EU to ban menthol and flavoured cigarettes: ASH Thailand

[webfact]

EU to ban menthol and flavoured cigarettes
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union have agreed to impose a new directive that prohibits the use of artificial flavours and menthol in tobacco products along with electronic cigarettes.

The secretary-general of the Action on Smoking and Health Foundation (ASH Thailand), Dr Prakit Wathisathokkit, said governments of all 28 EU member countries would also be required to print warning images covering 65 per cent of total area of cigarette packs by 2016.

The EU governments are welcome to impose stricter measures on their local cigarette businesses, such as ordering that all cigarette packs be plain, or not carry any logo, images or trademarks, he added.

Some 700,000 smokers die in EU countries each year. ASH Thailand once considered calling for a ban on the use of menthol in cigarettes but halted the plan after opposition by local and international tobacco companies.

Prakit said menthol made smoking more popular because it eased irritation while being inviting to young smokers.


-- The Nation 2013-12-26

[jaltsc]

"ASH Thailand once considered calling for a ban on the use of menthol in cigarettes but halted the plan after opposition by local and international tobacco companies".

In other words, those in power, who profit most from alcohol and tobacco sales set them straight about not interfering with the money flow. I am sure, that even if the ban were implemented to impress the western nations, it would have been as successful as the driving safety, and holiday alcohol ban campaigns .

[Alwyn]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

[robblok]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

[Alwyn]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

[robblok]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

That is the major drawback in what i propose.. but with all the taxes on alcohol and ciggies why not use that to finance it.

But the problem with this is.. what about high risk sports.... should they be taxed then too.. and what about.... ect ect.

I am not saying my plan is full proof, just saying that banning and prohibition of drugs never worked. Alcohol one of the most damaging drugs (because of its wide use) seems to keep going unlike smoking that gets attacked.

[Alwyn]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

That is the major drawback in what i propose.. but with all the taxes on alcohol and ciggies why not use that to finance it.

But the problem with this is.. what about high risk sports.... should they be taxed then too.. and what about.... ect ect.

I am not saying my plan is full proof, just saying that banning and prohibition of drugs never worked. Alcohol one of the most damaging drugs (because of its wide use) seems to keep going unlike smoking that gets attacked.

Most high risk sports come with insurances - I teach what is called a high risk sport and I have 3rd party public liability insurance which covers my students and me. If the tax from those products went in to the health care for the purpose that would work - but would the government just use that money for foreign aid or something? Tough one, but I'm with you on the taxation bit. Alcohol is indeed a terrible drug and from what I know far less harmful from weed etc (at least that's what the stoners keep saying!!) ah well, enough of this saving the World malarkey, I'm off to the beach for a beer!! Have a good day!

[somchaismith]

Picking on e-cigs again.

[Shiver]

I'm a smoker. I am very aware of non smokers around me and don't impose my habit on others. Apart from courtesy of not imposing my habit, I think second hand smoke may be at least as damaging as smoking, since a smoker will have an immune system (think of phlegm), fighting against it, whereas non smokers inflicted with the same smoke would not have lungs prepared for it. For comparison, if you think of someone who doesn't use alcohol and then drinking something, it affects them a lot more (a lot!) more than someone who is a regular drinker.

I'm not defending either practice - each to their own, but feel it is unlawful (in a universe sense, not a legal sense) to trespass upon others.

That said, I do wish there was an open ledger that showed taxes acquired from such practices could demonstrably be proven to be spent on the consequences of such actions. Another example would be road tax (I'm talking about UK here - not sure of other countries). How much of road tax goes on roads? How much of fuel tax goes on resolving the issues it causes?

Tea money in another form.

[chuang]

I am a non-smoker, just curious what's the difference between a menthol and non-menthol cig...

[Bluespunk]

I am a non-smoker, just curious what's the difference between a menthol and non-menthol cig...

One has menthol, the other doesn't would be my guess.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Bluespunk

[lucifer666]

I think that without alcohol and tobacco taxes most european governments and health services, would collapse through lack of funding. Unless they hiked the prices of fuel (again).

