Eighty national public health groups, including the American Heart Association, the American Medical Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Preventative Medicine, placed a full-page ad in Sunday’s edition of the Washington Post in support of a federal ban on menthol in cigarettes and all flavored cigars.
“The answer is clear,” the full-page ad says. “Saving lives starts by ending the sale of menthol cigarettes and all flavored cigars.
“Smoking kills nearly half a million people in the United States each year, and these addictive, deadly products are a big part of the problem. The FDA and White House have our full support to release lifesaving rules prohibiting menthol cigarettes and all flavored cigars.”
I have maybe a cigar a month. Sometimes, a nice dipped cigar is enjoyable. It’d be a shame to just outright ban them.
I sort of feel like this is the equivalent of banning white claws or even everything other than IPAs. During the summer I have a cigar most days. Once the temps drop below 60, I’m done with tobacco for six months or so. I don’t smoke flavored cigars, but I don’t like it for those who do.
Yeah, it’s unfortunate. I understand it. The flavours do make smoking more enticing to young people, who might not limit themselves to one cigar a month like you do. But it does suck to ban something outright just because some people will misuse it. Mind you, nicotine is addictive, which is a pretty critical facet to this (though I don’t think anyone starts smoking without knowing this risk).
I dislike smoking in general and do want things that are good for society as a whole. But the logic of banning stuff like this seems similar to, say, banning fast food because some people will overeat (or more extreme, having calorie rationing so that people can’t overeat on any kind of food). It’s admittedly always a balancing act for how much danger is acceptable before we just ban it for everyone. Some bans using this logic are very reasonable, some aren’t, and many are extremely debatable.
I think I currently prefer the sin tax approach, especially since that best accomodates occasional usage. A hefty tax makes the dangerous thing less accessible to impressionable young people and helps pay for the social cost (though IIRC, smokers actually cost society less because they die younger, reducing the many medical costs of old age). Price influences people’s choices, too. If healthy food is cheaper than unhealthy food, that encourages buying healthy stuff. But even sin taxes are imperfect, especially in a vacuum. They can make the cost of living higher for a vulnerable population. They need to be planned carefully.
Tobacco is fucking horrible, but Menthol and other flavorings make it so much worse. They increase the likelihood of addiction massively.
And is always the case in public health, you don’t put in rules to cater to the edge cases, you put in rules to protect the majority affected.
Tell me you’re not a smoker without telling me you’re not a smoker.
You clearly have no idea how tobacco addiction works.
Prohibition doesn’t work. Mind your own fucking business.
I can tell that you’re addicted just by the vitriol in your response here.
Did you start of menthols and other flavored tobacco? Because that’s how a lot of people start. Which is why people are pushing for a ban, so others won’t be as hopelessly addicted as you are.
