about the same thing right? no theyre
not. Im sure there are lots of peopel who do smoke both, hookah and
cigarettes. BUt someone who just gets into hookah and wants to smoke
one day but doesnt have enought ime isnt goign to say " well Ill just
pick up a pack of cigarettes, theyre the same thing anyways". Thats
just idiotic if you think hookah and cigarretes are the same thing.
Hookah is to cigarettes as wine coolers are to 100 proof
jack daniels.  Yes they both contain alchahol in them.  But
the whine cooler doesnt contain a lot, AND it doesnt taste like sh*t it
actually tatses quite nice. Jack daniels on the otehr hand, has alot of
alchahol and tastes like sh*t. Its almost pure alchahol. Same thing
with hookah and cigarrettes.  Hookah DOES have tobacco and
nicotine. But not nearly as much as cigarrettes do. And yes it IS
possible that someone would get adicted to hookah.....afte rliek 10
years of smoking maybe. But it wont be anything like it would be with
cigarrettes.  

And how are you going sit tehre and tell me that smoking hookah is
scientifically AS bad , if not worse, as smoking cigarrettes when
hookah tobacco doesnt include maybe half as many chemicals as
cigarrettes do? HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE??  ALl it is is
tobacco.......mollasses which is sugar, I didnt know sugar is harmful,
and fruit flavoring. When you smoke, the water filters out MOST of the
nicotine and tobacco. Im sure you still inhale some, but not alot which
is why its a VERY smooth smoke.  Ive read lots of articles that
try and say hookah is worse than cigarretes, and is very harmful. 
These people need to do their reaserch before making fals acusations
like that.   That slike saying the world
should fear antacrtica destroying the world with its many nuclear
missles, then the United States destroying the world with its nuclear
missles.........Hello? Since when did Anacrtica HAVE any missles? Its
nto a trheat. The US is MORE of a trheat, just like
ciggarettes.   These peopel are just stupid.

[Mathazar]

Yeah,  I was wondering what kind of coals they used,  too 

[Highpockets]

Hey man, Jack Daniels is good stuff.

[Mr. Scratch]

[quote name='HookahCulture']That article is propaganda.[/quote]
Welcome to the world of yellow journalism.  Writing a balanced story about the pros and cons of a new phenomenon doesn't sell enough papers. A journalist doesn't feel like he's done his job unless he's tracked down every partisan extremist on a given topic, and allowed they nut to screech about the impending DOOM that will strike us all down if product-A is allowed to be used.
As a gun collector and 2nd Amendment supporter, I've been through all this before -- I've seen total outright lies about firearms being fed through the media in order to fan up public hysteria. Journalists have about as much integrity as any used car salesman, and are half as likely to tell the truth.
 
 

[MR Bubble]

I am scared poopless. Talking about the need to "nip it in the bud" and such horse poop. Guess what? can you say BIG TAXES?
Also laughing my butt off! Good ol' Doctor egg-head claiming people think hookahs are safer but "there has not been enough research to prove that." Well, what about there being enough research proving it's more danderous? Flippin' communist subversive rammed his left foot in his [url="http://mailto:c@ck-sucker"]c*ck-sucker[/url] with that one.
I have had plenty of friend who loved to smoke the machine like a demon, but never had any urge to pick up a cigarette. Even after days of no hooka session. Oh, and they were running fools too. Never added any time to their 2-mile tested run run either. Heck, I knew a lady (used lightly) who quit cigarettes while smoking one bowl of maassel each night. She felt better later on too.
I've got a 50-50 mix of Al Waha urinal mint, err, I mean mixed fruit and Nakhla apple going and this is absolutely wonderful! Too bad some do-good anti-tobaccoist is trying to take my machines away. How ironic he isn't worried about the .44 Magnum that will remove the knee cap of the first person who decides to remove my machines.
The Cajun Red-Neck
MR Bubble

[Roketsloth]

"The data we have clearly shows that carbon monoxide is present in large amounts in smoke from water pipes, as is nicotine and the compounds we call 'tar,' " said Thomas Eissenberg, a researcher at the Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies at Virginia Commonwealth University.
how is this possible?

[MR Bubble]

Well, to be honest, I have always been a little concerned about what we get from the coals. Especially the quick lite variety, even though the gun powder is gone once lit. Something tells me the coals are not the most wholesome thing to lung. However, there have been numerous articles (don't ask for a link because I'm getting to be the age where things start to slip) confirming the fact that there is little to no tar. All of the manufacturers claim "0% tar" on the packaging, and I would like to think they know they could have problems from lawyers in other countries. Beats me. Maybe DR egghead laid the coal directly on the tobacco and fried it. Other than that, it's just another American Barney extremist popping off at the mouth because he's free to do it, trying to make sure others aren't free.
Well, I'm not really a red-neck
MR Bubble

[E.G.]

I know I'm coming to this thread late, but just to play devil's advocate for a moment While I agree that the article is slanted and lacking in hard data, I also don't expect that from a newspaper article. I expect talking heads summarizing it for me.Now, as for the indingnation expressed here -- there's a lot of hollering about "How can that be?" regarding CO, tar, and nicotine, and calling for "the proof."Let me flip it around and ask -- "Where's the proof that there [b]aint'[/b] nictoine, CO, tar, carcinogens, etc." If you can find that, you should answer the question one way or the other.The demands of school preclude me from doing a more comprehensive search, but a quick PubMed search pulls up the following (edited):Nicotine content in tobacco used in hubble-bubble smoking.Hadidi KA, Mohammed FI.Forensic Medicine and Toxicology Division, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jordan, Amman OBJECTIVE: To determine the nicotine content of commonly used tobacco in hubble-bubble (HB) and compare it with that found in cigarettes. METHODS: Analysis of nicotine content of 13 commercial brands of HB tobacco was carried out using gas chromatography over an 8 month periodRESULTS: A wide variation in nicotine content in all brands was noticed with an average of 8.32 mg/g tobacco, range (1.8-41.3 mg/g). The average nicotine content in each HB head (20 gm) of unflavored tobacco was (713 mg/head) and flavored tobacco has (67 mg/head). One head of unflavored tobacco has nicotine equivalent to 70 regular cigarettes. The addition of adulterations; honey, glycerin and other flavors in the process of preparing the flavored (Muasel) tobacco contributes to lowering the nicotine content in each gram of flavored tobacco. Smoking one head of flavored (Mua'sel) tobacco which contains on average one third of nicotine presented in 20 cigarettes (204 mg/pack) usually resulted in a higher plasma nicotine level by 20%. CONCLUSION: Hubble-bubble smokers are not at a lesser risk from smoking than cigarette smokers in relation to nicotine dependence. The inability of water to trap significant amounts of chemical substances present in tobacco (especially nicotine) and the danger which might result from the combustion of additives like; glycerin, honey and other flavors could be a very important factor to extrapolate the damage resulting from HB smoking.I assume that this is the article prompting the sometimes heard claim that one head = 20 cigs. A criticism of the article: IIRC, gas chromatography involves vaporizing the material (any chemists out there that can confirm?) I'm not sure that's the same as baking it with a coal, so there may be a difference there.Additionally, this looks to be a review paper of what little research this is re: waterpipe smoking, published, err, next Monday? Unfortunatly, my instiution doesn't have a subscription to the journal, so I can't get to the full article.[url="http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/13/4/327"]http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/13/4/327[/url]Tobacco smoking using a waterpipe: a re-emerging strain in a global epidemic W Maziak1,*, K D Ward1,, R A Afifi Soweid2 and T Eissenberg1, 1 Syrian Center for Tobacco Studies, Aleppo, Syria2 Department of Health Behavior and Education, Faculty of Health Sciences, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon ABSTRACTContext: The global tobacco epidemic may kill 10 million people annually in the next 20–30 years, with 70% of these deaths occurring in developing countries. Current research, treatment, and policy efforts focus on cigarettes, while many people in developing regions (Asia, Indian subcontinent, Eastern Mediterranean) smoke tobacco using waterpipes. Waterpipes are increasing in popularity, and more must be learned about them so that we can understand their effects on public health, curtail their spread, and help their users quit. Objective: To conduct a comprehensive review regarding global waterpipe use, in order to identify current knowledge, guide scientific research, and promote public policy. Data sources: A Medline search using as keywords "waterpipe", "narghile", "arghile", "shisha", "hookah", "goza", "hubble bubble" and variant spellings (for example, "hooka"; "hukka") was conducted. Resources compiled recently by members of GLOBALink were used. Study selection: Every identified published study related to waterpipe use was included. Data synthesis: Research regarding waterpipe epidemiology and health effects is limited; no published studies address treatment efforts. Waterpipe use is increasing globally, particularly in the Eastern Mediterranean Region, where perceptions regarding health effects and traditional values may facilitate use among women and children. Waterpipe smoke contains harmful constituents and there is preliminary evidence linking waterpipe smoking to a variety of life threatening conditions, including pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, and pregnancy related complications. Conclusions: More scientific documentation and careful analysis is required before the spread of waterpipe use and its health effects can be understood, and empirically guided treatment and public policy strategies can be implemented. E.G.

[Mr. Scratch]

[quote name='MR Bubble']I have had plenty of friend who loved to smoke the machine like a demon, but never had any urge to pick up a cigarette. Even after days of no hooka session. Oh, and they were running fools too. Never added any time to their 2-mile tested run run either. Heck, I knew a lady (used lightly[img]http://www.hookahforum.com/forum/smileys/smiley36.gif[/img]) who quit cigarettes while smoking one bowl of maassel each night. She felt better later on too.  [/quote]
I've observed this as well; once people are introduced to a quality, tasty ma'assel, they don't like the taste of cigarettes.  Coffin-nails just don't provide the same quality of smoke.
But you won't hear that from the Doc because it doesn't support his thesis, which is that tobacco is evil, and all tobacco users absolutely must end up as cancer-ridden, cig addicted nicojunkies.
Whether hookah smoking is better or worse though, the truth is you can't rely on these people to give you the straight poop.  The tobacco banners have already lied themselves blue in the face about everything from the number of tobacco-related deaths in the US, to the supposed increase in cancer rates among those who are subjected to second-hand smoke (and for those who haven't looked at it, the actual research by the World Health Organization revealed there was no link between the two - in spite of the fact that WHO tried to cover up their results when they came to light).
[quote] Too bad some do-good anti-tobaccoist is trying to take my machines away. How ironic he isn't worried about the .44 Magnum that will remove the knee cap of the first person who decides to remove my machines.[/quote]
Too true!  While the tobacco grabbers have been very intent on publicizing the death-by-cancer rates among smokers, maybe it is time smokers publicize the death-by-acute-lead-poisoning rates among smoke grabbers! 

[NERV]

EG, thanks for that info on the nicotine ratios, i wasnt sure which had
more becaus eon one hand the shisha is freshers unprocessed tobacco,
but on the other hand i had heard that tobacco companys add extra
nicotine to cigarettes, odd then that cigarettes r so addictive
but the hookah doesnt seem to be as so, i usually smoke 3 times a day,
mostly while im watching tv or a movie (i tihnk its healthier than
chips or popcorn )but i am by no means addicted to it, i dont need a
'fix' if i dont feel like it i dont have it, if i go for a few days
without it, it doesnt matter, my parents travel alot sometimes i go
with them, im not gonna bring my hookah onto a plane else they thinks
its a bomb or a bong, so sometimes i go over 2 weeks with nothing and
im fine, im sure there are people who get addicted to hookah as well,
but it seems to be less

[entrailsgalore]

[quote name='Highpockets']Hey man, Jack Daniels is good stuff.[/quote]
 Well I was just making a point that jack daniels is alot mroe potent than wine coolers.

[E.G.]

