It is NO April Fool’s
joke, when I read this editorial in the Mirror, of an initiative of British
doctors to ban the sale of cigarettes to anyone born in this Century!
In my opinion it is an
honest and practical way forward, and can easily be enforced, without affecting
the rights of those who are already addicted.
In this way we can stop
the next generation from getting into this habit, and counter the criticism
that Tobacco Companies target the very young and impressionable. With this initiative,
we can begin the publicity as to why it is best to avoid, and if this is
started in this fashion, there is little chance of people growing up being
addicted. Addiction being a very difficult task to kill!
The tobacco lobby
worldwide would be the first to counter this proposal that has come from
Medical Practitioners seeing patients with smoking related medical problems,
and knowing they can EASILY be avoided if there is a gradual ban and a
reduction in the smokers, which will eventually result in lower smoking related
deaths and illness.
Frankly this issue is a
NO BRAINER! Having to argue this anti smoking case is itself ridiculous as it is
self evident. So it is time the people and Governments take the initiative and the
courage of their convictions to demand this change in status, so that in 50 years
we can almost eliminate smoking related casualties “ALL TOGETHER”. Wouldn’t that
be nice?
I do realize that the Govt.
has now become dependent on the revenue from Tobacco taxes to waste on their extravagant
and unproductive investments. However in the long run, a country can count on better
health and productivity of its workforce, which will not only overcome the lost
revenue, but will be able to divert scarce
resources into other areas of say, Health Care spending, so that the health of the
community can be raised and maintained, and all possible emergencies curtailed.
It is incumbent upon us
to draw a line in the sand, and say enough is enough, and go ahead with conviction
politics, and themes to improve the quality of life of the people who live in this
fine Country.
1 comment:
the line in the sand is a tricky issue because who is to say what the line is? is it to ban tobacco products because they are carcinogenic? well what about banning alcohol because it corrodes health and society? what about gambling? what about fast food? what about other things? who is to say what should be allowed or not? should it be by fiat? democratic vote? individual liberty?
I would say individual liberty is the best way to go, because it avoids the slippery slope of overregulation. liberty must be supplemented by knowledge about the consequences of any decisitions that are taken, and thus minors need to be protected from many things until their mind is capable of discerning the good and bad of all decisions made, and to make deciisions that favor the good rather than going along with fads that they know are bad but bring them social approval.
the more serious health threat to the sri lankan public is not tobacco but SUGAR. 1/4 sri lankans is diabetic or borderline diabetic because of all of the sweets they consume in the form of sweetened milk, tea with sugar, and of course soft drinks. put a ban or a heavy tax on sugar and you will do a bigger service to the public than more tightly regulating the tobacco industry which is already heavily regulated.
Post a Comment