OTTAWA — It's illegal for kids under 18 to buy tobacco products in Canada and there's a movement afoot to make sure today's youth are never allowed to light up a cigarette — even after they come of age.
Not enough. Most people simply ignore tobacco as a substance and do not talk with their children, family and friends about it. It is addictive, it is dangerous for health but it should never be banned as it is being attempted on several countries.
Tobacco should be treated as a luxury, an indulgence, not something to label as a drug and criminalize. As you state and very well: this is prohibition. Puritanism never works and this will not be an exception.
Its part of school curricula, and there is a ban on advertising and it is now seen in film a lot less and you cannot smoke indoors. You have to ho outside to smoke. And tobacco products are locked in a case and you have to ask the cashier to get it.
I don’t see how much more can be mandated through legislation. I would be OK with an LCBO model. But after that, it’s prohibition
Prohibition doesn’t work because there will always be some people would still do it anyway. The goal should be to get to as close to elimination as possible.
This is not like small pox where it can be eradicated. Behaviours cannot be eradicated because people do the behaviour. You’d have to make it impossible for people to do the behaviour to eliminate it. But since we can’t change biology, the next best thing would heavily enforced prohibition and since that is impossible, make the activity extremely inconvenient.
First would be making tobacco a specialty item, to be sold solely on specialty shops. Take it out of the supermarkets, convenience stores, gas stations, etc. Put it in an enclosed, reserved space, with knowledgeable people behind the counter to actually teach a customer on tobacco and smoking and we have a start.
Second would be to end specific tobacco blends that invite to grab a cigarette after another. I work around smokers and the more conscious ones mention there are such blends, while others satisfy after just one, whatever that may mean.
Third measure would be to make tobacco expensive and perhaps even cap the price. I worked with a person that said he’d quit the day a pack cost 10€. We’ve been farther from that but the cheapest pack available on the market is 5,5€ which is cheaper than the average pack was when I had that talk with my coworker. Twenty years back. I wonder how the companies manage to put such cheap product on the market today and not then.
Next would be to move the culture forward and bring back the notion of smoking as an indulgence and not an escape. My country, in the 60’s and 70’s, during a civil war, dispensed cigarette packs to soldiers where it was stamped “Have a cigar and relax.” It did wonders to boosts the tobacco consumption in the country. Previously it was mostly confined to more afluent people, who would usually smoke the pipe or high quality cigars, which is a better form of tobacco.
Again, I agree with your first point. Hence I like the LCBO model ( Government owned and run store , it also adds to the budget ).
You mentioned civil war, not sure which country you’re from. Greece? Portugal? Former Yugoslavia?
Second would be to end specific tobacco blends that invite to grab a cigarette after another. I work around smokers and the more conscious ones mention there are such blends, while others satisfy after just one, whatever that may mean.
I like this second point a lot. One of the issues I have with the current government structures is that what we do is this: People -> MPs -> select Government -> select Finance Minister -> interacts with LCBO. I would be perfectly OK with people who drink to elect people to the board of LCBO (Liquor Control Board of Ontario), weed for OCS (Ontario Cannabis Store), and the equivalent one that would be for the tobacco one to get their voices heard. There should be people who represent people who don’t do those things on the boards as well to represent their interests. But this second point highlights why the people who use and make the products should take a charge in creating their experience and have customers and non-customers regulate their experience.
Well the advance of manufacturing is probably a key role in reducing the price, the same as in every industry. Hence the need of punitive taxes to discourage starting and staying (as your coworker shows).
I agree, this is a cultural change. This is a Canadian forum. We are heavily influenced by the US. US and Canadian media became really anti smoking in the 90s-2000s.
I am from Ontario, Canada.
Addictive substance abuse is taught in Grade 5 ( age 10-11 ) toward the end of the year. There is a whole unit on it. At the end of the year, there is also a unit on puberty. Then we get taught them again through the teenage years in physical education classes. Mandatory phys-ed ends at Grade 9 ( age 14-15 ).
We already do both. This is prohibition. This is dry laws for tobacco.
