Ok folks, bitch time!! We're all remotely aware of the moves by Government and society to eradicate smoking by 2025 in New Zealand. Ok, noble thought, but when put into perspective, are the motivations driving this move sensible and are they transferable? I've argued in previous blogs on the subject of fairness, i.e. the actual death rate of smokers being lower than the actual population mortailty rate for that group of people (and with merit), so what of other groups?
Well in the past week or so, two other factors have entered the debate on the health on New Zealanders, especially Obesity and the fact that a figure was bandied about, that being 1/3 of the population suffer from food addictions. No, not Bulimia or Anorexia, Food Addictions, and it was interesting to hear that by 2025 that group may double.
These food addictions strangely enough also have many health concerns evident, mainly Diabetes and Heart Disease, just to name two. Like espoused by the anti smoking protagonists, both these diseases kill.
And lately too has been the very small debate on the implications of alcohol in society, brought into public focus again by the double murder in Paraparaumu of two young males, as a result of drinking. So it's fair to also bring alcohol into the debate as society grapples with not only drink fuelled murders, but family violence, assaults, drunk driving and ongoing health issues with alcohol abuse.
Yes, why just tackle Smoking? It's largely harmless to those now except the smoker, so let them have their peace of mind, if not then go ahead and ban it. But there in lies the dilemma. If you ban smoking because of health factors, how about banning the sale of foods and alcohol that cause inherent health problems? And what about plain packaging to kick the ball off and get it rolling? Sounds bizarre yes? Well no, not really. If you have identified society ills (in this case - smoking) and have identified other society ills, what goes for one surely goes for the other yes?
I'll let you make your mind up as to how supermarkets and liquor stores will look after these measures are implemented. Suffice to say, if measures are not implemented, then there is surely a case for cigarette smokers to initiate a class action against the government on the grounds of discrimination.
I'm an American transplant to New Zealand, so by and large I tend to side with "Let 'em have their poison. It's not the government's business."
ReplyDeleteSo I wouldn't outlaw smoking, because that'll just spark a black market. But I do support controlling displays and cigarette advertising.
And if anyone messes with my cheese and butter, I can tell you one thing: THEY WILL LIVE TO REGRET IT.