UK Government To Offer One Million People Vapes To Cut Smoking Rates (miragenews.com) 144
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Mirage News: One million smokers will be encouraged to swap cigarettes for vapes under a pioneering new "swap to stop" scheme designed to improve the health of the nation and cut smoking rates. As part of the world-first national scheme, almost one in five of all smokers in England will be provided with a vape starter kit alongside behavioral support to help them quit the habit as part of a series of new measures to help the government meet its ambition of being smoke-free by 2030 -- reducing smoking rates to 5% or less. Local authorities will be invited to take part in the scheme later this year and will design a scheme which suits its needs, including deciding which populations to prioritize.
In a speech today, Health Minister Neil O'Brien will also announce that following the success of local schemes, pregnant women will be offered financial incentives to help them stop smoking. This will involve offering vouchers, alongside behavioral support, to all pregnant women who smoke by the end of next year. The government will also consult on introducing mandatory cigarette pack inserts with positive messages and information to help people to quit smoking. Additionally, there will be a crackdown on illicit vape sales as part of measures to stop children and non-smokers take up the habit -- which is growing in popularity among young people. Health Minister Neil O'Brien said in a statement: "Up to two out of three lifelong smokers will die from smoking. Cigarettes are the only product on sale which will kill you if used correctly. We will offer a million smokers new help to quit. We will be funding a new national 'swap to stop' scheme -- the first of its kind in the world. We will work with councils and others to offer a million smokers across England a free vaping starter kit."
In a speech today, Health Minister Neil O'Brien will also announce that following the success of local schemes, pregnant women will be offered financial incentives to help them stop smoking. This will involve offering vouchers, alongside behavioral support, to all pregnant women who smoke by the end of next year. The government will also consult on introducing mandatory cigarette pack inserts with positive messages and information to help people to quit smoking. Additionally, there will be a crackdown on illicit vape sales as part of measures to stop children and non-smokers take up the habit -- which is growing in popularity among young people. Health Minister Neil O'Brien said in a statement: "Up to two out of three lifelong smokers will die from smoking. Cigarettes are the only product on sale which will kill you if used correctly. We will offer a million smokers new help to quit. We will be funding a new national 'swap to stop' scheme -- the first of its kind in the world. We will work with councils and others to offer a million smokers across England a free vaping starter kit."
Obesity should be a higher priorty. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that people are not fungible, yes? Else we could turn CEOs into productive members of society.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think he meant that the CEO should hold a speech, the manure produced that way is of highest quality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's seems obvious what's changed to make us all fatter. Everyone is more sedentary due to available technology and entertainment options and it's starting at a very young age now. When was the last time children actually went outside to run around play? Same for adults. Our "labor" force does little to no actual labor any more either, we have machines for most of that now. There is no solution either.
Re:Obesity should be a higher priorty. (Score:5, Interesting)
That's obviously not helping anything, but obesity is increasing even among lab animals on calorie controlled diets.
There's obviously more to the story - a lab animal locked in a cage in the '70s wasn't getting any more exercise than one locked in a cage today, and even though their calorie intake is the same, the ones today are getting fatter.
As I've heard it there's two major theories:
1) modern food (including animal feed) is far more heavily processed - e.g. the calorie balance has shifted from lots of fiber and complex carbohydrates, to simple carbohydrates that are easier to digest and thus have a greater *effective* calorie content - food calories are measured by burning food samples in a calorimeter - and fire can release a lot of calories that wouldn't actually be released by digestion (such as those in fiber, which passes untouched through most animal's digestive track), or which require more energy-intensive digestion processes, reducing the effective calorie yield.
2) The entire fricking planet is now saturated with synthetic, bioactive organic molecules which are almost certainly having poorly understood effects on living creatures of all kinds. Pseudo-estrogens in particular (mostly from birth control and plastic additives like BPA, BPB, etc) are well know to promote weight gain, are present in significant quantities in every waterway on Earth, and are not generally removed by water treatment plants or common home water filters
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you go ahead and keep feeding "cosmic energy" to your unicorn. Leave the adults alone when they're talking about real things.
