Talk:Beedi

message: I have just rewrote russian version of this page. Found a very good source:
*Bidi Smoking and Public Health. Editors Prakash C. Gupta, Samira Asma
And more: 
*Official page of "501 Mangalore Ganesh Beedies". It is one of the most famous beedi brand in India, as I know. In the FAQ section there is an information about nicotine and tar content. I think it's a weighty argument then speaking about it.
*  Process of rolling bidi shown by the way. Pay attantion at the working conditions. 
--77.220.44.207 (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: How can bidis contain three times more nicotine than a regular cigarette, when they only contain 10-20% tobacco? (Diospyros melonoxylon does not contain any nicotine.) 62.113.159.156 20:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: but it's a raw off-grade tobacco. :/ --77.220.44.207 (talk) 09:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Don't think so. But if you do - feel free, edit page, add your own opinion, but don't forget - in should be quite weighty and citation proofed. --77.220.44.207 (talk) 09:52, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

text: i do think that there may be a point of view problem. this sentence in the lead section: "There, beedi consumption outpaces that of conventional cigarettes[2] and these tobacco-filled leaves deliver more nicotine,[9] carbon monoxide,[10] and tar[10] and carry a greater risk of oral cancers.[3]" sounds like outright arguing for conventional cigarettes. reference 8 is a broken link, while ref 11 is an online tabloid magazine article that is referring to a research conducted, but the article itself seems to be not very precise, eg: it contains a citation: "While the popular perception is that bidi is natural, hand-rolled and has fewer chemicals, it is as harmful as cigarette smoking if not more." at the same time the article title says "Bidi more harmful than cigarette: Study". it would be better to use the aforementioned study as a source rather than the article. while i would accept that beedi is likely to be more hazard to health than the average EU or US cigarette, this comparison is not well sourced in the article and i definitely do not like the advertising tone of the favorable comparison about conventional cigarettes.176.63.176.112 (talk) 23:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicotine content 

message: In SE Asia in the 60's and 70's it was possible to buy beedies that contained marijuana.  I cannot find any proof for this except that I remember indulging myself with them.  They were sold typically one at a time by kids on street corners.  This was at a time when the cannabis plant grew commonly along the edges of roads away from the city areas.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.63.161.79 (talk) 00:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marijuana 

message: The #2 Reference - http://www.tobaccofreeunion.org/files/44.pdf - gives a 404 error. I could not locate the file anywhere else either.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wildtornado (talk • contribs) 13:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Reference (404 error) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Beedi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120306053754/http://www.tobaccofreeunion.org/files/44.pdf to http://www.tobaccofreeunion.org/files/44.pdf
*Added  tag to http://www.bestpracticesfoundation.com/pdf/ILO.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:45, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Beedi 37.154.71.42 (talk) 13:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beedi