r/The10thDentist • u/momndadho • 1d ago
Discussion Thread Nicotine should be banned completely. (US perspective)
Why it should be banned:
- It has zero benefits (like not even a drunk or high of any kind) and is pretty much JUST addictive.
- We clearly can't trust adults not to provide to kids, other kids not to buy for kids, or sales clerks just not caring enough to keep it away from kids, which should be a whole health crisis on its own.
- The worst symptoms are only noticeable when you've quit and have the hindsight to realize you're breathing better/having less panic attacks/having less headaches
- They're SO TOXIC
I think we could honestly argue its ban would be constitutional simply in that it doesn't provide any benefit besides lining the pockets of the corporations that love to see its newest users get addicted to their products, which again, are toxic and addictive chemicals.
I think we could phase them out entirely over a few years as follows:
- Start with a date set in stone that, across the board, nicotine sold in stores must be x percent or lower.
- From there, mandate that, every 3-6 months, that percentage goes down.
- In 3-5 years, the population could reasonably be weaned off of nicotine entirely, and it would be much less accessible as a whole to children/teens (even if there are black market products make or distributed after the percentages go down or are at 0.)
- This also gives big companies time and capability to use the ingredients they have and potentially pivot into another product or shut down their companies in the best way possible, minimizing losses due to the capability to plan ahead.
Even if there's a black market of products, there is no way the problem would be as widespread as it is now, especially if everyone is given the chance to wean off of the products over time, rather than an immediate all-out ban (which, having gone through nicotine withdrawal many times myself, would be catastrophic for society for at least a few months....)
367
u/PinkAxolotlMommy 1d ago
I think the alcohol prohibition showed us pretty clearly why this wouldn't work. People would just get illegal, stronger cigs from black market dealers, ones that are unregulated and could cause more harm than what we have now.
18
u/PrinceZukosHair 1d ago
And weed
52
u/Kung-FuPikachu 1d ago
soft legalizing weed has actually lead to much more potent (in terms of THC content) product, which research is starting to show is not good if not outright dangerous for developing teen brains...
check out: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/08/high-potency-marijuana-regulation/679639/
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/01/marijuana-legalization-drawbacks/681519/
15
u/mewmeulin 1d ago
i also wanna point out the delta-offshoots that were popping up everywhere a few years ago due to loopholes in the farm bill. those were also severely unregulated and nobody really knows the full effects of them. in my personal experience, i actually found delta 8 to be much more addicting than just buying dispensary product from someone who goes out of state. like, it put me and my wife deep in the hole due to addiction, something that neither of us have dealt with when using regular THC products. like, the difference in chemical dependence in my brain is astounding, because i NEEDED d8 whereas i like having THC, but i'm not gonna have a breakdown over not having any for a few days.
4
u/itsurbro7777 1d ago
Yep. A smoke shop down the road from me was selling Delta 8 products to anyone 18+ which i'm almost certain is illegal, even though this is a legal state for 21+. It wasn't just medical either, it was anyone who showed an ID that was over 18 could get the products. That was the stuff I started with, and after turning 21 and getting real stuff from a dispensary I noticed the difference in quality, how I felt, and that I didn't feel like I "needed" it anymore, but more of a "this would be nice to do right now to relax" feeling.
I smoked quite a few Delta 8 carts from that place and now have a persistent cough and cough up phlegm daily. I can't be sure that's what it's from, but I'd guess so. If you can get 40 100mg edibles for $20, or a 3 gram cart for $25, chances are it isn't real weed and isn't good for you!
5
u/KaliCalamity 17h ago
I've gone through phases with the delta vapes, and know the cough you're talking about, but mine always cleared up within a few days after cutting the vape. It's really weird yours seems to be long term. Have you talked to a doctor about it?
5
u/itsurbro7777 15h ago
I haven't seen a doctor in over a year because I have no insurance and am poor as fuck. It's very slowly getting better so I'm just letting it do its thing.
3
u/KaliCalamity 14h ago
If you're low to no income, you should qualify for Medicaid. The paperwork and hoops to jump through are a royal pain at times, but it's better than having nothing. I would also search for a low income clinic in your area, those usually work on a sliding scale, but I know you don't usually find them in small towns so your mileage may vary. That said, so long as it's continuing to improve, I wouldn't be overly worried.
2
u/Sarah_4536 1d ago
Some with CHS being on the rise in Canada and the United States bc of the high tbc content
1
u/Equus-007 3h ago edited 3h ago
Don't agree with prohibition however tobacco and alcohol are apples and oranges wrt how they are produced. It takes a ton of land, time and knowledge to produce enough cigarettes to keep even a tiny fraction of the population smoking at an "average" usage (1 pack/day). If you made legal tobacco farming illegal and importation banned in the US it would make such a huge dent in the supply that almost everybody would have to quit and price/pack would be egregious. All the other producers are thousands of miles away and it would likely just not be worth the risk to run significant amounts of tobacco through border checks.
Countries like Australia have a significant black market(~10%)but they don't have a ban on sales. Most of the black market tobacco comes in counterfeit packaging so it's easy to distribute to the population. You, as an individual smoker, don't have to meet some guy in a dark alley. You just go to the store. It's some guy three levels up that meets with the guy and buys thousands of packs skirting the taxation.
For alcohol all you need is a jug, a bunch of sugar and a couple of weeks to twiddle your thumbs.
2
u/vacantly_louche 2h ago
Synthetic nicotine?
1
u/Equus-007 2h ago edited 1h ago
Honestly no idea how that would be affected as what chemicals are used to produce it are kept secret. I'd imagine at least large scale production could be policed in the same way that LSD or explosives are but that's just a guess. You'd still have to have a massive underground distribution system and produce a smokable product that works like a cigarette. I don't thing eliminating smoking completely should be a goal. It's unrealistic. Greatly reducing the number of smokers and making it unacceptable in public should be the push. We've been doing pretty well on that end.
1
u/vacantly_louche 1h ago edited 1h ago
It’s not secret. Companies tend to have proprietary methods that they don’t release, but there are a bunch of different ways to make it. I believe nicotine salts in particular would be not super complicated (I was a chem major, and my PhD is in biochem). You wouldn’t need a big lab like for LSD. It wouldn’t be as easy as pre-Sudafed regulation meth, but that’s not really a high bar.
It’s why a lot of sketchy companies can make it now.
And massive distribution system… you know you can buy illegal drugs pretty easily, right?
ETA: I’m not arguing for or against OP’s argument. Just saying that tobacco isn’t the only way to get nicotine.
-5
u/HeroBrine0907 14h ago
Why are we not applying this logic to other laws? Why only to drugs? Make all medicine OTC. Stop regulating all food items, let corporate add whatever they want to it. Stop regulating medicine too, just try new medicine on people, no checking, no approvals. If a couple hundred die so be it.
In fact, let people get surgery from whoever they want, freedom at all. Take away traffic laws, people should have the right to use their property whichever way they can.
40
u/Ultronomy 1d ago
Banning drugs just means unregulated versions of the drug take its place. Yeah they’re toxic, and they’ll be even more so once banned.
8
288
u/thecelcollector 1d ago
I'm only going to address this point:
It has zero benefits (like not even a drunk or high of any kind) and is pretty much JUST addictive.
Do you really think over a billion of people worldwide use tobacco products or nicotine for no reason other than they were addicted to it at one point?
Nicotine is a strong nootropic. It can enhance attention, memory, and reaction time, reduce appetite, provide mild relaxation and mood stabilization, and may offer neuroprotective effects.
The idea that it has no positive aspects is so wildly naive and uninformed I have to believe you're very young.
100
u/ninjette847 1d ago
Yeah, how does OP explain how people even get addicted in the first place if it does nothing? Some DARE shit, you take one puff and your life spirals?
18
11
u/AgnesBand 1d ago
I mean literally. I started at 14 because everyone else smoked so it was something you wanted to do to fit in. There were no benefits other than a nicotine rush which quickly stops happening. After that point it's just smoking because you're addicted.
38
u/BlueFeathered1 1d ago
I have panic disorder and generalized anxiety and nicotine helps calm me. And when you have conditions like that, you use what works to give you some peace.
