NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6390663.stm

I jokingly said to my girlfreind that after the smoking ban in pubs in England it won't be long before they ban drinking in pubs too. Now it looks as though we are at the start of a slippery slope.

Pubs aren't health farms - they are an integrtal part of British society.

Are we starting to go the American way in thinking that no-one should die of anything apart from extreme old age (and not even then if possible).

Stopping drinking and smoking doesn't make you live longer - it just makes it seem that way.

Drinking does have its positive effects:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6386173.stm

Not only do these jocks not pay for University - soon they won't have a pension crisis.

We need to stop Daily Mail reading puritans in their tracks and take back the pub!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6390663.stm

I jokingly said to my girlfreind that after the smoking ban in pubs in England it won't be long before they ban drinking in pubs too. Now it looks as though we are at the start of a slippery slope.

Pubs aren't health farms - they are an integrtal part of British society.

Are we starting to go the American way in thinking that no-one should die of anything apart from extreme old age (and not even then if possible).

Stopping drinking and smoking doesn't make you live longer - it just makes it seem that way.

Drinking does have its positive effects:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6386173.stm

Not only do these jocks not pay for University - soon they won't have a pension crisis.

We need to stop Daily Mail reading puritans in their tracks and take back the pub!

Relax. They're only talking about curbing the advertising of alcohol, not the consumption of it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6390663.stm

This man evidently believes we are all mindless drones who suck in advertisement like sponges. He's after censorship.

I jokingly said to my girlfreind that after the smoking ban in pubs in England it won't be long before they ban drinking in pubs too. Now it looks as though we are at the start of a slippery slope.
They aren't banning drinking, they're banning alcohol adverts.

Pubs aren't health farms - they are an integrtal part of British society.
Says something about us, eh? ;)

Stopping drinking and smoking doesn't make you live longer - it just makes it seem that way.
Drinking isn't awful, but smoking is pretty bad. Stopping smoking does make you live longer.

You're perfectly free to drink yourself into a stupor...you just don't have to look at a poster of what you're drinking while you're drinking in. Ads are annoying. Focus on the brew.

You're perfectly free to drink yourself into a stupor...you just don't have to look at a poster of what you're drinking while you're drinking in. Ads are annoying. Focus on the brew.

I agree. Ban all distractions.

t3h Br3wz > everything else

Relax. They're only talking about curbing the advertising of alcohol, not the consumption of it.

Slippery slope - they banned tobacco advertising first.

To quote Homer Simpson, "Alcohol is a way of life, and its my way of life damn it!!"

Slippery slope - they banned tobacco advertising first.

Ya...but last time they actually banned alcohol, in America at least, there was an uprising of organized crime and just crime in general that is unmatched in the history of our country. I think they learned their lesson.

Oh God! It begins!

Or not as the case may be.

Ya...but last time they actually banned alcohol, in America at least, there was an uprising of organized crime and just crime in general that is unmatched in the history of our country. I think they learned their lesson. We've never been aversing to ignoring lessons from across the pond before.

I can't see this government banning drinking. I can see them setting up hundreds of stifling regulations, though.

Stopping drinking and smoking doesn't make you live longer - it just makes it seem that way.
Except when they cause random cancers.

Except when they cause random cancers. Then they're not random, are they, silly! :p

Stopping alcohol ads are going to cause people to drink less? I doubt anything will cause this to happen.

Stopping alcohol ads are going to cause people to drink less? I doubt anything will cause this to happen.

it's more targeted at children than grown ups. and if i see how my little sister knows most advertisements by heart without trying i think it might have some effect.

Bars kind of suck here, now that smoking has been banned. It ruins the experience. I don't smoke, but if a privately owned restaurant, that pays their bills, wants to let their customers smoke inside.......is that really a big deal? And haven't the effects of second-hand smoke been debunked, like it's not really bad for you? Or have I just watched too much Penn and Teller?

Stopping alcohol ads are going to cause people to drink less? I doubt anything will cause this to happen.

