Controls on tobacco don’t go far enough

York Press: . .

I WELCOME the council’s recent announcement that they are one of the first signatories to the local government declaration on tobacco control, which primarily will restrict big tobacco’s influence in the formulation of public health policy.

While this should be applauded, only central government has the power to introduce legislation to further the assault on this pernicious trade.

The tobacco companies need to recruit 750,000 new customers every year to replace those who quit and die through smoking-related diseases – they do this by targeting the young.

Their support for programmes to discourage underage smoking serves them well, as it reinforces the notion smoking is an adult activity and impresses on teenagers their first cigarette is an initiation to adulthood.

Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you.

If it was a new product and a company wished to bring it to market, it would be shocking if they were allowed to do so.

Through increased awareness of the dangers posed by tobacco, and the introduction of legislation to prohibit smoking in the workplace and in indoor public areas, rates have now fallen to an extent where non-smokers are a large majority of the population.

Further actions to restrict tobacco use would have wide support and measures such as the standardisation of packaging should be introduced without delay.

Baz Buchanan, Teal Drive, York.

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:15pm Thu 5 Dec 13

Overproof says...

The standard 'tobacco control' stuff.

But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does.

For example :
"Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you."

Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference.

There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins.

It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer.
Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year.
This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum.

It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU.
Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban.

If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths.

Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill.

Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users).

Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step.

It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name
The standard 'tobacco control' stuff. But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does. For example : "Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you." Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference. There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins. It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer. Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year. This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum. It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU. Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban. If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths. Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill. Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users). Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step. It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name Overproof

11:10am Fri 6 Dec 13

Mr Trellis says...

There should be a ban on smoking within 20 metres of any establishment selling food. That should end it in York
There should be a ban on smoking within 20 metres of any establishment selling food. That should end it in York Mr Trellis

2:57pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Jonthan says...

Overproof wrote:
The standard 'tobacco control' stuff.

But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does.

For example :
"Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you."

Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference.

There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins.

It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer.
Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year.
This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum.

It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU.
Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban.

If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths.

Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill.


Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users).

Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step.

It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name
If you believe this, it's not just tobacco you've been smoking
[quote][p][bold]Overproof[/bold] wrote: The standard 'tobacco control' stuff. But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does. For example : "Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you." Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference. There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins. It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer. Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year. This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum. It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU. Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban. If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths. Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill. Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users). Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step. It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name[/p][/quote]If you believe this, it's not just tobacco you've been smoking Jonthan

3:47pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Overproof says...

Jonthan wrote:
Overproof wrote:
The standard 'tobacco control' stuff.

But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does.

For example :
"Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you."

Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference.

There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins.

It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer.
Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year.
This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum.

It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU.
Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban.

If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths.

Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill.


Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users).

Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step.

It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name
If you believe this, it's not just tobacco you've been smoking
.

Research the facts, not the propaganda.

If you don't want to take my word for it, how about Clive Bates, former director of ASH

http://www.clivebate
s.com/?p=1561

.
[quote][p][bold]Jonthan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Overproof[/bold] wrote: The standard 'tobacco control' stuff. But, as with most tobacco control experts, the letter writer clearly does not know the subject as well as he thinks he does. For example : "Tobacco is the only product on sale today which if used correctly will more than likely kill you." Incorrect - perhaps he meant to say "smoking" rather than "tobacco" but I suspect he doesn't know the difference. There are other forms of tobacco, for example Snus which is a form of oral tobacco. Snus is freely available in Sweden. Unlike similar oral tobacco products, Snus is pasteurised which removes most of the toxins. It is as a direct result of Snus that Sweden has the lowest smoking rates of any country in the EU and the lowest rates of lung cancer. Swedish smoking rates are currently 8% and falling by 1% per year. This is known as Tobacco Harm Reduction, substituting smoking tobacco with a much less harmful alternative - And before anyone says it, yes, Snus is much more satisfying (and therefore effective) than gum. It is thanks to Tobacco Control Fanatics that Snus is banned in the EU. Sweden is the only country to put facts, and the health of their people, first and stand up to the EU and refuse to implement a ban. If the rest of the EU had the same male smoking rates as Sweden then their would be 54% (92,000 per year) fewer male lung cancer deaths. Tobacco Control caused this differential, so must be responsible. They try to supress any form of Tobacco Harm Reduction and now they are trying to do the same with electronic cigarettes - a policy that will kill. Public Health encourages people to quit - but for people who do not want to quit, or cannot quit - there should be a reduced harm alternative. Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users). Tobacco Control is not about health - it is an ideology based around abstinence - and if you think it will stop there, with tobacco, think again. Next will be warning labels and plain packs for alcohol, then fizzy drinks and chocolate - known as the 'slippery slope' - these ideas are already being suggested as the next step. It is not about health, it is about control - the clue is in the name[/p][/quote]If you believe this, it's not just tobacco you've been smoking[/p][/quote]. Research the facts, not the propaganda. If you don't want to take my word for it, how about Clive Bates, former director of ASH http://www.clivebate s.com/?p=1561 . Overproof

3:59pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Overproof says...

