Smoking vs Drinking

This was in another thread but since I did not want to derail the discussion, I thought it might be a good idea to start a new one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Another one that you didn't mention was drunk driving, which kills a lot of people. But banning alcohol just won't work.

---

This is something I often wonder... Why are there smoking bans all over the world but nothing when it comes to drinking?

Drinking surely causes as much damage to one's body as smoking; it is as addictive and, what's more, its effects are felt more acutely: you don't hear people smoking one too many and gettting abusive towards their partners or children or causing traffic accidents.

So why has the society become more permissive towards drinking? Why is it OK to have beer and other alcohol commercials on TV but not cigarettes?

Disclaimer: I am not advocating smoking or drinking. I have never smoked and do not consume great quantities of alcoholic drinks (and yes, I lead a boring existence).

That is a good question Scher. The smoking restrictions have only been around for the most part in the United States in the last ten years. Here are some ideas on the disparity between the two vices:

1. More than 50% of the people have at least a mild drink every so often, but cigarette smokers are about 1/3 the population here in the US, so they are a minority. The power of a majority to make laws against a minority, despite minority protections, are part of the democratic system.

2. Like I said on that other thread, alcohol is interwoven into our culture. Cigarettes are mostly a 20th century phenomena (I know they date further back, but it was not as wide spread). So you have alcohol that dates back thousounds of years versus smoking which is a century or two.

3. Second hand smoke bothers people who are not smoking. I work in a one story very long building. I remember when I started working here 20 years ago and smoking was allowed in the office, by the end of the day my clothes smelled of smoke and could see a cloud hovering the ceiling all the way down. Drinking (other than drunk driving accidents) don't usually affect other people. Perhaps except for family members of alcoholics.

4. Alcohol in moderation doesn't affect your health. In some cases like wine, studies show it helps your health. There are no health benefits to cigarretes and if you smoke long enough and live long enough you will get cancer. And it contributes to heart disease. And I know. My father was a smoker and he recently died of heart disease, and the only factor he had against him (he was thin and had low cholestorol and good blood pressure) was that he was a smoker.

I'm sure I can think of more, and if I do i'll add it to the thread.

Alcohol is by far the most dangerous and most addictive drug. It just represents so much money that it has become impossible to ban. Also, during the prohibition years, crime rates went higher than ever (so much money was involved in bootlegging). I advocate legalising all drugs as that's the only way the state can control the quality of the products and reduce traffick linked crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

Alcohol is by far the most dangerous and most addictive drug. It just represents so much money that it has become impossible to ban. Also, during the prohibition years, crime rates went higher than ever (so much money was involved in bootlegging). I advocate legalising all drugs as that's the only way the state can control the quality of the products and reduce traffick linked crime.

---

I disagree. You would have an escalation in drug use that would be terrible for people. Like I said, alcohol is ingrained into our culture. But drugs are not. It makes no sense to add vices to our cultural norms. We are trying to reduce vices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

This was in another thread but since my post and the possible replies might lead the original thread towards another direction, thought it might be a good idea to start a new thread.This is something I often wonder... Why are there smoking bans all over the world but nothing when it comes to drinking?

---

A ban regarding drinking in public places is already in use in some parts of Austria. It is now possible to denounce people who are caught drinking alcohol in public. There is also a new Police Penal Law ('PSG') being discussed that will allow police forces to take actions against such offenders. Alas, it's not in use in all parts of Austria but that's just because of our legal system which is just a trifle complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

I disagree. You would have an escalation in drug use that would be terrible for people. Like I said, alcohol is ingrained into our culture. But drugs are not. It makes no sense to add vices to our cultural norms. We are trying to reduce vices.

---

I know what you mean, but people who want to do drugs are going to find them anyway, might as well make sure the danger is reduced as much as possible. In countries where pot is legal, people don't smoke much more than in other countries. Well, tourists do, but not the locals.

I'm sorry, I'm just not an idealist.

It's debates like these where one wonders if humanity was right to mess with natural selection.

Back to the discussion: there are more healthy drinkers (to my knowledge) than there are healthy smokers, in large part because smoking lacks benefits of any kind. The same may be said of alcohol, but drinking can occur safely -- smoking cannot. Of course, ideally, people would not feel the need to drink something so detrimental to their health, but then, people have been irrational since the beginning of time.

I dont have a problem with smoking/drinking.

I used to smoke (legal and not so legal) until fairly recently.

I started drinking at 13, it is a cultural thing where I am from - another of those rites of passage to prove you are a "man" in working class areas of Glasgow. There was nothing else to do of an evening and we all took to the bottle. I do not drink as much as I used to anymore, however I do enjoy having a drink when I'm out with my freinds and do not see any issue with doing so.

The problem comes when people obsess with the stuff, I have one friend in glasgow who is in the jail for culpable homicide because he got into an argument when drunk and beat a man to death.

The only time I have questioned my drinking was when my father's 2nd wife died (a woman I hated growing up) I had to be strong for my father and sort out the funeral etc, but each night during the 2 weeks thereafter I drank myself into a drunken stupor to stop feeling the pain.