Edit to add. It was the use of an electronic cigarette that helped me to stop smoking after 30 years, i personally, would recommend them.

Edited December 26, 2013 by lucifer666

[ggold]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

considering the amount of tax the UK government collect from cigarettes, which virtually covers the cost of the NHS I would say smokers should be first in line for treatment.

I would also suggest that when you find yourself on you're death bed that you're attitude will change quite dramatically once denied treatment for your live/kidney problems!

[Mampara]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

Reminds me of my younger days. i refused to go to kindergarten because every time i went they confiscated my pipe and tobacco

[Alwyn]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

considering the amount of tax the UK government collect from cigarettes, which virtually covers the cost of the NHS I would say smokers should be first in line for treatment.

I would also suggest that when you find yourself on you're death bed that you're attitude will change quite dramatically once denied treatment for your live/kidney problems!

I'm guessing you're a smoker Ggold? each to their own and all that but you could say also that the amount of Road Tax paid in the UK versus the amount that is actually spent on the road and upkeep etc (10%) leaves enough to pay for NHS too. If the tax generated was put aside specifically for the use of smoke related diseases and so on I would say yes, be first in line. same with tax on alcohol and alcohol related diseases. But the fact is the UK government doesn't do that. even money from NI payments is diverted for other uses. You're probably right about the kidney/liver thing too - hopefully I'll never get to know that one! But plenty of pissheads would agree I reckon!

[Alwyn]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

Reminds me of my younger days. i refused to go to kindergarten because every time i went they confiscated my pipe and tobacco

Yes, those kindergarten people could be total fascists about things like that. Mary Poppins would never have confiscated your stash!

[Dr Bruce]

Most people who use E-Cigs are trying to give up, why the hell are they banning them?

[jaltsc]

Most people who use E-Cigs are trying to give up, why the hell are they banning them?

"Trying"???...Either you give it up or you don't. "Trying" is just a term used by people who don't have the discipline to act upon their empty promises to themselves and others. AA, NA, GA among others are groups composed of people who stopped promising and actually quit. Smoking E-cigs to cut down on tobacco use is like someone trying to quit drinking vodka by consuming beer.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Most non smokers I know don't care if people want to consume tobacco products as long as they do it in privacy. However, many, if not most, tobacco addicts light up in places where there are signs prohibiting smoking, without asking if anyone minds. Of course! They don't want someone getting in the way of their next fix. As for the owners of establishments who put up "No Smoking" signs...Either enforce the ban or take the sign down.

[ggold]

Most people who use E-Cigs are trying to give up, why the hell are they banning them?

"Trying"???...Either you give it up or you don't. "Trying" is just a term used by people who don't have the discipline to act upon their empty promises to themselves and others. AA, NA, GA among others are groups composed of people who stopped promising and actually quit. Smoking E-cigs to cut down on tobacco use is like someone trying to quit drinking vodka by consuming beer.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Most non smokers I know don't care if people want to consume tobacco products as long as they do it in privacy. However, many, if not most, tobacco addicts light up in places where there are signs prohibiting smoking, without asking if anyone minds. Of course! They don't want someone getting in the way of their next fix. As for the owners of establishments who put up "No Smoking" signs...Either enforce the ban or take the sign down.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Funny and there I was thinking Drunks regularly share the result of their binge drinking with others like going home and beating the wife and or getting involved in fights after closing time. Quite a social bunch!

where as smokers are no longer allowed to share their habit with the general public as smoking in public places in now illegal!

[h90]

Sounds like nonsense regarding the menthol... Maybe things have changed but as a kid my school did a day trip to a cigarette factory in London (could you imagine that happening now!!!) whe I was maybe 9 years old. The menthol in cigarettes is not actually in the cigarette but the foil inside the packet was impregnated with menthol - they gave us all a piece of the foil to take home!! When I look back at this trip it's scary that the cigarette companies were campaigning kids our age. Didn't work with me thankfully as i had a grandad who educated me against the evils of smoking!! (thanks grandad) Maybe things have changed and they impregnate the tobacco now? But the EU should stop messing about and just ban all tobacco products that involve putting a small stick in your face and setting fire to it?

