Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Sunak wants to phase out legal smoking

I'm not convinced that's not just a scare story TBH. In the same way as "super-strong modern skunk" has been copiously bolloxed about in recent years

20% (20mg) nicotine fluid approximates to approx one cigarette (11-15mg, of which typically 1.5mg is actually absorbed) over 40-60 inhalations, depending on lung capacity/amount inhaled. So for one puff, to equivalent 2-3 fags, you would need a concentration far in excess of 100% of fluid.

It simply does not add-up.
Lol I was actually told this by a very heavy vaper who disnt see it as a bad thing, and said that it had been a reason why she'd been able to get off fags and considered it better than smoking. But yeah prepared to believe she may have been mistaken!
 
Lol I was actually told this by a very heavy vaper who said that it had been a reason why she'd been able to get off fags and considered it better than smoking. But yeah prepared to believe she may have been mistaken!

Back before regulation limited UK fluid to 20mg, the 50mg fluid you could get for mixing was interesting stuff but you would need a wrought-iron throat to vape it undiluted.

I tried, once and quickly went very green at the gills...! :eek: 🤮
 
And yeah I've known people who vape morning noon and night to an extent you rarely see smokers doing these days apart from in old films. But I'm prepared to accept that's probably influencing my views a bit. Clearly its much better in terms of the people around you and theoretically it's probably better, but in terms of the volume and how people actually use the stuff? Dunno.
 
Back before regulation limited UK fluid to 20mg, the 50mg fluid you could get for mixing was interesting stuff but you would need a wrought-iron throat to vape it undiluted.

I tried, once and quickly went very green at the gills...! :eek: 🤮
Yeah I think this may have been before tougher regulation came in. It was definitely much more than 20ml.
 
And yeah I've known people who vape morning noon and night to an extent you rarely see smokers doing these days apart from in old films. But I'm prepared to accept that's probably influencing my views a bit. Clearly its much better in terms of the people around you and theoretically it's probably better, but in terms of the volume and how people actually use the stuff? Dunno.

Yes, constantly vaping away across the day can see a substantial amount of nicotine absorbed but that's not quite the same order as the scare stories would like to have us believe.
 
Anyhoo are they sure that the lose of tax revenue will be repaid by less NHS footfall? Are there any studies to prove this?
 
Last edited:
Anyhoo are they sure that the lose of tax revenue will be repaid by less NHS footfall? Are there any studies to prove this?
Yeah loads here's just one


I can remember people smoking in the office back in the late 1980's/1990's and it was pretty vile for those of us that weren't smokers. It wasn't actually made illegal until around 2006/2007 ish but loads of companies had banned it years before then driven by several successful court cases where people had taken their employers to court over passive smoking at work. The place I worked in Liverpool during the 80's was on Dale St and the boss banned people from smoking in the office and they had to go up to the roof to smoke there. Rain and chilly winds off the Mersey helped loads to quit.
Evil American Megacorp had a smoking room in the basement where by mid afternoon, the addicts didn't really need to light up they could just stand there and take deep breaths. After a while they decided to close that and turn it into a prayer room and the smokers were forced to go and huddle outside in this open sided bus shelter thing around the back. This fell down after a heavy snow storm one year and there was no budget to put it back up so they became an even more pitiful bunch of refugees huddled next to the air con outlet ducts in a desperate search for warmth. When it was actually made illegal EAM just banned it period though to be fair they did offer some break the habit stuff for the last few survivors.
I get the whole 'freedom to choose' thing and the 'They came for the smokers first and I didn't speak up' vibe but this isn't a hill I'd be prepared to die on. When they come for the smokers to put them in camps, they're welcome to them.
 
And yeah I've known people who vape morning noon and night to an extent you rarely see smokers doing these days apart from in old films. But I'm prepared to accept that's probably influencing my views a bit. Clearly its much better in terms of the people around you and theoretically it's probably better, but in terms of the volume and how people actually use the stuff? Dunno.
It's up to them though, not Starmer
 
Yeah loads here's just one


I can remember people smoking in the office back in the late 1980's/1990's and it was pretty vile for those of us that weren't smokers. It wasn't actually made illegal until around 2006/2007 ish but loads of companies had banned it years before then driven by several successful court cases where people had taken their employers to court over passive smoking at work. The place I worked in Liverpool during the 80's was on Dale St and the boss banned people from smoking in the office and they had to go up to the roof to smoke there. Rain and chilly winds off the Mersey helped loads to quit.
Evil American Megacorp had a smoking room in the basement where by mid afternoon, the addicts didn't really need to light up they could just stand there and take deep breaths. After a while they decided to close that and turn it into a prayer room and the smokers were forced to go and huddle outside in this open sided bus shelter thing around the back. This fell down after a heavy snow storm one year and there was no budget to put it back up so they became an even more pitiful bunch of refugees huddled next to the air con outlet ducts in a desperate search for warmth. When it was actually made illegal EAM just banned it period though to be fair they did offer some break the habit stuff for the last few survivors.
I get the whole 'freedom to choose' thing and the 'They came for the smokers first and I didn't speak up' vibe but this isn't a hill I'd be prepared to die on. When they come for the smokers to put them in camps, they're welcome to them.
Yeh with an attitude like that you'll find yourself in pastor niemoller's unenviable position
 
It's up to them though, not Starmer
I agree but only while it remains the case that it's relatively unproblematic, health-wise. If suddenly there's evidence of a vaping cancer wave I'd probably change my mind. I do think that there's unfortunately a necessity for the State to take action on improving public health at a population level, because otherwise we see too much strain on the NHS, and arguably one of the reasons for the current problems especially GP access is the fact some issues that cause chronic long term illness (diet etc) have not been tackled by successive governments.
 
