3 ms·

> I suppose the next step would be to ban branding from tobacco packages so the only thing on the package is the warnings and images. We're already going in th

by jperras 10y ago

> I suppose the next step would be to ban branding from tobacco packages so the only thing on the package is the warnings and images. We're already going in that direction here in Canada: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/05/31/well-consult-canadians-on-tobacco-packaging-says-philpott.html https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/05/31/well-consult-... > I don't necessarily like legislation that bans people from choosing to do something, but I think there's a decent case for it in countries with publicly funded health care, where tobacco uses costs everyone, and not just the individual who chooses to use it. Bingo. While I am in favour of individual liberties, smoking is not one of them if I am required to subsidize the healthcare that smokers will inevitably need.

rpeden 10y ago
Thanks for the link. I'm in Toronto, and I'd heard that plain packaging was being considered, but I didn't realize the the gov't had committed to it. Since I don't know any smokers, and places that sell cigarettes aren't allowed to display them in a visible location, I haven't really even seen what cigarette packages here look like for the past couple of years.
refurb 10y ago
Bingo. While I am in favour of individual liberties, smoking is not one of them if I am required to subsidize the healthcare that smokers will inevitably need. That's a slippery slope. Are we going to ban fatty or high sugar foods next? How about extreme sports? Motorcycles? You pay for the outcomes of all those activities as well.
- rpeden 10y ago
  I'm not sure about bans, but I wouldn't be surprised to see warning labels becoming required on foods that are tasty but terribly unhealthy. It might be a way to change behavior slowly over time. Activities with a high risk of physical injury are more difficult. For things like extreme sports, the relatively small number of participants might mean that the net increase in health care costs in negligible. For activities like motorcycling that have relatively large numbers of participants, mandatory supplemental medical insurance is an option. It's probably already a good idea to have it right now, even when you aren't required to. This is another slippery slope, though. If motorcyclists are required to have extra insurance to cover medical expenses, they'll inevitably ask "why us, and not skydivers, scuba divers, etc?". It would be difficult to know where to draw the line.

by jperras 10y ago

rpeden 10y ago

Thanks for the link. I'm in Toronto, and I'd heard that plain packaging was being considered, but I didn't realize the the gov't had committed to it. Since I don't know any smokers, and places that sell cigarettes aren't allowed to display them in a visible location, I haven't really even seen what cigarette packages here look like for the past couple of years.

refurb 10y ago

Bingo. While I am in favour of individual liberties, smoking is not one of them if I am required to subsidize the healthcare that smokers will inevitably need. That's a slippery slope. Are we going to ban fatty or high sugar foods next? How about extreme sports? Motorcycles? You pay for the outcomes of all those activities as well.

rpeden 10y ago
I'm not sure about bans, but I wouldn't be surprised to see warning labels becoming required on foods that are tasty but terribly unhealthy. It might be a way to change behavior slowly over time. Activities with a high risk of physical injury are more difficult. For things like extreme sports, the relatively small number of participants might mean that the net increase in health care costs in negligible. For activities like motorcycling that have relatively large numbers of participants, mandatory supplemental medical insurance is an option. It's probably already a good idea to have it right now, even when you aren't required to. This is another slippery slope, though. If motorcyclists are required to have extra insurance to cover medical expenses, they'll inevitably ask "why us, and not skydivers, scuba divers, etc?". It would be difficult to know where to draw the line.