We are bathed in energy from the the cosmos, in the form of high-energy hard and particle radiation, but
1) Our bodies have no way to convert radiation to useful energy, instead it actually consumes energy to repair the damage it causes.
2) there isn't actually all that much of it in terms of wattage - you get more from the radiation emitted by the ground beneath you
3)And what do
Re: (Score:2)
I'm overweight and gotten in shape. Being in good cardiovascular health and having good muscular endurance does not make the weight go away. Even with intense dietary restrictions it only gradually gets better and may plateau entirely. And exercise can only go so far - everything is rough on your joints when you are overweight. Once your metabolism is messed up, it doesn't go back.
Smoking is an easy win and since they have publicly funded healthcare, this will more easily end in a taxpayer savings.
Re: (Score:2)
Being in good cardiovascular health and having good muscular endurance does not make the weight go away. Even with intense dietary restrictions it only gradually gets better and may plateau entirely.
Off-topic to be sure, but I'm just hoping to help. Have you tried a ketogenic diet? It's very rare not to lose fat when eating that way. You might want to look at a YouTube channel called Low Carb Down Under. There's lots of contrarian information there, and most of it is from medical specialists, including at least one cardiologist who prescribes a low-carb high-fat diet for his patients and gets good results.
It's a very controversial diet and it's hard to separate the good from the guff, but it might be w
Re: (Score:2)
I believe there have been studies showing that smokers often take themselves out early enough so that they actually save money in the long run, ie the healthcare systems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We know what changed:
Diets have shifted heavily toward foods with high glycemic index, and an overall jump in caloric intake; coupled with an increase in sedentary activities.
The real answer is nobody wants to do anything about it. The fix is simple - eat your vegetables, drink lots of plain water, and spend time outdoors at sport, walking, physical labor, etc..
The hard part is getting people to want to do that stuff. No staving required - well as long as you are willing to forgo the calorie dense options.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the science is clear that the insulin response to certain foods plays a role, in how your body stores it.
If take two identical twins with the same life style and given one 3000 calories of processed sugar and the other 3000 calories of lean beef + how every much extra we calculate it takes to digest the beef vs the sugar; I strongly suspect the amount of increased body fat we find on them in the following days will differ.
Re: (Score:2)
That would help you with your point but it doesn't disprove theirs. You'd need quadruplets and differing levels of physical activity to see which has the bigger impact and whether diet matters at all when you are active enough.
Re:Obesity should be a higher priorty. (Score:4, Interesting)
The change is actually easy to see - 70%+ of food items now have added sugar (even some kinds of salt!) and sugar (specifically fructose) tells the liver to create/store fat. The mechanism is well understood and historically is how we "fattened up" for winter when high-sugar fruits ripened in the fall/early winter. Now of course we can get those fruits and lots of other sugar-laden foods all year 'round, not just a few months of the year.
There are also a lot of social behaviors that reinforce/emotionally reward eating "treats" (sugary foods), and your gut biome also influences your mood (cravings for sugar), so losing weight and keeping it off can be challenging even when you know what is happening in your body. That's why most successful weight loss regiments include physical activity since it both removes toxins (lymph system) and stimulates production of endorphins that help to level out your mood and cravings. Remove the sugar and do some light physical activity and you'd be surprised how easily the weight comes off. Add some intermittent fasting to get through plateaus...
Re: (Score:2)
It's not that baffling why people have gotten fatter. With ever more demands on our time, most of which are directly related to sitting and staring at a screen, rather than hard labor, there's little time for exercise. And while it may not apply to the UK, here in the US, we also have the industrialization of food to consider. The sugar lobby exists. The people that determine "best practices" for diet are usually bought and paid for by the preservatives makers to make sure all the shit they shovel into most
Re: (Score:3)
It is baffling to mainstream medical science, because obesity is still higher than what we would expect given people's habits.
