Trust Me Bro: the receipt

trustme.bro/r/…

✓ checked

trust me, bro:

here is the receipt.

the claim

It is more expensive to employ a smoker than a non-smoker

the verdict

SUPPORTED

the evidence backs this

confidence 75/100

Multiple studies and economic analyses conclude that employing a smoker involves higher overall costs due to increased healthcare utilization, absenteeism, presenteeism, and smoking breaks.

Evidence for · 3

tobaccocontrol.bmj.com: Estimating the cost of a smoking employee | Tobacco Control

cited by 0

Aims to estimate excess costs private employers attribute to a smoking employee.

citation format

See more details

More for · 2

doi.org: The Relationship Between Smoking and Health Care, Workers' Compensation, and Productivity Costs for a Large Employer

cited by 0

Quantifies higher health care, absenteeism, and productivity costs for smokers.

doi.org: Estimating the cost of a smoking employee

cited by 0

Finds that employees who smoke impose significant excess annual costs on employers.

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked31 Jul 2026

judged → SUPPORTED · 7531 Jul 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Iceland is a geological hot-spot directly overlying a deep mantle plume?Is it true that Genetic similarities between species are the result of common ancestry?Is it true that Diglossia is a situation where two dialects or languages are used by a single speech community?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: the research is thin, dig deeper

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt