U.S. bans flavored cigarettes

[ZippyDSMlee]

i've seen a number of studies done throughout the 90's and early 00's. where are these unbiased, third-party studies demonstrating the safety of secondhand smoke? i can't find any mention of them.

Gee, maybe that's because NO ONE (including me) has tried to convince you that smoking isn't bad for your health at all.

What I (and the other "pro smokers" or whatever the hell we should call them) have said is that the supposed threat caused by second hand smoke isn't as alarming is some people try to claim it is.

When you get me a trained doctor who, with a straight face, tell us that ALL cigarette smoke is LETHAL if inhaled sporadically, to EVERYONE, and he has the relevant facts and figures to back it up, THEn I might believe you.

So far, the proof hasn't shown anything else than "smoking is bad for you". And then we come back to my other argument that LIFE is bad for you, since there are so many things EVERYONE is exposed to EVERY DAY 24/7 that can be detrimental to their health and are very likely to kill you.

If no one bans all that other stuff, then there is NO REASON AT ALL to ban smoking, WHAT SO EVER. Unless the goal is to pass yourself off as sanctimonious hypocrites that is...

2nd hand smoke is not as bad as car emissions, yet you don't see the moral panic thought police shut down traffic around buildings and tell people they can't drive.
===============

Life is bad for you I mean it will kill you one day after all, Have a nice day!. =^^=


So instead of banning things that may indirectly harm us lets ban stupid people, not foolish idiots like myself no we merely deserve to be made sterile, but stupid people are the bane of anyone who is capable of breathing through their nose and thinking a thought through where the thoughts "anti god", "moral high ground", "der wat?", "huh?", "say again?", "I can not answer that...","that's racist!!11". And a plethora of other like minded thoughts which should speed you to being boiled in the reject gene pool they came from. And those who are less than half wit well being sterilized and placed first in line to adaption...er..thats to get a kid not be...never mind.....

Oh what a wonderful day I am having....
/B
/sarcasm
/being lightly serious (stupid people cause more trouble/death/suffering than all the functional addicts in the world twice over!!)

 

[cjbos81]

I see that freedom of choice isn't that big of a concern in the US

What you're witnessing is what happens when 70 million people simultaneously lose their minds and elect a communist.

What's next, flavored alcohol? That would leave beer, whiskey and vodka, and I'm more of a wine guy.

When I was a teenager, we all drank Seagrams Gin with orange juice...good times...

To be honest, I remember back in High School anyone who smoked did so with flavoured stuff so in my opinion, they're kinda right about it luring young people into smoking. Here's hoping they ban it here in the UK.

No one I knew smoked flavored cigarettes. They all smoked menthols, while I smoked Lucky strikes and Winstons...I think I was Eisenhower in my former life.

 

[inflamessoilwork]

Just get a hookah and buy flavored tobacco, I prefer it anyway

 

[iron codpiece]

I used to smoke, when i did I smoked Cloves because people around me complained a lot less because the smell wasn't as vomit inducing.

 

[fix-the-spade]

but this makes no sense from a public health standpoint and pointlessly restrains free trade.

This is a slightly random thought, but is selling cigarettes free trade at all?

These things are highly addictive, quite often once someone's bought them a few times they'll be compelled to buy them for the rest of their life by forces within their own body that they have limited at best control over. As much as they repeat the 'it's my choice' mantra over and over the science says otherwise.

Does it really count as free trade or is it any different to drug dealers and their 'customers'?
Just a thought.

 

[Iskenator67]

As long as I can get my cigars, I don't care what they ban.

 

[Rekuiem]

How many people actually smoke flavored cigarettes anyway? and no smooth, menthol, and light aren't flavors.

 

[Sven und EIN HUND]

im 16 and smoke on the very rare occasion, last time i had some smokes was at a party and I was hella drunk, I wouldnt have given a damn if it tasted nice or not. I don't see how they could justify banning flavoured cigs :S

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Does it really count as free trade or is it any different to drug dealers and their 'customers'?
Just a thought.

Again: put sugar, methadone, coffee, chocolate, tea, aspirin, paracetemol, ibuprofen, anti-biotics into that category.

You could equally add mobile phone top-ups, ISP charges, electricity charges, water, gas, service charges, taxes...

fast food, slow food, cooking utensils, filofaxes, diaries, calendars, condoms, fertilizers, wheel rims...

 

[Dudeakoff]

I remember this from a while ago. The general population get treated like babies again. Unlucky Americans, though I half expect Britain to be getting this at some point.

 

[Nutcase]

but this makes no sense from a public health standpoint and pointlessly restrains free trade.

