Smoking Ban Legislation Bill

Muck Spreader said:

Plus the fact that smokers are more likely to die prematurely saving the NHS/ Government on pensions and long-term age related healthcare. And as a thought, is this current mental health and obesity spiral related to people not smoking anymore as the go to method of stress relief.

Click to expand...

The best substitute for cigarettes and pipes is to take a walk to Mothercare and buy a dummy to suck on.
Or you could buy a pen to suck and chew on. All this nicotine addiction is just bs. As an ex smoker, the habit was broken by nibbling peanuts to go with my pint, Gave away my lighter when the duty free fags ran out. Just had to man up and stop looking for a tit to suck on then i had some money to buy a car. Much more fun than smoking.

manhill said:

The best substitute for cigarettes and pipes is to take a walk to Mothercare and buy a dummy to suck on.

Click to expand...

I know they involve the same product but it's a pity that pipes got caught up in the anti-tobacco storm.

Never knew anyone that smoked a pipe that wasn't a proper decent sort.`

Knew one guy that only smoked a pipe at the weekend, so plainly it's not exactly the same as the cigs.

Although as mentioned earlier, notwithstanding the evidence, has it been taken too far, especially when other equally or more damaging habits get either ignored or even facilitated?

yoki said:

I realise treatment of those affected by it's different forms is paramount.

But I also think that it's becoming so prevalent, that serious funding needs to be diverted to identifying causes and serious action taken, including legislation, where appropriate.

It used to be something like one in ten would know someone affected by cancer, it's now almost one in two will actually have a form of cancer.

Such an extreme exponential increase surely justifies positive identification of causes, followed by mitigation measures.

Click to expand...

I know you are religious, so don't take this the wrong way... people now breed older and live longer than we have evolved to. This almost certainly has a bearing on the increased prevalence.

I recall hearing a fellow, presumably a distinguished oncologist or some such, being interviewed and stating pretty plainly that he thought there is a relatively clear link between cancer frequency and immune system effectiveness - although he said nobody yet had found what the link is.

If this is so, it is logical that since modern medication has been available, and has saved many who would otherwise have died, the gene-pool has been 'enriched' - at least numerically speaking - by an unnaturally large number of people with weaker immune systems.

Which leads me to the conclusion that it is quite likely eugenics only seems to be a bad thing when humans are the driving force, rather than nature. The latter having the term 'natural selection' applied for the same - but unconsciously derived - result.

robs1 said:

Meat probably
Yet there is a campaign to legalise cannabis, strange times

Click to expand...

Have not the German government made cannabis legal in the past few weeks ? as you say "strange times".

Perhaps we should also be banning anyone born in and after 2009 from buying UPFs - reduce cancer rates and obesity issues.

You really have to believe the Tory & Labour leadership are a right bunch of morons, all very well saying 15 year olds can’t buy cigs but with the age limit rising by one year each year in 5 years time 20 year olds will need to prove their age, 5 yrs after that 25 yrs old will need proof, can you imagine being a shop keeper refusing to sell to a 25 yr old.
Is there now an intention to bring in ID cards but far safer not to mention it.

BrianV said:

You really have to believe the Tory & Labour leadership are a right bunch of morons, all very well saying 15 year olds can’t buy cigs but with the age limit rising by one year each year in 5 years time 20 year olds will need to prove their age, 5 yrs after that 25 yrs old will need proof, can you imagine being a shop keeper refusing to sell to a 25 yr old.
Is there now an intention to bring in ID cards but far safer not to mention it.

Click to expand...

You can picture all those future 65 year olds waiting outside the shop for their 66 year old mate to buy them a pack of cigs

manhill said:

The best substitute for cigarettes and pipes is to take a walk to Mothercare and buy a dummy to suck on.
Or you could buy a pen to suck and chew on. All this nicotine addiction is just bs. As an ex smoker, the habit was broken by nibbling peanuts to go with my pint, Gave away my lighter when the duty free fags ran out. Just had to man up and stop looking for a tit to suck on then i had some money to buy a car. Much more fun than smoking.

Click to expand...

I don't think the addiction thing is BS, I smoked for ten years not wanting to most of the time and just felt I couldn't give up, managed it in the end with nicorette chewing gum, getting the little bit of nicotine from that took the edge off packing it up. We shouldn't downplay how addictive nicotine is for some people, I would say kicking the habit was about the hardest thing I've done and I was only a ten a day man. All this was some 35 years ago now. Once the nicotine has you the choice between smoking and not is eroded and so having the gov take that choice out of an addicted or potential addicted person's hands is a good thing in my book. I think - not all but most smokers wish they had not started. Still cannot see how the ban would work but think pricing and restrict supply is only way forward.

Danllan said:

I know you are religious, so don't take this the wrong way... people now breed older and live longer than we have evolved to. This almost certainly has a bearing on the increased prevalence.

I recall hearing a fellow, presumably a distinguished oncologist or some such, being interviewed and stating pretty plainly that he thought there is a relatively clear link between cancer frequency and immune system effectiveness - although he said nobody yet had found what the link is.

If this is so, it is logical that since modern medication has been available, and has saved many who would otherwise have died, the gene-pool has been 'enriched' - at least numerically speaking - by an unnaturally large number of people with weaker immune systems.

Which leads me to the conclusion that it is quite likely eugenics only seems to be a bad thing when humans are the driving force, rather than nature. The latter having the term 'natural selection' applied for the same - but unconsciously derived - result.

Click to expand...

As an opinion that's all perfectly fair and as you say, logical.

Certainly as good a punt at explaining the increasing prevalence as any of the health agencies have managed.

On your first point, am I religious?

Not a church goer or frequenter of any social/religious meeting place, and am highly sceptical of most organised religions and their disciples.

However, I do believe with total conviction of some manner of God/supreme being/power, call it what you will overseeing things and that there are forces of good and evil continuously battling each other all day every day right across the globe at a level that us mere humans can't really comprehend. I also believe there will be a day of reckoning/judgement day, again call it what you will, where we will all have to answer for what we've done, and it's rapidly approaching.

If that fits your definition of "religious" then guilty as charged, but I know that plenty of the established bible bashers locally actually view me as beyond redemption instead!