To ask why cigarettes are still legal when they are so bad for our health

[SelenaMeyer2016]

Why are cigarettes still being sold?

Many health risks associated with smoking.

Following on from smoking looking cool thread...

[Catatlarge]

Because they make the govt so much money through tax?

[PancakeInMaBelly]

Cause bootleg cigs are worse?

[SuburbanRhonda]

Alcohol is also widely available and is arguably just as dangerous, just more socially acceptable.

[MissionItsPossible]

Because of money

[PancakeInMaBelly]

I think statistically red meat is pretty close to cigs in the cancer causing stakes

[Topseyt]

The tax revenue that they bring in for the government has to be a big factor. Same goes for alcohol.

[BartholinsSister]

Because many of the people who enjoy them suffer no ill-effects.

[ReginaldMolehusband]

Because some governments have a monopoly on tobacco sales. Because some US states rely on tobacco growing. Because no one is prepared to take the financial hit from loss of taxes and recompense the millions of farmers whose sole income comes from tobacco. Because public health and pharma garner millions of £s researching anti tobacco shit. Because the anti smoking charities would be out of a tax payer funded job.

[RunningOutOfCharge]

Sugar is as bad.... but you can't just withdraw something from sale because it's bad for us

People need to be responsible for their own health...., why can't they be?

[Iwillstartagainonmonday]

Because they bring in too much revenue in tax. Same as alcohol. Is the sad answer.

[yorkshireyummymummy]

Because of the income they raise through taxation and because it’s none of the governments business frankly if people smoke. The government is not (yet) our mummy.
You could ask why is alcohol still sold?
Or sugar?

Not everybody who smokes dies of a smoking related illness. It’s our choice what we put in our bodies and if the government tried to ban tobacco I would be marching on the streets even though I don’t smoke. No government would dare try to do it as it would be political suicide. If they took tobacco away what would be next? Where would it stop??

You would also end up with many many deaths through people buying bootleg tobacco which would FLOOD the black market.
Didn’t work when they tried to ban alcohol in the USA did it.

[MrsDilber]

Free choice is why. I'm a non smoker and don't drink, but if I wanted to, I wouldn't want any government nannying me.

Also, regarding red meat, I was anemic a few years ago, my gp told me to eat red meat (as well as given me an iron supplement), I don't think a gp would prescribe 20 Silk Cut.

[MrsDilber]

Thin edge of a wedge the government interfering with what you can and can't do.

[MinorRSole]

Are we making things illegal purely based on the health aspects? Not sure I want to live in a society that restricts free will to that extent thanks.

[PotatoesOfTheCarribean]

*I think statistically red meat is pretty close to cigs in the cancer causing stakes

Nope. HALF of all smokers will die from a smoking related illness. Half.
Red meat is nowhere near that level.

[SelenaMeyer2016]

ah, sugar. Yet companies are changing recipes and replacing sugar with awful sweetners so I have made a choice not to buy products. Is sugar as bad as smoking though?

I have never thought of the aspect of American states growing tobacco and therefore losing income.

Revenue from tax I completely understand.

[Thehogfather]

Because like alcohol there's a huge amount of tax made. Far more than it costs to treat smoking related illness on the nhs.

Banning them would be a bit like banning overeating to combat obesity, it won't stop anyone. So it would be like obesity, a cost for the nhs but without the tax paid to cover it because everyone would just buy them illegally. No benefits

[RosemaryHoight]

But they did raise the risk factor for processed meat to the same as 15 cigarettes a day. So if you have a sausage or bacon it's the same health risk as smoking cigarettes.

[ShrinkWrap]

Err, regarding the red meat or smoking thing it’s quite clear in this article.

www.theguardian.com/science/sifting-the-evidence/2015/oct/26/meat-and-tobacco-the-difference-between-risk-and-strength-of-evidence

[Adrianflank]

I work in a bottling factory, it's bonded, at anyone time we have over £20 million in stock in just tax, we send tankers out, for 30,000 litres it's worth £15,000 but if it goes missing HMRC will fine us 1 million pounds, it makes to much money for the giverment

[SelenaMeyer2016]

Interesting...

I have definitely heard a medical professional tell a patient to have a smoke to calm down. Not quite the 20 silk cut analogy but still...

I don’t want to live in a nanny state either - I’m assuming it’s the sugar tax that is making companies change their recipes to reduce sugar. Where is the choice in this for consumers?? However I would much rather consume sugar in small amounts than have squash etc. that has been cut with sweetners. Possibly another thread....

[kungpopanda]

HALF of all smokers will die from a smoking related illness. Half. And that means the other 50% will die of something else, no? So, not smoking can kill, you read it here first.

[Iwillstartagainonmonday]

Is sugar as bad as smoking though

I dont think so not really. Nowhere near. Take the bloke who winded up in Judge Rinder on an oxygen tank who was still smoking. I don't really tie people who like an extra slice of cake sometimes in with the same category.

[safariboot]

The USA in the 1920s demonstrated what happens when you try and prohibit a popular recreational drug. Alcohol use did decrease but it was nowhere near eliminated, organised crime flourished, and the government lost out on the taxes it had imposed when alcohol was legal.