Tobacco Companies Up Against It In Canada

[mikey4444]

TTT...you will like this !

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-32969338

[sandyRoe]

Good. It's a vile business with a product that kills at least half of the people who become addicted to it.

[cassa333]

people have known for decades that smoking is bad for you and the people around them. And it has said so on the packets for donkeys years as well.

This is just another example of people wanting someone else to blame. And they have managed to do it.

[Svejk]

^not another one. ;-(

[Svejk]

crossed posts, cassa, my comment was aimed at the puritan above you. ;)

[sandyRoe]

Most smokers start when they're young and green in judgement. And when you're young the prospect of cancer when you're 50 or 60 seems so remote that it's not worth worrying about.

[mikey4444]

I agree...its about time we got tough with these Companies, who kill their own Customers.

That is why they promote cigarettes in the Third World so aggressively...they have replace the people that they have killed every year, and they do that by encouraging children to take up the habit.

Look at all these stupid Chinese people, smoking where people are eating !

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-32933819

[mikey4444]

Sandy...the voice of common sense at 08:48 !

[naomi24]

//its about time we got tough with these Companies, who kill their own Customers. //

How? They're producing and selling their product quite legally.

[sandyRoe]

The people who already smoke are addicted and probably beyond any message about what they're doing to their health. The anti smoking message should be directed towards the young.

[cassa333]

Just because the young are, by your reckoning Sandy, young and green in judgement doesn't make it the tobacco companies fault they start smoking. They, along with everyone else know it is dangerous. Just because they ignore the warnings doesn't make it the TC fault.

Perhaps young and green in judgement should be changed to young and arrogant? And of course if they are too young to make an informed decision on smoking the legal age of smoking should be much higher. maybe 21.

I am in my 50s and started smoking when I was 16. I gave up when I was 30. I knew back then it was addictive but still did it. No one (in the western world) that smokes can blame anyone else but themselves.

[mummybee]

Leave the smokers alone I say!!!

They are paying the government tax and will probably die before they become a burden on society! It's a win win for the government.

[Svejk]

mummybee- the voice of common sense at 9.07

[Canary42]

But they will , and do, become a burden on the NHS.

[sandyRoe]

Yes, there's the arrogance of youth. And in other fields, driving for instance, insurance premiums are weighted to reflect that potential harm that arrogance might cause.
Maybe society should try and protect youngsters until they're in a position to make better judgements

[naomi24]

As do most other people for one reason or another - and much of that self-inflicted. Obesity is a major risk to health.

[naomi24]

^That was to Canary.

[youngmafbog]

YEs Naomi, both need to be tackled though rather than sya one is as bad as the other so dont bother!

If we dont start tackling the cause rather than the symptom in all these self inflicted cases the NHS will go under.

[retrocop]

Rather a coincidence that this post is about smoking in Canada.
My sister,long time ex-pat and heavy smoker in Ontario, purchases,as do many others, from the Indians. The Indians used to smuggle it across the border from the U.S. for resale at a lesser duty rate.
Now the Indians,apparently, manufacture their own cigarettes in bulk complete with hooky packaging at a lesser price than the Canadian Govt,s duty.

[cassa333]

Ah but Sandy, how can one say on the one hand they are responsible enough to leave home, have sex,have opinions and vote etc etc etc when they are 16 or 18 depending on the activity. But on the other hand society needs to protect them from thier own arrogence. Human rights will pop up soon enough if you think anyone will agree to civil liberties being taken away from a whole band of the population Just because they don't appreciate the danger spelt out to them?

[sandyRoe]

Retrocop's post goes a good way to show why prohibition wouldn't work. If we accept that the majority of adult addicts are beyond saving then it should be, 'Education, education, education', for the young.