I haven't smoked for years, but I do prefer facts over propaganda

Countries, like Sweden, will see smoking rates drop at a rate that can only be dreamed about by those that follow the tobacco control agenda.

And if you don't believe the slippery slope, Australia started plain pack for cigarettes, now look what is next

http://tvnz.co.nz/na
tional-news/alcohol-
plain-packaging-next
-step-deter-drunks-5
529965

http://ca.news.yahoo
.com/blogs/daily-buz
z/bad-cigarettes-aus
tralia-looks-plain-p
ackaging-junk-food-1
70450028.html
I haven't smoked for years, but I do prefer facts over propaganda Countries, like Sweden, will see smoking rates drop at a rate that can only be dreamed about by those that follow the tobacco control agenda. And if you don't believe the slippery slope, Australia started plain pack for cigarettes, now look what is next http://tvnz.co.nz/na tional-news/alcohol- plain-packaging-next -step-deter-drunks-5 529965 http://ca.news.yahoo .com/blogs/daily-buz z/bad-cigarettes-aus tralia-looks-plain-p ackaging-junk-food-1 70450028.html Overproof

9:35pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Omega Point says...

". Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users)"

As a stimulant this is a fair comment.
But not in terms of addiction.This statement is misleading. As an addictive substance nicotine is rated in the top five., way above caffeine.
". Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users)" As a stimulant this is a fair comment. But not in terms of addiction.This statement is misleading. As an addictive substance nicotine is rated in the top five., way above caffeine. Omega Point

12:24pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Overproof says...

Omega Point wrote:
". Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users)"

As a stimulant this is a fair comment.
But not in terms of addiction.This statement is misleading. As an addictive substance nicotine is rated in the top five., way above caffeine.
Yes, perhaps you have a point, in which case it only goes to support the view that a liberal harm reduction approach will be considerably more successful than the tobacco control "quit or die" approach.

Incidentally, there has actually been no research to confirm that nicotine on its own is in the 'top 5' most addictive - just that smoking is highly addictive, and I bet it would be very easy to combine caffeine with 4000 chemicals and make it very addictive as well.

But, regardless of the relative habit forming properties, nicotine use is regarded to be on a par with caffeine.
[quote][p][bold]Omega Point[/bold] wrote: ". Nicotine is actually a relatively safe stimulant, about as toxic as caffeine (which also causes dependence amongst its users)" As a stimulant this is a fair comment. But not in terms of addiction.This statement is misleading. As an addictive substance nicotine is rated in the top five., way above caffeine.[/p][/quote]Yes, perhaps you have a point, in which case it only goes to support the view that a liberal harm reduction approach will be considerably more successful than the tobacco control "quit or die" approach. Incidentally, there has actually been no research to confirm that nicotine on its own is in the 'top 5' most addictive - just that smoking is highly addictive, and I bet it would be very easy to combine caffeine with 4000 chemicals and make it very addictive as well. But, regardless of the relative habit forming properties, [clean] nicotine use is regarded to be on a par with caffeine. Overproof

1:03pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Omega Point says...

I think most working in substance abuse would say iot is on a par with the opiates actually.
I think most working in substance abuse would say iot is on a par with the opiates actually. Omega Point

5:18pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Overproof says...

Omega Point wrote:
I think most working in substance abuse would say iot is on a par with the opiates actually.
In terms of toxicity and long-term harm to user ? - they are wrong, more like caffeine.

People generally don't burgle, rob or prostitute themselves for nicotine - same can't be said for opiates.
[quote][p][bold]Omega Point[/bold] wrote: I think most working in substance abuse would say iot is on a par with the opiates actually.[/p][/quote]In terms of toxicity and long-term harm to user ? - they are wrong, more like caffeine. People generally don't burgle, rob or prostitute themselves for nicotine - same can't be said for opiates. Overproof

5:35pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Overproof says...

Quote:

"Nicotine itself is not a particularly hazardous drug, It's something on a par with caffeine." - Professor John Britton, who leads the tobacco advisory group for the Royal College of Physicians.
Quote: "Nicotine itself is not a particularly hazardous drug, It's something on a par with caffeine." - Professor John Britton, who leads the tobacco advisory group for the Royal College of Physicians. Overproof

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree