Brazilian government passes nationwide NO SMOKING law

Hi William!

Having seen my father die a horrible death due to his lifetime of smoking (and even though he had already quit after his heart attack in 1983) from the effects of congestive heart failure, diabetes and emphysema, and being a lifetime NON-smoker MYSELF (as is my partner, thank God)  whose MAJOR goal was always to STOP my father from smoking since I was in 1st grade and they showed us what smoking does to LUNGS, I applaud Brazil in this decision, because, even though my feeling is that cigarettes should be BANNED ALTOGETHER, I know, of course, that this will never happen, much less WORLDWIDE, I at least ALWAYS applaud and WHOLE-HEARTEDLY ANY attempt whatsoever to discourage smoking. So, although, as you said, these laws don't go far enough, and I agree, I still view it as a POSITIVE (as I see you do too, even with you being a smoker) and hope it saves many lives in the process.

And, I hope you won't mind my including on a more personal level, my friend, that I sincerely hope you stop yourself. If not for your own sake, for your dear family's sake, as we all know TODAY about the effects of second-hand smoke, something we were not aware of when I was a child and my father smoked.

Hi Dalia,

No I don't mind the personal comment at all. Trust me I really do know just how STUPID I am for having ever started smoking in the first place. Even stupider still, I've actually quite smoking 7 separate times, the shortest of which was one full year and like a fool always went back to smoking. That is really just how bad the addiction really is! I will be the first to admit that it is an addiction more powerful even than crack cocaine and probably far more deadly too. If tobacco were to be invented today, it would without a doubt be illegal in every nation on the face of the planet.

While I have not been successful in ridding myself of the habit and its dependency, I have never smoked indoors and do not smoke around others. I do know the effects of second-hand smoke and would not subject others to the ill effects of my habit. I'm now 65 years old (next Wednesday) and after a lifetime of smoking I doubt that quitting now would do much in terms of extending my life, since the damage has already been done. Smoking is my only vice, I don't drink alcohol to excess and in fact hardly at all and thank God otherwise enjoy perfect health.

I really do support the Brazilian government's efforts to discourage smoking and only hope that they would follow my home country Canada's lead and increase the taxes on all tobacco products every 3 months in order to force more and more individuals to give up the habit. By the way, every cent of the tax revenue Canada gets from tobacco sales gets plowed back into the healthcare system and programs to treat lung cancer and other tobacco related illnesses; so they're not just being hypocritical and saying "Don't Smoke!!!", while raking in tax dollars that go into the general revenues. At least in Canada the government is putting their money where their mouth is.

Cheers,
William James Woodward, EB Experts Team

Thank you for not minding my concern and suggestion on a personal level, William. And at the very least I congratulate you for being a "considerate" smoker, who doesn't subject others to their habit, as you said. THAT is VERY uncommon as most smokers as a "rule" usually are self-absorbed in their habit and could care less who else bears the brunt of it.

In the only thing that quitting helped my father in was in extending his life for a good 30 YEARS, which I know he would not have lived had he continued to smoke. And while (like you said) the effects were already made and he still died a smoker's death, his QUALITY of life during those 30 years also I feel benefited after quitting. He had his heart attack when he was 54 (MY age NOW) and died when he was 84 and before dying he STILL WORKED and was completely active til he was 83 when (as his Lung Specialist put it) he had reached the "end stage of his disease."

Regarding different COUNTRIES' treatment of this "cancer" called cigarettes among the world population,  I applaud Canada's treatment of the matter. In the U.S., there's been much chest-pounding on the matter, but, in the end, more has been done (I feel) on an individual State by State level than nationally. New York City ex-mayor, Bloomberg, for example, did just that that you say Canada has done, about taxing cigarettes to the HILT, as he's done with sodas (an "addition" for U.S. children and teens and leading to much obesity), and though he was highly criticized by many for these taxes pointing to claims of "government overstepping their boundaries and rights", he was applauded by others, as he was by myself. Nationwide, yes, they have banned smoking in public places and there's been no TV ads for example for cigarettes since my early or late 20s I think, but even so, Cigarette companies continue to lobby Government and get their way in many other things, just as, ironically, do "Healthcare" companies. After all, these are MONSTER money-making companies, and, here in the U.S., MONEY TALKS and votes are bought every single day, while the good of the people that elected them in the first place are forgotten.

Sorry to get off-topic, if I did, but, even though we've extended to the U.S. and Canada, and even our own personal experiences, in the end, the effects of smoking are the SAME, regardless if the smoker is in Brazil or in America. So, hopefully, I haven't gotten too much off topic, after all. 

No Dalia, I don't think any of what you're saying is the least bit off topic.

I welcome debate on both sides of the issue and, trust me, I've heard every reason given on both sides over 20 years ago when British Columbia, the Canadian province where I lived, brought in the most restrictive No Smoking laws in the world at the time. All the arguments both for and against are still the same; and from my point of view (even as a smoker) the FOR side still wins hands down.

I also believe that if all smokers had always been like me, very concerned about and considerate of others, we wouldn't be seeing such restrictive No Smoking laws now, because they simply wouldn't have been necessary... in the end, we are the ones who forced this to become an issue.

Good, I'm glad I wasn't off-topic. I wasn't sure, as smoking is one of those subjects I just go out on a tangent about.

And you're so right that if people who smoke would ALL have been considerate regrading their habit as you are and have always been, then these highly restrictive and seemingly (to the smokers) abusive laws wouldn't be necessary. But, then again, isn't it so true that if ALL people would just practice CONSIDERATION regarding ALL of their behavior and actions and not just about smoking that MOST if not ALL "laws" would not be necessary? Think about it. Homicide laws, traffic laws, noise-ordinance laws,  "decency" laws, "hate crime" laws, robbery laws, etc., etc., etc. The very intrinsic ROOT of ALL "laws" is that not all people behave in a considerate or respectful manner THEMSELVES, and, THUS, the considerate and respectful ones have been forced to "impose" that behavior on the ones who don't (or WON'T) behave that way of their own accord. It's sad.

Just think how wonderful things would be in this world if the only thing left to have a law about or think about outlawing was being nice to eachother!!! 

  What a SMASHING, SCATHINGLY BRILLIANT IDEA...!!!!!    CHEERS to THAT, my friend!    CHEERS to THAT!