No agreement over the reduction of harm produced by tobacco

Technology, computers, sciences, mysteries and phenomena of all kinds, etc., etc. all here at The Loresraat!!

Moderator: Vraith

Post Reply
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

No agreement over the reduction of harm produced by tobacco

Post by stonemaybe »

From The Pharmaceutical Journal Oct 7 2006 Vol 277 No 7421
A comment in The Lancet for 9 September reports that a world conference on tobacco and health, held in Washington in July, failed to establish a consensus on some key policy issues regarding smoking.

On the subject of harm reduction, the 4000 participants, including advocates, scientists and clinicians, seem to have been evenly divided. A tobacco control programme devised by Californians has had much success in reducing smoking, second-hand exposure and disease, without however incorporating an element of harm reduction. This is defined as any process that reduces harm in continuing users of tobacco by reducing toxins in the smoke, promoting their conversion to smokeless tobacco or introducing longterm replacement therapt with nicotine.

One reason for reservation on harm reduction has been an implication that nicotine addiction itself is virtually harmless. This is contrary to its known pharmacology and to regulatory efforts to ensure that the doses and treatment patterns do not pose significant risk. Another reason is that the earliest attempts to reduce harm by reducing tar did not bring the expected decrease in mortality or persuade young smokers that cigarettes labelled as low tar were safe. Nicotine replacement therapy has the potential for harm reduction but has not generally been approved.

All tobacco products present a risk that depends on how they are used. Altering the way in which tobacco is cured can substantially reduce nicosamines. Reducing toxins in tobacco, restricting smoking and increasing its costs are seen as prudent steps, but promoting certain types of tobacco in place of others may help to undermine attempts at harm reduction.
As a smoker, this type of sh*t makes my blood boil! yes yes I know smoking is bad for me, but to think that there are ways of making it less bad for me and that an international congress of experts cannot agree that making these ways available to me is a good idea, AAAAARRRRGGGHHHHHH!
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 48373
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post by sgt.null »

quitting seems to be healthy?
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 62038
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times
Contact:

Post by Avatar »

Sure. Of course smoking is bad. But if they can make it less bad, that would be a good thing. :D

--A
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 48373
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post by sgt.null »

i guess like making bullets out of a softer metal?
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
User avatar
stonemaybe
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 4836
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:37 am
Location: Wallowing in the Zider Zee

Post by stonemaybe »

i guess like making bullets out of a softer metal?
Or polystyrene?
Aglithophile and conniptionist and spectacular moonbow beholder 16Jul11

(:/>
User avatar
sgt.null
Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
Posts: 48373
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
Location: Brazoria, Texas
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Post by sgt.null »

more like asbestos i think?
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
Post Reply

Return to “The Loresraat”