Sunak wants to phase out legal smoking

[Silas Loom]

Yes, fair points.
Assuming that an authoritarian New New Labour administration would never go for legalisation, we'd probably be looking at a decade's time at least, by which time the born after 2009 cut-off would affect all under 25s. That must a sizeable chunk of the potential, legalised weed market? Even if legalisation permitted these under 25s to buy weed, Sunak's law determines that purchase of fag papers would be illegal.

I expect the legal weed retail market would be restricted to edibles and to preparations for vaping, with fruity flavours strictly forbidden. Maybe they would have to taste like Fishermen’s Friends or something.

The under 25s would probably be fine with that. They’d be more likely to support a black market for strawberry and watermelon cannabis vapes than one for age-inappropriate rizlas and skunk and Old Holborn.

 

[Karl Masks]

I was thinking about the people who support the school in London that has banned prayer. If it was Christians being banned from praying they would be losing their shit.

Is there a thread on that, because I find it a very odd story.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

The prohibition on selling fag papers might be more of a challenge to get around but there will undoubtedly be a way.

Go to hairdressing supplies shop and buy perm-papers, is what we had to do in the Philippines, where skins are outlawed. Second trip we just took our own in, along with our own weed, pain in the arse trying to score over there.

 

[belboid]

the Philippines, where skins are outlawed.

Sorry, whaaaaat?

 

[pogofish]

Yeh I had a similar discussion on reddit, banning booze is basically impossible on a practical level. Would need to ban yeast and sugar/fruit juice/fruit/grains/potatoes whatever.

Not an outright ban but SHHAP, the former pressure group that is now the Scottish Government's principal "consultant" on alcohol reform originated with a plan to link all alcohol sales to the ID register and have a "national consumption limit" set - so that you couldn't buy alcohol without official ID and if you bought more than the limit, penalties/"treatment orders" could be issued automatically.

Control-freakery or what..?

Although they did moderate these proposals somewhat in exchange for a seat at the political top-table but I don't think they have really changed that much.

Also RWJF, the very wealthy US think tank/foundation behind just about all the world's anti-smoking "reform"/policies these last few decades has largely abandoned its anti-tobacco work (except on a policy-making level) in recent years and repositioned itself behind alcohol reform - which it has always maintained was the biggest "prize" of all but would be unobtainable unless they conquered tobacco first.

So, practicalities or not, change is coming - and they are patient!

 

[Giles]

This will be the end for the burgeioning "shisha lounge" places, won't it?

There are loads of these around where I live in NW London, catering largely to young adults from demographics who don't drink alcohol and prefer these places to socialise while smoking tobacco in hookah pipe thingies.

 

[pogofish]

Go to hairdressing supplies shop and buy perm-papers, is what we had to do in the Philippines, where skins are outlawed. Second trip we just took our own in, along with our own weed, pain in the arse trying to score over there.

Ahhh - That might raise a few eyebrows for me!

I remember years back, some people having a thing for skinning-up using pages out of Bibles - The lightweight paper they tend to be printed-on works pretty well but I found the "Blessed & Blazed"-type conversation of Christian stoners toe-curling..!

 

[Sasaferrato]

I was thinking about the people who support the school in London that has banned prayer. If it was Christians being banned from praying they would be losing their shit.

I wouldn't. I don't think religion of any flavour has a place in schools.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Ahhh - That might raise a few eyebrows for me!

I remember years back, some people having a thing for skinning-up using pages out of Bibles - The lightweight paper they tend to be printed-on works pretty well but I found the "Blessed & Blazed"-type conversation of Christian stoners toe-curling..!

That was me. I brought a lot of tobacco back to school after the holidays, but not nearly enough papers. We were half way through Leviticus when the crime was discovered.

 

[Artaxerxes]

Is there a thread on that, because I find it a very odd story.

I think its that Birbelsingh loonspud teacher.

 

[lazythursday]

Not an outright ban but SHHAP, the former pressure group that is now the Scottish Government's principal "consultant" on alcohol reform originated with a plan to link all alcohol sales to the ID register and have a "national consumption limit" set - so that you couldn't buy alcohol without official ID and if you bought more than the limit, penalties/"treatment orders" could be issued automatically.

Control-freakery or what..?

Really? What ID register? Can you provide any links for this as I can't find any reference to this through internet searches.

 

[pogofish]

Really? What ID register? Can you provide any links for this as I can't find any reference to this through internet searches.

I linked it up well-enough at the time but the two links I can quickly find have gone dead.

Compulsory - "Alcohol Assessments" by GPs was another of their demands.

They launched during that period (early/mid 2000s) when a national ID card was in planning - which gave birth to the current ID register, but the most controlling stuff vanished off their website when they went for inclusion in policy making.

