Smoking ban and Smokers

It’s abundantly clear TJ could give Rees-Mogg a run for his money in the top filibuster stakes and could have an argument in an empty room 😉

I keep peeking in here to see if it’s starting to peter out, but no. It’s like opening the door on a western saloon and seeing a massive melee with the air full of bottles and bar stools. Marshal TJ is still trying to run the baccy varmints out of town (whilst hiding a cheeky cheroot behind his back).

That means you’ve never stopped, just paused then started again.

Well if he didn’t smoke for years at a time he would have been classed as an ex-smoker. I think the NHS considers anyone who hasn’t smoked for at least a year to be an ex-smoker.

He certainly wouldn’t have had any physical addiction nor nicotine in his system, that resolves itself over a matter of days, although the psychological addiction will obviously last for very much longer

If I was chain-farting in public I’d apologise and try to move away from others before dropping one if possible. Wouldn’t you

Oh come off it! Who hasn’t sniggered to themselves after squeaking out an SBD just before getting out of a lift?

I wasn’t even aware that the correct protocol is to publicly apologise to everyone before moving away.

My strategy has always been to avoid doing it in public or failing that to quietly slip away without saying anything.

Who the **** apologises?

Who hasn’t sniggered to themselves after squeaking out an SBD just before getting out of a lift?

Years ago on a packed, standing room only tube carriage one morning after a heavy night. A leaving do involving a beer festival followed by a curry. People were literally retching and I was biting my tongue so hard to stop myself laughing it bled. Not proud.

You didn’t apologise?

I think I’d have been lynched if I’d identified myself by apologising.

Again… Its not yours or anyone else’s job to dictate what people can and can’t do.

Nonsense really. Lots of things you can’t do, because of these things called laws and this thing called society. Things are changing. Old duffers will always struggle with change.

Again… Its not yours or anyone else’s job to dictate what people can and can’t do.

I’m not dictating anything to anyone, but I do think the proposed smoking ban is a good idea.

If this was the case you would have expected to see an acceleration of the rate of decline when the smoking ban came into effect in 2007

Why would you expect to see an acceleration in the rate of decline? I would expect that the smoking rate would tend to plateau and stabilise unless you keep innovating and introducing new interventions or nudge factors, so merely the fact that smoking has continued to decline could be partly due to the original ban. That would need to be confirmed by a proper investigation, however; you can’t tell just from a graph.

This study claims there was a statistically significant increase in the number of smokers trying to quit at the time the smoking ban was introduced (equivalent to 300,000 smokers)

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/impact-of-smokefree-legislation-evidence-review-march-2011

Well if he didn’t smoke for years at a time he would have been classed as an ex-smoker. I think the NHS considers anyone who hasn’t smoked for at least a year to be an ex-smoker.

Not once he started again they wouldn’t.

Nonsense really. Lots of things you can’t do, because of these things called laws and this thing called society. Things are changing. Old duffers will always struggle with change

Brilliant! Let’s ban everything we don’t like then eh? what’s next? Rack’em up! 

You know who absolutely love all this shit? The Faragists and their ‘they want to dictate every aspect of your lives’ narrative

And those who are meant to have more sense play straight  into it for some ridiculous reason

I mean who really gives a flying **** if people smoke in beer gardens or not? Seriously? What difference does it ****ing make? But they come out with bollocks like this and provide the UKIP/Reform/Whatever they’re called this week with all the ammunition they need

And to achieve what? So a few petticoat-ruffling bedwetters  in Islington, who never went to the pub anyway, get to feel smug and pleased with themselves having apparently saved us from ourselves

Seriously…. Just **** right off!

Self-defeating stupidity on a truly epic level and they’re too myopic and wrapped up in their own self-righteous,  sanctimonious, holier-than-thou, virtue-signalling bullshit to even see it. Like a lot of people on this thread

And to achieve what? So a few petticoat-ruffling bedwetters  in Islington, who never went to the pub anyway, get to feel smug and pleased with themselves having saved us from ourselves

it’s not about you, or any current generation (of smokers). It’s about future generations. Do you honestly not understand that? That’s what I call “wrapped up in your own bullshit”, if so.

That means you’ve never stopped, just paused then started again.

“Quitting smoking is easy, I’ve done it loads of times.”

