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.

  • Optional
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1314 months ago

    Hey New Zealand, how’s it goin’?

    reads article

    Oh. Right wing garbage huh. Sorry. It’s everywhere.

    • @kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      194 months ago

      I’m so fucking angry with my fellow citizens. Voting for these assholes was either selfish, hateful or disturbingly stupid and unthinking.

  • @Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    614 months ago

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

    absurd

    • @fidodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      184 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
        124 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.

        • @fidodo@lemmy.world
          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@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        34 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.

        • @fidodo@lemmy.world
          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
        504 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
          18
          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
        104 months ago

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

        • SatansMaggotyCumFart
          link
          fedilink
          English
          234 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.

            • SatansMaggotyCumFart
              link
              fedilink
              English
              34 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.

          • PaleRider
            link
            fedilink
            English
            24 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.

  • @Tyrangle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    314 months ago

    Came in here to criticize the concept of a smoking ban based on comparisons to prohibition and the “war on drugs” in America, but reading through the article it actually sounds somewhat reasonable. Using regulation to reduce nicotine content sounds fantastic - no one should be forced to smoke if they don’t want to, and making tobacco less addicting might actually help to accomplish that.

    Still not a fan of prohibition as a means of addressing health issues, but I suppose it’s different when your country has universal healthcare.

  • @jobby@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    284 months ago

    Smoking makes lots of money for the tobacco companies and for governments. Hence not wanting to ban it.

    It’s a weird drug of choice; -Super addictive. -Doesn’t really do anything except briefly offset addiction withdrawl symptoms. -Very expensive. -Makes people smell really awful.

  • Orbituary
    link
    fedilink
    English
    234 months ago

    Lacking evidence. Go suck your cancer sticks, you fools.

    • @Nawor3565
      link
      English
      38
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      To be clear, they’re saying that repealing the ban is lacking evidence to support the decision. It’s just worded very poorly, but the article makes it clear:

      “Repealing the legislation flies in the face of robust research evidence; it ignores measures strongly supported by Māori leaders and it will preserve health inequities,” co-director professor Janet Hoek of Otago University’s Aspire Aotearoa Research Centre said.

  • @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    174 months ago

    I still don’t understand why Lemmy likes these sort of laws. There are plenty of vices that people have. Who cares? What’s the harm in letting adults make their own decisions so long as it affects just them?

    Like ban smoking in public thoroughfares and such where one couldn’t avoid secondhand smoke, etc but what does anyone need to be concerned with if an adult smokes a cigarettee otherwise?

    • @Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      284 months ago

      Smokers do not live in vacuum with their own healthcare that is only paid by them.

      Smoking has huge impacts on our healthcare system, the high is shit and they only exist to make rich people richer and keep poor people poor.

      I say this as someone that recently restarted, I wish it was banned when I first started. It’s easily the thing that I’ve wasted the most money on uselessly and has caused the most damage to my health.

      • @kofe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        84 months ago

        Cannabis was illegal when I started smoking it. We tried banning alcohol, and look how that turned out.

        • @Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          I think there’s a huge difference between them. Alcohol and weed is used occasionally by most and is more of a social activity(“lets go for drinks, lets smoke a J”). Smoking affects all it’s users negatively while the others really only do so for a small subset of the population.

          No one only smokes occasionally, it is much more addicting then the others for the general population and isn’t done in a social context neither. No one invites their friends for a cigarette on a Friday night.

          There is just nothing positive about cigarettes. I don’t think it’s at all comparable.

      • @Timecircleline@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        44 months ago

        I think I remember reading that smokers, paradoxically, cost less to the social security net systems including healthcare because they die so young. So I guess don’t feel so bad? Other than the money and health problems.

        For real, I’m sorry that you have this addiction that forces you to take part in an activity it sounds like you don’t enjoy (or at least the enjoyment does not even out the downsides for you.)

        • @Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          24 months ago

          I will quit again but I ultimately wish I had never started, and I’m fairly certain that sentiment is found in practically all smokers.

          I understand the importance of having choice, even bad ones. But if 99% seriously regret one of the choice and are affected negatively with no gain by it, why even offer it?

          And society can easily shrug off the negative effects but it’s just not healthy imo. A solid percentage of our population is a slave to this stuff and it’s just bad form.

          The 99% might be an exaggeration, I’m clearly not impartial about it.

      • @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        44 months ago

        So your bad choices dictate life for everyone else?

        Sorry for your struggles but what’s next? Ban alcohol, ban soda, ban fast food, ban ANYTHING at all harmful? People also get in crashes so let’s ban cars. After all, that’s paid for by healthcare.

        • @Grimy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          3
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I never said any of those things. It’s also worth noting that it doesn’t take anything away from current users but stops new ones from starting.

          I’m advocating this because of my bad choice, something that came about mostly because I was a stupid kid that got caught in their propoganda. Back when I started it was still “cool”. I don’t want other kids to make those same mistakes and there isn’t a situation where it isn’t a mistake.

          But sure, keep licking malboros boots lol

          • @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Wanting to make personal choices? Sure. That’s " licking boots."

            Do you realize how utterly stupid that sounds? And i don’t even smoke.

