China, India, Mexico, Bangladesh praised for anti-smoking measures

Anti-smoking measures in China, India, Mexico and Bangladesh were singled out for praise at an international conference on lung health in Cape Town Friday, amid warnings that global tobacco-related deaths are set to almost double by 2030. Some 1.3 billion out of the world's 6.6 billion people are smokers and 5 million people die each year from tobacco use, the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (The Union) and the World Lung Foundation (WLF) told the 38th Union World Conference on Lung Health.

While saluting anti-smoking efforts in developing or emerging economies such as China, Bangladesh, Mexico and India, The Union and the WLF warned that tobacco-related deaths were set to double by 2030 as tobacco use shifted from rich to poor countries.

The World Health Organization (WHO) in July predicted tobacco- related deaths would shoot up to 8.3 million annually by 2030.

The WLF and The Union estimated the figure at closer to 10 million, of which 70 per cent would be in low- and middle-income countries.

"The whole epidemic has shifted from rich to poor countries," Dr Judith Mackay, coordinator of Global Tobacco Control Programmes at the WLF told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

"Reducing tobacco use must inevitably be a central strategy in the fight against lung disease for many years to come," she said.

Reducing exposure to smoking and second-hand smoke could also help bring down tuberculosis rates, Dr Karen Slama of The Union told the conference. Around 1.6 million people died of TB in 2005, according to the WHO.

Two thirds of the world's smokers live in just 15 countries, several of which are major tobacco producers and have scant, if any anti-smoking programmes, according to The Union and the WLF.

China received praise for creating smoke-free public places for the 2008 Olympic Games, Mexico for implementing comprehensive tobacco control laws, Bangladesh for a tobacco advertising ban and India for its plans to make Delhi a smoke-free city by 2009.

The 38th Union World Conference on Lung Health is continuing through November 12.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/139276.html

^^ If there has been any progress against tobacco that's impressive.

Breathing Dhaka air in the 1990s was probably worse than breathing second hand smoke and honestly even with CNG taxis there is a long way to go. I will not be surprised if in 10 - 15 years there is increase in incidence for chronic lung problems and cancer on account of poor air quality (it takes about 20 years for such problems to manifest themselves). Poor air quality added to smoking ensures a nice double dose of toxins.

Very impressive. A somewhat related question..... why do people from developing countries smoke so much more?

Very impressive. A somewhat related question..... why do people from developing countries smoke so much more?

not sure but most of my cousins in Bangladesh smoke. I keep telling them that it's the 21st century and no one smokes anymore.

It's not just people in undeveloped countries...many Europeans also smoke. Most of the young Bangladeshi men here in Columbia smoke. No idea why they all have the compulsion to light up in this day and age...I have to tolerate the second hand smoke when I am hanging out with them.

Very impressive. A somewhat related question..... why do people from developing countries smoke so much more?

I think they associate that with manliness, as very females publicly smoke in South Asia.

Atleast thats the case in Pakistan. :ohno:

Very impressive. A somewhat related question..... why do people from developing countries smoke so much more?
Is it really (impressive)? When you're in Dhaka, it doesn't feel like that at all! As far as social consciousness is concerned, I don't see much improvement, even in efforts. The television soaps continue to glamorize smoking by making their characters light up, all over the place, all the time.

In the US, at least among the 30 years and older Bangladeshis I meet, smoking is virtually non-existent. Also, I don't see it in big dawat gatherings either. The few who smoke will huddle outside the house or community center and take their puffs but inside the house it's a big no-no. I have relatives who smoke, but never had to tell them they can't smoke in the house. Everyone seems to be well aware of the taboo.

The air quality is definitely better in Dhaka now than in the 90's when the soot from the baby taxis would literally cake up on your face.