I am not so sure about banning smoking, actually I hate all those bans and prohibitation never worked. Then again I am for more free drug laws. Let people do what they want as long as they don't affect others. Let the price of tobacco be taxed so the health costs are paid from it and let everyone do as they please. (of course no smoking indoors with non smokers).

For the record, I don't smoke but I hate it that you can't do what you want with your body as long as you are not bothering others. People should be allowed to use their drug of choice.

Agreed! My point was why bother with banning menthol cigarettes? As for people doing what they want to their own bodies then yeah, why not as long as it doens't impact me? But.. Other things to take into consideration are things like health services. I'm from the UK where there is a fine national health service which is more or less free. My thoughts would be if somebody gets sick on a self inflicted basis - such as lung cancer etc due to smoking or heart attacks due to morbid obesity then they should pay for their own treatment and not the 'collective' so to speak! I abuse my own body now and then with sessions down the pub!.. If my liver and/or kidneys pack up bacause of this why should others have to pay for the treatment?

considering the amount of tax the UK government collect from cigarettes, which virtually covers the cost of the NHS I would say smokers should be first in line for treatment.

I would also suggest that when you find yourself on you're death bed that you're attitude will change quite dramatically once denied treatment for your live/kidney problems!

there was once a study that smokers don't cost more money, because they are healthy enough till the retire and the shorter lifespan and so less pension cancel itself out with the cancer treatment. And actually non smoker get sick as well..maybe 10 years later but it still costs.

[h90]

Most people who use E-Cigs are trying to give up, why the hell are they banning them?

"Trying"???...Either you give it up or you don't. "Trying" is just a term used by people who don't have the discipline to act upon their empty promises to themselves and others. AA, NA, GA among others are groups composed of people who stopped promising and actually quit. Smoking E-cigs to cut down on tobacco use is like someone trying to quit drinking vodka by consuming beer.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Most non smokers I know don't care if people want to consume tobacco products as long as they do it in privacy. However, many, if not most, tobacco addicts light up in places where there are signs prohibiting smoking, without asking if anyone minds. Of course! They don't want someone getting in the way of their next fix. As for the owners of establishments who put up "No Smoking" signs...Either enforce the ban or take the sign down.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Funny and there I was thinking Drunks regularly share the result of their binge drinking with others like going home and beating the wife and or getting involved in fights after closing time. Quite a social bunch!

where as smokers are no longer allowed to share their habit with the general public as smoking in public places in now illegal!

Actually there are no smoker that beat their wives because they are nicotine drunk, no car accidents after binge smoking......

[Thai at Heart]

"ASH Thailand once considered calling for a ban on the use of menthol in cigarettes but halted the plan after opposition by local and international tobacco companies".

In other words, those in power, who profit most from alcohol and tobacco sales set them straight about not interfering with the money flow. I am sure, that even if the ban were implemented to impress the western nations, it would have been as successful as the driving safety, and holiday alcohol ban campaigns .

What a principled bunch

[ggold]

Most people who use E-Cigs are trying to give up, why the hell are they banning them?

"Trying"???...Either you give it up or you don't. "Trying" is just a term used by people who don't have the discipline to act upon their empty promises to themselves and others. AA, NA, GA among others are groups composed of people who stopped promising and actually quit. Smoking E-cigs to cut down on tobacco use is like someone trying to quit drinking vodka by consuming beer.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Most non smokers I know don't care if people want to consume tobacco products as long as they do it in privacy. However, many, if not most, tobacco addicts light up in places where there are signs prohibiting smoking, without asking if anyone minds. Of course! They don't want someone getting in the way of their next fix. As for the owners of establishments who put up "No Smoking" signs...Either enforce the ban or take the sign down.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Funny and there I was thinking Drunks regularly share the result of their binge drinking with others like going home and beating the wife and or getting involved in fights after closing time. Quite a social bunch!

where as smokers are no longer allowed to share their habit with the general public as smoking in public places in now illegal!