Who the **** apologises?

Gentlemen?

Leaving a silent crop dusting upon exiting a lift, as Binners suggests I’d be giggling about that. Dropping a bag of flip-flops out of the loft at the theatre, I’d err towards a quiet “oops, pardon me” rather than “cor, you could get your breakfast out of that.”

a few petticoat-ruffling bedwetters in Islington
…
Like a lot of people on this thread

At the risk of repeating myself, there’s only one wildly overreacting sanctimonious bedwetter on this thread some 12 pages in and counting now.  I can only assume you’re going for the ‘humour’ vote because rabid condescending frothing rarely reinforces an argument.

it’s not about you, or any current generation (of smokers). It’s about future generations. Do you honestly not understand that? That’swhat I call “wrapped up in your own bullshit”, if so.

How many times? I haven’t smoked for over ten years

Do you not understand that people of any age don’t want the government telling them what they can and can’t do on this level?

You can do this there, but you can’t do it there. You can only do this where I say that you can

Its just typical sanctimonious bullshit from spirit-crushingly tedious people who are so inexplicably arrogant that they think they have some god-given right to tell everyone else how to live their lives

Next  year: compulsory muesli and yoga?

Just leave people alone to get on with their lives, making their own choices, if they’re not harming anyone else FFS!

Its bollocks on stilts and all it achieves is fostering massive resentment towards those smug, condescending bastards issuing dictats from their ivory towers

Can anyone join in? Bit torn tbh. On the one hand who likes bans, and I like weaknesses in a person. All the best people used to smoke.

On the other hand, the tobacco industry is plain evil. Their business model is based on wrecking people’s health (stopping smoking being the single best thing you can do for your health) and over the years they’ve done their best to continue unimpeded. Millions suffering and dying round the world as a result and I can evidence this statement if anyone particularly wants. Their tactics of disinformation are now adopted by the oil companies. Who wants to be on the same side as those guys?

So how do you eliminate it from the world in the face of the tobacco industry’s tactics? Hoping people see sense ain’t going to do it.

How many times? I haven’t smoked for over ten years

Yes you have.  What do you suppose is in an e-cig, liquified Hob-Nobs?

Do you not understand that people of any age don’t want the government telling them what they can and can’t do on this level?

Too bad, this is the price you pay to live in a civilised society.  There is a handful of people I would cheerfully drown in a bucket of Dulux, but sadly the “government” tells me I’m not allowed to do that.

Its just typical sanctimonious bullshit from spirit-crushingly tedious people who are so inexplicably arrogant that they think they have some god-given right to tell everyone else how to live their lives

… he said, with no trace of irony.

All you’re doing here is trying to shout down anyone who disagrees with you, over and over and over, and then you accuse everyone else of being sanctimonious.

All you’re doing here is trying to shout down anyone who disagrees with you, over and over and over, and then you accuse everyone else of being sanctimonious.

I’m doing the opposite. You seem to be struggling with it. To clarify: I’m saying I have absolutely no right to tell anyone how to live their lives and the only assertion I’ve made is that other people don’t have that right either

You can do whatever the **** you like as far as I’m concerned and if you’re not harming anyone else, then good luck to you. I literally couldn’t care less

A principle that you and many others on this thread seem to be struggling with. You either don’t get it, despite it being easy enough to comprehend, or in a lot of cases actively object to it. For reasons that can only really be seen as ‘I know best. Do as you’re told’

You seem to think that ‘I don’t like it’ seems to be enough of a reason to have something banned.

It isn’t.

I don’t know how many times I have to repeat this but if people are making lifestyle choices that have no detrimental effect on others then leave them alone to get on with it

’I don’t like your lifestyle choices’ is not a reason to ban things you personally don’t like.

I’m not calling for anything to be banned, not even the sanctimonious, condescending, self-righteous bell-endery that this thread is absolutely chock full of

Nobody needs or wants you to save them from themselves

Do you not understand that people of any age don’t want the government telling them what they can and can’t do on this level?

You can do this there, but you can’t do it there.

So do you think smoking should still be allowed inside pubs?

There is a handful of people I would cheerfully drown in a bucket of Dulux

I’m stealing that phrase, superb!