In the US, at least among the 30 years and older Bangladeshis I meet, smoking is virtually non-existent. Also, I don't see it in big dawat gatherings either. The few who smoke will huddle outside the house or community center and take their puffs but inside the house it's a big no-no. I have relatives who smoke, but never had to tell them they can't smoke in the house. Everyone seems to be well aware of the taboo.
The hardcore smokers among professionals from Bangladesh is becoming insignificant. I wonder though, how it is in Hamtramck, Astoria, Jamaica or in Florida.

The air quality is definitely better in Dhaka now than in the 90's when the soot from the baby taxis would literally cake up on your face.
Perhaps that is true but smoking still is very much in vogue. I hate it when people just light up on your face, without bothering to ask if it is okay. If most Bangladeshis are avid followers of the US, why don't they pick up this one good redeeming feature of the American society today?

^^ I dunno what to say Im a smoker myself. Most Bangladeshis wont know how it is in the US specially when Marlboro the most 'posh' brand comes from the US.

One thing I can say though is our cigarettes arent as bad as American ones. Benson Hedges and Gold Leaf dont have as many additives and chemicals. And the tobacco is good. Although the brands are foreign the tobacco is completely local. We are afterall an exporter of tobacco.

One thing I can say though is our cigarettes arent as bad as American ones. Benson Hedges and Gold Leaf dont have as many additives and chemicals. And the tobacco is good. Although the brands are foreign the tobacco is completely local. We are afterall an exporter of tobacco.

Coming from a true smoker :)

^^ I dunno what to say Im a smoker myself. Most Bangladeshis wont know how it is in the US specially when Marlboro the most 'posh' brand comes from the US.

One thing I can say though is our cigarettes arent as bad as American ones. Benson Hedges and Gold Leaf dont have as many additives and chemicals. And the tobacco is good. Although the brands are foreign the tobacco is completely local. We are afterall an exporter of tobacco.

I wasn't aware that Marlboro is considered a posh brand. Here it is associated with die hard (hardcore) smokers since it is considered to be the strongest cigarette, other than Camel. Furthermore, smoking being associated with "posh-ness" has long been retired into the history pages in these societies/cultures. It is actively frowned upon. Not only all government and most public buildings are completely smoke free zones, but most cities/counties do not allow smoking near/next to such buildings. Smoking ban in restaurants and bars are becoming increasingly popular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans_in_the_United_States

If one is an "America watcher", s/he will know that the tobacco companies (cigarette makers) have been forever on the defensive, since multi billion dollar judgments against them, the outcome of many successful lawsuits by many states over the years. Smokers also pay a heavy price as duties and taxes are forever on the raise (considered to be a sin tax). If I'm not mistaken, today, most popular brands of cigarettes costs $5/pack, in most areas of Michigan. So, smoking is very much out, here in these United States. It is unfortunate that people outside America tend to copy the vices of Americans far more readily than what virtues they may possess. :)

There is nothing good that can be said in defense of (cigarette) smoking, and for that matter there is no such thing as a "not bad" or "any worse" or "better" or for that matter a "good" cigarette. Leaving tobacco aside, just the smoke itself is not only carcinogenic but has a net negative effect on anybody's overall health. That has been proven scientifically over a long period of time, with plenty of data.

^^ All that is prolly in the US. In BD a pack of Benson costs Tk. 93. Malboro almost similar. When I was in the US I used to take 2 cartoons of Benson with me everytime I was going back after vacation. Low grade cigarettes in BD would be Sheikh, Akij Biri, Nasir Gold all that. Ppl who smoke those wont be able to afford Benson, Marlboro. Btw I think Gold Leaf is stronger than Marlboro.

There is nothing good that can be said in defense of (cigarette) smoking, and for that matter there is no such thing as a "not bad" or "any worse" or "better" or for that matter a "good" cigarette. Leaving tobacco aside, just the smoke itself is not only carcinogenic but has a net negative effect on anybody's overall health. That has been proven scientifically over a long period of time, with plenty of data.

It all has to do with the amount of chemicals put in it. Tobacco itself is not that harmful and Cigars and Pipe Tobacco do not have any tar or nicotine in it. As I have said BD is an exporter of Tobacco our forefathers were smoking "hukka" for generations (diffrent from sheesha though).

