New Zealand aims to create smoke-free generation | Hacker News Reader

New Zealand aims to create smoke-free generation

theguardian.com

62 pointsedward40 comments

The duties on smokes here just cause more people to move to black market chop chop. Another example of idiot politicians refusing to address the underlying causes of addiction and instead fellating themselves over how smart they are banning something

I remember when I stopped (heavy) smoking for a little while I was putting all my craving into alcohol.

I did stop alcohol and now I am binge eating instead !

I tried sports and have injured myself pretty bad doing ~100km a week running...

Whenever a vice gets tamed another vice rise up....

"New Zealand has announced a suite of proposals..."

It's not a law or even a plan. Just thought bubbles at this stage.

They should do the same for alcohol. It's a public health crisis, killing thousands every year and leading to all kinds of violence and other crimes. /s

Excellent. We all know how well prohibition works.

They've been able to keep the Corona out...

If it were up to me we would have started reducing the amount of nicotine in tobacco by 5% a year starting 30 years ago.

Although nicotine is poisonous, it's not really what kills smokers. That would be the tar.

One causes cancer, the other causes or contributes to atherosclerosis. [1]

[1] - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3755365/

it's not really the nicotine that's the problem, it's the delivery method.

Nicotine is a large part of the addiction capability of the delivery method.

I think the trouble is that all that limiting nicotine would do is increase consumption (you need more cigarettes to get the same nicotine fix) and thus would actually increase the damage. It needs to be combined with other measures to be effective.

In Sweden "snus" is really common, usually delivered in poches[1]. Health consequences doesn't seem too bad[2]. I'm a user and "my doctor" doesn't really think there's an issue with that, while everyone suggests people to stop smoking. It's very non-invasive and quite cheap. It'd be more expensive for me to stop (because of increased sugar consumption, which is also bad for your health).

EDIT: My dentist even said Snus is good for my teeth since something related to the PH level of the saliva, but bad for your gum, so you need to be careful brushing and such.

1: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/Po...

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snus#Health_consequences

Tobacco industry would be all over this proposal, as people will just buy more cigarettes.

As a thought experiment, raising minimum allowed nicotine contents up to a level where an average person experiences the unpleasant effects of mild nicotine overdose (dizziness and further) without long-term damage is what could actually force some smokers to quit, and more others to never start. That would be a very controversial measure, of course (and those with dedication would be willing to work around it by breaking the container).

Black market in cigarettes will be the result no doubt.

People smuggle cigarettes into Singapore for god sakes.

I think this is a good idea. Cigarettes smell bad and are expensive. If they don't scratch the itch, people would switch to vaporizers, patches, or gum.

We are also looking to legalize marijuana. I'm not weighing in on either side but I don't see how you can do both.

Cigarettes are specifically designed to get you hooked, whereas pot isn't.

And with what are you smoking it? Pure?

I assume you're asking because people around you tend to smoke spliffs rolled from hash and tobacco. I know this is common in Europe at least, but in the US (and probably elsewhere) it's relatively uncommon and smoking just cannabis flower is overwhelmingly more popular.

This is not true. Cigarettes are addictive because the nicotine in tobacco leaves is addictive, not because they are “specifically designed” to be addictive. They are designed to deliver tobacco smoke, which is addictive.

Over the many decades, it’s come out that it’s not just the nicotine, but many other additives that are also addictive. The reason is simple: the tobacco companies have an interest in keeping you a customer. Whether that’s a cigarette or vaping flavors, they’ll do it.

I know plenty of people who have thrown away their entire potential to smoking weed. Smart, young people who instead of developing their skills, making friends, doing well in school, advancing their career, and dating, just sit around and get stoned all day. In my mind, the effects of weed are worse than tobacco. Sure, cigarettes will kill you at 60, but weed will turn you into a lifelong loser at 15.

Very underrated point. We’ve all seen this, don’t know why there’s some psuedoscientific push by almost everyone to convince the world weed is practically harmless, when it’s definitely not. Homelessness exploded in Los Angeles in exactly 2016 when weed was officially legalized. For some reason, people refuse to even look into a possible connection. They think the idea is absurd. It’s Strange.

Imagine being this confidently incorrect.

Correlation does not imply causation. Looks like our education system has failed us once more.

