this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2024
399 points (98.3% liked)

World News

39127 readers
3662 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

The UK has introduced the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, aiming to make it illegal for future generations to buy cigarettes. The bill proposes gradually raising the minimum smoking age, so those born after January 1, 2009, will never be able to purchase tobacco legally.

It also includes restrictions on vape flavors and packaging to prevent youth addiction and bans smoking in certain outdoor spaces, though pub beer gardens are exempt.

Supported by the Labour Party's majority, the legislation seeks to create a “smoke-free U.K.” and combat smoking-related deaths.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dontfearthereaper123@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I suppose i wouldnt oppose a ban like that in theory, but because doctors rnt omniscient, in practice, you'd end up with either, smokers not being treated for illnesses completely unrelated to their smoking, or non smokers not being treated because doctors think its related to smoking. I mean how could u tell for 100% certain someone is a smoker, I can bet theres smokers out there w still perfectly white teeth etc and non smokers whos lungs r black from car exhausts. Is it really worth letting a non smoker die js because you dont wanna pay for the smoker too? Its hardly like people r gonna be honest abt smoking when they won't get free healthcare for it

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Of course not, but that's the only option that allows people to enjoy their cancer sticks and not have everyone else pay for the cancer.

[–] Dontfearthereaper123@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So ud genuinely rather non smokers die than let smokers get medical care? I feel like I have to be reading this wrong thats a bit psychopathic to admit that once someones smokes u actively dislike them so much ud be okay w collateral damage to prevent them getting medical care

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No, I said what I would genuinely rather. I would genuinely rather have doctors wean people off of cigarettes by putting them behind a prescription barrier instead of cost rate payers huge amounts of money in the future because of some libertarian "I should be allowed to do whatever I want and fuck everyone else" bullshit.

[–] Dontfearthereaper123@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I feel like cigs on prescription is a fast way to get an oxy-like black market. You'd have people faking prescriptions to sell those cigs most likely to people who smoke more than the doctor wants them to or js children. Denmark is an example of a country which banned disposables yet a lot of teens still vape there they js buy em from dealers instead of stores thus increasing the danger for them

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Then what's your solution to stopping the overloading of the NHS and costing British rate payers billions of pounds due to smokers?

[–] Dontfearthereaper123@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Tax smokers more and use that money to pay for it it also works as a passive deterrent to stop smoking.

Edit: looking up the numbers it seems they could already pay for any nhs costs that appear solely from the taxes on tobacco so thats not an issue your getting mad at nothing idk what to say except live and let live

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What specifically gave you the idea that any of this had to do with anger? I'm not angry at people who are addicted. I think they are placing an unfair burden on the system.

I think people who believe that smoking is some sort of human right, which is where this started, are extremely silly though.

Also, please show me the numbers you looked up.

[–] Dontfearthereaper123@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Look it up urself I'm on holiday and its a been a day they werent hard to find

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

It's not my job to prove you aren't lying.