This is a slightly random thought, but is selling cigarettes free trade at all?

These things are highly addictive, quite often once someone's bought them a few times they'll be compelled to buy them for the rest of their life by forces within their own body that they have limited at best control over. As much as they repeat the 'it's my choice' mantra over and over the science says otherwise.

Does it really count as free trade or is it any different to drug dealers and their 'customers'?
Just a thought.

You have no idea what "free trade" means. I have to buy food to survive, ZOMG ARE GROCERY STORES NOT FREE TRADE?

 

[Housebroken Lunatic]

This is a slightly random thought, but is selling cigarettes free trade at all?

These things are highly addictive, quite often once someone's bought them a few times they'll be compelled to buy them for the rest of their life by forces within their own body that they have limited at best control over. As much as they repeat the 'it's my choice' mantra over and over the science says otherwise.

Does it really count as free trade or is it any different to drug dealers and their 'customers'?
Just a thought.

It's their choice to get addicted to nicotine if they feel like it...

 

[Credge]

As long as I can get my cigars, I don't care what they ban.

You should. They are limiting what you can legally buy.

 

[George Palmer]

I think people are mostly for the ban because smoking specifically causes diseases which kill people. Now that isn't so much of a problem other than the fact that it ends up costing all of us money in the long run via health insurance and medical/medicine prices. Combine that with questions about second hand smoke, the smell, the clear and proven marketing to children and well...

Also when you get right down to it, smoking doesn't actually do anything good for the human body. There isn't one positive physical thing about smoking. I know that some people say they just "enjoy the act of smoking", but I really don't know anyone who smokes that doesn't wish they never started in the first place.

I say to smokers "enjoy it while you can". Eventually smoking will be made illegal all together. Probably within the next 25 years is my guess. UNLESS, of course, science comes up with a way to counter all of the health problems that come from smoking.

 

[Bigeyez]

Do many people actually smoke any flavors besides menthol? I occasionally smoke flavored cigarillos or cigars but I've hardly ever seen flavored cigerettes (again besides menthol) outside of tabacoo stores.

All in all it's a pointless law. I seriously doubt flavored cigerettes attract a substantial number of people to smoking who would have never smoked otherwise.

 

[Icehearted]

i try to keep up on political news, but a friend linked this to me, and i'm amazed no one seems to be talking about it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/health/policy/23fda.html

i'm surprisingly furious at this. i'm not a regular smoker, and i'm completely in favor of taxes on tobacco and public smoking bans, but this makes no sense from a public health standpoint and pointlessly restrains free trade. it also bothers that the federal government is trying to raise our children for us; i'm afraid a ban on violent games is next. Or maybe the FDA will require all liquor to taste terrible, so they won't be as appealing to kids?

Neither did prohibition, and neither does outlawing weed. The point is, lobbyists, politicians, the real money men are who decide how "free" we really are, and smoking is no longer chic, but is now the favorite hot button issue for better health. May as well be deep fried foods for all the sense it makes, but hell, that's America; where the citizens obey the government's will, rather then the government obeying the citizen's.

 

[Parallel Streaks]

Cigarettes are evil and smokers should pay high taxes for their filthy habit.

I'm of the opinion that it should be outright illegal.

To rehabilitate smokers and separate them from the good pure non-smokers, like I dunno, sending them to a CAMP where they can CONCENTRATE on quitting smoking?

But seriously, that was a bit of an over-reaction. They can be very destructive when smoked in large numbers, but people like me who smoke one a day in my back-garden when there's nobody else around aren't fit for banning forever. It's stress relief.

On topic: That's a bit silly.

 

[porknbeans]

I wanted to reply to the smokers who say that second hand smoke is not harmful. Two recent studies have shown that heart attack rates drop pretty drastically when legislation is passed that bans smoking in restaurants and/or bars. (http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/22/moh.healthmag.smoking.heart/).

The difficulty that I have with smoking laws is that legislation banning smoking is really a grey area. The more smokers there are in a community, the more likely non-smokers are to develop certain cancers (although this number may be fairly small due to how to dangerous second hand smoke is and laws about smoking in restaurants and bars). This ban on flavored cigarettes will decrease the number of future smokers and therefore decrease the number of non-smokers who develop health problems, however slightly. So whether this legislation is right or wrong boils down to whether the right to life of a small number of people is more important than the right of a much larger group of people to buy whatever flavor of cigarette they want. I honestly don't know which is more important, but it isn't a black and white issue of the government being overprotective and stupid.

Also, before someone argues that there are worse things in the world for public health than second hand smoke, it doesn't matter. Prosecuting manslaughter is a good idea even though there are murderers about.