[quote name='NERV']i had heard that tobacco companys add extranicotine to cigarettes[/quote] I believe that's the case. For a good, albeit somewhat fictionalized, take on the tobaco industry check out the flick "The Insider." (Nice bonus that Lisa Gerrard of Dead Can Dance contributed to the soundtrack too )It is intersting that some people get hooked on cigs, cigars, pipes, etc. and others don't. I've heard it said that as few as 2 or 3 cigs can cause addiction and/or withdrawl symptoms. Of course, there are also people who quit cold turkey with no problems. I wonder how much is genetic?Oh, and just for the record -- I'm not some anti-smoking crusader with nothing better to do than troll around on hookah boards. I do own a pipe, and enjoy smoking it. I just think it's important that people have information when considering engaging in risky behavior, be it use of tobacco in any form, other substances, sex, jumping off a cliff tied to a large elastic band, or whatever.E.G.

[E.G.]

[quote name='Mr. Scratch']The tobacco banners have already lied  themselves blue in the face about everything from the number of  tobacco-related deaths in the US, to the supposed increase in cancer  rates among those who are subjected to second-hand smoke (and  for those who haven't looked at it, the actual research by the World  Health Organization revealed there was no link between the two - in  spite of the fact that WHO tried to cover up their results when they  came to light).[/quote] Links, please?I think I may have seen the WHO studies a long time ago on a newsgroup far far away, but I'm not sure. I'd like to look at them (again?).As for the fictionalizing of tobacco-related deaths in the US, that's a new one to me, and goes absolutly contrary to damn near everything medical and health researchers have found. Got any articles?About the only thing that smoking *doesn't* seem to have a negative effect on according to conventional wisdom is either Alzhimer's or Parkinson's (I forget which), in which there is possibly a protective effect. Beyond that though, smoking is linked to cancer, hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, asthma, mouth cancer, lip cancer, throat cancer, etc etc etc. (This applies to cigs mostly. Hookah -- who knows?)E.G.

[To100YearsToLate]

We all know that everything that is fun and enjoyable is somehow bad for you.

I smoke hookah 2-3 times a week, and fight the urge to do it more often
because of the mere fact that I don't want to take the next step to
cigarettes since they are more convenient... I've been addicted to
those once already (cloves actually) and when I started coughing up
blood from smoking a pack of those a day at age 18, I quit.

Hookah started as and will always be mainly a social thing for me... I
think I've smoked hookah alone all of 3 times in the 2 years I've been
smoking it.  Its relaxing and a thing you can do with your friends
where the focus can be conversation instead of a lame movie, sports
event, etc.

My mom's a nurse she's even told me its not as bad as cigarettes,
cigars, etc. but still has dangers from excessive use, just like
anything else out there.

[Mr. Scratch]