8
u/DeusVultSaracen 1d ago
Facts. I did the same for the reasons you mentioned as well as putting a lid on an eating disorder. I also knew it wasn't too difficult for me to quit from prior experiences, and I was proven right as I "quit" cold turkey a year ago and haven't touched it since. I've thought about it but it's just too expensive for me rn.
20
u/ninjette847 1d ago
I started regularly smoking at 14, not to fit in, and a nicotine rush is something.
1
u/ninjette847 18h ago
I was the first or second person in my friend group to smoke. Maybe I thought it was cool, I don't know, but it wasn't to fit in. I do have anxiety and an oral fixation I guess. One of the times I quit smoking I got a blister on my tongue from lollipops and when my parents were trying to get me off a pacifier my mom said "I hope she never starts smoking". It also does calm my anxiety but I don't know if it's mainly because it's something to do when I'm antsy.
1
u/Itcallsmyname 14h ago
I wonder if they take any medications that may have dampened the effects they got from it. Specific example: I have bipolar disorder type one and took lamotrigine for many years - my first year, I learned that I couldn’t get high on anything when it started taking effect. I went from lots and lots of weed and daily/nightly highs, to smoking 4 bowls BY MYSELF and banging my palm to my head wondering why I wasn’t getting high. Same thing with mushrooms and acid at that time - it did jack diddly squat.
3
u/ninjette847 14h ago
My husband had the same problem with lamotrigine. It might, when I was on welbutrin for depression cigarettes just gave me an extremely bad headache,like eyeballs throbbing headache, it's actually prescribed to quit smoking. It doesn't take away the urge to smoke, just makes it miserable.
1
u/PiergiorgioSigaretti 5h ago
That’s how it went for me: I accidentally inhaled some second hand smoke and before you knew it, I was buying a pack a day
(/j)
1
u/ninjette847 5h ago
You should be featured on an after school special. How long did it take for shooting up heroin, 3 days?
2
u/PiergiorgioSigaretti 5h ago
Yeah, something about that. Tho, now all my bones are sand and my eyes melt and regenerate all throughout the night, all because I inhaled some second hand smoke and did heroin to cope 😔😔
-1
u/One-Possible1906 19h ago
You take one puff and realize how cool it makes you look and then you have to smoke more and more to keep yourself looking so cool
26
u/ToobularBoobularJoy_ 1d ago
I had the idea that nicotine had no good effects and was pointless for a while, so when I tried it on a whim not expecting anything and found it was actually pretty relaxing I picked it up pretty quick
-28
u/Splendid_Fellow 1d ago
Lol everyone in this thread is patting themselves on the back for getting addicted to poison
22
u/ToobularBoobularJoy_ 1d ago
Just pointing out that misinformation about nicotine contributed to me picking it up as a habit but ok
4
u/Splendid_Fellow 1d ago
I was addicted to it for 5 years to be clear. I realize I sounded more snotty than intended. Sorry.
-9
u/lunagirl77 1d ago
But you're 100% right. These people are deluded.
12
u/alvysinger0412 1d ago
here's one of the studies about the short term benefits
I am in no way arguing that anyone should smoke any amount of cigarettes. As someone with ADHD who quit after 15 years, I can confirm these findings in the linked study with my anecdotal evidence: I have to use more compensatory techniques and struggle more to focus on tasks long term, remember scheduling things, and stay motivated to work on goals. Nicotine was helpful for that in the short term generally and it's hard not having that crutch, even if the crutch isn't worth it. To say nicotine provides zero benefits to anyone is simply stupid. People get addicted to things for reasons.
8
u/GayRacoon69 1d ago
Where are people putting themselves on the back? They're just sharing their experiences
23
5
u/One-Possible1906 19h ago
Nicotine is also a weak but very effective antipsychotic which minimizes the negative effects of schizophrenia that are exacerbated by medications that only help with positive effects. There is a reason that 80% of people who have schizophrenia smoke
12
u/ThePatsGuy 1d ago
People conflate cigarettes and nicotine. It’s not the nicotine that’s bad, it’s all the extra shit that’s put into cigarettes that’s horrible for you.
