Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 
4298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1713


  Reply # 1958538 15-Feb-2018 11:36
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

However, it seems to me that if an adult wishes to partake of something in the privacy of their own home, they should be free so to do.

 

We do not, for example, apply an additional tax to rugby players who may need the ACC more than non-rugby players. We do not try and ban it because there is an increased injury risk. We do not charge drunks for the free rides home they get on Police 10-7 or for the additional healthcare and related injury costs that might arise out of their drinking.

 

 

Generally I agree with the bold bit.  Although passive smoking by kids is claims to have a high health cost.

 

Rugby: results in some injuries but keeps people fit - stopping people from playing rugby, may simply increase the chronic disease burden.  Ditto other sports.

 

Alcohol: is heavily taxed, so the government has a compensating revenue source.  I have no objection to this. 

 

I note that alcohol, when used in lawful manner, does not harm bystanders.  Generally, someone has to drink alcohol and break the law (assault, drunk driving, parental neglect etc) to cause harm to others.

 

The same can not be said of smoking tobacco. Although it could be said of chewing tobacco, snuff etc.





Mike

6376 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3206


  Reply # 1958585 15-Feb-2018 12:39
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Fred99:

 

MikeAqua:

 

If a person standing next to me at a bus stop is smoking I am exposed to second hand smoke (no known safe level of exposure).

 

 

That linear no-threshold model also applies to the radon seeping in to your home from the ground.  I'd put the risk from passive smoking outdoors (as opposed to being stuck in a smoky bar or in a car with a chain smoker and the windows closed) as probably lower than the low risk from radon (in NZ homes anyway) while sitting inside watching TV.

 

 

Any radon creeping into my house is a naturally occurring and probably unavoidable.  By contrast smoking is not.

 

But again there are WHO reference levels for radon exposure.  None for cigarette smoke.

 

 

 

 

I mentioned that as in the USA (where radon is an issue - unlike in NZ where it isn't considered to be) and number of cigarettes consumed per capita more than double that of NZ, the estimated total lung cancer deaths from second-hand smoking is estimated at 7,000 per annum, for radon the estimate is three times higher - 21,000.  Radon is of course much simpler to measure, as you're just looking for alpha particle count from decay of radon daughters, then looking for lung cancer.  Smoke has many compounds, and there are many diverse health effects, but in any case it should be fully expected that most of those would be the result of people "passively" smoking indoors and in cars etc, not being exposed to a whiff outdoors.

 

In my opinion, treat smokers at a bus stop in the same way you'd treat someone who stinks for some other reason - not as a threat to your health. Move away if possible.  Giving them a lecture is at your peril.

 

 


11238 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3579

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1958593 15-Feb-2018 12:43
One person supports this post
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Geektastic:

 

However, it seems to me that if an adult wishes to partake of something in the privacy of their own home, they should be free so to do.

 

We do not, for example, apply an additional tax to rugby players who may need the ACC more than non-rugby players. We do not try and ban it because there is an increased injury risk. We do not charge drunks for the free rides home they get on Police 10-7 or for the additional healthcare and related injury costs that might arise out of their drinking.

 

 

Generally I agree with the bold bit.  Although passive smoking by kids is claims to have a high health cost.

 

Rugby: results in some injuries but keeps people fit - stopping people from playing rugby, may simply increase the chronic disease burden.  Ditto other sports.

 

Alcohol: is heavily taxed, so the government has a compensating revenue source.  I have no objection to this. 

 

I note that alcohol, when used in lawful manner, does not harm bystanders.  Generally, someone has to drink alcohol and break the law (assault, drunk driving, parental neglect etc) to cause harm to others.

 

The same can not be said of smoking tobacco. Although it could be said of chewing tobacco, snuff etc.

 

 

 

 

I'll agree that alcohol itself does not harm bystanders in the same way that a person smoking on their porch alone does not either. Smoking is even more heavily taxed to provide compensating revenue, of course.

 

However, the social cost of alcohol is vast. Probably much greater than tobacco use.






4298 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1713


  Reply # 1958620 15-Feb-2018 14:30
Send private message

Fred99:

 

In my opinion, treat smokers at a bus stop in the same way you'd treat someone who stinks for some other reason - not as a threat to your health. Move away if possible.  Giving them a lecture is at your peril.

 

 

I agree there probably isn't a health risk from passive smoking outside, but it is actually an unknown.

 

Generally only an issue on rainy days when some smokers choose to smoke inside the bus shelters, and avoidance means standing in the rain.  That's rather in-considerate and also illegal (by-laws).  I've never been afraid of pointing this out (politely).  I've actually never had much negative reaction to that.

