ban urged on smoking
 

the lancet medical journal has urged the government to ban smoking in the uk totally it published its findings which have suggested passive smoking kills and the fact that its costing the NHS £1.5bn pounds to treat smoking related illnesses

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3292979.stm

the report does go on to mention smoking is a £9.3bn revenue generator although in my view a complete ban to add it to the illegal substances list as suggested would be something i would completely back as it kills many people in the uk who dont even smoke but the loss of revenue may make the government think twice about a ban

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Should be brought in ASAP as far as I'm concerned.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

as im an anti smoker per say i fully back a ban but how would you make up for lost revenue ?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

It will never happen, but IF it did it would only drive it underground and we would have yet another banned substance being plied to the " addicts " by organised crime etc etc.

Plus the governvent could not afford it as stated previously

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I agree in principle although I think that people should have a right to smoke. What really needs addressing how their right to smoke, effects others when they are smoking. In other words, the passive effect.

I certainly feel that there ought to be a ban on smoking in public places. New Zealand have just done this....good on them.

If someone chooses to smoke on their own in their own house then I have no problem with that. But I HATE having smoke blown over me when I am eating for example. And I really don't appreciate going home smelling of smoke until I shower just because I went to the pub.

I used to be a cardiorespiratory technician and not everyone knows that smoking is responsible for at last 111 different pathologies. I remember one guy who lost his feet then his legs due to smoking. He then had a heart attack but eventually died due to a Pulmonary Embolism. Which is a clot of blood that gets stuck in the blood supply to the lungs. If he hadn't had smoked he probably would be here today...

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

The government get's around 7-8 billion in excise duty and nearly 2 billion in VAT on cigarettes per year ... take 1.5 billion out and give it to the NHS .. what's the problem?

http://www.forestonline.org/output/page22.asp

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

My thoughts exactly. :smokin:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Ban it now. It's absolute lunacy to smoke and shouldn't be allowed.
(not that it'll ever happen)

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

If it was banned then all the lost money would have to be got back by increasing the taxes on me !!

Please smokers, carry on as much as you like and keeping my taxes down. :D

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Cheers Pem :smokin: :cool:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Yep Thanks ..... I'll be round the back having a fag :D :smokin:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I don't think an outright ban is practical. By all means ban it in public - I, too, hate coming home from an evening out smelling like an ashtray just so people nearby can enjoy committing slow suicide - but if people want to do it at home, and contribute a fortune to the exchequer at the same time, thus helping keep my taxes lower ... well, I can live with that.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

i agree with you smoking has no positives except for the tax we get back from smokers but its just such a disgusting habit it kills you or effects your health in a big way

as stated before it wont happen but a public ban is the way forward

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Yes it has to those who smoke:smokin:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I think the only way to ban it would be a rolling ban, move the age limit up a year each year until everyone is excluded. That way the country could adjust slowly to the change in tax revenue slowly.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Hmm banning smoking because it costs the NHS £1.5 billion. I wonder how much all the immigrants cost the NHS per year. The costly medicine for AID's alone. Banning something that make's them 9.5 billion a year yea make's sense

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

OK...

say you have never commited a crime. You are a genuinly good person in every way, but you smoke.

Then the government we have decides to make something that has never been illegal, illegal. Knowing that it is a highly addictive substance, that to quit takes a lot of well and self decipline.
So this person now becomes a CRIMINAL. I don't think so.

As a smoker, I desagree.
There needs to be more education given to really young children, so that they don't smoke as adults. But they can't just ban it out right.

If they do, then they might as well ban booze too. Its the cause of anti - social behavior in every way. Screw it, why not ban salt and fat too.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

What ever happened to the idea of free will?This state gets worse and worse for the nanny attitude.Ban this,ban that.Everytime they do,the problem ISN'T solved it's just hidden away.Banning handguns has not stopped gun crime at all has it?
Anyway the prohibition of alcohol in the 20's in the US proved that it just isn't possible.After all we have a complete ban on drugs and where has it got us?Drugs are just as prevelant as ever.

And what next?Ban red meat?Ban cheese.They are both high in animal fat-bad for your health and cause high cholosteral which is bad for your arteries so the heck with it let's ban them.Ban all sugar as it rots childrens teeth.

You know ladders are really dangerous.Did you know an enormous number of people fall off them each year and are seriously injured.I think we should put a health tax on them to stop people using them.

You know people are still using ladders so I think an outright ban is a good idea.

I have an even better idea.WHY don't we TEACH people about the DANGERS of using ladders and how to use them safely.What's that?Revenue to pay for the training? How about using all the ladder tax we have collected to educate the masses.