There may be some old press still in the news archives.

 

[newme]

Not an outright ban but SHHAP, the former pressure group that is now the Scottish Government's principal "consultant" on alcohol reform originated with a plan to link all alcohol sales to the ID register and have a "national consumption limit" set - so that you couldn't buy alcohol without official ID and if you bought more than the limit, penalties/"treatment orders" could be issued automatically.

Control-freakery or what..?

Although they did moderate these proposals somewhat in exchange for a seat at the political top-table but I don't think they have really changed that much.

Also RWJF, the very wealthy US think tank/foundation behind just about all the world's anti-smoking "reform"/policies these last few decades has largely abandoned its anti-tobacco work (except on a policy-making level) in recent years and repositioned itself behind alcohol reform - which it has always maintained was the biggest "prize" of all but would be unobtainable unless they conquered tobacco first.

So, practicalities or not, change is coming - and they are patient!

I can make 100l of cider/beer/ginger beer/whatever a month quite simply without a sale having been made so it makes absolutely no sense as its unenforcable. People sold effectively wine kits with warnings on them not to do x, y and z or it might turn into wine during prohibition. They can't even stop people taking stuff that has to be imported from another continent. Let alone something anyone can make at home.

 

[PR1Berske]

We were half way through Leviticus when the crime was discovered.

Is that a Fall lyric?

 

[pogofish]

I can make 100l of cider/beer/ginger beer/whatever a month quite simply without a sale having been made so it makes absolutely no sense as its unenforcable. People sold effectively wine kits with warnings on them not to do x, y and z or it might turn into wine during prohibition. They can't even stop people taking stuff that has to be imported from another continent. Let alone something anyone can make at home.

Absolutely - It was just a move to assert control IMO.

And their later proposal/fervent support for minimum unit pricing doesn't seem to have worked much, if at all - Except that people already on the fringe have been driven further into poverty/deprivation by it.

 

[Indeliblelink]

And their later proposal/fervent support for minimum unit pricing doesn't seem to have worked much, if at all - Except that people already on the fringe have been driven further into poverty/deprivation by it.

Talking of which, this has popped up my BBC feed. They're increasing the minimum price by 30%

Minimum unit pricing: Scottish MSPs to increase price to 65p

MSPs increase the cost of alcohol but opinions remain split over the policy's effectiveness.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[pogofish]

Yes. One thing that they never make clear is that MUP benefits no one negatively affected by alcohol.

This is not any kind of duty or levy to fund or support alcohol issues, treatment or the NHS in Scotland, or even a general tax. It is purely prohibition motivated and simply a price they fixed to hit the poorest drinkers hardest, and any money raised goes right back to the shops/producers.

Also there is the whole matter of "alcohol units" being a complete and utterly fictitious swizz to begin with.

 

[Cerv]

Also there is the whole matter of "alcohol units" being a complete and utterly fictitious swizz to begin with.

it's a straightforward measure of the volume of ethanol, the active ingredient.

Yes. One thing that they never make clear is that MUP benefits no one negatively affected by alcohol.

This is not any kind of duty or levy to fund or support alcohol issues, treatment or the NHS in Scotland, or even a general tax. It is purely prohibition motivated and simply a price they fixed to hit the poorest drinkers hardest, and any money raised goes right back to the shops/producers.

Labour have at least proposed to introduce a public health levy into MUP to address that.

 

[lazythursday]

Yes. One thing that they never make clear is that MUP benefits no one negatively affected by alcohol.

This is not any kind of duty or levy to fund or support alcohol issues, treatment or the NHS in Scotland, or even a general tax. It is purely prohibition motivated and simply a price they fixed to hit the poorest drinkers hardest, and any money raised goes right back to the shops/producers.

Also there is the whole matter of "alcohol units" being a complete and utterly fictitious swizz to begin with.

This is a bit of an exaggeration - there is mixed evidence for the MUP, in terms of reducing alcohol consumption and associated harm. It probably hasn't achieved what was intended but at least Scotland tried something and it now can be researched and amended.

Alcohol units are not fictitious, FFS.

 

[pogofish]

This is a bit of an exaggeration - there is mixed evidence for the MUP, in terms of reducing alcohol consumption and associated harm. It probably hasn't achieved what was intended but at least Scotland tried something and it now can be researched and amended.

Alcohol units are not fictitious, FFS.

Its no exaggeration that the excess cost of MUP does nothing to help alleviate alcohol-related issues or suffering. Its a purely prohibitonist/commercial innovation!

None of the main issues MUP was supposed to address have been proven effectively - some have even got worse despite it. If the extra money it raises had been put towards relieving the problem, I could have possibly got behind it


Alcohol units are a load of codswallop! Dreamed-up by some policy committee with no significant scientific/medical basis.

