Maybe we can make food less enjoyable and start tackling that second one.
I seriously doubt it will have any positive effect on the number of cigarettes smoked, short or long term.
But there will be a bunch of people who can pat themselves on the back and claim that they accomplished something. So, there’s that.
We probably should start tackling unhealthy food in the US.
Mayor Bloomberg tried it in a small way and was hated for it.
We’ve been slowly but surely bringing down cigarette usage in the US but obesity we’ve barely addressed. It is the biggest health crisis. And I am obese writing this.
Yeah, one thing that people like even more than nicotine is food. Trying to take either of them away is never going to be popular.
Only real difference is, unlike food, not everyone uses tobacco products, so those who don’t use tobacco products can look down on those who do and do their best to try to control their lives, for their own good, of course.
As am I. And the problem is that we are trying to go against pretty well ingrained nature. Not just human nature, but the nature of virtually any animal. Food is typically scarce, it usually is quite an effort to acquire, and usually spoils relatively quickly. Every instinct that we have in our bodies from hundreds of millions of years of evolution are telling us to scarf down as much of that food in front of us as we can.
The obesity epidemic will be solved either by govt regulations that mandates adding Durian fruit to everything, or a global food crisis that makes food scarce.
But anyway, back to the topic at hand, the Democrats just lost a whole lot of votes. I’d be fine if it was LGBTQ+ issues, or racial inequality issues, or climate change issues, or even voter rights issues that they chose as their hill to die on. Instead, they chose this.
I’m seeing a market for menthol drops that can be introduced to the tobacco in a cigarette through some means.
Place 1-2 drops onto end of cigarette. Stand cigarette upright (see drawing) for at least 90 seconds. Enjoy!
$3.95 for a bottle the size of a Visine container. Flavors 20 cigarettes
ETA: seeking investors. Serious inquiries only, please.
EETA: overhead is .03 cents per unit.
Can we charge more by making ‘em vitamin-enriched?
Add “gluten free,” and you’ve got a winner.
Some number of menthol smokers will take this as the final “nail in the coffin” so to speak, and yes, quit.
The the main idea is to stop teens from starting. Menthol cigs make it easier for a kid to start:
So, this is not entirely a feel good move and it has a positive public health benefit.
This is an old thread I had already posted in–was against this ban when it was being proposed and am still against it now. I generally support attempts to lower the number of people smoking, but I don’t like it when it crosses into coercive bans. I don’t really believe the government should be telling us we can’t ingest cured plant products. I’ve basically always felt that way on drug regulation–I am fine with bans on things like manufacture/distribution of “refined” drugs that have to be produced via a complex chemical process (whether the ultimate source is a plant or other chemicals)–methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin all fall in this category of processed drugs and I am fine with those things being banned as public health dangers (I am in favor of unprocessed coca leaves being legal to possess/consume under this logic.)
Well, as long as people didn’t smoke anything but pure tobacco, you’d have a point.
I suppose you agree that we should be able to drink milk , and that there won’t be lead or arsenic added?
Cigs can be as little as 60% tobacco, the rest is paper (which is chemically treated) plus a host of other additives to keep smokers addicted. Like menthol.
There are approximately 600 ingredients in cigarettes. When burned, cigarettes create more than 7,000 chemicals. At least 69 of these chemicals are known to cause cancer, and many are toxic.
Tobacco companies use additives to make the effects of nicotine more impactful and to make cigarette smoking more appealing to consumers. Unfortunately, these additives also drastically increase the health risks related to cigarette smoking.
The use of these additives sheds a light on the strategies tobacco companies use to appeal to certain groups of people, including especially vulnerable groups like adolescents… Tobacco companies use some additives to flavor cigarettes and to make the smoke less irritating to a person’s throat. But research shows that the additives aren’t just affecting a person’s smoking experience; they drastically increase health risks associated with cigarette smoking.2
…
Tobacco companies add ammonia compounds to cigarettes during the manufacturing process in order to mask the harshness of tobacco. It creates a “smoother” feeling when you inhale cigarette smoke.
However, ammonia compounds create a chemical reaction with nicotine, which creates something called free-based nicotine. Free-based nicotine is delivered to the brain at a much faster rate than normal nicotine, resulting in a more immediate and more intense reaction.2
Absorbing nicotine faster means that a person is more likely to become dependent on it, which increases the risk of nicotine addiction.3
Typically a cigarette weighs approximately 1 gram of which the tobacco content can vary between 65-100% depending on the type of cigarette; a cigar weighs approximately 2 grams and contains a similar proportion of tobacco as a cigarette.
[
From who? I don’t see the Republicans positioning themselves as the “legalize Kools” party when it was Loser Donald who raised the smoking age to 21 and wanted to ban vaping, and I can’t imagine people sitting out the election because of such a minor thing.
As if he (and they) won’t say he did no such thing, and that anyway nobody is the boss of you who already smokes to take away your menthols.
Some number may quit, but they won’t thank those who made them do so. And while some teens may prefer menthol, they aren’t smoking for the flavor.