Sorry about the rant but this committed non-smoker of 51 years(and non ladder user) thinks the idea of an outright ban is stupid.
I DO however think the banning of their use in all public spaces is a good idea as would be the TOTAL BANNING of drinking and driving.It's a shorter term goal that might just be adhered to by the majority of people.

I want a government to treat me like I'm an adult not a child.

Incog. :spin:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

there's a problem with banning smoking, if they do they will have to ban drinking as well. how much money do drunken idiots cost society each year. all those fights outside pubs and clubs the policing costs and hospital bills must be a lot. and lets not forget the drunk drivers, there wouldn't be any if booze was illegal.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

If they ban smoking it'll definately hit the governments coffers. As a non smoker who feels sick when smoked around I would dearly love a ban on smoking in public places. If smokers want to smoke in the privacy of their own home I don't think they should be prevented. If they are stupid enough to smoke and happy enough to pay £2000 a year for the privilege of 20 a day its fine by me.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Incognitas. I will never understand those arguments that surround the issue of just because other things kill you we shouldn't tackle one of them.

With regards to ladders and food, they are neccessary. Smoking is not. Also.. when you eat cheese or red meat you do it yourself. When you climb a ladder you do it yourself. When you smoke you damage the health of those around you who haven't chosen to accept the risks of your habit. Why should I have my health damaged by someone who smokes ?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Please dont stand under my ladder, whilst I smoke, with that attitude - I might, in a moment of consideration, check on the smoke rising away from others due to heat rising, and fall off, landing on you with an acceleration of 9.81 m/s/s.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

When will the do gooding non smokers stop trying to force their viewpoint on everyone else?

How the feck can someone smoking in their own home possibly affect any of you?Because this is what a total ban would mean.I think that to persist in this is just one group of people trying to force their attitudes onto others.

I'll fight for people to have the freedom to choose in private whether they smoke,eat what they like,worship how they like.How can it possibly affect you under those circumstances?

Like I said originally what ever happened to free will and freedom of choice?
Non smokers be content with the victories you already have.No smoking at work and a ban in public areas all seem very sensible suggestions to me.Anything more than that and you begin to look vindictive.

If it is just a matter that you think that smokers should pull their collective financial weight in regards to the NHS then let's persuade the government to put more of the tobacco revenue into the NHS and into BETTER education about health risks plus get around to truly helping/funding nicotine addicts to give up VOLUNTARILY.

Incog.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Who are you arguing against Incog ? Think its obvious that the majority would want a ban in public but are quite happy for smokers to kill themselves privately.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Sorry if I seem a bit strong in my opinions but we are all sometimes guilty of that aren't we Nor?

I just worry that smokers are not given all the help that THEY need to give up.It is a chemical addiction and an outright ban is not the way to get them to become unaddicted.However I have seen gradually over time how they have been hounded in the workplace and now in public places.I just feel that when they are at home in private they shouldn't be victimised further.

What we do in the privacy of our homes should be our own business.How many other activities could be banned for the good of society as a whole?Where would it end?

I haven't forgotten the story of a man who having got a super new job at a wonderful firm that had a firm no smoking policy confessing to someone at the place that he was hoping that the no smoking rule would give him the necessary push to finally give up.That woman was the boss's wife and the wonderful new job was no longer on offer to him.

He hadn't even been smoking on the premises but he lost the job.

Incog.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

We can all pick extreme examples to unbalance the argument though mate.

I agree with what you've said in the main, that smokers should be helped to give up and not persecuted. It is their free choice to smoke, but I don't agree that its their free choice to smoke in public places and thereby remove others free choice not to breathe in the smoke from their habit.

Completely agree whatever people do in the privacy of their home, providing it doesn't negatively affect others, is upto them and nobody should interfere.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

well we seem to agree on everything thus far though I don't recall saying that smokers had a right to smoke in public places.Quite the reverse.

The only thing we are likely to fall out about is that I would rather not be called mate.Incog,missus,madam,you,boss,she who must be obeyed and or goddess will all suffice.

Incog. :)

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I am concerned for the kids of all those 'private' smokers.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

'Aesha' :D it is

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Aye very true.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

There is something in this post that leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

that will be the creosote, stop eating your fence man :rofl:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

He's made his thoughts clear on "that" subject several times, as have I, and I can assure you that neither of us are sitting on the fence ;)

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

if someone wants to smoke let em what happened to freedom of choice if u ban fag's then you have to ban booze as well :nono:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

If someone doesn't want to smoke though Jonboy where is their freedom of choice ?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Why?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

walk away just open the door and walk away easy :D

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

i would like to point out i smoke but do not inflict it on others

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

No you don't. Booze in moderation is actually good for you. Fags in moderation (or any amount) are bad for you from the first puff.

