Prohibition only serves to empower organized crime and cops. We have been through this shit with booze and cannabis. We know better than this. Come on people.
Black market suffer too much after loosing hand on canabis?
Which prohibition has ever been good for health?
This has nothing to do with health. We could cure death and everyone would still think smoking is the deadliest thing ever. I realized this 20 years ago while reading a book on nano technology that posited that we could cure death someday with it.
And I thought “That’d be great. Then I can smoke and not worry.” But then immediately I thought, “That can’t be right!” And I spent 5 minutes trying to figure out how smoking would be bad for me in a scenario where it’s impossible for it to be bad for me. When I present this puzzle to others, they do the same thing.
Even without die of it, I would still prefer to avoid cancer. And smoking clearly rise the risk to have one.
Also, a cure we may have someday, is just a call to found research, not a real promise. Don’t build anything on such.
Sure, but if we can’t imagine a scenario where it’s okay to smoke, then it’s clearly a moral issue and nothing else.
Cancer is an health issue. Without health consequences at all, smoking would not be a problem.
I don’t see how moral could be related to smoking…
Because when you have a scenario where if you get cancer all you do is take a pill full of nanobots and you’re cured, it’s working kind of hard to find a problem with that. Admit it. It feels icky and wrong to say “It’s okay to smoke”. There’s a part of you that feels guilty for writing what you just wrote. What if a child reads that and starts smoking because of what you said?
Admit it. It feels icky and wrong to say “It’s okay to shoot yourself in the head”. There’s a part of you that feels guilty for writing what you just wrote. What if a child reads that and starts shooting themselves in the head because of what you said?
“It’s okay to eat rotten food that has mold growth on” “It’s okay to stop breathing air” “It’s okay to tan using a UVC lamp” It’s okay to jump off a skyscraper"
The only reason why you consider one question (smoking) to be a moral issue instead of all questions is because you want to smoke. You’re not saying jumping off skyscrapers is a moral issue, let along the infinite other questions not listed here.
Yes. I do want to smoke! If we cured death, would it be okay?
This question can be rephrased like this: how can shooting myself in the head be bad for me in a world where shooting myself in the head is impossible to be bad for me? We could cure death and people will still say shooting yourself in the head is the deadliest thing ever.
So therefore, trying to prevent people shooting themselves in the head is not about health.
If nothing can kill you (even shooting yourself), then can anything (including shooting yourself) be dangerous?
I present this puzzle to others, they do the same thing.
Think of it this way, if we had death curing nanobots, does this mean you can survive a nuclear explosion? Will you become immortal?
The nanobots the book was talking about are nanobots that stop the tendency for the body to decay as we age. They are not meant to make us immortal.
Think of them like very advanced prosthetics.
Having the ability for prosthetic arms and legs does not mean that arms and legs (both natural and prosthetics) is impossible to be chopped off. Having heart pacers does not mean that poor diet and low exercise is impossible to cause heart disease.
People with poor health need more medical intervention and earlier than people with good health. The existence of inventions does not change risk factors.
We have a real life example. Oxygen is a very reactive molecule, it is unstable in large amounts and corrodes everything else, yet we need it to survive. Something that is bad for other things is required by us. The reverse is also true. CO2 is harmful for us but good for plants.
Hope that actually clears up your thought process and helps you stop believing in none sense.
I’m not believing in nonsense. When they cure death and we’re in our 200s, I’ll be out smoking cigars, enjoying hot sex orgies, and playing Counter Strike for real while you’ll be at home worrying about your health and freaking out that second hand smoke will kill you at the age of 915,278 instead of the average of 995,562.
I was being purposely absurd about shooting people in the face to prove a point.
But since you would actually play counterstrike IRL if these nanobots were invented, I’d gladly take the opposing side to your team.
When (not if) I win, I’ll emphatically take over those sex parties, but leave the cigars and smoke (not really my thing).
You really think technology will make you immortal. I bet my mortal life that you didn’t take a STEM degree. You really are a delusional joke.