It's pretty obvious what's going on, though, and what makes it obvious is how people lose weight with poop transplants. Our internal biomes are getting fucked up by something (I vote for practically everything as the culprit, but especially antibiotics, and the sketchier preservatives, and oh yeah microplastics) that affects obesity. All that stuff about people's eating and exercise
Re: (Score:2)
This thread is amazing.
One post says "it's obviously this!" Another replies "it's obviously this!"
Then you point out that actual scientific study indicates all the obvious explanations don't completely explain the effect... then say "it's obviously this!"
Re: (Score:2)
Get a dozen gym rats and a dozen fat weeble wobbles and ask each group what causes obesity and what they could do to be thin.
It will become totally obvious why the fatties are fat.
Re: (Score:2)
You know it's possible to work on more than one problem at a time, right?
Re: (Score:2)
You know it's possible to work on more than one problem at a time, right?
You know it's possible for people to make their own health versus lifestyle decisions, right?
Re: (Score:2)
I do, yes. I also know addiction isn't something you choose to just give up.
My mom used to smoke. Switching to vaping got her off the cigarettes. Trying to quit in any other way just did not work for her, and believe me - she tried.
Re: (Score:2)
I know more obese people than smokers these days (including myself). Smoking is already on the decline with cigarettes in plain packaging and costing over £10 a packet.
I got a better idea. How about we let people decide for themselves whether smoking, vaping, crisps, skiing, bungie jumping, driving too fast, being a couch potato, tanning, promiscuous sex, working a stressful job, and a zillion other things are worth the costs (including health consequences)? It's not like the information isn't widely available.
I trust people to make decisions about their own lives much more than I trust you or me to make decisions about their lives.
Re: (Score:2)
I would say that the information *isn't* widely available, or at best is diluted with misinformation. For example, sugary drinks are promoted as vital hydration for sports. Now people think that if they go for a light jog they need to drink half a litre of sugar water (with "electrolytes!") in order to recover.
Re: Obesity should be a higher priorty. (Score:2)
But it's got what plants crave!
It takes £680/person to quit smoking (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it prevents one in a hundred of them from getting a long drawn out lung cancer or other expensive condition, it will probably still net a health spending savings in the longer term.
This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:5, Insightful)
Show me one case where someone has been harmed by vaping. And exclude the back alley THC oils that caused EVALI and home made vape devices that shorted and exploded. Those are edge cases and not what's on the shelf at Tobacco Hut. If vaping was inherently harmful, we'd know it by now.
Cigarettes, on the other hand, are basically 100% fatal. Yeah, they said 2 out of three. Both of my parents died from COPD caused by smoking.
If you're reading this and you smoke, switch to vaping immediately. It's easy.
Re: (Score:3)
Don't exaggerate, it weakens your case.
"As many as one-third of heavy smokers age 35 will die before age 85 of diseases caused by their smoking.."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Given your genetics, you are correct to avoid smoking. In my family the ill affects show up as heart disease instead of lung problems, so I don't smoke either.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if the lung damage doesn't kill you, quality of life is pretty bad. My Dad spent his last decade chained to an oxygen tank, struggling for every breath.
Re: (Score:2)
And what percentage of non-smokers will die before age 85 from other causes?
TBH, living to age 85 seems like quite an accomplishment; if you told people there was a drug which gave you a 2/3 chance of living until 85, I bet most people would take it.
Re:This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:5, Interesting)
Show me one case where someone has been harmed by vaping...If you're reading this and you smoke, switch to vaping immediately. It's easy.
The irony being that there's a huge movement in the US to suppress vaping because activists are making the perfect (not using nicotine at all) be the enemy of the good (using nicotine in a much safer way).
I'm sure politicians go along because they're addicted to the tobacco settlement money so they don't actually want to see people stop smoking cigarettes.