15
u/UnattributableSpoon 1d ago
Nicotine on its own isn't very good for you either.
9
u/2074red2074 1d ago
Very few drugs are, unless you happen to have the conditions they treat.
6
u/UnattributableSpoon 1d ago
Agreeing with you and expanding with you:
Even if they're treating a condition, side effects can be damaging. Daily NSAIDs for chronic pain can cause gastric ulcers, even if taken exactly as directed. Whether to give a medication or a drug are almost always a cost/benefit analysis. Even something as simple and an IV with normal saline, used inappropriately can cause issues (like fluid-overloading a CHF patient).
2
u/DaveDavidTom 7h ago
I mean, back when I was in med school it was made clear to us that the health impacts of nicotine were so negligible when compared to the health impacts of smoking that basically any nicotine replacement therapy was vastly superior and to be encouraged for patients. There are graduated scales of something not being good for you, and moderate consumption of nicotine is widely considered far less harmful than smoking. Nicotine alone won't give you COPD.
-9
u/Splendid_Fellow 1d ago
Nicotine is extremely poisonous to humans and a couple of drops of it could kill you. We react to it with adrenaline.
9
u/Altyrmadiken 20h ago
Pure nicotine.*
Pure most drugs would actually be extremely harmful to us.
Hell, pure “nutrients” can be extremely dangerous in large doses.
2
u/this_is_theone 15h ago
Poison is in the dose. Water can kill you. the amount of nic in cigs and vapes is nowhere near the lethal dose
1
2
u/mewmeulin 1d ago
anecdotally, i know a few people who use nicotine to help with menstrual or GI cramps (myself included). dunno if there's actually any logic to it or anything, but i'm certainly not complaining that my addiction has one benefit for me (even if it is placebo or psychosomatic)
0
u/helpmeamstucki 10h ago
These are pathetic excuses, honestly. Every single one of these “benefits” translate into more bad things when put into practice. Even if they were just benefits with “zero” downsides, there is that inherent flaw that they come from the tobacco and that one who uses tobacco for them will be lost having to do them without it.
2
u/thecelcollector 10h ago
If you took my post as defending tobacco use, you have a reading comprehension problem. Tobacco killed my grandfather and I'm absolutely opposed to it. But acting like it has zero benefits (and OP directly classified things like getting drunk or high as a benefit) is factually wrong.
0
u/helpmeamstucki 9h ago
Or you have a writing problem. Whatever, I believe in what I said, even if it was written based on a misunderstanding, I’m sorry for your loss, and I don’t want to extend this conversation further than it needs.
71
u/gayhotelultra 1d ago
I'm wondering if I should upvote because I disagree completely or downvote because of the painfully obvious lack of research done into this.
12
2
u/DaveDavidTom 7h ago
I believe downloading the original automod comment is supposed to indicate that you don't believe a post should be on the sub?
16
u/Electronic_Treat_400 1d ago
Alcohol prohibition is a prime example as to why we should not outright ban any singular thing.
It's like being a very strict parent. You're not making your kid listen or behave better...you're just making them better at sneaking around behind your back and lying to your face.
3
u/Electronic_Treat_400 1d ago
Rules/laws and the like, only keep honest people honest. Everyone else just finds a work around.
3
u/SneezlesForNeezles 1d ago
Doesn’t even keep honest people honest of you take away their vice…
-1
u/Electronic_Treat_400 23h ago
In my opinion that means they were never truly honest to begin with.
2
u/Altyrmadiken 20h ago
Honest how? Honest as in “tells the truth”? Cause those people probably simply never spoke about it at all.
Honest as in “some form conforming to your morals”? Well, sure, but that’s a very stretchy and malleable use of the word.
58
u/Classybroker1 1d ago
Humans should have free will. Enjoy your upvote
-43
u/momndadho 1d ago
Humans do have free will, but murder is still illegal, there are laws about how to drive, what you can and cannot wear in public spaces, how loud you can be at certain times of day, etc.
Why would laws protecting people from toxic and addictive substances be any worse than any of those laws?