No, I doubt that either. Banning smoking advertising has probably had minimal impact here. (the anti-smoking ads may have had some effect, though).

Slippery slope - they banned tobacco advertising first.

But they haven't banned smoking--just smoking in certain places. The only slippery thing around here is your logic.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6390663.stm

I jokingly said to my girlfreind that after the smoking ban in pubs in England it won't be long before they ban drinking in pubs too. Now it looks as though we are at the start of a slippery slope.

Pubs aren't health farms - they are an integrtal part of British society.

Are we starting to go the American way in thinking that no-one should die of anything apart from extreme old age (and not even then if possible).

Stopping drinking and smoking doesn't make you live longer - it just makes it seem that way.

Drinking does have its positive effects:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6386173.stm

Not only do these jocks not pay for University - soon they won't have a pension crisis.

We need to stop Daily Mail reading puritans in their tracks and take back the pub!

Uh...ok

it's more targeted at children than grown ups. and if i see how my little sister knows most advertisements by heart without trying i think it might have some effect.

If people want to try to cut back on underage drinking then lawmakers need to increase the penalty on vendors who sell alcohol to those under legal age. Make it HURT if they do so. Further for adults who buy alcohol and hand it over to those who are underage, make it HURT if they are caught doing so. Perhaps by doing this people will feel less inclined hand over some booze to kids.

Ya...but last time they actually banned alcohol, in America at least, there was an uprising of organized crime and just crime in general that is unmatched in the history of our country. I think they learned their lesson.

They wouldn't ban alcohol. Just the consumption, sale or possession of it!

England has no place learning lessons from US mistakes.

But they haven't banned smoking--just smoking in certain places. The only slippery thing around here is your logic. They've banned having smokers' sections in pubs, however well ventilated/separated, where the only thing in danger is the health of the smokers, which is hardly passive smoking. This government is mired in control-freakery.

If people want to try to cut back on underage drinking then lawmakers need to increase the penalty on vendors who sell alcohol to those under legal age. Make it HURT if they do so. Further for adults who buy alcohol and hand it over to those who are underage, make it HURT if they are caught doing so. Perhaps by doing this people will feel less inclined hand over some booze to kids.

Or maybe they could look at societies where underage drinking doesn't exist because there's no artificial age limit placed on when drinking is allowed and learn from them. Drinking ages are bullshit, and I say that as a person with a teenage kid.

Or maybe they could look at societies where underage drinking doesn't exist because there's no artificial age limit placed on when drinking is allowed and learn from them. Drinking ages are bullshit, and I say that as a person with a teenage kid. The French kids don't get plastered on cheap beer though. That's the important difference, not the various restrictions we throw up.

Um... yaaay?

Less advertising = good.

Bars kind of suck here, now that smoking has been banned. It ruins the experience. I don't smoke, but if a privately owned restaurant, that pays their bills, wants to let their customers smoke inside.......is that really a big deal? And haven't the effects of second-hand smoke been debunked, like it's not really bad for you? Or have I just watched too much Penn and Teller?

i'm no smoker either but i like the smell of smoke and it would suck if they banned smoking in bars here, although i don't mind if they do that in restaurants. and i don't think you should underestimate the effect of second hand smoke, i have astma and if someone blows their smoke in my direction i often have to cough a lot, wich would imply it is unhealthy.

If people want to try to cut back on underage drinking then lawmakers need to increase the penalty on vendors who sell alcohol to those under legal age. Make it HURT if they do so. Further for adults who buy alcohol and hand it over to those who are underage, make it HURT if they are caught doing so. Perhaps by doing this people will feel less inclined hand over some booze to kids.

maybe they should do both, why can't they prohibit advertisement for alcohol and punish the barkeepers? it will be hard to catch them though and in general i'm for lighter punishment but more chance that you get cought.

Or maybe they could look at societies where underage drinking doesn't exist because there's no artificial age limit placed on when drinking is allowed and learn from them. Drinking ages are bullshit, and I say that as a person with a teenage kid.