What is interesting is that in the US smoking is more frowned about than drinking. In BD its the opposite. The ones who drink smoke in the first place. A non-smoking drinker is hard to find. Also most ppl will find it difficult to accept that smoking is forwned on the US. Marlboro which is from the US is resposible for 65% of cigarette sales after all. :tongue3:

^^ Tobacco not that harmful? That's news to me.

What is interesting is that in the US smoking is more frowned about than drinking. In BD its the opposite. The ones who drink smoke in the first place. A non-smoking drinker is hard to find. Also most ppl will find it difficult to accept that smoking is forwned on the US. Marlboro which is from the US is resposible for 65% of cigarette sales after all. :tongue3:

Drinking is almost a national past time here in the US, and especially in the cold states like Minnesota and Wisconsin. Still, groups like MADD(Mothers Against Drunk Driving) and others have been successful in getting Congress to enact laws that have lowered the blood alcohol level for DUI enforcement. I think it's only a matter of time before alcohol faces some kind of backlash like tobacco did. Prohibition will not work, but somehow the ill effects of alcohol publicized widely will cause a shift in general public's perception.

In Bangladesh, religious prohibition coupled with high price of liquor has kept alcohol away from the general masses and has led to the stigma you talk about. Those who drink either buy the expensive stuff, or drink the homemade brew which more often than not kills them.

The big tobacco companies after losing the US market have shifted their focus to developing countries and that's why you see so much marketing of cigarettes in countries like ours.

^^
Smoking is far more harmful (injurious) to health than alcohol consumption. Drinking is harmful when only it is abused. There is no such distinction/differentiation with smoking.

Alcohol 'as harmful as smoking'

Alcohol causes almost as many deaths and disabilities globally as smoking or high blood pressure, researchers warn.
An international team of scientists, writing in the Lancet, point out alcohol is a factor in about 60 different diseases.

The researchers found 4% of the global burden of disease is attributable to alcohol, compared with 4.1% to tobacco and 4.4% to high blood pressure.

And they said that increasing alcohol prices in the UK could cut deaths.

The scientists were critical of the UK, saying that it had not implemented effective alcohol control policies.

The UK is about to introduce legislation allowing 24-hour drinking from later this year.

In many countries that have more liberal licensing hours, binge drinking is far less frequent

Department of Health spokeswoman


'Drink damaged my health'

Professor Robin Room, of the Centre for Social Research on Alcohol and Drugs at Stockholm University, is one of the lead authors of the study.

He told the BBC: "The evidence we have is that if you increase the drinking hours then you get more trouble with alcohol."

He said the potential effects on health were not taken into account when changes to licensing laws were considered. "It's a very short-sighted approach."

'Little effect'

The report looks at diseases including cancers of the mouth, liver and breast, heart disease and stroke, and cirrhosis in which alcohol can play a role.

It also highlights the role of alcohol in car accidents, drownings, falls and poisonings. Alcohol is also linked to a proportion of self-inflicted injuries and murders.

We don't know why we drink the way we do and how we could change the culture

Professor Ian Gilmore, Royal College of Physicians

Using data on alcohol cost and UK alcohol related mortality information, the researchers estimate that increasing the price of alcohol by 10% would produce a 7% drop in deaths from cirrhosis of the liver in men and an 8.3% drop in deaths in women.

Restricting the availability of alcohol by reducing the hours pubs and shops can sell it would also affect rates of alcohol-related harm.

Professor Room criticised the emphasis of the UK's alcohol strategy, published in March last year.

"It emphasises measures that really have very little effect. The emphasis is on public information and education. There's not much on taxes."

He added: "A stark discrepancy exists between research findings about the effectiveness of alcohol control measures and the policy options considered by most governments.

"In many places, the interests of the alcohol industry have effectively exercised a veto over policies, making sure that the main emphasis is on ineffective strategies such as education."

