4 ms·

Sorry if I was unclear, the part you quoted was meant as a future example based on slippery slope, the direction being taken, and similar substance outlawings.

Sorry if I was unclear, the part you quoted was meant as a future example based on slippery slope, the direction being taken, and similar substance outlawings. I am not saying this particular ban is criminalizing it.

Alex3917 8y ago
> was meant as a future example based on slippery slope, the direction being taken, and similar substance outlawings. The next logical step would be to ban cigarettes, but allow people to continue to purchase loose leaf tobacco. But if that happened then smoking rates would likely fall enough that it'd no longer be a major health issue, so even if we are in a slippery slope situation it doesn't seem likely to me that criminalization is the logical conclusion. Already most smoking deaths are in long term smokers. The 14% of Americans who still smoke are for the most part only smoking a few cigarettes per day (except the couple percent in the severely mentally ill population), so they're going to have nowhere near the same level of health outcomes as the folks who spent decades smoking multiple packs per day. I wouldn't personally ever use tobacco products because I place a high value on not being dead, but from a statistical perspective just looking at the number of current deaths would lead one to vastly overestimate the risks of tobacco use practices. I guess my point is that from a personal level you should definitely not smoke, but at a public policy level we'd hit the point of diminishing returns far before instating a complete ban.
- jon_richards 8y ago
  >at a public policy level we'd hit the point of diminishing returns far before instating a complete ban. I think there was a study that showed chain smokers are actually less of a burden on the public because they die relatively quickly, reducing their consumption of medical resources.
  - michelledepeil 8y ago
    I think I read on HN, including a source, that the concept of early smoker death was propaganda from the tobacco industry. I will look it up.
    - sokoloff 8y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Finance_Balance_of_Smoking_in_the_Czech_Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Finance_Balance_of_Smok... or search "smoking early death czech" for much more coverage of the Philip Morris study.
    - jon_richards 8y ago
      Interesting. I see a lot of criticism for the message of the article (saving money on people dying early), but not any for the methodology.
- madaxe_again 8y ago
  >smoking a few cigarettes per day (except the couple percent in the severely mentally ill population) Smokers are mentally ill? Really? I’d say that people who see smokers as mentally ill are neurotic and have an authority complex, and probably have far greater issues than smokers.
  - dnbgfher 8y ago
    You're jumping the gun here. A number of mental illnesses are highly correlated with heavy smoking. It's a legal coping mechanism that people can easily obtain entirely on their own.

Alex3917 8y ago

> was meant as a future example based on slippery slope, the direction being taken, and similar substance outlawings. The next logical step would be to ban cigarettes, but allow people to continue to purchase loose leaf tobacco. But if that happened then smoking rates would likely fall enough that it'd no longer be a major health issue, so even if we are in a slippery slope situation it doesn't seem likely to me that criminalization is the logical conclusion. Already most smoking deaths are in long term smokers. The 14% of Americans who still smoke are for the most part only smoking a few cigarettes per day (except the couple percent in the severely mentally ill population), so they're going to have nowhere near the same level of health outcomes as the folks who spent decades smoking multiple packs per day. I wouldn't personally ever use tobacco products because I place a high value on not being dead, but from a statistical perspective just looking at the number of current deaths would lead one to vastly overestimate the risks of tobacco use practices. I guess my point is that from a personal level you should definitely not smoke, but at a public policy level we'd hit the point of diminishing returns far before instating a complete ban.

jon_richards 8y ago
>at a public policy level we'd hit the point of diminishing returns far before instating a complete ban. I think there was a study that showed chain smokers are actually less of a burden on the public because they die relatively quickly, reducing their consumption of medical resources.
- michelledepeil 8y ago
  I think I read on HN, including a source, that the concept of early smoker death was propaganda from the tobacco industry. I will look it up.
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Finance_Balance_of_Smoking_in_the_Czech_Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Finance_Balance_of_Smok... or search "smoking early death czech" for much more coverage of the Philip Morris study.
  - jon_richards 8y ago
    Interesting. I see a lot of criticism for the message of the article (saving money on people dying early), but not any for the methodology.
madaxe_again 8y ago
>smoking a few cigarettes per day (except the couple percent in the severely mentally ill population) Smokers are mentally ill? Really? I’d say that people who see smokers as mentally ill are neurotic and have an authority complex, and probably have far greater issues than smokers.
- dnbgfher 8y ago
  You're jumping the gun here. A number of mental illnesses are highly correlated with heavy smoking. It's a legal coping mechanism that people can easily obtain entirely on their own.