            And you’re doing exactly what i said- wanting to limit others because of your poor choices. At least own it.

            • @Grimy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              24 months ago

              I did own it.

              If you spent your time making home made explosives as a kid and one blew up in your face, should your first hand experience be ignored because it turned out badly?

              And it’s not so crazy when the personal choice can only harm the person and it’s only being given to line the pockets of Marlboro and co. You’re acting like if this is abortion we are talking about.

              If your so confident, go out and buy a pack, and then buy one a day for the next two years and then try to quit. You don’t know what you are defending.

              • @timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                14 months ago

                I’ve smoked for months while on a trip then stopped as son as i got back. So yeah, I do know.

                So yeah, stop putting your poor choices on everyone else. Thanks.

    • @Pulptastic@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 months ago

      That’s fair if it harms no one else and costs true societal cost to do. Two giant ifs that are never true. Yesterday I inadvertently walked through a vape cloud at the entrance to my gym because you can’t vape inside so they took a yuge puff just outside the door otw in. Secondhand happens and many smokers are totally indifferent about it.

      The tax on cigarettes should cover the amortized lifetime health care cost added by taking on the added risk. If it’s a million bucks to take care of a lung cancer victim at 65, add that cost less interest divided by the # of cigarettes smokes to the price of each one.

    • @Kroxx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      I agree.

      Raise the age to 21 so high schoolers have less access, educate all children/teens on the dangers of tobacco use, restrict smokers to designated areas in public that allow sufficient ventilation from the non smoking population, let adults make their own health choices. Prohibition just isn’t effective and tobacco is a plant, educate and regulate.

  • @ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    154 months ago

    Lemmy: ban cigarettes because they’re bad for you, but not alcohol which is worse and, oh btw, legalize marijuana because it’s totally not like cigarettes.

    • @BluesF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      54 months ago

      Cigarettes do fuck all and then kill you. As a former smoker - ban cigarettes, please. Let us have the fucking fun drugs for god’s sake, not the pointless cancer sticks!

    • @mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      54 months ago

      I’ve never seen people struggle with alcohol and pot like I’ve seen (and struggled myself with) nicotine. YMMV, but perhaps getting some actual life experience around addicts might give you some perspective. I’ve known heroin addicts that had tougher times leaving tobacco behind.

      • @ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        74 months ago

        You’ve never seen how people are destroyed by alcohol?

        Dying is one thing; the suffering alcoholism can bring to everyone in the situation is heartbreaking, and it can take decades to play out before it finally kills the addict. And nobody can change anything except them. But of course, they don’t.

        I’ve watched family kill themselves with hard drugs, it’s pretty quick comparatively. It’s ugly, but after they manage to ignore all help, they do themselves in fast when they get serious about it.

        I hardly need your condescension about addictions there, buddy. I’ve seen it all too closely.

      • @Kroxx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        44 months ago

        Alcohol/benzo withdrawal is the only kind of withdrawal that kills people, it can cause a seizure that literally kills you

    • @kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      44 months ago

      People can have a occasional drink without doing harm. There’s no non harmful level of smoking

    • @Pretzilla@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No the opposite

      It’s an easy game - just think of the worst thing and that’s what the right wing conservative party is trying to do.

      And it’s a global issue now

      • @kescusay@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        214 months ago

        It’s been so disheartening to watch. There’s apparently a large percentage of the world’s population that is scared of every change for the better. Just absolutely driven by mind-numbing, counter-productive fear. And I don’t get it.

        I mean, come on, these are fucking cigarettes. There’s no mystery, here, they kill people. They’re a poison product, and the monsters who sell them are selling gruesome death. But somehow, stopping a business from profiting off of these horrible, unnecessary deaths is scarier than the cancer sticks themselves? Why? Fucking why? Is it because literally all change is scary, no matter what its nature?

        I’m starting to think we’re an evolutionary dead end. I don’t know how we survive past this madness.

        • iAmTheTot
          link
          fedilink
          64 months ago

          There is a nonzero population of people, all across the planet, across all cultures, that just don’t like being told they cannot do something.

          You could tell them that smoking is very, very bad for you, and they’ll say “wow, no one should do that,” and then you tell them that they cannot smoke, and they’ll say “the fuck I can’t!”

          • @kescusay@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            54 months ago

            But in this case, it was telling cancer-stick merchants that they can’t kill people, and then their victims rushed to their defense.

            • iAmTheTot
              link
              fedilink
              34 months ago

              Yes, because those people don’t like being told what they can’t do. The thing they can’t do, in this case, is buy cigarettes.

              • @quafeinum@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                44 months ago

                So what? If they were old enough to buy fags before the ban they could still do so. They argue that their children have a right to lung cancer.

                They are also told to wear a seatbelt and don’t rail against that.

                • iAmTheTot
                  link
                  fedilink
                  44 months ago

                  Some people do, actually. Look, I’m not trying to argue their position for them, I’m not one of those people.

          • @kescusay@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            54 months ago

            I think that accurately describes the power-brokers, the ones in charge. But I think the people who actually support them are driven by - and easily manipulated with - fear.

  • THCDenton
    link
    fedilink
    English
    34 months ago

    But I bet this ban and subsequent repeal was the best advertisement for tobacco this century.