Re:This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:4, Informative)
There's a very fine line to walk between encouraging and suppressing vaping. Vaping is the lesser of two evils, but it's still a worse outcome than "don't be a nicotine addict in the first place".
If it works as a smoking cessation tool for 10 smokers, that's great! But if in the process the marketing of the cool new cherry bubblegum flavor in Teen Vogue gets 10,000 kids (who largely had little interest in cigarettes to begin with thanks to previous success of anti-tobacco campaigning) to get hooked on nicotine for life, that's a downside.
We've got to weigh the cost and benefit, and reign in the nicotine dealers as needed.
Re: (Score:3)
You are the problem mentioned in the post you replied to.
Re: This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As long as they stick with vaping, nicotine isn't really that much worse for you than caffeine. However, nicotine is typically delivered in far higher equivalent doses than caffeine over the course of the day. Again, something that would be far less harmful to teenagers than adults other than the lifelong addiction part. I definitely have a lifelong addiction to caffeine and nobody tried to keep me away from it as a kid.
So while teen vaping is "bad" it's probably not a good enough reason to keep interest
Re: (Score:2)
The irony being that there's a huge movement in the US to suppress vaping because activists are making the perfect (not using nicotine at all) be the enemy of the good (using nicotine in a much safer way).
Yeah, this baffles me. Even with the various "unknowns" of vaping factored in, the chances of it *not* being much better for smokers than cigarettes are basically zero, because what we do have is a very good understanding of just how devastating to health smoking is.
Once vapes appeared on the market, it seemed obvious to me that any sane / responsible / competent government at either Federal or State level would increase the taxes on cigarettes relative to the taxes on vapes, and could then just sit back an
If it has nicotine... (Score:2)
...then it is bad for you. Ask a dentist.
Re: (Score:2)
...then it is bad for you. Ask a dentist.
Tomatoes?
Re: (Score:2)
Tomatoes are fairly acidic and thus not great for having in contact with your teeth for very long. But it only has about 1/10,000 the nicotine content of a single cigarette.
Re:This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:4, Informative)
If vaping was inherently harmful, we'd know it by now.
It could very well be harmful. Almost certainly not as harmful as cigarettes but those take 40 years or more to kill you. We haven't even had 40 years of vaping to study.
Re: This is Good - Vaping is Harmless (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Same addiction, _much_ less harm.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're reading this and you smoke, switch to vaping immediately. It's easy.
Or quit. I mean that's an other option as well. Vaping is cheap and all, but quitting is even cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
Show me one case where someone has been harmed by vaping.
Ok. See these sites and the references they contain.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.or... [hopkinsmedicine.org]
https://www.lung.org/quit-smok... [lung.org]
https://my.clevelandclinic.org... [clevelandclinic.org]
All I did was search for "harms caused by vaping" and click a few of the top results at reputable sites. The Cleveland Clinic page has a concise list of specific harms caused by vaping, including asthma, lung scarring, organ damage, EVALI (e-cigarette, or vaping, product use associated lung injury), and addiction. The American Lung Association page lists s
Re: (Score:2)
It's a weird phenomenon where drug enthusiasts have to insist their drug of choice is totally harmless. Less harmful won't do, it's got to be at least completely harmless. A miracle cure for everything is even better.
Meanwhile in the US (Score:4, Informative)
They have made it exponentially harder to vape than smoke.
I use to be able to buy directly from a US manufacturer with a lab you could contact to verify its purity.
With FDA guidelines, I now have to go through an "authorized" storefront, with whatever his supply chain is, if he can even order from my previous manufacturer.
Safer my ass.
Re: (Score:2)
I can order tobacco online and have it shipped to my door. But not vape supplies.
Re: (Score:2)
I use to be able to buy directly from a US manufacturer with a lab you could contact to verify its purity.
What, you'd call them up and they'd say "yeah it's totally pure"?
Re: (Score:2)
if you have nothing to add, don't.