'Sensible drinking'

Professor Ian Gilmore, chairman of the Royal College of Physicians' alcohol committee, said: "There has been very little relevant research in this country, so we don't know why we drink the way we do and how we could change the culture."

He said the health impact of alcohol had to be addressed by the government.

There are huge flaws in this theory - no one is saying let's double the price of food to tackle obesity

Mark Hastings, British Beer and Pub Association
"It's easier to demonise the yobs - 'other people'. But 25% of the population are drinking at a potentially hazardous level. And three million people are dependent on alcohol."

The British Medical Association said the government was too slow at tackling public health concerns, such as alcohol abuse.

A Department of Health spokesperson said: "The government is working with the drinks industry, police and health professionals to increase awareness of the dangers of excessive drinking and make the sensible drinking message easier to understand.

"This is a central focus of the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy which clearly sets our plans to tackle issues around the potential harm of alcohol and anti-social behaviour linked to excessive drinking."

She added: "We have no evidence to suggest that flexible licensing hours in the UK will, in fact, lead to increased consumption of alcohol. Indeed in many countries that have more liberal licensing hours, binge drinking is far less frequent."

Mark Hastings, of the British Beer and Pub Association, said: "There are huge flaws in this theory.

"No one is saying let's double the price of food to tackle obesity."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4232703.stm

^^ The harm from alcohol is from abuse of it, which many tend to do. Religious considerations aside - alcohol at small quantities, is not harmful - and in case of red wine lowers cardiovascular risk to some extent when consumed in small amounts daily. In comparison, even a single cigarette can have negative health effects.

Considering overall statistics, yes alcohol is just as dangerous as tobacco, if not more. Hence the need to regulate it and have strict laws against drunk driving.

However, on an individual level, there is a safe way to drink - there is no such way to smoke. Even a single cigarette a day will lower your life expectancy, whereas there have been numerous studies showing the health benefits of certain kinds of alcohol - for example moderate amounts of red wine consumed at the same time as eating meat significantly lowers the ill effects of red meat.

^^ The harm from alcohol is from abuse of it, which many tend to do. Religious considerations aside - alcohol at small quantities, is not harmful - and in case of red wine lowers cardiovascular risk to some extent when consumed in small amounts daily. In comparison, even a single cigarette can have negative health effects.

Agreed. But we have to look into the overall negative impact of alcohol in a society. It's not just about comparing a glass of wine to one cigarette. Human beings are susceptible to excess use as shown globally. There has been quite a few articles in BBC regarding the impact of alcohol in British society, a quote from the above article:

An international team of scientists, writing in the Lancet, point out alcohol is a factor in about 60 different diseases.

The researchers found 4% of the global burden of disease is attributable to alcohol, compared with 4.1% to tobacco and 4.4% to high blood pressure.

Another interesting fact is, the researchers are saying that "education" is not as effective strategy compared to ban/strict regulation:

"In many places, the interests of the alcohol industry have effectively exercised a veto over policies, making sure that the main emphasis is on ineffective strategies such as education."

My concern is, if developed nations like UK,USA are struggling to tackle the issue. How would Bangladesh ( a developing country with thousands of unemployed youths and corrupt law enforcement agencies), going to handle the harmful usage of alcohol? Some things are just bad for the society regardless of religious verdict.

^^ In the US, we are taught that smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and premature death...accountable for 440,000 deaths annually including 30% of all cancer deaths, 80% of COPD deaths, and is a contributor to many cardiovascular deaths...I remember these stats cause I had to do a presentation not long ago. Alcohol I am sure is also a big problem, but I cannot imagine it being as deadly as cigarettes...I can look up some stats sometime later. BD however because of religion already has laws for alcohol. For me putting emphasis on smoking prevention is where more health benefits can be achieved, but of course alcohol abuse should also be targeted.

In the US, alcohol prohibition is unlikely to make a comeback anytime soon. In fact, we are moving in the other direction when it comes to marijuana. More and more states are making medical marijuana legal and refusing to prosecute people for simple possession under a certain limit, even if it is technically illegal.

As far as Bangladesh is concerned, I have no problems with the government regulating tobacco or alcohol, just like it is done in the US. However, I would like to see people's freedom of religion respected. Which means if Hindus, Christians, "relaxed Muslims", or atheists such as myself want to purchase alcohol, we should be able to without having to show our passport and prove we are non-Bangladeshi.

^^ 2 interesting articles on alcohol use

Alcohol: Is it really good for you?
By Sue Nelson
Writer and Broadcaster

Alcohol is bad for you. Red wine is good for the heart. It's all about moderation… Confused? You're not alone.

Government guidelines state that men and women should not consume more than 21 or 14 alcoholic drinks each week.

Yet the Million Women study reported that just one drink a week increases your risk of breast, pharynx and liver cancer.

No wonder a recent UK survey for the World Cancer Research Fund found that people are deeply sceptical about claims for what causes or prevents cancer.

In exploring the alcohol-cancer connection, Radio 4's Frontiers reveals a frightening lack of knowledge about how alcohol interacts with the body.

Toxic compounds

Scientists do not know definitively why we get hangovers or how alcohol may be causing cancer.

In high doses it does seem to enhance the lifespan of mice - but you need huge doses

Professor Roger Corder
Alcohol is metabolised in the body into toxic compounds - but how these compounds cause damage is unknown.

Since genetics, gender and age play an important role in how we interact with alcohol, a safe amount for one is not safe for another.

The negative effects of alcohol on health and the economy are reported regularly in the media and highlighted by the government.

But despite the link between alcohol and cancer being known for over 100 years, it is an area of research that is little understood and, according to many scientists, underfunded.

This means that drinkers, no matter how moderate their consumption, are not fully aware of the risks or damage, as the science is not there.

In fact, many drinkers believe they are improving their health.

Myth

"It's an absolute myth that red wine is good for you," says Professor Valerie Beral from the University of Oxford and lead author of the Million Women study.

"The evidence is not there."

Polyphenols, such as the antioxidant resveratrol, are found in the skins of red wine grapes.

"In high doses it does seem to enhance the lifespan of mice. But," he adds crucially, "you need huge doses."

In humans, it equates to thousands of litres of wine.

Professor Corder dismisses wines that effectively promote themselves as a health drink, with 'rich in polyphenols' or 'rich in antioxidants' on the label.

"The problem is that most supermarket wines are low procyanadin and high alcohol," he said.

"We're promoting bad wine for bad habits."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8079816.stm

NW England 'is alcohol blackspot'

Alcohol misuse is a major problem for the NHS
The North West region has England's biggest problem with alcohol, research figures suggest.

A table of blackspots compiled by the North West Public Health Observatory included seven areas in the North West in the top 10.

The list is an attempt to assess the impact of alcohol on local communities, based on factors such as hospital admissions, premature deaths and crime.

Experts warn alcohol-related disease is on the rise across the country.

In 2006/07, there were around 800,000 alcohol-related hospital admissions in England - up 9% in a year.

Some 63% of local authority areas showed an increase, with just 6% registering a decrease.

Deaths from chronic liver disease increased by 7% for women and 5% for men.

The local areas least affected by alcohol were mostly in the South East or Eastern regions of the country, including Mid-Bedfordshire, East Dorset, West Berkshire and South Norfolk.


Lead researcher Dr Karen Tocque said: "No area of England can escape the fact that alcohol is having some negative influence on their residents.

"Each year, people living in each community become a victim of a crime, are unable to work, are admitted to hospital or may even die - all because of alcohol."

Professor Mark Bellis, director of the observatory, added: "Rises in alcohol-related health problems reflect not only weekend binge drinking but also how use of alcohol on a nightly basis continues to erode our health.

"Further increases in alcohol problems are in store if we continue to focus on the symptoms of alcohol misuse, like night life violence and ill health, but ignore the causes such as cheap alcohol and a lack of recognition that alcohol is a dangerous drug."

