Let smokers smoke.

Post Reply New Topic

WHERE did you find that? I am too rusty on Indic scripts to sort it out. Not Dravidian nor Burmese, and I THINK not Thai. But the type face is too fancied and I do not know enough to get through to the sound.

The Tobacco Industry Lies
Key Quotations

"We don't smoke the crap. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the blacks and the stupid." - R.J. Reynolds executive on the question of why their chief personnel do not smoke, 1994

"Realistically, if our Company is to survive and prosper, over the long term we must get our share of the youth market ..."
- Claude Teague, director of research and development for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co

"The simple truth is that secrets the executives held and lies they told encouraged people to smoke and ultimately to die. Since their first congressional appearance alone, more than 4 million Americans have started smoking."
-USA Today, February 12, 1998

"They (R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.) state that billboards should be placed wherever young people congregate - near fast-food restaurants, basketball courts, video game arcades and record stores. This while Reynolds steadfastly denied that Joe Camel was designed to appeal to young smokers..."
-Los Angeles Times, January 16, 1998

"There is a strong drive in most people, particularly the young, to try new things and experiences. This drive no doubt leads many pre-smokers to experiment with smoking, simply because it is there and they want to know more about it. A new brand offering something novel and different is likely to attract experimenters..."
-Claude Teague, director of research and development for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

" ...If the desire to be daring is part of the motivation to start smoking, the alleged risk of smoking may actually make smoking attractive. Finally, if the 'older' establishment is preaching against smoking, the anti-establishment sentiment ... would cause the young to want to be defiant and smoke. Thus, a new brand aimed at the young group should not in any way be promoted as a "health" brand, and perhaps should carry some implied risk. In this sense, the warning label on the package may be a plus." - Claude Teague, director of research and development for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

" ... Thus a new brand aimed at the young smoker must somehow become the 'in' brand and its promotion should emphasize togetherness, belonging and acceptance, while at the same time emphasizing individuality and 'doing one's own thing.'" - Claude Teague, director of research and development for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

" ... A final psychological factor ... involves smoking-health attitudes. The smoking-health controversy does not appear important to the (21 and under) group because, psychologically, at eighteen, one is immortal." - Claude Teague, director of research and development for R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

"Low tar cigarettes aren't healthier and in some ways the type of cancers they cause are uglier."
- Jules Maaten, member of the European Parliament

" ... Cigarette companies had all along been aware that the terms "light" and "mild" were misleading ..."

" ... Public health authorities, including the World Health Organization, say it amounts to a misleading claim that some cigarettes are less toxic than others. Surveys suggest that this advertising influences smokers, especially women, to switch to lower-tar cigarettes instead of quitting; it also prompts young women to take up "light" brands, thinking they are safer."
Excerpts taken from Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)

"If immunity is not part of a comprehensive tobacco policy, the industry would be
'obligated' to challenge limits on advertising and marketing restrictions."
--Geoffrey Bible, Chairman and CEO, Phillip Morris Companies, February 25,
1998

"Four years ago, Big Tobacco's seven top CEO's appeared before a congressional subcommittee and swore that cigarettes are no more addictive than Twinkies. A slew of industry documents released in recent weeks shows those statements weren't true. And evidence is mounting that the CEO's knew it."

I'm a libertarian and believe in minimal government interference, but cigs are where I make an exception. It's a disgusting habit, it pollutes the air, it dramatically reduces society's productivity, it makes people sick, it's just a huge nuisance that ought to be stamped out for good. Sure people should have a right to smoke in their own homes, but that's about it. We should do whatever we can to work toward getting rid of it.

************************************************************************************************************************************

Check out my IMDB page!

From a medical perspective any attempt to support smoking is spurious. There is no benefit from smoking that cannot be substituted in some other, less harmful way.

But even in a civilized country in which medically necessary care is available to all, I wouldn't countenance an outright ban. Tax it to the hilt, and place restrictions on its free exercise. But I can't see a justification for an outright ban.

I have absolutely no concern about erosion of the capacity of smokers to smoke in places to which the public has access. No smoking in workplaces, within 6m of a doorway or ventilation intake, I'm good with those.

But I draw the line at private homes. I recognize that in apartments and townhouses there will be cross contamination, but that's a choice that we make when we opt for condominium or townhouse living.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YjrkBYDDQM[/youtube]

I know how hard it is to quit.

while cigarettes are “addictive, it is not that hard to quit”

Are Australian cigarettes lacked with meth?

and again emotional judgement of an issue prevails in face of the facts
fact is second hand smoke in an eclosed space havent been proven to be the direct cause of anything, that being said i can easily understand piublic (as in state buildings, not simply where the public has access) having a moking ban, it should be free choice for everyone else, in reality most workplaces would still have a smoking ban.
if not you can always quit and find a company that has a smoking ban.

outside smoking bans are complete and utter BS with no medical justification at all, only justification there is some peoples preference and their inability to tolerate anyone having a differing opinion.