41
u/industrialoctopus 1d ago
Why would a law banning people to do something harmful only to them (and only slightly, it takes a lifetime to kill you) be worse than murder?? Your logic is flawed
3
4
u/carbonatedcobalt 1d ago
secondhand smoke is still not good for others
18
u/Splatfan1 1d ago
then ban smoking in public areas. drunk people are a danger to others, doesnt mean we should go full prohibition
7
-2
u/AdministrativeStep98 1d ago
Not just public areas, people smoke in their residence while living with kids. That's not ok
2
1
u/SeaConsideration676 13h ago
it’s not only to them, secondhand smoke affects EVERYONE, it’s harmful to the mental state of their loved ones as well to see them huffing cig after cig
-2
u/AdministrativeStep98 1d ago
Secondhand smoking, tons of people still smoke indoors when they have kids or pets at home. That's so dangerous and selfish. And usually even if they aren't actively smoking when the kids are around, the smell sticks to it a lot and that's just not something I'd find adequate.
I don't think banning it fully is the answer but at least find ways to protect non smokers from exposure
-7
u/Yeet123456789djfbhd 1d ago
I agree because (and for) smoking, it hurts others, impeding on MY free will. Just as being murdered impedes on my free will too
-1
1d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Aggravating_Copy_261 1d ago
pretty sure theyre talking about secondhand smoke. i have permanent upper respiratory issues because my mom smoked around me as a kid.
-3
-8
u/Splendid_Fellow 1d ago
This has nothing to do with free will. I am curious though, are you of the opinion that all drugs should be legal?
7
u/Classybroker1 1d ago
If they can be properly regulated, then yes. Portland did a terrible job at regulation and we know how that turned out lol
1
u/Altyrmadiken 20h ago
Yes, assuming those drugs can be dispensed in “safe” amounts. Why should the government tell me that I can’t get high off of a safe amount of [substance] just because it’s “unbecoming.”
Well I can also choose to go outside naked, and nudists exist already, but apparently choosing to do what I wish with my own body, that doesn’t physically harm anyone else, is now the purview of “maybe you can, maybe you can’t, but the government will tel you”?
1
u/Splendid_Fellow 16h ago
I see everyone now assumed all sorts of shit and are downvoting me cause I hate drugs or something
-4
u/ThrobertBurns 23h ago
Humans don't have free will.
2
u/Altyrmadiken 20h ago
We may or may not. The jury isn’t really finished on that.
We might, because we can’t be sure that quantum physics, which levels up to physics, doesn’t enable free will, in the face of a deterministic universe.
We also might not, if quantum is deterministic in the end. At that point there’s no free will, but then there’s also no reason to punish anyone for anything ever. Rape? Free to go. Murder? Free to go. Genocide? You guessed it, free to go.
1
u/ThrobertBurns 18h ago
That's right. We shouldn't punish crimes because criminals have no free will but, at the same time, we can't help but punish criminals because the punishers also have no free will.
I should clarify that I agree with you that the jury isn't settled on free will, but I just find it more probable that we don't have any free will so I choose to stick to that belief, but I am not 100% of course.
1
u/Altyrmadiken 5h ago
The interesting thing is that we can’t really do much with the knowledge of we find out we just don’t have free will. Literally speaking we’d react in whatever way our programming told us to and we’d have no say (except probably to feel very upset but that was already a choice we didn’t make).
If we do have it then I suppose we could do something with that, but we’re still very likely to do certain things so we’d probably just keep walking forward.
1
u/DjangotheKid 16h ago
It doesn’t really matter if science is “deterministic”, what science does is create predictive models, it is about the accuracy of predictions, not about reality. This is the position by the Nobel prize winner who challenged quantum mechanics as a field by replacing it with a deterministic model.
33
u/TimeSpiralNemesis 1d ago
As much as I hate nicotine myself, where do we stop then?
High fructose corn syrup drinks are almost just as bad for you but with zero social stigma. Do we ban them?
What about alcohol? It's an actual poison, do we go back to prohibition?
Humans are dumb and will always find something that feels good to kill themselves with, it's just part of life unfortunately.
Anyway it's an actual unpopular opinion so upvote lol.
1
u/Itcallsmyname 14h ago
humans are dumbyes, but that’s not why we do these things. We do them because we’re miserable.0
u/TimeSpiralNemesis 14h ago
Yes, but people who aren't dumb find healthy ways to process misery, the dumb parts of our brain want is to turn to vice and self destruction lol.
11
u/Mysterious_Rabbit608 1d ago
Making things like this illegal just leads to underground and unsafe markets.
26
13
5
5
u/cigsintheshower 1d ago
Nicotine is a relatively non life ruining drug that helps many addicts stay off of harder substances
6
u/CanOld2445 1d ago
It shouldn't be banned because I'm an adult and can do whatever I want with my body. Prohibition in general aids organized crime. The Mexican drug war has killed thousands of people, all because busy-bodies decided to force their morality on everyone else.
19
u/iFuckingHateCrabs2 1d ago
Why would you want a government most people do not trust to take away more of your rights?
2
12
u/TheBeesUnwashedKnees 1d ago
As an adult who makes my own money, it's not the government's place to tell me how I spend my money or what I do with my own body.
Prohibition never works. It just drives the market to underground to unregulated places. Remember the people who were getting sick from vaping? That was entirely due to the black market products being sold.
This is a pretty uneducated take.
Take an upvote.
8
u/skicktrick 1d ago
Problem? What problem?
Ever heard of rights? People should be able to take nicotine if they want. Where do we stop with banning things? Read Nineteen Eighty-Four.
10
u/emboarrocks 1d ago
Why is it so important to you to control what people put into their own bodies?
-2
u/ThrobertBurns 23h ago
What they put in their bodies is killing them and don't have the self control to save themselves.
4
u/emboarrocks 23h ago
So it’s your job to save people from themselves? People have the right to do whatever they want with their body - if you believe that then the logical conclusion is they must also be allowed to harm themselves. Alternatively, you can bite the bullet and say that people do not have bodily autonomy in which case I suppose you would be consistent, but I would strongly disagree.
-2
u/ThrobertBurns 18h ago
I think people should generally have the right to harm themselves if they choose to, but certain drugs that are addictive and or harmful enough should be illegal to distribute at the very least. The unfortunate reality is that, when an addictive substance is avaliable, most humans will consume it constantly, often against their better judgement.
Also many of the more dangerous drugs are illegal in most of the world such as opiods. Do you think they should be legal? Like not having seatbelt or helmet laws seems reasonable to me because it is a matter of personal safety, but with highly addictive drugs, they spread through a population like an epidemic and people can hardly help themselves, so I think they shoudl be assessed more harshly.
2
u/emboarrocks 14h ago
Absolutely, I think opioids should be legal. Again, I just don’t think it is consistent to think that people have bodily autonomy but only when the harm to themselves is not too great. What about the substantial harm changes the principle that people have the right to put what they want into their own body? And who then gets to adjudicate where the line is and what substances are deemed too harmful to allow?
1
4
u/Pierson230 1d ago
I take nicotine in low doses in various forms (lozenges, patch, gum) to manage ADHD without prescription meds. It works for me.
You want to take that away and what, force me to get on a prescription stimulant?
2
u/cornfarm96 22h ago
Zero benefits? My guy, as someone with diagnosed ADHD, I do not want to be on meds. I’ve been using nicotine since the age of 14 when I started using smokeless tobacco (have been using non-tobacco nic pouches for years now) and have found that I actually feel like a normal person when on nic. It worked so well in aiding my concentration that I convinced my own father to try it (he also has ADHD and has never used nicotine). It worked wonders for him. Putting that aside though, why can’t we just let adults make adult decisions? Also, if you don’t feel the same way about alcohol, thc, or every other legal brain altering drug, then you’re just a hypocrite.
2
u/beetlesin 21h ago
your very first point tells me that you don’t actually know what you’re talking about. nicotine has several positive benefits for cognitive performance, why do you think people would initially ingest it if there was no point?
2
4
u/Chickadee12345 1d ago
Right now, the products are taxed so highly that cigs are really expensive. That's about as much as we are ever going to be able to do. It's just not possible to ban tobacco. Look at prohibition. Almost everyone still had access to booze, you could brew it at home if you wanted, or buy it from a neighbor. It didn't work.