The effect this will have on the overall rates of smoking are pretty miniscule. Even the best estimates, which I find rather suspect, claim less than a million, out of the 30 million smokers, will quit.
Okay, I’ll grant you that. It’s a 97% feel good move, with a potential 3% positive public health benefit.
So, better regulations and disclosures on what is in a pack of cigarettes? I think there are few that wouldn’t get behind that. Why don’t they do that instead?
The 18.6 million people who smoke menthol.
People who are over 21, which is the vast majority of voters, don’t mind if the age of buying cigarettes is raised to 21, they may even applaud the move if they think that it will help to keep the younger generation from being hooked as they are.
And you’ll note that they did not ban vaping, even if the “wanted” to, as they saw it as something that would cost them votes.
I take it you are not nor have never been a smoker, if you consider such to be a “minor” thing.
How do you think the Democrats should sell this?
“Hey Black community, we’ve done something to help you out!”
“Great, did you fix racial inequality in housing and unemployment?”
“Um, no, that’s hard.”
“Okay, did you address disparities in policing and criminal justice?”
“No, not that either, but we have our best men on it.”
“Did you solve the problem of guns being freely available for criminals to get, endangering us in our own neighborhoods?”
“Oh GOD no.”
“Okay, so what did you do for us?”
“Well, we decided we know what’s best for you, so we took away one of the few pleasures that you have in this kinda crummy life. We banned menthol cigarettes!”
“Oh, well, thanks? That’s not exactly why I stood in line 8 hours to vote for you. I guess I’ll just smoke a regular cigarette instead, I won’t enjoy it as much, but it’s not like I’m going to quit.”
“Great! Remember to take off work and get a babysitter so that you can wait in line for 8 hours to vote for us in the fall!” -beat- “Hey, are those Funyuns you are eating there? We’re going to help you out and ban those next!”
I get the same two numbers when I Google how many smokers and how many menthol smokers. Clearly these numbers are some bullshit, unless we are to believe that most smokers smoke menthols.
Hmmm, true, I just took the numbers by the CDC and the FDA as given, I suppose I shouldn’t have trusted them.
Digging deeper, I find that it’s around 26-30% of smokers smoke menthol.
So the FDA, in its research in supporting this decision, apparently is mistaken by at least a factor of 2. I wonder what other numbers they are mistaken on that they used to support this decision. What numbers did they use to come to the conclusion that it would get around a million people to quit? (Or is it the CDC that is wrong on the number of smokers?)
I’ll admit that I was wrong with the 18 million number, as I relied on the number that came from the agency responsible for making this decision, and it’s probably closer to 8-9 million people who are being told they can’t make their own decisions.
I suppose that’s a bit less of a political hit to the Democrats, but I wouldn’t write off 8-9 million voters quite as cavalierly as they seem to have.
There is rampant double counting, of course. If you Google to find out how many Americans are killed by smoking each year for, let’s say, 2018 through 2021. The first two years are pre-covid, the last two during covid.
Notice how there is no change whatsoever in the smoking deaths before and after covid? It’s almost like they would have you believe that covid didn’t kill one single smoker.
Note that the smoking death numbers very specifically do not say number of smokers who die from any cause. They consistently make it a point to emphasize that smoking is directly responsible for the deaths. Often by bolding the phrase smoking kills x number of people per year. (Currently it says 480,000, which is essentially the same number reported for 30 straight years now. Seems kind of fishy that that number never changes.)
Here’s a post I made 8 years ago on this topic. The rest of the thread is fairly short, where I go back and forth with DrDeth.
I would like to point out that if you Google right now at this moment how many people smoking kills in the United States each year, Google says 480,000. In the linked thread, DrDeth immediately replies with a cite that says “more than 480,000.” Eight years later, the exact same number. What are the odds!
The other part of that number is that smoking, unlike guns, doesn’t kill you immediately.
So, if someone smokes through their 20’s, quits at 30, then dies at 90 of heart complications, they will be written up as a smoking related death. Even if their death can be directly attributable to their having smoked over half a century before, the number is still disingenuous, and it gives anti-smoking zealots a cause to rally around. Even if they managed to completely ban all tobacco products today, you’d still have pretty much the same number of smoking related deaths going trailing out for decades. If you had 10 people in the entire country who still smoked, they’d be blamed for the 450,000 smoking related deaths.
Smokers are just an easy target for people to feel superior to, look down on, and try to control their lives.
OK. How about banning indoor smoking in restaurants, clubs, airplanes and the workplace? Because that is fucking disgusting and the world is a much better place for those bans.
That’s been done in 38 states already.
The rest are pretty much deep red states, so if you want the FDA to extend its authority to ban it in those states, at least Democrats won’t be losing any voters over it.
I’m not sure that US law would have the authority to make bans like that, but if you can find a way to do so, sure, why not?
I don’t want the FDA to extend their authority. Clearly they cannot make that kind of mandate. I am interested in your thoughts on those laws in general if you would be so kind to indulge us.
Agreed, it is fucking disgusting, and indoor bans on smoking in public places is an unassailable good in my opinion as a smoker.
I’m glad I was done going to bars right around the time smoking bans started to kick in.