You'll know when I don't, because I won't.
Vaping doesn't cut smoking rates (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reading between the lines a bit here, you seem to be classifying not-smoking in the smoking category.
Do I have that right? Or does the data actually show that people are taking up smoking (actual smoking) at the same rate that people are switching from smoking to not-smoking?
Fuck that (Score:2)
How about they just make tobacco products illegal? All this half assed namby pamby bullshit with taxing them and spending the money to tell people not to use them is weak. Just fucking make it illegal to sell any dried tobacco product already. Statistically nobody will grow their own tobacco. Also, make it illegal to smoke anywhere anyone else might breathe in your smoke, inside or out. Smokers can go to lounges with air filtration equipment. Or, hear me out, they can buy their own fucking vapes.
All kinds o
Re: (Score:2)
"How about they just make tobacco products illegal?"
"This must have something to do with titled families which got rich on slavery-based tobacco."
Its purely a function of the fact that if they did so they'd lose the next election, and they know it.
Re: (Score:2)
How about they just make tobacco products illegal? All this half assed namby pamby bullshit with taxing them and spending the money to tell people not to use them is weak. Just fucking make it illegal to sell any dried tobacco product already. Statistically nobody will grow their own tobacco.
New Zealand is trying this, by annually raising the age at which people can buy tobacco: https://www.theguardian.com/wo... [theguardian.com]
So, we just have to wait a few years and we'll know if works.
Re: (Score:2)
Just making it illegal worked great for the American Prohibition for alcohol!
Financial incentives? (Score:2)
They offer financial incentives to smokers, but what about those who never smoked in the first place?
Some companies also offer smoking breaks to smokers, but don't offer equivalent breaks to non smokers.
These things actually serve to encourage smoking.
Re: (Score:2)
Some companies also offer smoking breaks to smokers, but don't offer equivalent breaks to non smokers.
These things actually serve to encourage smoking.
If I had mod points, you'd get them. The current situation is all stick and no carrot.
Pointless to lean on financial incentive. (Score:2)
Vaping is far cheaper than smoking. Anyone who can afford to smoke can afford to vape instead (and save a shitton in the process). People who don't vape don't do so because they don't want to.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids (Score:2)
Kids love vapes. Previous generations may have taken up smoking because it was "cool", but smoking is a fairly unpleasant activity.
Vapes have the same "cool" factor and come in raspberry. This is a problem.
Re: (Score:3)
I vape. I DO NOT WANT tobacco flavored juice. I love the fact there is a wide range of flavors to choose from! The companies are marketing to what sells, and what sells are all sorts of fruity, sweet, etc flavors. I dont care for the sweet flavors, but my brother does. Pure flavors like Apple are my favorite.
I am not a kid, and haven't been one for decades. Same for literally everyone I know, and NONE of these adults want no flavor or tobacco flavors, they all switched to vaping to stop smoking c
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
We did grow up. And we discovered the world is full of far more interesting and satisfying drugs than the sugar and caffeine that were easily accessible to us as children.
I've never really understood the appeal of nicotine, especially considering the health costs associated with tobacco - but then I rarely use caffeine either. Both are highly addictive with long withdrawal periods, and intensely habituating so that you need to consume them in ever-greater quantities to get the same high - with regular no
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Since people keep dying in droves from using drugs despite all the warnings, it's time to stop wasting all those taxpayer dollars and let nature take its course. Get rid of government programs to prevent usage or stop usage, no clean needle programs, no detox programs, no PSAs warning of the dangers, no nothing.
It's your body and the government shouldn't have a say in what you do with it.
Re:This sounds stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
But telling other people what drugs they should avoid is extremely egotistical.
Your freedoms end when they infringe on mine. Do pretty much what you want if it doesn't impact others. Smoke in your own house or designated place, but don't smoke in public places or around those who don't enjoy second-hand smoke. Drink if you desire, but don't drive when impaired. If pregnant, avoid drugs which could harm the baby. You get the basic idea.
