this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
73 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

217 readers
14 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories

πŸ™οΈ Cities / Regions

πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

πŸ’» Universities

πŸ’΅ Finance / Shopping

πŸ—£οΈ Politics

🍁 Social & Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
73
Ban selling cigarettes to anyone born after 2008, Ottawa Public Health urges Health Canada (ottawacitizen.com)
submitted 10 months ago by NightOwl@lemm.ee to c/canada@lemmy.ca
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] undercrust@lemmy.ca 36 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Shit policy idea. Banning things never works. Please see all of history as evidence.

Increase taxes on nicotine ten-fold if it's so important. Use taxes in part to ensure that the amount of smokes that fall off the back of trucks doesn't spike. That's about as good as you're gonna get to influence anyone who's addicted.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 23 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Which "all of history" are you using as a base? Because this is a slow phase-out of cigarettes, nothing like anything we've had before.

This is not a ban on nicotine, like we had bans on alcohol. People would still be able to vape nicotine.

[–] AnotherDirtyAnglo@lemmy.ca 22 points 10 months ago

You don't have to increase it 10 fold, that just creates an overnight black market.

Banning sales to people born after a specific date is just as good a solution as any. If you want go full retar-, er, libertarian on it, let people grow their own, but forbid sales/distribution.

There is no upside to cigarettes -- it's the leading cause of lung cancer and a dozen other diseases that cost our health care system billions in each province, every year. The only people who will complain will be the companies who make billions in profit from human addiction, misery, and death.

[–] Hyacin@lemmy.ca 21 points 10 months ago

This kind of policy is not about influencing people who are already addicted, it is about trying to prevent anyone new from getting addicted and eventually putting the entire thing in the rear view.

[–] k_rol@lemmy.ca 18 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yeah sure let's go back to banning drugs.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 22 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is a ban on cigarettes, not on nicotine

[–] k_rol@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Good point I didn't think of. I guess removing that convenience could discourage a lot of people. But won't it still increase contraband?

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Unlikely because the cigarettes can still enter the market and be commercialized legally, so the economics of contraband doesn't change. It's like the currently existing age restrictions already in place.

We might observe some just not caring to check birthdates, like currently not every cashier asks for IDs selling alcohol as they should. But the benefit is still there if a decent percentage of the next generation will just trade cigarettes for vapes for the sake of convenience.

[–] AnotherDirtyAnglo@lemmy.ca 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, let's bring back lead in gas. And asbestos. And raising radiation exposure limits. And measles. Smallpox. In fact, let's roll back all progress we've ever made to improve human health. Let's get those 10 year olds back into the coal mines and smoking unfiltered cigarettes.

[–] LostWon@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Actually, filtered cigarettes have been said to be worse in some articles I've seen.

As you said above though, unadulterated natural tobacco should always be available to people who have a cultural connection with it and can prepare it traditionally. Take away the cool factor and the chemical-laden stuff could hopefully be phased out. Education campaigns can also talk about the human suffering and environmental costs of production on a large scale.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 3 points 10 months ago

filtered cigarettes have been said to be worse

Yeah. They add fiberglass to the inhaled particulate and are easily defeated as a filter as the act of smoking crushes and chanellizes the filter.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Yeah, let’s bring back [...] measles. Smallpox

You heard what America's aristocracy was making its dumbest do during CoVid, right?

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 14 points 10 months ago

Maybe nicotine addiction should be medicalized.

Anyone born after [date] could get it legally through a pharmacy after talking to their doctor/nurse-practitioner and explaining why they need a prescription (ie they are addicted and can't function without it).

I actually like that framing. I'm imagining explaining it to my 5 year old:

What's that person doing?

They took the wrong medicine and now they have to take that medicine everyday. It's yucky, expensive, and very hard on their body.

Why did they take the wrong medicine?

They didn't realize it was medicine and they thought it looked interesting or fun, I'm not sure exactly. You know not to take medicine without talking to mum, dad, or a doctor right?

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 8 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

They should ban smoking cannabis, too. It's just as bad. Produces tar in the lungs and can cause lung, throat and mouth cancer as well. And because it dilates the bronches, it goes in deeper.

Honestly if they do that people will fall back to contraband. And that's worse.

And I love having the occasional cigar. (Like a couple of times a year) There's very little harm in that.

Edit: you know there are other ways to consume cannabis than to smoke it, right?

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 3 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Cannabis has potential medical applications in areas like pain management. Tobacco has none that I'm aware ofβ€”its only legitimate use is in the ceremonies of some Indigenous peoples.

So, given that one is useful and the other useless, why do you want us to get rid of the useful one?

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 7 points 10 months ago

Yes. I'm a frequent user. But I don't smoke it. I use oils or edibles. There are other ways to consume cannabis than by smoking it.

I don't care if people down vote me for this. Smoking anything has big potential cancer risks and that's a fact.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

Nicotine outside of its addictiveness does have perks. It does assist with anxiety and makes you more aware which is said to make you remember things better. They aren't advertised often because the downsides of smoking cigarettes outweigh them usually.

I would argue that if they were trying to make it about health, edibles and such may reduce lung and other impacts by cannabis but only time will tell in studies.

The law just seems strange to me to say, we vote ban smoking cigarettes (pre-rolled) for those who can't vote and have no say, but we keep that privilege for ourselves. Also no changes to rules about smoking around those people.

Either make the rules for everyone or no one.

[–] trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 10 months ago

On the one hand I respect personal choice but on the other hand I feel like this is definitely something that should be done (or the recommended idea from undercrush's comment of extremely high taxes on the products to disincentivize use) because the public healthcare system is definitely spending too much time and effort dealing with the ramifications of peoples decisions to continue to hurt themselves.

Yes, quitting sucks, I was at like a pack a day before 16, ended up going cold turkey around 24 and although the first few months suck with the odd craving for the next year or two, it's not that bad. If push comes to shove, changing smokes to sugar free gum would be a vast improvement.

Although a few friends have tried that 'fum' thing and said they succeeded in quitting but I haven't personally tried that. There's a wide variety of ways to beat the addiction these days and if everyone is contributing to a national money pool for everyones health then at the very least we need to do the minimum amount of effort to try to be healthy so as to not overburden the system and collapse it.

... especially when canada keeps losing billions of dollars to corporate tax fraud. Fucken CRA is trash at everything.