The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
3 added 1 character in body
source | link

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoke", to talk about the health problems of people who are not themselves smokers, but who regularly inhale tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years). Ngram

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoke", to talk about the health problems of people who regularly inhale tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years). Ngram

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoke", to talk about the health problems of people who are not themselves smokers, but who regularly inhale tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker). The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years). Ngram

2 added 117 characters in body
source | link

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoker"smoke", to indicatetalk about the health problems of people who regularly inhalesinhale tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years). Ngram

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoker", to indicate people who regularly inhales tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years).

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoke", to talk about the health problems of people who regularly inhale tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years). Ngram

1
source | link

"Firsthand smoker" would be redundant. We would just say "smoker".

I gather you are confused by the use of the phrase "secondhand smoker", to indicate people who regularly inhales tobacco smoke (from living in a household with a smoker) but who are not themselves smokers. The use of this term is relatively recent (only about the past 20 years), while "smoker" is much older (at least 200 years).