Doctors and other experts have an obligation to warn about possible side-effects of drugs (eg. tell others which drugs they should avoid). It's up to you to decide whether to listen.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed.
And, especially when you have a socialized medical system, the government has a vested interest in mitigating self-harm as well - such as by encouraging vaping rather than smoking carcinogens.
Though, from a strictly financial perspective I seem to recall hearing that smokers actually put a below-average load on the health system since they tend to die from smoking-related illnesses before they develop all the really expensive chronic end-of-life problems that plague older people. So such damage miti
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a smoker, but they can look all they want and never find me buying cancersticks. That's because I smoke a pipe, and one thing you don't want to do is put cigarette "tobacco" in a pipe. It burns too fast, too hot and tastes terrible.
Re:This sounds stupid (Score:4)
Nope, that door opens as soon as the government has a mandate to promote the general welfare - such as is established in the opening sentence of the US constitution.
And it was wielded as such within a decade of being ratified, when in 1798 congress passed “An Act for the Relief of Sick and Disabled Seamen.” which established government-operated marine hospital services and mandated that privately-employed sailors purchase health care insurance. To a resounding silence from the founders themselves, who were still alive and healthy, and quite capable of objecting if they thought the constitution was being misinterpreted.
They key is in whether the government *promotes* the general welfare, or *enforces* it. A freedom-loving people should never let it cross that line.
I already pointed out that smokers are actually less expensive than non-smokers for public health care systems. And the health problems generally don't show up show up until after retirement, when their productive days are behind them anyway. As added benefits, smoking also tends to enhance productivity (and thus generated tax revenue) during the working years, and that early death saves money on government retirement benefits as well.
From a strictly self-interested perspective a government should be promoting smoking as heavily as they can - it's nothing but benefits for the government, the only downside is for the smoker themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
smoking also tends to enhance productivity (and thus generated tax revenue) during the working years, and that early death saves money on government retirement benefits as well.
From a strictly self-interested perspective a government should be promoting smoking as heavily as they can - it's nothing but benefits for the government, the only downside is for the smoker themselves.
I dunno, I've worked with plenty of smokers, and when they disappear for a "smoke break" for ten minutes every hour, it sure as hell isn't productive.
Re: (Score:2)
You should also be stepping away for 10 minutes every hour. It improves cognitive ability to step away for a few minutes.
As a former smoker, I got to "rub elbows" with people from all over the company, at all levels right up to SVP level. Those frank, direct conversations led to some genuine change. I am glad I ditched cigarettes though, I always felt bad about coming back in, knowing I was reeking of smoke.
Re: This sounds stupid (Score:2)
That's not the smoking gun you think it is.
Government also mandates seatbelts and helmets, and has done so long before being involved in healthcare. They mandate buildings that don't fall down and pay for firefighters. They invest heavily in medical research.
The gov have a vested interest to keep their population reasonably safe, educated, and healthy. Welcome out of the third world. But sure, it must be a freedumb thing, right?
Re: This sounds stupid (Score:2)
I can pay less for a procedure in many foreign countries without insurance than I can in the US even though I have pretty good health insurance.
I would like to see some sort of balance where some visits are completely free for citizens but ensure elective procedures remain completely private.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of it, is due to kids to what they see Adults and other people they look up to do.
So as a kid, you see your older brother, or a friend of his who you see as really cool, and he smokes, then you will will associate it to what the cool older folks do.
When you get into High School and College, and your friends who you trust and respect start smoking, you will want to fit in, and join them.
I didn't get into smoking or drinking (or harder drugs), but I was such an unpopular outsider, that I didn't look up
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, not to mention all the massive advertising to children that used to happen (Shoot, as a kid I collected "Camel Cash" from all the adult smokers I knew)
>It will just replace the habit from smoking to vaping.
