Smoking ban and Smokers

A more rigorous statistical approach was taken in this paper.

If I’m reading that paper correctly, the authors developed a theoretical model of how smoking prevalence would be affected by a smoking ban, and tested that model using empirical evidence from the Scottish and English bans (which weakly supported the conclusions of the model). So they weren’t simply analysing whether smoking prevalence dropped as a result of the bans; they were modelling smoking behaviour to predict if it would drop in the event of a ban.

So it’s not so much a “more rigorous statistical approach” as a completely different sort of study.

The model did predict that people smoke less as a result of a ban, however.

However, there is evidence it would cause economic harm to an already embattled sector and it would impinge on individual’s freedoms.

Is there evidence of this? It must be difficult to disentangle the many other problems pubs and clubs are facing and identify how much economic impact they have today from the existing smoking ban (and what the economic effects of the outdoor ban would be – positive as well as negative, because a ban will encourage some new customers).

Impinging on individual freedom? We have many examples of individual freedoms that society has collectively agreed to limit. The freedom to smoke outside a pub is pretty low on the Braveheart scale.

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!

The motivation behind the proposal is alleged concern for the wellbeing of smokers, you don’t appear to be in full sync with the spirit of this proposed law.

The problem here is that people are selfish and frankly don’t care much about things which have little effect on their lives. The proposal appears to have widespread public support (which is presumably useful for a government which would rather the public didn’t focus on less popular issues) I suspect that most people who support the proposal don’t do so because they are concerned about the health of smokers.

You don’t seem to understand I was poking fun at those wetting the bed over this!

Yes I understood that you were taking the piss. I didn’t think you were being serious with your talk of “fine outstanding citizens” and “snowflakes”.

Might have missed this, as the thread goes on a bit… but has anyone mentioned that, presumably, this is all a part of trying to prevent a new generation of smokers? It’s not just about “protecting smokers from themselves”, but about (further) reducing take up… fewer new smokers has to be an aim of any public health policy. Removing smoking from the places we socialise and relax begins to remove the, hard fought for by the companies that sell this stuff, emotional and social link between smoking and switching off that us older peeps have hard had wired into our brains… reducing that for younger generations has to be key. That’s what occurred to be when I was sat in the sunshine in the pub yard earlier anyway.

Possibly Kelvin, I have no idea how kids get introduced to fags these days. For me smoking was more associated with going to school than going to the pub. By the time I looked old enough to get away with ordering a pint in a pub I was already an addicted smoker.

Is it likely to be much different these days?

It’s all about da vapes wit da kidz, innit?

Now they after your chips Binners!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2n2g5wze4o

That article doesn’t define what is likely to be classed as “junk food”, they just give a couple of examples of won’t be.

That’s interesting. How will the ban on online ads be monitored and enforced?

That article doesn’t define what is likely to be classed as “junk food”

And you don’t think using a picture of a burger and chips is in any way indicative of the type of junk food they’re likely to target ?

Well I think that the BBC decided to  use an illustration of a burger and some chips to interpret what they consider to be junk food, does that provide evidence that it also the government’s definition of junk food?

Does the government even use the term “junk food” in the context of the proposed legislation? I would have thought ultra processed food might be a better defined target with regards to tackling childhood obesity. Which would include biscuits, cakes, crisps, sugary drinks, etc

But as I say the article doesn’t define what is likely to be classed as “junk food”

Edit : Sorry my mistake, according to the article it isn’t “proposed” legislation, it will come into force October 1st next year.

If they’re tackling advertising because Won’t Somebody Think Of The Children their efforts would be better spent on the intrusive shit which suddenly appears mid-sentence during Peppa Pig.

Well to answer my own question it likely will include the following:

soft drinks with added sugar

juice drinks with added sugar

milk drinks with added sugar

crisps and savoury snacks

breakfast cereal

chocolate confectionary

sugar confectionary

ice cream

cakes

sweet biscuits

morning goods

pudding and dairy desserts

yoghurts

pizza

chips and potato products

family meal centres

complete main meals (ready meals)

breaded and battered products

main meals (out-of-home)

starters, sides and small plates (out-of-home)

children’s meal bundles (out-of-home)

sandwiches (out-of-home)

It would appear that the current government are basically going ahead with a proposal by the previous government which was put on hold to give the junk food industry time to adjust:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/further-advertising-restrictions-for-products-high-in-fat-salt-and-sugar/outcome/introducing-further-advertising-restrictions-on-tv-and-online-for-products-high-in-fat-salt-and-sugar-government-response#annex-1-products-in-scope

What are “morning goods”?