I was given to understand that such societies also have a higher rate of alcoholism.

Or maybe they could look at societies where underage drinking doesn't exist because there's no artificial age limit placed on when drinking is allowed and learn from them. Drinking ages are bullshit, and I say that as a person with a teenage kid.

are there societies like that? i believe here you can always legaly drink, but you can't buy alcohol under the age of 16 IIRC. i do find it kind of annoying when i see 15yo drunk or something.

and i don't think you should underestimate the effect of second hand smoke, i have astma and if someone blows their smoke in my direction i often have to cough a lot, wich would imply it is unhealthy.

Yeah, I have no idea as to whether or not it's bad for you, I was just wondering if someone else did. I just remember Penn and Teller speaking out against Second Hand smoke, but they are skeptical about everything.

The French kids don't get plastered on cheap beer though. That's the important difference, not the various restrictions we throw up.

In my experience--and I'm talking about personal experience here--kids get plastered on cheap beer because there's a taboo to drinking while underage and they get off on breaking the taboo as much as the drinking itself. If there's no taboo, and if kids are introduced to alcohol consumption as a normal part of life, they're less likely to overindulge in an attempt to get away with something.

I was given to understand that such societies also have a higher rate of alcoholism.

Not so far as I know, though I'm sure someone out there has the statistics at the ready. But I'd be willing to bet that even if that is the case, that they're not factoring in regular binge-drinking among underage drinkers as alcoholism, and that's even more dangerous.

In my experience--and I'm talking about personal experience here--kids get plastered on cheap beer because there's a taboo to drinking while underage and they get off on breaking the taboo as much as the drinking itself. If there's no taboo, and if kids are introduced to alcohol consumption as a normal part of life, they're less likely to overindulge in an attempt to get away with something. You're probably right, but you can't break the culture by just changing the law. Especially after three escalating centuries of this shit.

isn't slippery slope a logical fallacy?

isn’t slippery slope a logical fallacy?
Yup.

In my experience--and I'm talking about personal experience here--kids get plastered on cheap beer because there's a taboo to drinking while underage and they get off on breaking the taboo as much as the drinking itself. If there's no taboo, and if kids are introduced to alcohol consumption as a normal part of life, they're less likely to overindulge in an attempt to get away with something.

i don't think that's entirely true. i don't come from a culture where drinking is a taboo, but kids here tend to get drunk too. it's only recently that i started to drink dramaticaly less (i'm 19). on the plus side, most people know how to handle alcohol when they start to drive (+-18)

You give the government the right to ban what you can do and they will abuse it. In my county they just passed another tax on cigaretts, so like a pack is like $35 or something.

isn't slippery slope a logical fallacy?

Sometimes, sometimes not. Its fallacious if you say x occurred, therefore y must occur, it can be valid if you say x occurred, therefore y is more likely to occur.

isn't slippery slope a logical fallacy?

Yeah. But if you're making a historical inductive argument based on a relevant/analogous event, rather than a deductive logical argument, it can count as evidence in favor of a slippery slope claim. Not proof certainly, but evidence.

Edit: What Pyotr said too.

Ya...but last time they actually banned alcohol, in America at least, there was an uprising of organized crime and just crime in general that is unmatched in the history of our country. I think they learned their lesson.

I don't think they completely learned their lesson... Drug prohibition is why we have such a gang problem today.

Yeah, I have no idea as to whether or not it's bad for you, I was just wondering if someone else did. I just remember Penn and Teller speaking out against Second Hand smoke, but they are skeptical about everything.

The scientific community agrees that second hand smoke is indeed bad for you. There really is no debate, just people purposely trying to misinform you for their own self interests. Like the global warming "debate."

In my experience--and I'm talking about personal experience here--kids get plastered on cheap beer because there's a taboo to drinking while underage and they get off on breaking the taboo as much as the drinking itself. If there's no taboo, and if kids are introduced to alcohol consumption as a normal part of life, they're less likely to overindulge in an attempt to get away with something.