I don’t know much about LA homelessness, but I have plenty of experience with stoners smoking away their opportunities.

Conversely, two of the richest and most successful friends I have have been chronic weed smokers for over twenty years.

I've seen people go off the deep end with weed, but I can always discern patterns of behaviour that would lead to them doing so that are more to do with existing personality constructs than the weed itself, specifically.

As with everything - moderation and self-awareness is key.

- ed

well, not 'chronic' - regular daily smokers.

That IS the difference, I find - people who think it's acceptable to 'wake and bake' tend not be so good at grasping at opportunity. But that's on them - same could be said for starting the day with a gin or three.

52% of americans say they have tried marijuana

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/half-american-adults-marijuana...

Just wait till the newly-banned cigarette industry gets into the "marijuana" smoking market.

> We are also looking to legalise marijuana

What a confusing statement. You only just recently had a nation-wide referendum on this issue, a majority voted no, it was not passed.

NZ will not try again to legalise for at least a decade or two. Strict Asian countries that currently hang people for weed are more likely to be legally selling marijuana in corner-stores before the Kiwis do. The recent vote made any attempt to change the law in parliament untouchable for a long time, pushing it through would be political suicide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Zealand_cannabis_refe...

That was a non binding referendum. With our current government I suspect they will move to legalize regardless of the referendum results. It would not be the first time they have decided to go against a non binding referendum.

I would be surprised if they don't legalize within the next decade.

> With our current government I suspect they will move to legalize regardless of the referendum results.

Adern famously never had a position on the ballot despite later saying she voted yes. I honestly doubt taking such a political risk for little gain is on her agenda.

> I would be surprised if they don't legalise within the next decade.

Dragged kicking and screaming by international counterparts perhaps. Otherwise I see no one actually willing to do it.

Not sure about how it works in NZ but I would love Australia to have non-binding referendums. Even the politicians in support of higly popular issues like gay marriage were terrified of putting it to a referendum, same with Aboriginal recognition in the constitution which has overwhelming bipartisan and public support, everyone is shitscared it likely won't pass the threshold and for good reason.

Referendums are basically impossible to pass in oz, a super-majority is a very difficult thing to achieve in a country. Have the feeling the reason they are out of favour now is because it dramatically highlights how much serious electoral power a hundred thousand people in Tasmania/SA wield.

I think the idea is more to get in there before they're legally allowed to buy them anyway. If they're already addicted, they got them some other way anyway and this makes no claims to make that harder. But if I had to go beg my dad or older sibling every time I wanted to drink (as an adult) I probably just wouldn't do it much and not develop the tendency. You've gotta really want it. That, or the exact opposite happens and it becomes more desirable through exclusivity.

...in the US. Once. For alcohol.

You have a point, but maybe cigarettes are different.

I have a felling that without social pressure to smoke, there won't be much of a market for them. It must take some effort to start smoking (I have never smoked, it just seems awful to me) and the young people I see smoking do it to look cool.

I completely agree with you. To me cigarettes are social crutches. Because of COVID-19 I haven't been in social gatherings in a year, so I haven't smoked a single cigarette in a year. The thing is, I didn't just smoke when I was in a social situation. I smoked alone at home as well. But since the reason because I smoke has ceased to exist (social interaction) my cravings also disappeared. I actually fear going back to normal life because I know It's very likely that I'll start smoking again. And it doesn't help having people around me smoking in those social situations. Specially when I have a few drinks.

at this point, I just don't want to see or smell anyone smoking out on sidewalks or anywhere in public anymore - after a year away from it due to pandemic, and also the side notion that smokers standing around blowing smoke out into their surroundings seems to go against any kind of pandemic squashing efforts, it's just not a thing that should be acceptable anymore. It just seems odd to have something where someone randomly imposes that on your fresh air/surroundings at will.

and yes, I have experienced the 'old days' of bars and clubs full of smoke etc. Nostalgic times at parties coming out totally stinking of smokey rave grime, but we've all gotten used to that not being a thing by now.

I fully support it

> New Zealand has announced a suite of proposals aimed at outlawing smoking for the next generation and moving the country closer to its goal of being smoke-free by 2025.

This goal is authoritarian.

But more so than banning other drugs?

There's a pol here saying support 96.9% https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/11/e037362

Reply on news.ycombinator.com