We've been through this before - The old link I've posted has gone dead but the quote remains:

Guidelines on safe alcohol consumption limits that have shaped health policy in Britain for 20 years were “plucked out of the air” as an “intelligent guess”.

The Times reveals today that the recommended weekly drinking limits of 21 units of alcohol for men and 14 for women, first introduced in 1987 and still in use today, had no firm scientific basis whatsoever.

 

[kabbes]

Unit guidelines may lack scientific credibility, but that doesn’t mean you can’t quantify the alcohol content of a drink in terms of units. For a given person, drinking six units will be worse than drinking five units.

 

[pogofish]

Unit guidelines may lack scientific credibility, but that doesn’t mean you can’t quantify the alcohol content of a drink in terms of units. For a given person, drinking six units will be worse than drinking five units.

But they are used with implied scientific/medical credibility and no qualification whatsoever. That makes it different.

 

[kabbes]

But they are used with implied scientific/medical credibility and no qualification whatsoever. That makes it different.

Well, if you truly want scientific credibility, the answer is that you should be drinking zero units. That’s unlikely to be a palatable message, though. So an attempt is made to give a number above zero that might help restrict consumption. Scientifically, any number they pick is better than any higher number and worse than any lower number.

 

[newme]

Well, if you truly want scientific credibility, the answer is that you should be drinking zero units. That’s unlikely to be a palatable message, though. So an attempt is made to give a number above zero that might help restrict consumption. Scientifically, any number they pick is better than any higher number and worse than any lower number.

Yeh WHO say no alcohol whatsoever. Units are obviously a quantifiable value, the suggested max varies all over the world but I rarely see it mentioned anywhere other than people saying "I did that on Saturday haha" or whatever. Not like it is being enforced in any matter so its basically irrelevant and anyone with an actual problem will just not tell the doctor the right amount anyway. They already know its an issue and sitting through a lecture about it doesn't change anything.

 

[pogofish]

Well, if you truly want scientific credibility, the answer is that you should be drinking zero units. That’s unlikely to be a palatable message, though. So an attempt is made to give a number above zero that might help restrict consumption. Scientifically, any number they pick is better than any higher number and worse than any lower number.

Maybe so but it still doesn't lift them beyond being expediently meaningless shite.

Also potentially racist as at least some of the justification SHAAP relies on is cribbed from Australia's anti-alcohol provisions that target the indigenous population far more severely than the incomers.

Anyway, we are getting beyond tobacco and into an argument we had ten+ years ago that hasn't quite come back round again, although it probably will after the tobacco changes work through.

 

[pogofish]

Yeh WHO say no alcohol whatsoever. Units are obviously a quantifiable value, the suggested max varies all over the world but I rarely see it mentioned anywhere other than people saying "I did that on Saturday haha" or whatever. Not like it is being enforced in any matter so its basically irrelevant and anyone with an actual problem will just not tell the doctor the right amount anyway. They already know its an issue and sitting through a lecture about it doesn't change anything.

Making alcohol unit limits legally enforceable was a big part of SHAAP's founding manifesto and even though they have backpedalled for now, I don't think we will have heard the last of that idea if they keep getting their way.

 

[newme]

Making alcohol unit limits legally enforceable was SHAAP's founding policy and even though they have backpedalled for now, I don't think we will have heard the last of that idea if they keep getting their way.

Its impossible to enforce it tho, plus its an immediate vote loser with little public support.

 

[pogofish]

it's a straightforward measure of the volume of ethanol, the active ingredient.



Labour have at least proposed to introduce a public health levy into MUP to address that.

Nope - A UK unit is the total volume of the drink multiplied by the ABV (Alcohol percentage By Volume) then divided by 1000

Also the typical unit amounts often used to "advise" people on safe consumption are based on very general estimates and don't take into account that different brands/versions of a drink can have a fairly wide ABV range, esp at the cheaper/poorer quality/higher strength end of the market that MUP targets hardest.

I've seldom if ever seen a clear explanation of the difference in units/ABV between say, cider and (much stronger) white cider.

So yes, more codswallop.

 

[pogofish]

Its impossible to enforce it tho, plus its an immediate vote loser with little public support.

Yet it got them a seat at the top table in Scotland and later proposals have been acted-on.

 

[pogofish]

Its impossible to enforce it tho, plus its an immediate vote loser with little public support.

That's why they wanted ALL alcohol sales linked to the ID register and fines/treatment orders issued automatically to anyone who exceed the now-mandatory "limits".

Note they didn't propose to meddle with the market and try to actually restrict sales.

Alcoholic ANPR if you will..!