Don Shenker, chief executive of Alcohol Concern, said the figures showed that public health campaigns and soft-touch regulation of the industry were not working.

He said: "There is no longer any doubt that the rise in alcohol harms is related to cheaper, more widely available and irresponsibly sold alcohol.

"Many cases of alcohol-related ill-health, deaths and crimes can be avoided, and related costs to the NHS and the policing can be brought down.

"But without firm action on pricing and sales the numbers and the costs will continue to spiral pointlessly."

A spokesman for the Department of Health said ministers had announced their intention to impose new standards on the alcohol industry.

He said: "We are determined to reduce the health and social harms caused by alcohol."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7788469.stm

As far as Bangladesh is concerned, I have no problems with the government regulating tobacco or alcohol, just like it is done in the US. However, I would like to see people's freedom of religion respected. Which means if Hindus, Christians, "relaxed Muslims", or atheists such as myself want to purchase alcohol, we should be able to without having to show our passport and prove we are non-Bangladeshi.

To me it's not a religious issue. For example: Islam does not explicitly mention about cigarette being haram (even though anything that has negative impact on one's body/health is asked to be avoided). But I would still like ban on cigarette or really high tax so that it's basically inaccessible to most of the society.

^^

Heart disease and diabetes kill way more people than lung cancer - would you also be in favor of the Bangladesh government banning biryani?

^^

Heart disease and diabetes kill way more people than lung cancer - would you also be in favor of the Bangladesh government banning biryani?

Isn't that the exact same excuse used by the multinational cigarette companies? They argued with US senate in vain regarding taxing McBurger aswell since tax was increased on cigarettes and it was banned from many public places..

This is not even an argument anymore, since the side affects of smoking and alcohol on society is much more extreme than burgers or biriyanis.Moreover, pizza or fried chicken are not addictives like cigarettes or alochol. Otherwise there won't be hundreds of different reports regarding banning/controlling smoking and alochol and none regarding food. The scientists and researchers cannot be that naive.

Another quote from the article, I wonder which biriyani leads to such impact on a community:

Lead researcher Dr Karen Tocque said: "No area of England can escape the fact that alcohol is having some negative influence on their residents.

"Each year, people living in each community become a victim of a crime, are unable to work, are admitted to hospital or may even die - all because of alcohol."

Just to show the seriousness of the issue, one of my clients "Scotts Lawn" became the first US corporation to dismiss employees for smoking outside of work:

Scott Rodrigues had been working as a lawn-care employee for The Scotts Co. for only about two weeks when he was fired in 2006 after a drug test found nicotine in his urine, a violation of a company policy forbidding employees to smoke on or off the job. He promptly filed a lawsuit that argued, among other things, that the company violated his right to privacy.

Now a federal judge has dismissed the Bourne man’s suit, ruling that Rodrigues’s smoking was not a protected privacy interest because he never kept his puffing a secret.
http://www.tobacco-facts.net/2009/08/smoker-who-lost-job-loses-in-court

^^ In the US, we are taught that smoking is the leading cause of preventable disease and premature death...accountable for 440,000 deaths annually including 30% of all cancer deaths, 80% of COPD deaths, and is a contributor to many cardiovascular deaths...I remember these stats cause I had to do a presentation not long ago.

What are the stats like for BD? Also what about Cigars, Pipe Tobaccio and Sheesha (The Arab one). Sheesha is the new in thing in Dhaka.

For me putting emphasis on smoking prevention is where more health benefits can be achieved

As I said we are an exporter of Tobacco. So it wont happen.

But I would still like ban on cigarette or really high tax so that it's basically inaccessible to most of the society.

Why so? Im not harming anyone with my smoking. Smoking can be harmful but so is Red meat, greasy food, cholestrol, the 10 din purano oil that is used to make bhaja pora in restaurants in BD, formalin jukto fish, etc. Its my body what I intake is my business. And Im not addicted to it either.

