You can make them from just tobacco, but that’s apparently not what most of the companies do:
American Lung Association link, so they aren’t unbiased. And I sure some of what they list are natural components of tobacco (nicotine for sure).
Is there any reason to suppose marijuana is much different?
Looks like MJ is slightly less lethal, at least in this article:
- Marijuana smoking found to raise levels of potentially harmful chemicals but to a lesser degree than tobacco smoking*
- Exposure to a toxic chemical associated with heightened risk for cardiovascular disease increases with tobacco smoking*
IANAD, but the sense I get is that inhaling smoke is bad for you 
One heavy smoker flat-out admitted to me that he was addicted to the additives in Marlboros or whatever it was, but many hard-core smokers I know seem to just buy pouches of supposedly 100% tobacco. That has to be cheaper than buying pre-rolled coffin nails, and that will be a significant savings when you smoke that much. (I suppose you could also adjust the blend to suit your purposes. I doubt Virginia tobacco, Turkish tobacco, and Périque all taste the same.)
Yes, and the activity can be socially pleasant. Smoking by contrast has an unpleasant aura, like pissing in elevators. It’s reasonable for a society to eliminate such activities.
That ship already sailed. But there are people who like to piss in their own private elevator.
I’m not going to defend smoking but I’m not hugely interested in living in a nanny-state.
You already do. Unless you don’t like to follow those pesky “laws”
Yay! It will save people so they can die of something else instead.
47 posts were split to a new topic: Nanny States and Covid Vaccines: Hijack of NZ smoking thread
That is interesting in that this law does not apply to those who made the law or any of their voters.
This point is rarely noted. Amazingly, if you took a magic wand right now instantly curing all forms of cancer (or cardiac disease), human life expectancy would (in each case) increase by well under two years.
Is it? As far as I can tell this is precisely targeted to “grandfather” in current smokers: if you’re currently legally able to smoke that’s preserved given the age cutoff. If you’re currently too young you’ll remain “too young” forever.
I haven’t seen the actual law (just the reports on it) but I’m not sure I understand why it’ll be overly beuroratic. I don’t know about NZ but at least in the US I see “you must be born before a specific date to buy alcohol/tobacco” all the time in convenience stores. That date has to be updated every day to correspond to an age cutoff. Wouldn’t the NZ proposal mostly just result in this date being completely fixed? Seems… easier in a way.
On the one hand, this is true for smoking cessation programs.
On the other hand, this is also true for vaccines, antibiotics, surgery, prenatal care, postnatal care, neonatal care, cancer treatments, heart treatments, insulin… literally every single medical advance since the average life span was 30 until we (someday?) become immortal.
You’re standing on the street choking to death on a hotdog, bystanders should think “why save him, he’ll just die of something else someday.” Seems a bit grim.
I would question this. People don’t routinely drop dead of a heart attack at age 50. I would assume that anybody who dies of a health condition at fifty must have had a lot of significant health problems before they died. The smoker you’re describing just had them when he was in his forties rather than his eighties.
I believe a law like that here would be a disaster. It would be, “Prohibition the Sequel”. New Zealand, however, is a horse of a different color. It is a small island nation located in a remote section of the world. Maybe they can control illegal tobacco more effectively.
It would depend on their rights as set down in New Zealand. It’s not likely to survive a legal test in the US but that’s a different story.
Riiiggghhht, that’s why no recreational drug has ever been banned at any time in American history
So I’ll mark you down in the column that believes tobacco will be outlawed in the US.
Who knows, but clearly you are wrong about a ban on tobacco violating the Constitution.
Unless, of course, you want to cite ‘chapter, verse’, and case law?