You really think technology will make you immortal. I bet my mortal life that you didn’t take a STEM degree. You really are a delusional joke.
It’s a hypothetical and it’s making you hopping mad, jumping all around it. It’s a moral issue.
“Kids who vape are 3 1/2 times more likely to smoke tobacco in the future,” said Jessica Buckley, president and CEO of the foundation.
Sounds like bullshit. There are lots of fraudulent studies around vaping.
One of the things people need to understand is that many people self medicated using nicotine. But it’s almost inconceivable that vapers will go to smoking.
If u think the study is flawed, the onus is on you to explain why it’s flawed
Sadly yes. But this has a long tradition - put out flawed study methodology or write publish incendiary claims and then only later it gets debunked. It’s fucking evil because vaping actually is one of the most effective ways to quit smoking and vastly safer.
It’s fucking evil because vaping actually is one of the most effective ways to quit smoking and vastly safer.
So far you’ve accused studies that say otherwise of being flawed without providing any analysis as to why, and you haven’t provided any sources of your own. It should like you just like vaping and have an axe to grind
Sure I have. Smoking kills. And vaping is ultimately just as safe as the nicotine patch. It doesn’t take much to understand that.
But as long as you are entertained mocking me by posting smarmy pictures, enjoy. I find it despicable. I doubt you ever research the topic. But the WHO, the World Health Organization, can be accused to killing millions with their zealotry that pushed many countries to outright ban vaping, while smoking remains perfectly legal and convenient. That is the result of many fraudulent studies.
This is not a trivial topic about “an axe to grind”. From my perspective, it’s not much different than mass murder. Why? Because of stupidity or profiteering.
So laugh it up. Mock me if you want. I don’t have time or energy to read and debunk this latest study, they are relentless. But I have read these kind of studies in the past and all the anti-vaping studies turned out to be fraudulent. Fraud use for propaganda leading to bad policies and preventable deaths. That is the moral dimension of this shit.
So reputable scientists at the WHO telling people that they shouldn’t inhale vape juice is tantamount to “mass murder”? I don’t know how to respond to this message without it sounding like I’m “mocking you” because what you are saying is so unbelievable and has so many flaws in reasoning that there is no sober response that doesn’t make you look bad
I don’t get why getting the patch and vaping should be seen as a simple neutral choice of delivery method when the delivery method is the very thing being debated?
Nobody here is against the patch to get off smoking. The article is about starting the habit. And studies about vaping is literally about the delivery method.
People who start vaping are more likely to start smoking. Before vapes, they may have gone straight to smoking? Or not done it at all? But to focus on the getting off, when there are people getting on and then going further should be seen as diversion from the topic at hand.
regulatory hubris will only strengthen the black market.
personally I am actually FOR this as I want my dual nicotine/thc vapes ASAP. the black market always provides. and I dont give a fuck what your opinion is on this.
Plenty of opportunities for me on the black market then.
Morons.
We shouldn’t ban cigarettes and vapes instead we should push people to healthier alternatives.
Education and freedom, yes!
But please don’t push, making addicts guilty doesn’t help health issues.
Education and Freedom is not enough. You must pave the road of a smoke free life and put barriers on the road to a smokers’ life.
You’re educated and free to drive your car how you please. We design roads to make it easy to drive one way over another. But if the driver overcomes those barriers and drives in a poor manor, there are physical and legal penalties.
I strongly disagree.
Driving involves other people in your car and around you. And the public power should be used to protect them if you represent a threat toward them.
If you drive on some private road or circuit, you may drive how you please (according to the private rules). And this freedom is important.
The barrier you want to put on smokers life are abusive, in my opinion, not only as it restricts liberties, but mostly because it comes with criminalization of smoking. If it is a crime or a shame, people are most likely to hide it, do it worse, and make it cause more harms. And it also make it harder to help those who want to stop.
Driving involves other people in your car and around you. And the public power should be used to protect them if you represent a threat toward them.
As opposed to smoking, which doesn’t affect other people’s health? Secondhand smoke is a thing.
