Reversal of smoking ban criticised as ‘shameful’ for lacking evidence

New Zealand is repealing the world’s first smoking ban passed under former prime minister Jacinda Arden’s government to pave the way for a smoke-free generation amid backlash from researchers and campaigners over its risk to Indigenous people.

The new coalition government led by prime minister Christopher Luxon confirmed the repeal will happen on Tuesday, delivering on one of the actions of his coalition’s ambitious 100-day plan.

The government repeal will be put before parliament as a matter of urgency, enabling it to scrap the law without seeking public comment, in line with previously announced plans.

  • @Varyk
    link
    English
    654 months ago

    Wtf, it’s difficult to imagine a more directly harmful and scientifically evidenced habit.

    absurd

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      164 months ago

      I see people on this site say all the time that all drugs should be legalized and we should allocate the money used to enforce drug laws on addiction resources instead. I’m not sure why this harmful drug is different. I totally support anti cigarette campaigns but I’m not sure bans are a good tool in general.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        English
        84 months ago

        I’m not sure why this harmful drug is different

        work in the smoking section of a restaurant for a bit and the phlegm ball you cough up every morning will be your proof that smoking isn’t just an individual’s choice.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          Smoking in public is already very widely banned, and I do support that ban since as you say it impacts others.

      • @Varyk
        link
        English
        24 months ago

        There are a few good reasons.

        1. cigarettes are more harmful than any of the other harmful drugs you’re referencing, and all of those “harmful drugs” combined.

        2. cigarettes were unnecessarily designed to be more harmful and addictive than necessary

        3. bans come in many forms and have many uses

        I’ll preface this by saying I’m one of those people that think all drugs should be legally regulated and available.

        That won’t result in all drugs having equal regulations, just as the regulations for driving a bicycle versus driving a car are different, auto drivers requiring more regulations because of how much more dangerous they are.

        Drugs, even the illegal ones, are nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes or kill as many people as cigarettes, and a lot of these drugs may be mixed with a few chemicals, not hundreds.

        Magic mushrooms are biologically harmless, for example: shrooms are about half as toxic as caffeine, one of the most common and addictive legal regulated chemicals in the world.

        When I talk about supporting this ban on cigarettes, I’m specifically supporting this ban in this country at this time as a good way to show cigarette corporations the consequences of continuing to market a known harmful product at the expense of society.

        If that ban had lasted for even a couple of years, the companies would be forced to adapt their manufacturing or even mission statement so that they were producing less harmful cigarettes.

        Even with the short amount of time it was active, it’s a clear shot around the bow globally to cigarette companies and other companies purposely using cheaper and more toxic ingredients for their products, telling them that they’re going to have to change what they’re doing.

        Because of worldwide lax regulations, the historical popularity of smoking plants, the enormous profit margin, corporate legal lobbying supremacy and modern mercantilism(capitalism), we have the result that at least 7 million people are directly dying every year from a product designed to addict you with toxic compounds and is scientifically, indisputably proven to violently harm you.

        We aren’t including plantation slavery, second hand smoke, manufacturing deaths, or any other processes and infrastructures that have gone into propping up the industry

        So quick math, well over a billion people in the last century, well over 10% of the Earth’s current population, has died because of cigarettes, most of them from directly known toxic substances and processes sold to people under false pretences.

        Prohibitions don’t work, but regulations do, which are simply targeted prohibitions.

        Lowering the amount of mercury and lead in the water and air of the United States has significantly lowered the amount of birth defects, chronic illnesses and cancers in the United States.

        Not using a particular red dye that was found to be carcinogenic meant m&m and cake shops had to take a decade to reformulate a non-toxic red dye, but because of that regulation requiring a safer product, cancer and illness rates dropped.

        Banning cigarettes is not going to stop people from smoking cigarettes, but a nationwide ban on an indisputably toxic substance is practically and politically important so that companies know the momentum that they’ve built up pushing their unnecessarily toxic products is losing steam.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          Totally agree on regulating cigarettes and I think pretty much all the additive chemicals added to cigarettes should be banned, the same way dangerous chemicals are banned in food regulations. I think it’s ridiculous that it hasn’t happened yet.

      • Nate Cox
        link
        fedilink
        English
        454 months ago

        Alcohol is indeed bad for you, but not on the level of cigarettes. Cigarettes are intentionally filled with additive chemicals that both cause them to be hyper addictive and substantially raise the risk of cancer. They are designed to be deadly from the ground up in the name of making a few extra bucks.