Well, even if it becomes legal to drink at say, 18, I would think that binge drinking would still be popular with college kids as it is part of the culture now. Partying in this manner is part of the "college experience" to many, it becoming legal isn't going to make it any less interesting to people. It'll just make it a little easier to get the alcohol for the binging.

I would support a lowering of the age to 18 along with a campaign that says that drinking itself is fine --- as long as you drink in moderation. Education, like with so many other touchy subjects, is what is needed after all. Further, we need to increase the penalties of DUI. We should have no tolerance for the assholes who drive intoxicated and endanger others on the road.

Yeah, I have no idea as to whether or not it's bad for you, I was just wondering if someone else did. I just remember Penn and Teller speaking out against Second Hand smoke, but they are skeptical about everything.

Penn and Teller got torn a new one on that, it turned out that they had ignored loads of evidence in favor of it, and used extremely outdated evidence that only applied to a few situations. There's a retraction or such on the DVD with that episode.

i'm no smoker either but i like the smell of smoke and it would suck if they banned smoking in bars

I'll start a company that sells tobacco inscence sticks just for you, eh?

Relax. They're only talking about curbing the advertising of alcohol, not the consumption of it.
Slippery slope - they banned tobacco advertising first.
That's what I was thinking, too.

*smokes cigarette*

Maybe I should drink a beer while I still can!!!

*wanders off to fridge with a big grin on his face*

I'll start a company that sells tobacco inscence sticks just for you, eh?

thanks

I'll start a company that sells tobacco inscence sticks just for you, eh?

Perhaps it would sell well. Wouldn't have all those nasty chemicals that slowly kill you, right?

Perhaps it would sell well. Wouldn't have all those nasty chemicals that slowly kill you, right? What, like tobacco?

Perhaps it would sell well. Wouldn't have all those nasty chemicals that slowly kill you, right?

Preferably not. Else there'd be a bunch of commercials denouncing 'Big Inscence'.

Ah, yes. Nothing like good old sin taxes to boost the treasury. Those opposed look like reprobates. This has worked well in the SE US for years.

In fact, let's add another $2 to a pack of smokes. Got to fund those oxygen machines!:rolleyes:

Ah, yes. Nothing like good old sin taxes to boost the treasury. Those opposed look like reprobates. This has worked well in the SE US for years.

In fact, let's add another $2 to a pack of smokes. Got to fund those oxygen machines!:rolleyes:

i'd rather have them get money from cigarettes instead of important things, like people their wage.

Wouldn't it be more effective for kiddies to not get their driver's license until a few years after they're permitted to drink?

When I say effective, maybe lowering the number of drinking and driving related deaths?

Oh, what do I know. :p

Wouldn’t it be more effective for kiddies to not get their driver’s license until a few years after they’re permitted to drink?

When I say effective, maybe lowering the number of drinking and driving related deaths?
Yeah always found it funny that here in the Scotland, you can drive a car, get married and pay taxes up to two years before you can legally have a drink in a pub or watch A Clockwork Orange.

Preferably not. Else there'd be a bunch of commercials denouncing 'Big Inscence'.

Well good! We wouldn't want a new business to have trouble right off. To be accused of poisoning its customers... that might hurt its profits don't you think? :p

Yeah always found it funny that here in the Scotland, you can drive a car, get married and pay taxes up to two years before you can legally have a drink in a pub or watch A Clockwork Orange .

Wait, that one article pointed out... okay, so maybe that doesn't always work. :p

A Clockwork Orange?

Ya...but last time they actually banned alcohol, in America at least, there was an uprising of organized crime and just crime in general that is unmatched in the history of our country. I think they learned their lesson.

They obviously haven't, they continue drug prohibition.

They obviously haven't, they continue drug prohibition.

Beat you to it... ;)

it's more targeted at children than grown ups. and if i see how my little sister knows most advertisements by heart without trying i think it might have some effect.

yeah... if you look at most tobacco/alcohol ads, they're geared toward 11 year olds.