Good!
...Do you drop your fag ends or the cellophane that you unwrap from the packet onto the ground?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Aye I hear what you're saying. I don't think though having to avoid public places or having to move away if someone decides to smoke as freedom of choice.

I'm quite happy for people to smoke if they want. If they aren't doing anyone any harm I don't care what people get upto. The way I look at it is that if you want to smoke you should be the one who has to go out of their way to do it. Its your habit and you get the enjoyment. I don't believe in non smokers having to go out of their way to accomodate a habit of someone else.

A daft example this, that I just thought of :) If I enjoy playing golf and practicing swinging my driver. Would it be acceptable if I wanted to do it in the middle of a pub and everyone else had to sit in another area of the pub cos I decided I wanted to enjoy swinging a golf club ? No, that'd be daft.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Before casting the first stone, as a non drinking smoker I think the ethanol imbibers should contemplate this article. "Who takes up more NHS resources ethanol addicts or nicotine addicts ?"

Answers on a postcard please

"Disturbing new figures show drugs and alcohol abuse are causing widespread damage to Britain's health and social services.
Experts are warning that illnesses and injuries caused by alcohol abuse cost the NHS up to £3bn a year.

And the government's financial watchdog says drug addicts will continue to commit half of all crime, because their treatment is so ineffective.



The NHS is on the brink of collapse and it is hard to argue otherwise

Dr Chris Luke
A report by the charity Alcohol Concern says that more than 28,000 hospital admissions a year are caused by alcohol dependence or poisoning.

Such statistics have prompted warnings that the health service could crack under the strain of dealing with alcohol-related illness.

Alcohol is implicated in 33,000 deaths every year and one in six people attending accident and emergency units has alcohol-associated injuries.

This rises to eight out of 10 at peak times.

Alcohol Concern will present its findings at a conference for primary care health workers on Thursday to alert them to the scale of the problem.


Alcohol implicated in 33,000 deaths a year

Dr Chris Luke of Cork

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

if a smoker want to smoke fine same goes for drinkers and junkies as long as no one get hurt while we enjoy our habit they will be banning sun bathein next cos it Might Cause Skin Cancer Etc Etc Etc

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

fireman you've got a good argument, but its got a major flaw. It exists on the basis that we should never tackle one problem because there are other problems.

Of course alcohol causes a major strain on the NHS. The number of deaths from alcohol fair outweigh the deaths from any illegal drugs for example. But it doesn't alter the fact that smoking kills. It doesn't alter the fact that hundreds of non smokers die each year through passive smoking.

I'm all for tackling all the ills of society but please don't use the argument that we just have to live with the problems of smoking because there are other things which cause death aswell.

The simple fact of the matter is, passive smoking kills people. So we shouldn't allow people to smoke in public places where they are killing others through their uncessary habit. If smokers want to smoke, fine, it should be their free choice to smoke even if its bad for them. But since its bad for those around them too they should be forced to go out of their way to enjoy their habit, non smokers shouldn't have to go out their way to accomodate their addiction, ala the golf club example.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

no the argument is if im sitting next to a smoker on public transport there are no other seats available im breathing in the toxins he/she is creating i dont want to breath them in if he or she wants to harm there health then they can do so but not at the expense of my health too

the point is not just about harmful substances to ones self its about the health impact it has on others

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

So you agree that a ban on public smoking is acceptable then? Anybody smoking in public puts smoke into the air that other people then breathe in. There are harmful chemicals in smoke - including cyanide - that I don't want to breathe in.

Anyone who doubts the difference a ban on public smoking might make should go and visit a few shopping malls. Some ban smoking, some do not. A trip to the Marlowes Centre in Hemel Hempstead followed by the Arndale in Luton would illustrate the point very nicely. The Arndale hasn't banned smoking. After being used to shopping in Hemel (or at the Harlequin in Watford, which is also non-smoking), going to the Arndale is a vile experience. It stinks.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

All very true so lets start by banning booze, it costs the NHS and society in general a lot more than tobacco ever will. I have not got any figures but I would imagine alcohol related deaths far out way tobacco related deaths. just go and stand in any busy city center on a saturday night and you will see what a dramatic influence alcohol has on society.
so if we must start banning peoples bad habits at least lets start with ones that cost the most and have the biggest effect on the population.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

last time i was in heckmondwike all public transport was non-smoking ;)

im all for banning it in public though. cant stand walking through somewhere and coming out smelling like a backy factory. people doing it in nightclubs and pubs though i have nothing against funnily enough. i think it is part of the atmosphere of a pub that it has to have a visible "smoke layer" there...

and no im not a smoker in case anyone asks :angel:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

yes thats correct

i dont think anyone cares if people smoke in a pub and or club its the norm so to ban that would be a travesty :rolleyes:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

So if dropping the date-rape drug in to drinks became the norm would that be ok?

