4 ms·

I feel like the same article could have written 30 years ago about smoking. "Look, personally I'm all for smoking bans, so don't attack me, I just want to poin

by xg15 2mo ago

I feel like the same article could have written 30 years ago about smoking. "Look, personally I'm all for smoking bans, so don't attack me, I just want to point out those studies that show that statistically, people in no-smoking areas have almost the same amount of respiratory symptoms as people in the regular areas. Maybe the real issue is our outdated idea of 'clean air'..."

EA-3167 2mo ago
If the respiratory symptom you’re talking about is lung cancer then the rate of that has dropped by hundreds of thousands. Not smoking works, but maybe people need more freedom to hurt themselves. I’d support that if society didn’t have to pay their bills later on.
- xg15 2mo ago
  True, but I imagine in an environment in which the vast majority of people smoke, the ones who don't will probably still passively inhale a lot more toxins than if no one smoked at all - making the effect size in direct comparison with smokers seem weaker than we know today it really is. I believe social media and phone use could have a similar dynamic - like the kids said themselves, it's more a "collective action" than an individual problem. That was what I was trying to get at with that analogy.
  - graemep 2mo ago
    One of the effects of heavy social media and phone use is parents (and other carers) paying less attention to kids.
    - pibaker 2mo ago
      https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/11/27/parents-now-spend-twice-as-much-time-with-their-children-as-50-years-ago https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/11/27/parents-... > Parents now spend twice as much time with their children as 50 years ago
      - xg15 2mo ago
        Both things could be true: It's possible that parents are more physically present (because they consciously decided to reduce hours or work from home) but are less mentally present (because a lot of that home time gets eaten by being on the phone or because working at home is still work).
      - graemep 1mo ago
        I have seen this claim before but I would really like the details. What are they doing? Physically present or engaging with kids? As far as the UK goes I find this hard to reconcile with longer hours in school (breakfast clubs and after school things), huge growth in childcare businesses, etc. I wonder whether the missing factor might be less informal childcare from family, so even if kids are spending more time with parents, they are spending less with family in total (therefore still getting less individual attention).
- rixed 2mo ago
  "Freedom" is a valuable concept but a poor model for understanding behavior. I'd support that if there were no business incentive to spend money and research to influence people into taking the wrong decisions.

by xg15 2mo ago

EA-3167 2mo ago

If the respiratory symptom you’re talking about is lung cancer then the rate of that has dropped by hundreds of thousands. Not smoking works, but maybe people need more freedom to hurt themselves. I’d support that if society didn’t have to pay their bills later on.

xg15 2mo ago
True, but I imagine in an environment in which the vast majority of people smoke, the ones who don't will probably still passively inhale a lot more toxins than if no one smoked at all - making the effect size in direct comparison with smokers seem weaker than we know today it really is. I believe social media and phone use could have a similar dynamic - like the kids said themselves, it's more a "collective action" than an individual problem. That was what I was trying to get at with that analogy.
- graemep 2mo ago
  One of the effects of heavy social media and phone use is parents (and other carers) paying less attention to kids.
  - pibaker 2mo ago
    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/11/27/parents-now-spend-twice-as-much-time-with-their-children-as-50-years-ago https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2017/11/27/parents-... > Parents now spend twice as much time with their children as 50 years ago
    - xg15 2mo ago
      Both things could be true: It's possible that parents are more physically present (because they consciously decided to reduce hours or work from home) but are less mentally present (because a lot of that home time gets eaten by being on the phone or because working at home is still work).
    - graemep 1mo ago
      I have seen this claim before but I would really like the details. What are they doing? Physically present or engaging with kids? As far as the UK goes I find this hard to reconcile with longer hours in school (breakfast clubs and after school things), huge growth in childcare businesses, etc. I wonder whether the missing factor might be less informal childcare from family, so even if kids are spending more time with parents, they are spending less with family in total (therefore still getting less individual attention).
rixed 2mo ago
"Freedom" is a valuable concept but a poor model for understanding behavior. I'd support that if there were no business incentive to spend money and research to influence people into taking the wrong decisions.