Ciggarette price is fine as it is in BD.

Btw did u guys know alcohol is legal in BD for sweepers and mathors? Alcohol might not be available so freely but cigarette, biri, marijuana consumption is high. Also we've had a drug problem for years now. Heroin, Pathedine, Phensidyl, Yaba. You name it.

^^ junk food are not addictives like alcohol or cigarettes.Also as research has shown the impact on society is much more severe.

You must know about "second hand smoking", the people around gets impacted by one's smoking aswell. So yes in a way you are harming others..

Also, many considers high tax on cigarettes and alcohol as an attack to personal freedom of choice, without realizing the impact it has on society. That is, high regulation/ban can prevent the spread of these harmful addictives to children and youth and take the burden off the shoulder of the parents.

Tobacco Is Extremely Addicting

Perhaps the most important single message is that smoking is extremely addictive. Once you start, you may not be able to stop — ever. And the same is true for drugs and alcohol. I can’t emphasize this enough — you may not ever be able to stop, if you start smoking or chewing tobacco.

How long does it take? A September 2000 study shows that one quarter of 12- to 13-year-olds who smoke as few as two or three cigarettes a day become addicted in just two weeks. Most of the rest get addicted within a few weeks more. … If you are smoking now, or experimenting with tobacco, see the school nurse -- or talk to an adult. It’s okay to talk to someone and get help. …

Today in the U.S., smoking causes 1 of every 5 deaths. Cigarettes kill 1,200 Americans every day — that amounts to 420,000 American deaths each year, and two to three million deaths worldwide annually. In coming decades, the World Health Organization tells us that smoking will kill 500 million people worldwide.

Let’s take a look at cigarette advertising. Would you object to being manipulated mentally? Well, tobacco ads are designed to play with your mind. In January 1998, Democratic Congressman Henry Waxman revealed some very secret memos of the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company. In 1975 one executive wrote, "The Camel Brand must increase its share penetration among the 14 - 24 age group — which represent tomorrow’s cigarette business." A 1986 memo noted how the cartoon camel campaign would utilize "peer acceptance/influence" to "motivate the target audience to take up cigarettes." …

Every day, 3,000 teens become newly addicted to cigarettes. The tobacco industry knows exactly what they are doing, and they spend billions every year to manipulate the unconscious minds of millions.
http://www.saferchild.org/tobacco.htm

Im not addicted to smoking. Those who are its their body let them do what they want to. When Im smoking most of the time Im with other smokers or Im smoking alone.

Im not addicted to smoking..

Yup, most of my friends who are smokers say the same thing aswell :lol:

What are the stats like for BD? Also what about Cigars, Pipe Tobaccio and Sheesha (The Arab one). Sheesha is the new in thing in Dhaka.
I doubt if there's any relevant data for Bangladesh. Who would compile it? All forms of tobacco is harmful. The smoke based ones are worse.

As I said we are an exporter of Tobacco. So it wont happen.[/QUOTE]
Don't bank on it. Remember, jute, the "golden fiber"?

Im not addicted to smoking.
Yeah, that's what they all say. :)
Why do you smoke then? I smoked and having quit a long long time ago, I can be objective about it. There is nothing pleasurable in smoking. It stinks and lingers in the environment (clothes, fabric as in car seats, curtains, etc.) forever. And those are only the superficial negatives for the real harm is to one's own health, leaving second hand smoke aside.

Could you stay away from it, say for a solid month?


Those who are its their body let them do what they want to. When Im smoking most of the time Im with other smokers or Im smoking alone.
A very convenient libertarian excuse!

With all the patches, chewing gums, fake cigarettes, hypnotic methods(?) and what not available today, the habit of smoking is much easier to quit. People who quit many years ago had it really tough with going cold turkey being the only method. TISLAM can probably relate.

King Nothing bhai, you can smoke if you choose to, but don't fool yourself about whether it is harmful (even in small quantities) and whether it is addictive (and whether or not you are addicted).

