https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12566141/
There is a huge relationship between obesity and cancer.
Sure there are other food choices that lead to obesity, but sugar is certainly high on the list.
One thing in common though is that telling a smoker to "just quit" is about the same as telling someone who likes sugar to "just stop". Personally I'm working to "reduce my intake", slowly but surely.
Edit:but for sure there's no such thing as second-hand-sugar and that a Huge difference between the two.
Which makes this a truly personal choice.
“Smoking is a choice, don’t ban it” always irks me because it’s a choice smokers make for themselves and everyone else in a 30m radius around them from forcing others to breathe in their polluted air.
But there absolutely is such a thing as a "food desert"
an urban area in which it is difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food.
Good governments that are orientated toward the well being of their citizens population tend to enact limits on sugar in food, improve transport, subsidize good food etc.
Often with the evil socialist goal of better health, improved job options via transport, reduced universal health costs, and more taxpayers ..
https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-environment-atla...
and the various initiatives started to address the issue haven't yet had time to make significant changes in enough of the areas worst off:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/29/us-food-...
It's a good start, with a way to go:
> On Sept. 28, the White House is hosted a conference on hunger, nutrition and health — the second conference of its kind in five decades — and introduced a 40-page national strategy as a roadmap toward the goal of ending hunger and increasing healthy eating by 2030.
https://journalistsresource.org/home/food-insecurity-health/
Obesity can cause epigenetic changes that are passed down to offspring.
> Or having their jaw removed due to mouth cancer . Or hooked up to one of those oxygen machines due to irreversible lung damage.
There are plenty of people who lost extremities and/or their sight due to diabetes. They'll be hooked up to insulin pumps, or they'll need regular insulin injections or they'll die. Others can get cancer, as well. Some might need machines just to move around, or will need serious surgeries to keep themselves from eating to death.
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026156142...
There may be other problems with certain fats. In particular there is growing evidence that highly processed seed oils are problematic, although that hasn't been definitively proven yet.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0OuoFyJtZuI/VkofY-qgeOI/AAAAAAAAbb...
We’d meet for senior leader meetings and it was pretty stark. None of the US people smoked and 80% of the Europeans did (small sample).
When a European VP had her birthday we joked and asked her if her colleagues bought her a carton of smokes.
Especially in places like NYC, cigs are very expensive.
I believe (iirc) that legality is quite recent (possibly from the ACA), but I'm pretty sure that is news within the last 20 years.
In that search, I spotted a study that stated the surcharge does not increase cessation but does decrease uptake. Which makes sense, tobacco has a higher relapse rate at 6 months than compared to relapse rates for cocaine or heroin.
High cig prices have a similar effect for youth smoking. Smoking is an infamous example of inelastic demand (that and gasoline were _the_ examples used when I was taught elastic vs in-elastic demand in grade school)
That being said you arent alone in this desire. The work around appears to be clubs with a membership fee and volunteer bartenders (at least where I live). If its something that pops up for you frequently then it might be worthwhile to pursue.
Yes, it is. I think it's a great thing. If you don't like it, then stop trying to subject everyone around you to your nasty cancer-causing habit. Careless people like you deserve to be stuck out in the cold.
Just look at the people who questioned the vaccine. Hordes were calling for those people to be locked up, jailed, isolated from the population, denied medical care, denied basic access to needs (like grocery shopping) and even fired from their job.
These people have absolutely no regard for _anyone_ that disagrees with them. It's very sad.
Making these people pariahs and social outcasts is one of the big things that reduced smoking so much in North America, and thereby saved a lot of people from the health effects of secondhand smoke from these selfish assholes.
I think the real issue here is this topic being discussed on HackerNews of all places.
Edit: Just to be clear, thanks to this smug, pompous, "holier than thou" post of yours, I'm going to go out of my way to blow smoke in people's faces the next time I'm at a bar entrance. Congrats on your contribution to second-hand smoke.