[quote name='E.G.] [quote name='Mr. Scratch]The tobacco banners have already lied themselves blue in the face about everything from the number of tobacco-related deaths in the US' date=' to the supposed increase in cancer rates among those who are subjected to second-hand smoke (and for those who haven't looked at it' date=' the actual research by the World Health Organization revealed there was no link between the two - in spite of the fact that WHO tried to cover up their results when they came to light).[/QUOTE''] Links, please? I think I may have seen the WHO studies a long time ago on a newsgroup far far away, but I'm not sure. I'd like to look at them (again?). [/QUOTE]
The WHO has buried their findings because they didn't like the results, but they were leaked to and reported by the London Telegraph.  The LT link is expired, but there are plenty of reports on their finding via other sources.  Here is the report via the Sunday Telegraph:
UK Sunday Telegraph...Passive Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer - OfficialHeadline: Passive Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer - OfficialByline: Victoria MacDonald, Health CorrespondentDateline: March 8, 1998The world's leading health organization has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect. The astounding results are set to throw wide open the debate on passive smoking health risks.The World Health Organization, which commissioned the 12-centre, seven-country European study has failed to make the findings public, and has instead produced only a summary of the results in an internal report. Despite repeated approaches, nobody at the WHO headquarters in Geneva would comment on the findings last week.-------The findings are certain to be an embarrassment to the WHO, which has spent years and vast sums on anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns. The study is one of the largest ever to look at the link between passive smoking - inhaling other people's smoke - and lung cancer, and had been eagerly awaited by medical experts and campaigning groups. Yet the scientists have found that there was no statistical evidence that passive smoking caused lung cancer.
-------The research compared 650 lung cancer patients with 1,542 healthy people. It looked at people who were married to smokers, worked with smokers, both worked and were married to smokers, and those who grew up with smokers. The results are consistent with there being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer.The summary, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, also states: "There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood." A spokesman for Action on Smoking and Health said the findings "seem rather surprising given the evidence from other major reviews on the subject which have shown a clear association between passive smoking and a number of diseases."-------Dr Chris Proctor, head of science for BAT Industries, the tobacco group, said the findings had to be taken seriously. "If this study cannot find any statistically valid risk you have to ask if there can be any risk at all. "It confirms what we and many other scientists have long believed, that while smoking in public may be annoying to some non-smokers, the science does not show that being around a smoker is a lung-cancer risk."
[quote]As for the fictionalizing of tobacco-related deaths in the US, that's a new one to me, and goes absolutly contrary to damn near everything medical and health researchers have found. Got any articles? [/quote]
It does go  contrary to the reports of medical and health researchers, but that is because the research is cooked up bullcrap.  This was demonstrated in federal court, when a judge presiding in a case against the EPA's passive-smoking study declared their supportive data to be "cherry-picked".  Cecil of the straight dope explains it best:
[url="http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000602.html"]http://www.straightdope.com/columns/000602.html
More:
[url="http://www.junkscience.com/feb01/perske.htm"]http://www.junkscience.com/feb01/perske.ht...eb01/perske.htm[/url]://http://www.straightdope.com/columns.../perske.htm[/url]://http://www.straightdope.com/columns.../perske.htm
[url="https://www.cato.org/dailys/9-28-98.html%5b/url"]]https://www.cato.org/dailys/9-28-98.html[/url]://http://www.junkscience.com/feb01/pe...-28-98.html
Unfortunately, you can't depend on the reputation of a researcher on such topics; once they get in the pocket of a lobby or a social movement, truth goes out the window.
A good example of this is the CDC's Kellerman release of gun-death statistics about a dozen years ago that found that a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to shoot someone the owner knows ("such as a friend or family member") than an intruder.  Quite an idictment of firearms, eh?  Too bad their research didn't hold up to the scrutiny of the Senate committee who financed them.  When the Senators asked the CDC to turn over their raw data, Kellerman refused to do it.  It turned out he had based his entire study on a couple of Washington districts populated by econimically depresssed minorities where high drug-crime rates were prevelent.  Since drug dealers who shoot each other in criminal disputes usually know each other, this allowed him to state the conclusion that a gun was more likley to be used on someone the owner knew, and then added in the bit about "such as a friend or family member" for emotional effect.  The Senate was infuriated that the CDC had abused the taxpayer's money, and defunded the wing of the CDC that initiated the report.  But in spite of this, you STILL see the 43:1 stat being bandied about, because people don't know the history of the research.  Just like you see keep seeing these smoking-death stats ballooning up larger and larger every year.[/quote]

[TheHookahGurus]

"thats just stupid, 1 how could it have tar when its just tobacco, honey, and flavor? 2, if your smoking it properly the tobacco never actually burns so how could it have as much carbon monoxide if it isnt burning like cigarettes?"
  Are you kidding?  No carbon monoxide?  What do you think you are smoking then?  Smoke IS carbon monoxide.  The coals do burn the shisha, its just not a direct flame to the shisha.  I mean, I do not agree with the article, but some of it is factual.  Even though most do not inhale shisha smoke, you are in the process of bring it in.  Some does enter you lungs.  There is no doubt about it in terms of "safer" smoking, however smoke is smoke.  You just dont have all those other additives of cigarette smoke. 
As for smoking shisha as a gateway to cigarettes, yes i believe it does depend on the person.  In my case, it happened.  When I went to college, our dorms banned smoking in the dorm, so taking my hookah outside to smoke wasnt going to happen.  And the shisha bar on campus is about 8 dollars per bowl.  Expensive in my opinion.  So...I some how got a little hooked on cloves.  And regretting it. 
My main question is...what are the effects of burnt molasses/honey in your lungs?  If you've ever burnt sugar, the byproduct is pure carbon.  Im sure that can not be good for you.  I am in no way supporting the article, but I believe we are all a little ignorant when it comes to the effects that smoking shisha has.  Let's be honest.
-Mac