I am a lawyer and because of my profession ( for more than 15 years now) i have seen many families ( cases of divorces, custodies of children etc ) been separated and destroyed because of drinking. And not of smoking.

I am not a doctor , but when somebody smoking can control himself, he doesnt react strangely : he doesnt hit people, he doesnt drive maniac, he doesnt kill people. When somebody drinking like a fool he can be a danger for everyone. And especially for his own family ( and his own wife!!!)

Virgil.

1/3 isnt a small amount of people . Democracy ( in my way of thinking) means that everyone has his word into a community. I have been at the States a lot of times and the image of people( many of them , as you said 1/3 of the population) smoking outside in the cold streets , it is rediculous. You could finf a better solution : non smoking and smoking places ane evryone could be satisfied. But from the moment that the American citizents are satisfied, it their own business.

I just think that it is hipocritical finding smoking so "bod deal" and letting other things happened freely.

Evi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

I know what you mean, but people who want to do drugs are going to find them anyway, might as well make sure the danger is reduced as much as possible. In countries where pot is legal, people don't smoke much more than in other countries. Well, tourists do, but not the locals.

I'm sorry, I'm just not an idealist.

---

Agree with you there, Mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

Back to the discussion: there are more healthy drinkers (to my knowledge) than there are healthy smokers, in large part because smoking lacks benefits of any kind. The same may be said of alcohol, but drinking can occur safely -- smoking cannot. Of course, ideally, people would not feel the need to drink something so detrimental to their health, but then, people have been irrational since the beginning of time.

---

To add Robin's point:

Quote:

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/healthy_..._alcohol.shtml

Alcohol consumed in moderation is thought to be beneficial in reducing the risk of coronary heart disease. Indeed, alcohol consumption in conjunction with high intakes of fruit and vegetables, may well explain the so-called 'French paradox'. The French diet is considered to be very high in fat, especially saturated fat, yet the death rate from coronary heart disease remains relatively low. It is thought this is at least partly due to people's consumption of red wine.

The key word, though, is moderation. In 1997, the World Health Organisation concluded that the reduced risk from coronary heart disease was found at the level of one drink consumed every second day.

---

Probably that's why alcohol is not as evil as smoking. I don't think we can find similar statement on cigarettes (smoking).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

So why has the society become more permissive towards drinking than it is towards smoking?

---

Personally, I think society is also becoming more permissive to obesity.

I agree with you, enjoying a drink when out with friends is not an issue. In fact it usually adds to the fun if done in moderation. There will always be someone who takes things to the extreme, that is where problems can arise ( like your friend in glasgow ).

Laws to stop people from doing things they have always enjoyed, not such a good idea in this area.

Smoking a cigarette once in a while after a nice dinner never killed anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

I know what you mean, but people who want to do drugs are going to find them anyway, might as well make sure the danger is reduced as much as possible. In countries where pot is legal, people don't smoke much more than in other countries. Well, tourists do, but not the locals.

I'm sorry, I'm just not an idealist.

---

Well I'm not an idealist either. I understand the short term benefits of legalizing drugs. What I worry about is codifying it into our culture as acceptable behavior. I think that in the long run will be disasterous for society. So I'm willing to accept the crime and small percentage of illegal behavior. As long as we codify it as morally wrong, it will not be absorbed as a cultural rite.

Any statistical data to support the "small percentage of illegal behaviour" statement, Virg?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evi

IVirgil.

1/3 isnt a small amount of people . Democracy ( in my way of thinking) means that everyone has his word into a community. I have been at the States a lot of times and the image of people( many of them , as you said 1/3 of the population) smoking outside in the cold streets , it is rediculous. You could finf a better solution : non smoking and smoking places ane evryone could be satisfied. But from the moment that the American citizents are satisfied, it their own business.
Evi

---

Oh I'm just speculating. I don't know if that is a real reason for smoking being squashed while alcohol isn't. I was just listing possibilities. If it is I would be upset too. I'll tell you though most of those 1/3 agree with the laws making smoking tougher. They have rebelled or protested. I find what has happened to smokers unfair. Although prohibiting smoking in public places is just proper etiquette. What really boils my blood are the taxes they have put on cigarettes. Here in New York City a pack of cigarettes costs over $7 per pack. It costs the cigarette companies around 50 cents to make a pack of cigarettes and between the cigarette company, the distributor, and the store selling them, there is around 50 cents of profit for them. That means the government is making $6 profit (12X what the profits are for everyone else combined) on a pack. The people who smoke are lower class people, not rich people. The government is making huge profits off of poor people while in the same breath they are calling cigarette companies immoral. That is real hypocrisy. :flare:

Quote:

---

I just think that it is hipocritical finding smoking so "bod deal" and letting other things happened freely.

---

That another reason why I am against legalizing drugs. The preocess of legalizing drugs while slowly illegalizing cigarettes is more hypocrisy.