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Thats the whole point Kronos :) Its all about banning people smoking in pubs and clubs. Of course we care :)

Using aesbestos in schools used to be the norm until the health risks were realised. Then something was done about it.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

its not the general ethos in the public though


but will we ever see a ban soon i doubt it


of course not you have missed the sarcasm in that post im all for a ban on smoking in all public places but there seems to be an issue with most that they dont want to see a ban

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Hi kronas, :wavey:
I think we are missing a lot of the nuances of your postings because of the lack of punctuation.It makes it all too easy to miss your meanings and leads to misunderstandings.

Incog. :Peaceman:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

LOL i did put the sarcastic smiley at the end :disturbd:

i cant punctuate :zzz: :p

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Alcohol related injuries...like a split lip or a broken arm- not like tobacco related injuries....cancer!

Drugs and alcohol? Nicotine is a drug! Lets leave 'drugs' out of this and just talk about alcohol and tobacco. Dont lump drug addicts together with p*ssheads drinking too much on a Saturday night.


Drug addicts causing crime? OK, different argument. Lets leave that for a different thread

It costs far more to treat cancer from smoking than alcoholism.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I don't agree with sunbathing (without factor 40) either, but lets leave that out of this discussion as well!
Smokers will kill themselves (or others) if they live long enough while smoking-any amount (so will junkies) whilst drinkers (in moderation) will just die of something else.
There is no safe dosage of tobacco, there is a safe dosage of alcohol.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Not when said alcohol drinking twerp is behind the steering wheel of any vehicle or transport.Not when drinking pillock carries a knife and then uses it or they bottle someone.

Frankly we can all argue for the total ban of anything on the grounds that it can cause serious injury,death and can be a drain in the public spending through the NHS,police and social services and for it's effects on the whole community.

To go back to my ladder theory,where do we begin to stop banning things?My stepfather,bless him, in his later years had an addiction to climbing ladders and falling off them.He ended up in the hospital THREE times because of his addiction,each time managing to break a leg and various other bones.In the end I took his ladder away from him until I caught him standing on a chair. :banghead:

Of course this only goes to underline the fact that you can only go so far to protect people before it becomes an interference and then they will find a way to circumvent the rules.

A total ban in public spaces,buildings,work spaces,shops,pubs-yes.Elsewhere I'm not so sure that it is right or fair.

Incog.Who's only true vice is CHOCOLATE and having watched a childrens programme where chocolate was totally banned by the government because it was bad for everyone's health I truly shudder at where banning will lead. :ninja:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

That's ok, we pay through the nose in the form of taxes on cigarettes for such treatment.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

"Nanny state!!" "Nanny state!!" :Peaceman:

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

Although I am a non-smoker, I don't agree that the bans we have in place should be extended. Yes, smoking related-diseases cost the NHS about 1.5 Billion pounds. The government collects many times that in excise duty though.

Also, if you are considering banned smoking because of it's environmental impact (polluting the atemosphere for other people), then really, there are other things you need to consider banning (or at least controlling). Cars & Lorries being two examples (petrol fumes have been linked to various diseases and Diesel produces some of the worst pollution, far worse than tobacco).

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

But stabbing someone or drink driving are illegal ? Killing someone through passive smoke isn't.

Re: ban urged on smoking
 

I quite agree with what you say about cars, but the problem is that they are neccessary. We should definately be investing in clean fuels, but stop fume producing vehicles and the economy stops overnight, food, water, electricity runs out before very long. Smoking isn't neccessary.

With regards to not banning smoking..... perhaps if you worked in a pub you'd support a ban of smoking in public places. Its all about how it affects us really. Most people are selfish, quite rightly, and if it doesn't affect them in their life they won't have too much of a strong opinion on something.

The laugh is that its much more harmful for a smoker to smoke in a pub than it is for him/her to smoke on their own. There are cases where smokers have taken employers to court because they provided smoking rooms for them at their workplace. If smoking kills you, isn't it abit daft for smokers to actually smoke and enjpy 1 cigarette but breathe in 50 from those around them. Its akin to 1 glass of wine a day as a drinker and doing the damage of a few bottles without the enjoyment of drinking them :)