A Clockwork Orange?
A must-see 18-certificate film.

Check it out (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_(film)).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6390663.stm

hmm, i was disgusted when i saw an advert for Bacardi Breezers claiming "now half the calories, not half the fun!" with a picture of a young girl having the time of her life on the poster.

i wrote to the ASA about it but they said the advert was not promoting the consumption of alochol as being fun. which it fucking was, no question.


i'd be all for tightening up of regulations, but not a ban like with tobacco.

Just think how you would feel if you worked in a pub, and were constantly exposed to second-hand smoke, and ended up with lung cancer. Now, wouldn't that suck?

Just think how you would feel if you worked in a pub, and were constantly exposed to second-hand smoke, and ended up with lung cancer. Now, wouldn't that suck?
Just think how you lost your job because people no longer showed up to your pub because they couldn't have a cold brew and a smoke along with it. Now, wouldn't that suck, too?

Just think how you lost your job because people no longer showed up to your pub because they couldn't have a cold brew and a smoke along with it. Now, wouldn't that suck, too?

Well, I suppose it depends on the state of the economy, but finding a new job once you've died may be marginally more difficult.

Of course, that's not really what this is about, is it?

Just think how you lost your job because people no longer showed up to your pub because they couldn't have a cold brew and a smoke along with it. Now, wouldn't that suck, too?Just you wait a couple of years & it'll be like Tehran. No discos, no pubs. People only have parks & shit to hang out in, and with the increasing influx of people from the countryside, the parks are vanishing too.

Maybe it's time to buy realestate with flat rooftops, eh?

Slippery slope - they banned tobacco advertising first.

Yeah, but your server at the pub isn't going to get second-hand brew. (Well, not unless you have a really good relationship with the waitress or something.) The banning of smoking in pubs, while questionable to me, is all about preventing the workforce from the negative health effects. Alcohol isn't the same.

Plus, even if someone were stupid enough to prohibit alcohol consumption, doesn't mean it's going to stop. Smoking marijuana's illegal here in Canada. People still toke it.

Well, I suppose it depends on the state of the economy, but finding a new job once you've died may be marginally more difficult.

Of course, that's not really what this is about, is it?
No, of course not. I just punched my first thought into the keyboard. :p

(Onehandedly... http://www.studip.uni-goettingen.de/pictures/smile/smokin.gif)

Anyway - I do enjoy going out to places that ain't smoke-filled, but it would also be nice if the smokers wouldn't have to stand in the rain or cold in the street to have a cigarette...

smoking around people who don't smoke is just rude, to say nothing of the health risk you're subjecting them to. even as a smoker i much prefered pubs being smoke free, particularly as i work as a barman. i don't smoke now but that's not the point. and no-one's going to ban drinking, that's just ridiculous.

Just think how you lost your job because people no longer showed up to your pub because they couldn't have a cold brew and a smoke along with it. Now, wouldn't that suck, too?

I think it would probably suck less than dying. But that's just my opinion.

I think it would probably suck less than dying. But that's just my opinion.
Which I share, I might have to add.

It's totally okay to have a smoke-free working place and I whole-heartedly support that.
It would just be nice to have something like a well-ventilated smoking chamber - most establishments won't let you take your drinks outside while you have a smoke, and I ain't letting my beer sit on the counter all by itself...

smoking around people who don't smoke is just rude

I avoid being rude, and offer them a cigarette too.

to say nothing of the health risk you're subjecting them to.

Minimal at best. I'm subjecting people to a greater health risk by driving - one because of the air pollution, and two by the chance of violent death. But no one ever says driving near pedestrians is rude, why not? Because smoking is unnecessary recreation and me driving to the store so I can get a pack of smokes is necessary to western civilization?

I say ban the most abused drug. It has caused destruction for millions and millions.

I say ban the most abused drug. It has caused destruction for millions and millions.

Caffeine?

Caffeine?

Oh, you know I mean alcohol. I don't drink a sodie and then drive my car into another one, or I don't consume a thing of sweet tea and then beat my wife.