Which cuts smoking... I'm not seeing your disagreement. Sure, vaping has its own issues, but it's not smoking. And while I'm far enough out of the mainstream that I may have missed it, I've seen very little adoption of vaping by non-smokers.
Personally I think adults should be able to do consume
Re: (Score:2)
No thanks, I'll continue following in the footsteps of all the greatest and most successful minds our species has produced.
Pretty much everyone who advocates either "growing up" or avoiding drugs is a waste of space interested only in increasing your value as a cog in the machine that will keep your head down to produce wealth and power for your betters, while keeping little of it for yourself.
Virtually everyone who has ever actually been successful in their own right, or developed art, science, or technolo
Re: (Score:2)
I would like to say
2) Using drugs responsibly
but quite a few actually died young from drug-excess related problems of one stripe or another. But they still did more for society and/or their families than a hundred teetotallers who lived long and productive lives
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have numbers to back that up?
A teetotaler may be too stuck on following the rules and being the good guy, where they fail to innovate and shake up the status quo. But it isn't necessarily the drugs that help with success.
Re: (Score:2)
I never said there was a causal relationship.
I said our best and brightest have consistently used drugs and encouraged a childlike perspective.
When our best and brightest all agree that something like drug use is a desirable activity, while a bunch of mostly-worthless authoritarian assholes all scream about how bad it is...
Well, I know which group I'm going to listen to. No contest.
I'm also going to use them with caution and respect, since even our best an brightest can sometimes fall prey to the dangers o
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and as for numbers... not offhand - but I challenge you to find more than a handful of examples of great minds who did not drink alcohol, the most popular recreational drug in the West in recent centuries.
I suppose I should also make explicit that I have no objection to teetotalers, provided they keep their choice a personal one.
If you feel that, for you, the risks outweigh then the benefits, far be it from me to second-guess your decision.
If you look at people consuming alcohol, nicotine, opium, or wha
Re: (Score:2)
I challenge you to find more than a handful of examples of great minds who did not drink alcohol,
Easy, Donald Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'll admit he's more than a handful...
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with maintaining a childlike perspective on the world.
But using Drugs isn't really a good connection to success. I would say not being a prat around others who use drugs is important, just because you end up closing a possible business connection in the future.
But having a childlike perspective is indeed important. Too many failures happen, because we do things like we have already done it in the past, and reject a new idea and approach.
Re: (Score:2)
At least they would be cheaper deaths. Smoking can cause some pretty expensive long term health issues.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK has a pretty good, scientifically based, harm reduction program. We know that vaping is harmful, but we also know that it's much, much less harmful than smoking.
Re: Just make cigarettes more lethal (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While we are at that I fully support making it legal shooting people that make proposals like that. Would reduce the trash in the human race.
Re: (Score:2)
Synthetic marijuana is crap, it only replicates one or two compounds out of dozens of significant ones. Nicotine juice, on the other hand, contains nicotine, and there's not a lot of other interesting compounds in tobacco.
Re:What about the others? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, anyone who has worked professionally with them knows that you don't cure an addict by giving them the drug they're addicted to.
As someone who quit smoking using a nicotine patch. I can tell you, you are 100% WRONG.
Re: (Score:2)
"Cigarettes are the only product on sale which will kill you if used correctly."
What about alcohol?
Re: (Score:2)
Alcohol used correctly (i.e. in reasonable quantities) doesn't kill you. People who drink a glass of wine per day live just as long as those who don't drink at all.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll smoke a cigar infrequently and I have no doubts that it isn't going to improve my health and may be detrimental. I'll still do it anyway as it can be pleasurable in the proper setting.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably not. Why would smoking for 10 years cause you lungs to collapse 4 times?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Exhale instead of inhaling. And forget to light it.
Re: (Score:2)
Where taxes on tobacco are very high, black-market tobacco becomes more prevalent: https://www.abc.net.au/news/20... [abc.net.au]
I assume the same will happen for vaping liquids.