 

I agree there is no point in lecturing a smoker (or any addict).  I just wish to avoid their adverse effects.

 

On balance its probably favourable that smokers take the bus system.  Research on smoking and car accidents makes interesting reading (example).  A risk of crashes for smokers up to 150% higher that non-smoker has been reported.  This has been hypothesised as being due to one or more of distraction, partial asphyxiation (carbon monoxide ) or differences in behaviour between smoker and non-smokers.





Mike

7320 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3427

Subscriber

  Reply # 1958654 15-Feb-2018 16:00
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

Whilst I am of course also well aware of the arguments against it, I do feel the need to poke my head above the parapet and say that adults should be free to make choices. By all means, tax those choices to reflect a greater contribution to the possible healthcare that those choices might result in. By all means prevent those choices from impacting others where feasible. However, it seems to me that if an adult wishes to partake of something in the privacy of their own home, they should be free so to do.

 

We do not, for example, apply an additional tax to rugby players who may need the ACC more than non-rugby players. We do not try and ban it because there is an increased injury risk. We do not charge drunks for the free rides home they get on Police 10-7 or for the additional healthcare and related injury costs that might arise out of their drinking. Just to name a couple of instances where there is a bit of hypocrisy.

 

 

Hard day, home at last, time to put the feet up and have a good blow of some quality Jamaican grass. Ah, that's the thing. Oh! I wonder what that knock at the door is...

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


7320 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3427

Subscriber

  Reply # 1958655 15-Feb-2018 16:04
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

However, the social cost of alcohol is vast. Probably much greater than tobacco use.

 

 

Especially since it is heavily promoted through advertising, sponsorship, and cultural encouragement.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


7320 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3427

Subscriber

  Reply # 1958656 15-Feb-2018 16:07
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

On balance its probably favourable that smokers take the bus system.  Research on smoking and car accidents makes interesting reading (example).  A risk of crashes for smokers up to 150% higher that non-smoker has been reported.  This has been hypothesised as being due to one or more of distraction, partial asphyxiation (carbon monoxide ) or differences in behaviour between smoker and non-smokers.

 

 

Dropping a lit cigarette between your legs is generally considered a major driver distraction. Especially if the safety harness ('seat belt') prevents you from reaching it.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


6376 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3206


  Reply # 1958801 15-Feb-2018 21:30
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

MikeAqua:

 

On balance its probably favourable that smokers take the bus system.  Research on smoking and car accidents makes interesting reading (example).  A risk of crashes for smokers up to 150% higher that non-smoker has been reported.  This has been hypothesised as being due to one or more of distraction, partial asphyxiation (carbon monoxide ) or differences in behaviour between smoker and non-smokers.

 

 

Dropping a lit cigarette between your legs is generally considered a major driver distraction. Especially if the safety harness ('seat belt') prevents you from reaching it.

 

 

 

 

And the difference between dropping a lit cigarette and the inside of a hot meat pie between your legs is that one might eventually kill you...

 

Oh wait...


2960 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 445

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1960089 18-Feb-2018 23:41
Send private message

kobiak:

 

 - automate cigarette sale. hard/metal box like ATM which takes video of purchaser, ID scan required and finger print scanner to authorise the purchase (like at most airports). ID has to match finger print scan. 

 

 

Your plan fails on the face because of several things.

 

1. The government doesn't issue any form of ID which has fingerprint biometrics on it.

 

2. Even if the government did, not every other government issues forms of ID with fingerprint biometrics on it. How does a visiting Australian, for example, buy tobacco?


1 | 2 | 3 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07


All or Nothing: New Zealand All Blacks arrives on Amazon Prime Video
Posted 2-Jun-2018 16:21


Innovation Grant, High Tech Awards and new USA office for Kiwi tech company SwipedOn
Posted 1-Jun-2018 20:54


Commerce Commission warns Apple for misleading consumers about their rights
Posted 30-May-2018 13:15


IBM leads Call for Code to use cloud, data, AI, blockchain for natural disaster relief
Posted 25-May-2018 14:12


New FUJIFILM X-T100 aims to do better job than smartphones
Posted 24-May-2018 20:17


Stuff takes 100% ownership of Stuff Fibre
Posted 24-May-2018 19:41


Exhibition to showcase digital artwork from across the globe
Posted 23-May-2018 16:44


Auckland tops list of most vulnerable cities in a zombie apocalypse
Posted 23-May-2018 12:52



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.