Having watched my own parents die from smoking related illnesses, my father in law and sister in law succumb to lung cancer, it’s a shit way to go. Not something I want to watch or wish upon anyone.
As an ex smoker myself who hasn’t smoked in over 20 years, there are still days I think I’d like a smoke. It’s got a helluva mental hold on you.
Anything we can do to keep the next generation of kids to pick up this filthy habit is a win in my opinion. Stop them before they ever get the chance to start.
This may not be perfect, but at least it’s something.
And a great way to help stop cigarettes are vapes.
This. I know some people who have switched to vapes and have steadily reduced their nicotine to 0.
I used vapes to quit cigarettes and became more addicted to vaping than smoking. I could puff pretty much anywhere anytime. Nicotine pouches actually helped quit vaping though.
Its worked in other countries, they should phase out THC too
Yeah, and while we’re at it, let’s phase out ethanol and sugar too. But not caffeine, we need workers to be productive.
I agree with prohibition.
However, I know this incentivises the black market. The middle ground I would be OK with is the crown monopolies model in them like LCBO, not now where you can get it at any store.
not now where you can get it at any store.
Please understand, a carton at any store cost north of $200. Drive 1 hour from any major town an you can buy a carton for less than $50 at the rez.
While the majority of the tobacco is illegally sourced through the HA. First Nations Peoples in Canada have asserted their right to produce and sell tobacco. RCMP enforcement has only succeeded in pushing sales to further from major city centers.
Basically restricting locations will just drive more people towards the already flourishing black market supply chain.
Because teaching temperance takes too long. And regulate the companies is too much of a hassle.
We already do both. This is prohibition. This is dry laws for tobacco.
Not enough. Most people simply ignore tobacco as a substance and do not talk with their children, family and friends about it. It is addictive, it is dangerous for health but it should never be banned as it is being attempted on several countries.
Tobacco should be treated as a luxury, an indulgence, not something to label as a drug and criminalize. As you state and very well: this is prohibition. Puritanism never works and this will not be an exception.
Its part of school curricula, and there is a ban on advertising and it is now seen in film a lot less and you cannot smoke indoors. You have to ho outside to smoke. And tobacco products are locked in a case and you have to ask the cashier to get it.
I don’t see how much more can be mandated through legislation. I would be OK with an LCBO model. But after that, it’s prohibition
Prohibition doesn’t work because there will always be some people would still do it anyway. The goal should be to get to as close to elimination as possible.
This is not like small pox where it can be eradicated. Behaviours cannot be eradicated because people do the behaviour. You’d have to make it impossible for people to do the behaviour to eliminate it. But since we can’t change biology, the next best thing would heavily enforced prohibition and since that is impossible, make the activity extremely inconvenient.
I have a couple of ideas.
First would be making tobacco a specialty item, to be sold solely on specialty shops. Take it out of the supermarkets, convenience stores, gas stations, etc. Put it in an enclosed, reserved space, with knowledgeable people behind the counter to actually teach a customer on tobacco and smoking and we have a start.
Second would be to end specific tobacco blends that invite to grab a cigarette after another. I work around smokers and the more conscious ones mention there are such blends, while others satisfy after just one, whatever that may mean.
Third measure would be to make tobacco expensive and perhaps even cap the price. I worked with a person that said he’d quit the day a pack cost 10€. We’ve been farther from that but the cheapest pack available on the market is 5,5€ which is cheaper than the average pack was when I had that talk with my coworker. Twenty years back. I wonder how the companies manage to put such cheap product on the market today and not then.
Next would be to move the culture forward and bring back the notion of smoking as an indulgence and not an escape. My country, in the 60’s and 70’s, during a civil war, dispensed cigarette packs to soldiers where it was stamped “Have a cigar and relax.” It did wonders to boosts the tobacco consumption in the country. Previously it was mostly confined to more afluent people, who would usually smoke the pipe or high quality cigars, which is a better form of tobacco.
And where is tobacco a part of curriculum?
Should have been illegalized in the 20th century.