Oh, you know I mean alcohol. I don't drink a sodie and then drive my car into another one, or I don't consume a thing of sweet tea and then beat my wife.

But maybe you do. Caffeine is the most widely used, widely used regularly drug in this country. And, this country also has a huge problem with criminal violence. Coincidence? Obviously not!

I avoid being rude, and offer them a cigarette too.

Minimal at best. I'm subjecting people to a greater health risk by driving - one because of the air pollution, and two by the chance of violent death. But no one ever says driving near pedestrians is rude, why not? Because smoking is unnecessary recreation and me driving to the store so I can get a pack of smokes is necessary to western civilization?

it's rude because cigarette smoke to most people smells bad. only a very poorly maintained car will make enough of an odour and concentration of particulates to cause any significant discomfort in the average pedestrian. i happen to like some tobacco smoke, most of it is pretty acrid though. the danger from cars is tolerated simply because motor vehicle are a fact of modern life, although i'm all for banning cars from city centres as there really is no need for them. smoking on the other hand need not be, at least not in enclosed spaces. you have a right to smoke, but rights come with responsibility. you've every right to harm your own health, you've no right to needlessly endanger other people's health.

But maybe you do. Caffeine is the most widely used, widely used regularly drug in this country. And, this country also has a huge problem with criminal violence. Coincidence? Obviously not!

100,000 deaths a year(give or take a few 1000) are directly related to alcohol abuse. How many from caffeine?

And I know where you will go with that, saying something about obesity and heart attacks, but my response is that caffeine isn't the only thing that accounts for obese people dying, other things like fast food, lack of exericize and etc are also responsible, so there is no DIRECT link between caffeine and deaths as there is between alcohol and deaths.

100,000 deaths a year(give or take a few 1000) are directly related to alcohol abuse.

Which is far, far less than deaths from smoking. Alcohol isn't the worst drug, when others beat it by a factor of four at least.

100,000 deaths a year(give or take a few 1000) are directly related to alcohol abuse. How many from caffeine?

There aren't many studies on it! Alcohol is condemned religiously, but caffeine - shit, even a priest can be a rabid abuser. So a lot more studies are done on alcohol, not to mention alcohol being known as a "substance" worthy of study for longer gives the advantage to that too. Most people wouldn't even consider caffeine a drug - denial being the first stage of addiction, ya know - let alone seriously pursue studies to question its social effects.

But I know that in general, caffeine is a stimulant and in general, any stimulant - especially abused over time - is going to have bad effects on the human heart. The heart is not meant to be "stimulated" like that over, and over, and over, any more than the brain is meant to be daubed in alcohol over, and over.

And so, off the top of my head, I'd have to say that some number of the 910,000 people who die each year (one every 35 seconds) of cardiovascular diseases each year in America could be caused by caffeine abuse. Same with the six million hospitalizations. And as for violent crime, well, I also know how people get when they don't get their "fix" of caffeine. It's a mild, sadly funny form of the mentality of tweakers and cokeheads. Who is to say how much of the violence is not called "drug related" simply because the drug in question might be caffeine? Again, few seriously research this, because the findings would be uncomfortable... nearly everyone is addicted to caffeine and there is billions of dollars in the coffee and soda (etc) industries.

And I know where you will go with that, saying something about obesity and heart attacks, but my response is that caffeine isn't the only thing that accounts for obese people dying, other things like fast food, lack of exericize and etc are also responsible, so there is no DIRECT link between caffeine and deaths as there is between alcohol and deaths.

Just because there could be other factors involved doesn't mean any of those factors are dismissable. I'm less concerned with the DIRECTness of the link than with the widespread, socially accepted drug abuse which goes unnoticed in this country and the potential damage that causes.

Which is far, far less than deaths from smoking. Alcohol isn't the worst drug, when others beat it by a factor of four at least.

Oh, I agree. I think smoking should be banned as well. Smoking and wheat/barley based alcohol, but thats IMO.