So do you think smoking should still be allowed inside pubs

Of course not! Because smoking in an enclosed space obviously has impact on other peoples health. Nobody is disputing passive smoking is real. I certainly wouldn’t want to do it in an enclosed space with people smoking fags. It’s goppin’!

But smoking outdoors is completely different and has absolutely zero effect on other peoples health

The people proposing the ban know this full well but their basis for doing this isn’t to do with health, it’s ‘I don’t like it’

i don’t know how many times I have to repeat this but that isn’t a reason for banning things because once you start down that road, where does it stop?

Read some of the comments on this thread and I think it’s safe to assume that some would be happy to ban pretty much everything on the basis of ‘I don’t like it!’

Luckily we’re presently spared from their po-faced and joyless stick-up-the-arse disapproval from becoming law

But smoking outdoors is completely different and has zero effect on other peoples health

Please cite your evidence for this claim.

The burden of proof isn’t in me. It’s on the people proposing banning stuff. I note no evidence has been put up, other than ‘I want to ban it because I don’t like it’

You’re not going to get lung cancer from the odd whiff of a Silk Cut, as is glaringly obvious unless you’re a complete idiot

Why would you expect to see an acceleration in the rate of decline?

Because smoking has been declining steadily in pretty much all OECD countries for years and years and will continue to do so as older cohorts die out and are replaced by new generations where take up rates are lower .  To be fair the smoking ban wasn’t aimed at reducing smoking but reducing disease caused by second hand smoke.  That is also why the Evidence Review you linked is primarily focused on those outcomes.  The evidence for the smoking ban leading to a reduction in smoking isn’t at all robust which is openly discussed in the paper.  For instance

The study employed qualitative methods which have the benefit of yielding rich
and detailed insight into people’s views and circumstances. However, this means
that the research was not and did not aim to be representative of the English
population as a whole. The views expressed were by their nature specific to the
individuals and communities included. The study was limited to six areas
in two parts of the country and therefore was not able to explore the views and
behaviours of people living in other parts of the country. It is also worth highlighting
that, although the study explored smoking behaviour including cutting down and
quitting pre and post-legislation, this was based on interviewees’ accounts
of their behaviour; no attempts were made to validate these accounts. Finally,
pre-legislation data were collected in the three months leading up to the
legislation, when publicity about the law was already in place. As a result,
differences in attitudes and behaviour may have been less marked than they
would have been if baseline data collection had started earlier.

and

However, it is important to note
that the results of the toolkit study and evidence of increased client numbers
attending Stop Smoking Services only provide evidence of short-term behaviour
change and are not necessarily indicative of longer-term shifts in smoking
prevalence that can be directly attributed to smokefree legislation. With relatively
few data points utilised from the pre-legislative period, it was also not possible
to examine the effects over and above longer-term trends using more
sophisticated time series analyses.

A more rigorous statistical approach was taken in this paper.

This concludes only the heaviest of smokers may reduce their consumption a bit because, in a massive simplification, there are only so many hours in a day and they can’t replace all the consumption they missed out on when they were in a smoke free environment.  In its review of literature it notes that the result of other studies from other countries are very mixed.

In my view. there is insufficient evidence that any ban would achieve any significant health benefits.  However, there is evidence it would cause economic harm to an already embattled sector and it would impinge on individual’s freedoms.

Please cite your evidence for this claim.

Well for a start the government supporters of this proposal are not claiming that it is designed for the benefit of non-smokers – it is reasonable to assume they would if it was indeed the case. So there is a clue right there.

However some people apparently believe that smoking is so unbelievably dangerous that just smelling a cigarette in the outdoors can have a potentially negative effect on your health. Although I don’t think there is any scientific evidence that smelling a cigarette can be harmful.

So take your pick.

Just to drop in an anecdote of my own, drinking in a pub since the indoor smoking ban is a vastly more pleasurable experience. On the occasions when I sit outside a pub and have a drink, I honestly cannot remember any occasion, since the ban, when my enjoyment of drinking my pint or two has been impacted by someone smoking a cigarette.
It has just never happened.
*shrugs shoulders*

I’m doing the opposite. You seem to be struggling with it. To clarify: I’m saying I have absolutely no right to tell anyone how to live their lives and the only assertion I’ve made is that other people don’t have that right either

I’m not struggling. You’re the one screaming from the rooftops with a side order of patronising folk about their comprehension. We all get it, your point has been very much made.  You can stand down now, soldier.

The burden of proof isn’t in me.

Yes it is: you made what appears to be an extraordinary claim, so it’s up to you to back it up. Or you could carry on being a petulant toddler.

You’re not going to get lung cancer from the odd whiff of a Silk Cut, as is glaringly obvious unless you’re a complete idiot

Non smoker here. But pretty sure my local would shut if smoking in the beer garden was banned. Smoking amongst regular drinkers is higher (in my local anyway) than in the population in general.
And the burden of proof is on those proposing banning anything. I’ve not read this entire thread, but has there been any proper scientific study regarding the impact of occasional exposure to outdoor secondary tobacco smoke ?

I’ve not read this entire thread, but has there been any proper scientific study regarding the impact of occasional exposure to outdoor secondary tobacco smoke ?

No one has mentioned one. And the government have made it clear that the proposed outdoor ban is to save smokers from themselves, not non-smokers.

Although TJ appears to believe that there risk to non-smokers if they can “smell” a cigarette, without providing any evidence.

There is a risk that my hearing will further deteriorate if I am regularly exposed to the live music at The Oval pub, I think that the scientific evidence for that is conclusive, perhaps I should be campaigning to have all live music banned from pubs?

I’ve heard that looking at burgers makes you obese

Perhaps we should ban those next?

You’re not going to get lung cancer from the odd whiff of a Silk Cut, as is glaringly obvious unless you’re a complete idiot

@tjagain – You seem to think that it’s a risk to health?

I’ve point this out numerous times, on this thread and others. But some people think that passive smoking, in an outdoor environment, is a serious threat to health. God knows how they deal with real threats in everyday life?

We have a 200 year old smokehouse in our village, it smells when they are smoking fish. Should it be banned as well? I mean it’s smack bang in the middle of a residential street. The cancer rates in the vicinity must be off the scale.

Whatever next, eh? Making me wear a seatbelt when I drive? Taking away my opium?

No one has mentioned one. And the government have made it clear that the proposed outdoor ban is to save smokers from themselves, not non-smokers.

Gotcha, my personal view is it might encourage a few to consider giving up but most remaining smokers are pretty hard core now. They’ll just not come in but smoke at home with their cans and friends. The pub will close for everyone !! Unless smoking is completely banned (different debate), there should be a place for smokers to indulge. A pub smoking shelter or area in a beer garden seems a completely reasonable solution to me.

And the burden of proof is on those proposing banning anything. I’ve not read this entire thread, but has there been any proper scientific study regarding the impact of occasional exposure to outdoor secondary tobacco smoke ?

Given just how long it usually takes to kill oneself whilst being a smoker first hand, I would suggest such a scientific study would be entirely pointless, hell there’s even loads of us (Roy Castle aside) who have lived through years of people smoking inside pubs with relatively little effect apart from perhaps a more frequent use of laundry services.

Whatever next, eh? Making me wear a seatbelt when I drive?

I think the outrage from a sizeable chunk of the motoring population when compulsory seatbelts came in was even greater than the fuss about this.  See also compulsory motorcycle helmets*.  Though I think the immediate and significant lifesaving benefits of both of those laws are something a pub garden ban smoking ban won’t share!

*Completely off topic, but the story of Fred Hill, who campaigned against compulsory helmets is fascinating.  He died in Pentoville prison aged 74 in 1984 – his 31st incarceration.

I’ve heard that looking at burgers makes you obese

Feel free to post the evidence for your claim.

Maybe all of these community minded smokers could give up smoking and still support their local pub, instead of being a snowflake and giving up on the pub because they can’t smoke there.  In fact, with all the money saved on cigarettes, these fine outstanding citizens of the community will have more money to spend in the pub, and pubs will flourish.

This is a great idea, let’s get the ban through asap!

On the occasions when I sit outside a pub and have a drink, I honestly cannot remember any occasion, since the ban, when my enjoyment of drinking my pint or two has been impacted by someone smoking a cigarette.
It has just never happened.

It has happened to me more than once. But anecdotes eh?

Taking away my opium?

You have access to opium ?. PM sent.

For a friend.