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.
As a non smoker there are now options to go out I never had before. Restaurants are now safe again. (well except for parents who think it's OK for a child to be on a phone playing games at full audio volume, but we'll save that rant for another day.)
I'm a smoker, and I absolutely don't want smoking allowed in public indoor places, and some outdoor public places as well. I don't smoke indoors even in my own home.
On the other hand, when I duck down an empty alley and light up, I'm going to be annoyed if someone walking on the main road comes in to complain about how my second-hand smoke is going to give them cancer.
Too many times I have had people go out of their way to inhale my second hand smoke, and then complain about it.
Too many times I have had people go out of their way to walk in front of my 3 ton truck driving 100 mph in a pedestrian zone to almost get hit, and then complain about it.
Maybe you shouldn't be doing 100mph around other people.
Maybe english is not your first language, but you did read what I wrote, right? You did read my post saying that I get annoyed at people who go up to lone smokers and then complain?
You know what that means, right? It literally means "I don't smoke around other people!"
I'm afraid I am unable to simplify it any further.
There’s always a grey area, but generally I’d say in a public space it’s the smoker who should actively move to avoid non-smokers.
All health issues aside, it’s just disgusting. It smells awful, it makes everything else smell awful. I always hate ending up in an elevator with a smoker, it’s nauseating. It truly is a disgusting habit.
To say otherwise, in my view, would be overstating the risks of smoking.
What if instead of slowly dying of cancer, smoking had a tiny tiny chance of making you die by exploding your face? Exact same probability of dying, just very violent and graphic.
Chances are barely anyone would smoke. Yet, same death rate.
To answer your point, I think smoking is worse than making your head explode, it has a much greater societal cost in healthcare than if you were to die there and then, and creates much more suffering.
It's like saying if you put $100 in your 401k every month, there's a chance (equal to the number of new retirees) you instantly get $2M dollars.
Many more people would understand the immediate gain instead of the 30 year slog.
Which countries are those? I ask because it would be nice to compare the incidence of the top smoking-related diseases between the countries.
I have a PhD and studied for a time at one of France's premier universities: my advisor smoked, and one graduate student in his lab smoked. All told, probably 10-20% incidence. In America I've worked with or around close to 100 physicists, and only one of them was a smoker.
The other day I watched a French movie - "Other peoples' children". I had to check and re-check and check again if this was an old movie re-launched or something. In the movie the actors all started smoking at private dinners (with, in this case, a small child living in the house), women with cigarettes held vertically in that stupid-looking way, like in an old fifties tobacco ad. I couldn't understand why that was made part of a movie which was supposed to be "slice of life". It looked completely wrong. I can't imagine people smoking inside houses now, none of the people I know who still smoke will actually smoke inside. None. And everyone just grabbing a cigarette inside that living room? I think I even saw a cigarette scene inside a restaurant too.
For the same period, Iceland though was close to the US, with a reported rate of 12% of respondents saying they smoked.
"Smoked cigarettes right? :D"
Netherlands: stares in Dutch
"Smoked cigarettes right? :o"
Coming out from a night out with your clothes smelling like cigarettes felt like going back 30 years in time.
Do you consider vaping in this statistics? I can't find a definite answer.
I still see more cigarettes than vapes at bars, but the gap is closing. The annoying part is people seem to think they can vape indoors at the bar, whereas 95% will go to the covered patio to smoke. So vapes are more likely to get into your lungs second hand, and their long term effect on your lungs is entirely unknown. Hooray!
It could be very easy. Ban the sales of tobacco to everyone born after "YYYY", make cigarettes cost €50 per pack, make smoking when not allowed a €100 fine, deposit all tax from tobacco sales into a national program where people get free "exercise credits" to be redeemed at fitness studios etc.
Could another option be a higher `Eigen Risico` for smokers? I don't know if that could even be enforced.
This is what New Zealand just did: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/13/new-zealand-pa...