        Vast sums of money have also been spent on inveigling the public into believing that cigarettes are better for you than they actually are, up to and including the purchasing of scientists to draw false conclusions in public studies in order to present cigarettes as healthy.

        The sheer maliciousness of the cigarette industry is shocking and terrible, I just don’t think there’s a real comparison here.

        • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
          link
          fedilink
          16
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Also, tobacco is a lot harder to grow and process than alcohol. I’ve got everything I need in my house right now to mix up a batch of mead, and I don’t even have any specialized equipment. A quick trip to the hardware store and I’ve got a still. It’s also not like weed where you can have a plant in a closet and get a couple months worth of flower.

      • PaleRider
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -64 months ago

        As someone who struggles with alcohol, ban that shit as well…

        • SatansMaggotyCumFart
          link
          fedilink
          English
          214 months ago

          My heart goes out to you because alcohol is a cruel mistress.

          But banning a substance never works, if it did we wouldn’t have people addicted to illegal substances.

          • PaleRider
            link
            fedilink
            English
            14 months ago

            I appreciate the sentiment but I hold down a full time job (I absolutely don’t drink on the job. I work heavy machinery) and have a normal (as it gets) family life… I should just drink less.

            • SatansMaggotyCumFart
              link
              fedilink
              English
              14 months ago

              You’re the second person to talk about cigarettes which I’m pretty sure I haven’t mentioned.

              Am I missing something here?

              I’m not for banning anything besides personal WMDs and carnies.

    • FfaerieOxide
      link
      fedilink
      14 months ago

      What about the fact that Nicotine improves concentration, constricts blood vessels, medicates a host of psychological disorders such as schizophrenia, eases the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome, and feels good?

      • @Varyk
        link
        English
        74 months ago

        Seems like you’re incorrectly equating some conditionally positive effects of nicotine with cigarettes, which are wildly different substances.

        • FfaerieOxide
          link
          fedilink
          34 months ago

          Seems like you’re incorrectly equating some conditionally positive effects of nicotine with cigarettes, which are wildly different substances.

          Smoking Specifically has been linked to amelioration of the effects of and protection against ulcerative colitis.

          Smoking also possess quala not present in i.e. vaped glycerin suspensions or snus.

          While I actually agree nicotine alternatives should be encouraged over smoking, I don’t think burning a plant and inhaling the smoke should be a crime. Someone might have a reason to want to do it and that’s not your damn business.

          • @Varyk
            link
            English
            24 months ago

            More false equivocation.

            I don’t see anyone arguing against conditionally positive effects of nicotine or inhaling plant smoke.

            This complaint is specifically about cigarettes.

            People have lots of reasons for lots of things, and sometimes those reasons, like deriving profit from purchasing scientific studies and marketing demonstrably carcinogenic indulgences, affect others.

            • FfaerieOxide
              link
              fedilink
              34 months ago

              like deriving profit from purchasing scientific studies and marketing demonstrably carcinogenic indulgences

              If a company engaged in untoward practice, punish that company for that practice. Don’t punish unrelated smokers by illegalizing their activities.

              Alot of stuff, also, causes cancer. We gonna ban maillard reactions and The Sun now?

              • @Varyk
                link
                English
                1
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Can you cite the comparable artificial carcinogenic additives to the maillard reaction and the Sun that makes the maillard reaction and the Sun cancer-causing, and how the maillard reaction and the Sun have been marketed by their respective industries to addict several generations to their harmful products?

                Or are you making further false equivocations?

                • FfaerieOxide
                  link
                  fedilink
                  14 months ago

                  Can you cite the comparable artificial carcinogenic additives to the maillard reaction and the Sun that makes the maillard reaction and the Sun cancer-causing, and how the maillard reaction and the Sun have been marketed by their respective industries to addict several generations to their harmful products?

                  Whoa now, are you arguing for additive free cigarettes or illegalizing tobacco? Keep up.

                  And The Sun is absolutely addictive. Block it out and see the shakes society experiences.

                  • @Varyk
                    link
                    English
                    14 months ago

                    Neither, you’re confusing your insincerity with superiority.

                    The sun is necessary, not addictive.

      • HopeOfTheGunblade
        link
        fedilink
        34 months ago

        Did you know that you can vape nicotine as well as getting it in gum and patches? Don’t get me wrong, seeing the headline triggered an itch in the fingers to roll one and a craving in the lungs to breathe the smoke, but it’s a godawful habit to have.

        • FfaerieOxide
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          Did you know that you can vape nicotine as well

          I think both should be legal and vaping should be encouraged (over smoking).