Actually there are no smoker that beat their wives because they are nicotine drunk, no car accidents after binge smoking......

Point taken. but go to any Accident and Emergency unit in the UK on a Friday night, and you will see there are more drunks needing treatment than non drunks. Here in Thailand I don't know if a study has been done on Lao Kow drinking and effects on the community?

[h90]

"Trying"???...Either you give it up or you don't. "Trying" is just a term used by people who don't have the discipline to act upon their empty promises to themselves and others. AA, NA, GA among others are groups composed of people who stopped promising and actually quit. Smoking E-cigs to cut down on tobacco use is like someone trying to quit drinking vodka by consuming beer.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Most non smokers I know don't care if people want to consume tobacco products as long as they do it in privacy. However, many, if not most, tobacco addicts light up in places where there are signs prohibiting smoking, without asking if anyone minds. Of course! They don't want someone getting in the way of their next fix. As for the owners of establishments who put up "No Smoking" signs...Either enforce the ban or take the sign down.

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Funny and there I was thinking Drunks regularly share the result of their binge drinking with others like going home and beating the wife and or getting involved in fights after closing time. Quite a social bunch!

where as smokers are no longer allowed to share their habit with the general public as smoking in public places in now illegal!

Actually there are no smoker that beat their wives because they are nicotine drunk, no car accidents after binge smoking......

Point taken. but go to any Accident and Emergency unit in the UK on a Friday night, and you will see there are more drunks needing treatment than non drunks. Here in Thailand I don't know if a study has been done on Lao Kow drinking and effects on the community?

We had some construction workers here...middle age men who like to drink Lao Kaow. They were in mental conditions, that were simply unbelievable. Too silly for even simple tasks.

I guess these cheap homemade version has a lot Methanol and that really kills the brain.

I actually don't smoke anymore and stop drinking as well. But I have a real problem if people like Thaksin or Chalerm (speaking of Thailand) sets what people are allowed to do and what not. If someone want to smoke himself to dead let him, same counts for other drugs.

[ggold]

As for tobacco addicts...They are the only addicts who willingly "share" their substance of choice without regard to the health and welfare of those to whom they impose their unhealthy addiction. When was the last time you saw an alcohol, heroin or cocaine addict share their drug of choice to others on a regular basis for free?

Funny and there I was thinking Drunks regularly share the result of their binge drinking with others like going home and beating the wife and or getting involved in fights after closing time. Quite a social bunch!

where as smokers are no longer allowed to share their habit with the general public as smoking in public places in now illegal!

Actually there are no smoker that beat their wives because they are nicotine drunk, no car accidents after binge smoking......

Point taken. but go to any Accident and Emergency unit in the UK on a Friday night, and you will see there are more drunks needing treatment than non drunks. Here in Thailand I don't know if a study has been done on Lao Kow drinking and effects on the community?

We had some construction workers here...middle age men who like to drink Lao Kaow. They were in mental conditions, that were simply unbelievable. Too silly for even simple tasks.

I guess these cheap homemade version has a lot Methanol and that really kills the brain.

I actually don't smoke anymore and stop drinking as well. But I have a real problem if people like Thaksin or Chalerm (speaking of Thailand) sets what people are allowed to do and what not. If someone want to smoke himself to dead let him, same counts for other drugs.

the guy next door regularly staggers home after a laow kaow session. Once there was a hell of a racket as his son in-law proceeded to demolish one of the walls while under the influence, fortunately a hand full of nails and a hammer had the place looking the same in the morning.

There's a certain advantage to living in a teak house!

[sawadee1947]

"Prakit said menthol made smoking more popular because it eased irritation while being inviting to young smokers."

That's pretty much ok, isn't it? Make it popular, addict more younger once...!! Increase the profit of Tobacco industry! Well done, Mr. Prakit!!! You got the right position! Congrats!