Probably among the least healthy on that list! I imagine it’s croissant, pain au chocolat, brioche, pastries, that sort of thing?

Coffee and a fag?

A euphemism for one of the three ‘S’s?

I notice that yoghurts are on the list, no doubt a thinly veiled attack on Guardian readers by the previous Tory administration, I hope Keir Starmer removes it from the list.

I would also like confirmation that “breakfast cereal” doesn’t include muesli.

I guess it depends whether the muesli in question has a lot of added sugar or salt, but I can honestly say I’m not going to lose any sleep over a ban on advertising food.

Ban this filth!

crisps and savoury snacks

Woaaahhhh there,

Glad to see pies have recognised as a critical part of a nutritionally balanced intake and left off the list.

That’s the power of the ‘Big Greggs’ corporate lobbyists

Can’t wait for the C4 expose, “Under the crust: inside the flaky world of pastry”

Will drinks with apple juice be included?

It’s a very cheap and sneaky way lots of companies add sugar to their products.

I disagree that a burger is necessarily “junk”.

I make burgers from mince, with salt and pepper. Eat them with cheese and salad. What’s wrong with that?

Fat is a necessary part of any diet.

The facility that pasta and rice are “healthy”, is part of the reason that there are so many overweight kids.

I make burgers from mince, with salt and pepper. Eat them with cheese and salad. What’s wrong with that?

Nothing. Are you advertising them on TV?

Of course not but you knew that.

MacDonald’s burgers are the same. Beef, seasoned with salt and pepper.

MacDonald’s burgers are the same. Beef, seasoned with salt and pepper.

Served as meal with fries, coke and why not have cheese dippers too.

MacDonald’s burgers are the same. Beef, seasoned with salt and pepper.

Well if MacDonald’s burgers are not high in fat, salt, and sugar, then they will presumably be able to advertise them before 9pm.

What would happen if you sat in a pub beer garden playing a  YouTube reel of Gary Linekars Walkers crisps adverts on your phone?

the power of the ‘Big Greggs’ corporate lobbyists

It’s not the lobbyists who are big

sat in a pub beer garden playing a YouTube reel of Gary Linekars Walkers crisps adverts on your phone?

On speaker? Death penalty.

What would happen if you sat in a pub beer garden playing a YouTube reel of Gary Linekars Walkers crisps adverts on your phone?

After 9pm and without smoking a fag? Fine

I think they should probably ban pubs from selling crisps btw. And drinks high in alcohol.

As a teetotaler who is trying to give up crisps I would approve.

Is it just crisps Ernesto or are you an attempted refusenik on all savoury snacks?

Where do you stand on the pork scratching, or on that perennial pub debate…  is the mini cheddar technically a crisp?

I’m a non meat eater so pig skin, or whatever it is, is definitely out. I have a great weakness for mini cheddars.

Yesterday I decided to have a Sainsbury’s mini apple pie, I thought the apple filling must surely be healthy. I was horrified to read on the box that two mini apple pies contains a quarter of the recommended daily saturated fat intake. In fact it stressed me so much that I had to eat four for the satisfying comfort of the sugar.

What would happen if you sat in a pub beer garden playing a  YouTube reel of Gary Linekars Walkers crisps adverts on your phone?

All of the smoking gammons would be outraged at the videos of woke Lineker? ;-)

I have a great weakness for mini cheddars

I feel your pain, brother. When I’m working from home I have to constantly remind myself that it isn’t compulsory for me to emerge with another packet of them every time I go in the kitchen. Controversially, I prefer the Red Leicester ones to the originals.

And not that I’m trying to lead you astray, but they sell these beauties in my local, which is the best crisp to have with a pint EVER! I’ve just checked and, somewhat counterintuitively, they are fine for vegetarians

£24.80 for a packet of crisps?

I paid £3.50 for a tea in this supposedly “cyclist’s pub” the other day and thought that was a rip-off

Home

Controversially, I prefer the Red Leicester ones to the originals.

I’m with you on that one.

£24.80 for a packet of crisps?

For 12 large packets of crisps :-)