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

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.

  • VarykEnglish
    92·
    9 months ago

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

    • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
      63·
      9 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.

      • VarykEnglish
        31·
        9 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@kbin.social
          3·
          9 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?

          • VarykEnglish
            1·
            9 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@kbin.social
              1·
              9 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.

              • VarykEnglish
                1·
                9 months ago

                Neither, you’re confusing your insincerity with superiority.

                The sun is necessary, not addictive.

                  • VarykEnglish
                    1·
                    9 months ago

                    You’re sure that people can quit the Sun? The source of literally all life on the planet?

                    Love to hear your reasoning there.