Yeah loads here's just one


I have to say that I tend to take reports like that with a massive pinch of salt, not because I am defending smoking, being an ex-smoker myself, but because they don't/can't take into consideration the massive cost to society if smokers lived longer.

At the end of the day we are all going to die at some point, and the longer people live tends to increase the cost to society in general, because of increased health and social care costs in old age, and pensions being paid out for longer, this is not balanced out in these studies.
 
The ban will kill off a particular type of ale house. The gastropub, beloved of the chattering classes like Starmer will be okay, some city centre pubs will be fine too. Sadly, for some on here, I suspect most Spoons will also be okay.

But the community local, already dying off at alarming rates, will be finished by the ban. Can't smoke inside, can't smoke outside, can't smoke 'nearby'.... so the smokers will just start buying in from the supermarket or off licence. The rest of us will stop going too as the places will be empty.
Yeh this is a village pub, basically survived the smoking ban by offering more food options, its better than average food at average prices. Seems it was worth it for the summer trade to remove the pool table and add more tables. Which meant I had no reason to go there. The shop opposite has booze and no pool table too. Bought a pool table instead (obviously worse then theirs but when they have none..). Majority of the regulars are smokers or come with one or more who are and it skews heavily that way out of season. My neighbour works there.

Outside of tourist season I suspect without the smokers they would be iffy as to whether to actually made profit by opening even if we assume it only puts off half of the smoking area.
 
I think you need to also look at the cost to society in terms of mental health issues as well though. Not saying smoking is good for ones mental health but there is a point about disappearing social spaces and opportunities to meet strangers etc which a lot of have hospitality venues represented.
 
Tbf though some posters have said that because of health reasons they're put off going to pub gardens where lots of people are smoking. So they might attract a few new customers, dunno if it will be enough though.
 
So, Sir Keir says that a ban on smoking outside pubs, etc, should come in because the NHS is under pressure. “On its knees”. “We have to relieve the burden”, he says.

What bollocks! The NHS is under pressure because it has been underfunded, and the Starmer regime will not fund it at the level that health services are funded in comparable countries.

There are 80,000 preventable deaths per year, he says. The number of preventable deaths has declined, but Starmer blames deaths due to smoking for a lack of funding that he will not reverse.

Furthermore, any decline in the demand for health treatment as a result of this measure will not be manifest for years.
 
I agree but only while it remains the case that it's relatively unproblematic, health-wise. If suddenly there's evidence of a vaping cancer wave I'd probably change my mind. I do think that there's unfortunately a necessity for the State to take action on improving public health at a population level, because otherwise we see too much strain on the NHS, and arguably one of the reasons for the current problems especially GP access is the fact some issues that cause chronic long term illness (diet etc) have not been tackled by successive governments.
Obesity alone (im classified as such) costs the NHS more than twice what smoking (i vape) does from some quick googling. Smoking also raises more than it costs in tax by the same quick Google. I'm not standing by those figures at all so happy to be corrected.

Ones I found were (per year)

2.6b for smoking cost, over 8b raised.
Obesity cost over 6b. Sugar tax raised under 400m. I know there's probably some food tax income I'm missing in there, probably alcohol too? Tho is that another issue or the same one. I didn't gain weight from weed anywhere near what I did with alcohol even with the munchies.

Leave the pubs alone so they don't close.
 
So, Sir Keir says that a ban on smoking outside pubs, etc, should come in because the NHS is under pressure. “On its knees”. “We have to relieve the burden”, he says.

What bollocks! The NHS is under pressure because it has been underfunded, and the Starmer regime will not fund it at the level that health services are funded in comparable countries.

There are 80,000 preventable deaths per year, he says. The number of preventable deaths has declined, but Starmer blames deaths due to smoking for a lack of funding that he will not reverse.

Furthermore, any decline in the demand for health treatment as a result of this measure will not be manifest for years.

There will not be any decline in the demand for health needs if people live longer, they will end-up costing more by living longer and ending-up with more complex health and care needs.

Talk about not seeing the woods for the trees. :facepalm:
 
I don't smoke. And can't be arsed reading this thread tbh. But in principle, no. Let people fucking smoke outdoors, as many of my mates do. What did you Labour voting idiots get yourselves into her

" labour voting idiots" interesting take and view point on here

It's been widely popular for a good fifteen years surely? There must be some data.
but 15 -20 years ago E cigs were those little cigeratte resembling inhaler things not the puff the magic dragon devices with their plumes of glycerol smoke that give commercial stage smoke machines a run for their money
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom