The Welsh assembly is planning to ban e-cigs. Well, there’s a surprise. Their excuse is not that they are a danger to health – because they aren’t – it is because they normalise smoking and undermine the smoking ban. So, although this bill is supposedly about health, it is obvious that it is nothing of the sort – merely the usual vindictive politicking by the nasty, authoritarian leftist fascists that have dominated our politics now for several decades. Never mind that people trying to give up real cigarettes have an alternative that works – no, politics must come first. And, frankly, it is not up to these popinjays to denormalise anything. What we do and how we live our lives is none of their damned business.
A minimum alcohol price of 50p per unit is also proposed in a white paper of ideas for public health legislation.
Ah, yes, another draconian proposal that won’t work, will penalise the poor and is illegal under EU rules. And, frankly is all about control and is nothing to do with health.
Health Minister Mark Drakeford said the aim was to address some of the nation’s major public health challenges.
Frankly, if this is the kind of stuff they are proposing then we don’t have a public health problem – unless there’s been a typhoid outbreak I wasn’t aware of? No? Then there is no public health problem that needs fixing. What does need fixing is politicians’ heads on spikes outside the tower – although I could live with Cardiff Castle on this occasion.
However Richard Filbrandt, e-cigarette user and co-owner of the Vibrant Vapour cafe in Carmarthen, said they had studies showing there was no risk to passive smokers.
“There are studies done by Air for Change in America that say it doesn’t warrant withdrawing them from public places, and they are the same people that said take cigarettes away from public places,” he told BBC News.
“Why should we be treated like smokers? Why should we be put out at risk of passive smoking ourselves in a smoking area when we do not smoke?”
Oh, my… Presumably Mr Filbrandt hasn’t come across the term “divide and rule”. Idiot.
Those who bought into the SHS shit deserve to suffer the consequences of a politicised public health agenda. Unfortunately, the rest of us are being forced to pay the consequences.
Oh, my… Presumably Mr Filbrandt hasn’t come across the term “divide and rule”. Idiot.
Heh! My thoughts exactly when I read that bit. What a tosser. However, this is a theme which runs through many vapers’ justifications for their habit, the adoption of the Tobacco Control soundbite. It won’t do them any good. They may be vaping e-cigs, but in the eyes of Tobacco Control, they are SMOKERS. And as such to be eliminated. They can squeal about how they’re not like those horrid tobacco addicts all they like; the tinpot fascists like Mr Drakeford aren’t listening. This is a pogrom, and no new-fangled e-cig is going to get in the way of it.
I do wonder how long it will take Joe Public to wake up to the fact that the ‘Public Health’ zealots care not one jot for health, they care only to impose their ideology on everyone.
Yet Quorn “sausages” for some strange reason don’t encourage people to eat meat.
Heh heh. I’ll use that next time someone gives me grief being a smoker. Self righteous gits.
I’m quite happy to see it. Much as I sympathise with vapers, I hope that the Welsh Assembly pass it. It is the only way in which the MSM is going to react with the sort of vituperative that it normally reserves for disgusting, filthy, stinking smokers. But there is a chance that the vituperative will be addressed at the dinosaurs which inhabit ‘Public Health, Wales’. There will be just the possibility that the long-term fraud of Tobacco Control will be revealed, and smoking bans amended so as to reflect that it is only the smell of tobacco smoke which offends (along with the psychosomatic fear, of course).
Do readers know that the Medical Establishment, when given the opportunity in the McTear versus Imperial Tobacco Case (2005) in the Scottish Supreme Court, was unable to produce convincing evidence to the Judge, that smoking even probably causes lung cancer, never mind definitely causes it?
Read a summary of the case here:
http://junican.wordpress.com/
It will open your eyes.
At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law here, one wonders if Mr Filbrandt has ever considered how sympathetic the Nazis would have been if any Jewish-born person, on being arrested for being Jewish, had protested that he shouldn’t be arrested because he’d converted to Christianity only last year …
Clearly none of you understand the dangers of vaping.
Here in Wales our wonderful government health department has the best interests of the general public in mind when it seeks to ban these dangerous methods of generating water vapour/steam. Eventually it hopes to ban the use, firstly in public places, of steam cleaners, car washes, vehicles in general, kettles, and ultimately fog, and sea mist. This will be extended to private homes. Masks will be worn at all times to catch any water vapour that might be exhaled in the normal course of breathing.
Currently funding is being sought to finance the erection of giant fans for coastal and border situations in order to repel this serious threat to public health. The running costs of these fans will be zero since studies have shown that they are more than capable of driving the wind turbines littered all over the hills and at various coastal locations. They will generate their own power.
However, I think it might be that as the leading supplier of stolen, second hand body parts, (the Assembly claims to own your body when you’re dead) it is really just a quality control measure.
The Welsh Assembly, leading the world into hell!
This is why the Welsh / Snottish “Nats” piss me off, totally.
They are re-incarnated puritan religious zealots.
I am completely in favour of the current smoking ban, but I think that banning e-ciggies is/would be a serious mistake, to say the very least.
It is to be hoped that the report that comes back says: “Don’t waste your time”.
Not that sense or reason ever influenced any form of religious bigotry ……
I do not support the ban. It is a gross infringement on property rights. It should be up to individual property owners to decide whether or no to allow smoking on their property – not some nasty little fascist in government.
I am completely in favour of the current smoking ban,…
And why is that? Because you don’t like the smell? And you think that is justification to impose a law that has been a social and economic disaster? A law that has discriminated against millions? A law that has seen the social lives of old people destroyed, who now sit at home alone staring at the TV and waiting to die? A law that removes perhaps the only pleasure they have from those incarcerated in mental hospitals?
Because YOU don’t like it?
You must have been behind the bike sheds having a crafty fag when they were handing out the tolerance genes…
Or maybe – just maybe – because our GT is a vaper? Just a thought …
At my former workplace they used to have a room next to the bogs as the only place on the premises where smoking was allowed. We non-smokers avoided the unpleasant smells and second hand smoke by not going in there. After the smoking ban, the smokers congregated outside our workshop and the smoke found its way in through the doors and windows.
You would have been able to smell it, I suppose. And anything that you can smell is dangerous, I suppose. Well, it must be so, mustn’t it?, since anything that you can smell must be dangerous if SHS is dangerous. The ‘scientists’ just haven’t got round to the rest of the things you smell yet.
No, I don’t believe that passive smoking is harmful other than in extreme cases which are pretty rare. My point is that, in this case, the anti smoking legislation was a direct cause of the problem that it was supposed to be solving. This is a common problem that occurrs whenever the government takes it upon itself to fix something.
Not “just” the smell – though my late father’s old pipes made me sick …..
Tried smoking, very briefly for a couple of months in the 70’s & decided NOt to.
But the stink, the smell on your clothes, the revolting old ash & nicotine.
Spoils my enjoyment of a pint or 4 – yes – i like my beer – (life member of CAMRA) …
And “liberty” – what about the liberty of the 80% who DON’T smoke being infringed by the 20%’s vile noxious emissions?
Works both ways you know.
Oh – & “The smoking ban has close thousands of pubs” _ utter total BOLLOCKS.
It’s the greedy, stupid & short-sighted Pubcos – which reminds me – If “Punch Taverns” go tit-up in the middle of May, over 400 pubs could shut within a week or so.
Entirely down to their total mismanagement.
Oh – & “The smoking ban has close thousands of pubs” _ utter total BOLLOCKS.
You obviously live in a parallel universe, a kind of ‘down the rabbit-hole’ fantasy world. I suppose it was sheer coincidence that in the immediate aftermath of the smoking ban the rate of pub closures quadrupled?
Punch Taverns was trading at a peak on the stock market mid 2007. Between mid 2007 and 2009 they went from 160% to minus 80%.
http://shares.telegraph.co.uk/charts/?epic=BATS&period=YEAR10&type=2&compareTo=PUB&submit=Draw
The yellow line is Punch Taverns. It was not mismanagement that caused their plunge on the stock market, it was the smoking ban. You can deny it until you are blue in the face, but that won’t change the facts.