@oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip @Krauerking@lemy.lol
@aboringdystopia@lemmy.world

First, I don't smoke and never had smoked (not considering the passive smoking from being close to smokers), the only "drug" I use non-frequently is alcohol (a vodka-saké beverage).

This said, your paternalistic implied thought ("drugs are bad, people shouldn't use drugs"; are their bodies yours, to begin with? Do you happen to have some kind of ownership over other's bodies? Who gave you this almighty authority, do you happen to be a Demiurgal Archon of sorts?) is missing the forest for the trees.

I'm barely knowledgeable about biology, but I know enough to remember about symbiotic relationships in nature, as well as phylogenetics. The plant responsible for tobacco wasn't some kind of lab creation, IIRC tobacco plant even predates us homininae, and this means there are certainly species biologically interacting with the tobacco plant, perhaps species reliant of tobacco plant (not necessarily because of nicotine, but because it's a plant which siphons nutrients and resources from the soil, displacing water and somehow contributing to water cycles).

The moment this Archonic hubris illustrated by your text were to render tobacco extinct, unbeknownst to you, other species would be going extinct as well, and this may include humans due to how food web is so interconnected in ways we're still trying to figure out. That's part of why we try to classify species taxonomically and phylogenetically, because this is also valuable for us to identify potential interspecies relationships. I mean, this is exactly what phylogenetics is about: study of evolutionary relationships among biological entities.

So, please, seek some phylogenetics and biology awareness before feeding paternalistic, bigoted anti-drug thoughts. Others bodies aren't yours for you to wish for control, let alone other species.