Alcohol and tobacco are not alone in being both addictive and dangerous. All good things in life can be both of those - video games, good food, sex, fast cars, gambling, etc.

I am all for protecting minors and preventing people under 18 to have access to these things. However, consenting adults who are not depriving others of their rights or life or property should have the liberty to consume whatever it is that they wish. I am glad that these liberties are protected in the US, at least for the most part.

Alcohol and tobacco are not alone in being both addictive and dangerous. All good things in life can be both of those - video games, good food, sex, fast cars, gambling, etc.

I am all for protecting minors and preventing people under 18 to have access to these things. However, consenting adults who are not depriving others of their rights or life or property should have the liberty to consume whatever it is that they wish. I am glad that these liberties are protected in the US, at least for the most part.

Why not add heroin, yabba, cocaine in the list? Let's legalize everything for people over 18, afterall adults should have the liberty to consume whatever they want..

Alcohol and tobacco are not alone in being both addictive and dangerous. All good things in life can be both of those - video games, good food, sex, fast cars, gambling, etc.


Well said. Thing is alcohol and tobacco have been consumed for centuries. Keeping Religion aside it doesnt make sense to tax/ban these.

I am all for protecting minors and preventing people under 18 to have access to these things.

Thats another thing in the US that came as a shock. Specially since I have been buying cigarettes since I was 15.

^^

So I've convinced you? :)

I was never unconvinced ;)

Why not add heroin, yabba, cocaine in the list? Let's legalize everything for people over 18, afterall adults should have the liberty to consume whatever they want..

The "war on drugs" has been such a massive failure for the past three decades, that legalizing all drugs will probably be better than the status quo.

Also, if Islam says that anything harmful to the body is haram, then you're going to have to ban way more things than just alcohol and tobacco.

Also, if Islam says that anything harmful to the body is haram, then you're going to have to ban way more things than just alcohol and tobacco.

The Quran definitely prohibits some items like intoxicants(alcohol and other drugs), pork, carrion, wild animals of prey, etc. and that is well known and considered Haram. On the other hand there is a small verse where Allah mentions not to lead yourself to destruction by your own hands, basically telling us not to knowingly harm our body. Smoking and all behavior that are detrimental to one's health and well being fall in this category. This is not in the same category as Haram items, but nonetheless we were warned about it.

I think moderation is the key here, because if somebody is having biryani everyday or eating junk food daily, they definitely are leading themselves to bodily harm.

Alcohol and tobacco are not alone in being both addictive and dangerous. All good things in life can be both of those - video games, good food, sex, fast cars, gambling, etc.

I am all for protecting minors and preventing people under 18 to have access to these things. However, consenting adults who are not depriving others of their rights or life or property should have the liberty to consume whatever it is that they wish. I am glad that these liberties are protected in the US, at least for the most part.
Such libertarian mantra is as good as the law of the jungle! Please realize that we all pay for any/all excesses of individuals through indirect (social) costs.

Such libertarian mantra is as good as the law of the jungle! Please realize that we all pay for any/all excesses of individuals through indirect (social) costs.

Completely agree with you on this. We need to look into the greater benefit of a society and not just individual freedom of choice.

Completely agree with you on this. We need to look into the greater benefit of a society and not just individual freedom of choice.

So in your ideal society, what substances would you completely ban?

The idea of making cigarettes or other substances legal at all ages would have severe economic costs to society. Smokers get ill from all kinds of maladies, end up in the hospital, many don't pay for it, and society gets stuck with the costs. People who don't smoke suffer from second-hand-smoke in the workplace and in the home - second-hand-smoke can cause quite a lot of illness in and of itself.

The of banning "video games...fast cars...red meat etc" is also silly. Even water can kill you if you drink enough of it. In medicine we are taught that anything is toxic at sufficient dose. However this does not mean that everything is addictive (has potential to cause withdrawal). And very few substances are harmful at small doses. Cigarettes and most illicit drugs fall into both the latter categories.