Not enough. Most people simply ignore tobacco as a substance and do not talk with their children, family and friends about it. It is addictive, it is dangerous for health but it should never be banned as it is being attempted on several countries.
Tobacco should be treated as a luxury, an indulgence, not something to label as a drug and criminalize. As you state and very well: this is prohibition. Puritanism never works and this will not be an exception.
Its part of school curricula, and there is a ban on advertising and it is now seen in film a lot less and you cannot smoke indoors. You have to ho outside to smoke. And tobacco products are locked in a case and you have to ask the cashier to get it.
I don’t see how much more can be mandated through legislation. I would be OK with an LCBO model. But after that, it’s prohibition
Prohibition doesn’t work because there will always be some people would still do it anyway. The goal should be to get to as close to elimination as possible.
This is not like small pox where it can be eradicated. Behaviours cannot be eradicated because people do the behaviour. You’d have to make it impossible for people to do the behaviour to eliminate it. But since we can’t change biology, the next best thing would heavily enforced prohibition and since that is impossible, make the activity extremely inconvenient.
I have a couple of ideas.
First would be making tobacco a specialty item, to be sold solely on specialty shops. Take it out of the supermarkets, convenience stores, gas stations, etc. Put it in an enclosed, reserved space, with knowledgeable people behind the counter to actually teach a customer on tobacco and smoking and we have a start.
Second would be to end specific tobacco blends that invite to grab a cigarette after another. I work around smokers and the more conscious ones mention there are such blends, while others satisfy after just one, whatever that may mean.
Third measure would be to make tobacco expensive and perhaps even cap the price. I worked with a person that said he’d quit the day a pack cost 10€. We’ve been farther from that but the cheapest pack available on the market is 5,5€ which is cheaper than the average pack was when I had that talk with my coworker. Twenty years back. I wonder how the companies manage to put such cheap product on the market today and not then.
Next would be to move the culture forward and bring back the notion of smoking as an indulgence and not an escape. My country, in the 60’s and 70’s, during a civil war, dispensed cigarette packs to soldiers where it was stamped “Have a cigar and relax.” It did wonders to boosts the tobacco consumption in the country. Previously it was mostly confined to more afluent people, who would usually smoke the pipe or high quality cigars, which is a better form of tobacco.
And where is tobacco a part of curriculum?
Again, I agree with your first point. Hence I like the LCBO model ( Government owned and run store , it also adds to the budget ).
You mentioned civil war, not sure which country you’re from. Greece? Portugal? Former Yugoslavia?
I like this second point a lot. One of the issues I have with the current government structures is that what we do is this: People -> MPs -> select Government -> select Finance Minister -> interacts with LCBO. I would be perfectly OK with people who drink to elect people to the board of LCBO (Liquor Control Board of Ontario), weed for OCS (Ontario Cannabis Store), and the equivalent one that would be for the tobacco one to get their voices heard. There should be people who represent people who don’t do those things on the boards as well to represent their interests. But this second point highlights why the people who use and make the products should take a charge in creating their experience and have customers and non-customers regulate their experience.
Well the advance of manufacturing is probably a key role in reducing the price, the same as in every industry. Hence the need of punitive taxes to discourage starting and staying (as your coworker shows).
I agree, this is a cultural change. This is a Canadian forum. We are heavily influenced by the US. US and Canadian media became really anti smoking in the 90s-2000s.
I am from Ontario, Canada.
Addictive substance abuse is taught in Grade 5 ( age 10-11 ) toward the end of the year. There is a whole unit on it. At the end of the year, there is also a unit on puberty. Then we get taught them again through the teenage years in physical education classes. Mandatory phys-ed ends at Grade 9 ( age 14-15 ).
The portion of the Ontario, Canada curriculum that talks about addictive substance is found in Ontario Curriculum standard Grade 5 Standards Healthy Living section D1.2 , D2.3 , and D3.3 . Found here ( link: https://www.dcp.edu.gov.on.ca/en/curriculum/elementary-health-and-physical-education/grades/grade-5/strands#healthy-living )