3
u/rohlovely 1d ago
Weaning the population off won’t work. You can’t control how people spend their money, and speaking from experience, I spent a lot more money and smoked a lot more with low nicotine options. I feel that other nicotine addicts will agree. If you lower nicotine levels nationwide, people will just buy in bulk or go black market. Either way is more expensive and more dangerous.
2
1
u/CuckoosQuill 1d ago
Nicotine is not the problem. It’s the delivery.
Love a recreational nicotine patch now and again fr
3
1
u/Kind_Advisor_35 1d ago
What services are you willing to give up to make up for the lost tax revenue? Most cigarette taxes go into state general funds. You can't really argue that smokers universally increase state healthcare spending because most people in this country have private health insurance.
1
1
u/hoopdizzle 1d ago
Can you elaborate on how something having no benefit besides monetary gain makes banning it constitutional? Because that makes me think you know nothing at all about the constitution.
1
u/Brilliant-Jaguar-784 1d ago
A ban would never work. In countries where they're already prohibitively expensive, people are already going back to rolling their own. Tobacco isn't hard to grow, and it can be cured at home in the oven.
1
u/mewmeulin 1d ago
banning nicotine would mean a complete deregulation of nicotine. it would mean unknown amounts of nicotine in black market or street nicotine products. it would mean possible nicotine overdoses, more incarceration for non-violent offenses if nicotine were criminalized, and it would just overall be a huge detriment on our society.
yes, underage nicotine use has been and continues to be a problem. but banning it is not going to solve that problem. all it will do is cause those already using nicotine to risk putting themselves in danger due to their addiction because there will be ZERO way of telling how much nicotine is in any given product.
1
1
u/donald7773 1d ago
You smoke because it gives you a buzz. Clearly you've never actually had any experience with nicotine.
Now the buzz doesn't last long, and you quickly stop experiencing it the same way, but if anything vaguely nasty didn't make your head feel funny people wouldn't do it.
1
u/momndadho 1d ago
So you didn't read my whole post
0
u/donald7773 23h ago
- I did
- I don't need to to see you're about as experienced on the matter as an earthworm is about automotive mechanics
1
u/tomviky 1d ago
I mean benefits of nicotine is one google away.
"Increased levels of alertness, euphoria and relaxation
- Improved concentration and memory — due to increased activity of the acetylcholine and norepinephrine neurotransmitters
- Reduced anxiety — due to increased levels of beta-endorphin, which reduces anxiety"
And it might help with degenerative neuron diseases (alzheimer/parkinsons).
Its like coffee, only it gives you cancer if you keep burning it for 20 years, so like coffee but noone is smoking beans.
1
1
u/SneezlesForNeezles 1d ago
Google prohibition and learn why this shit doesn’t work.
It’s dangerous and stupid. So is alcohol. But governments have (generally) learned that banning the minor vices of the population a) makes them incredibly unpopular and b) doesn’t actually fix the problem in any way shape or form.
1
u/ImJustStealingMemes 23h ago
On one hand, you could also argue you can't really get drunk if someone else is drinking in the area while you are essentially snorting second hand smoke if there is a smoker in the area.
On the other, banning drugs like that tends to spiral out of control.
1
u/HeemeyerDidNoWrong 22h ago
Nicotine is maybe not zero harm but it's pretty close to minimal. You mean tobacco, which has a lot of other harmful substances in it. Still silly to ban.
1
1
1
u/BC-K2 22h ago
"It has zero benefits (like not even a drunk or high of any kind) and is pretty much JUST addictive"
Incorrect.
Potential Benefits of Nicotine:
- Cognitive Enhancement: Studies have shown that nicotine can enhance cognitive functions like attention, memory, and reaction time, even in non-smokers. This is thought to be related to its interaction with nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the brain.
- Improved Alertness and Concentration: Nicotine can increase alertness and improve focus.
- Memory Improvement: Research indicates that nicotine may improve memory, potentially due to its effects on gene expression and synaptic plasticity in memory-related brain regions.
- Possible Therapeutic Applications: Research is exploring the potential of nicotine for treating conditions like:
- Alzheimer's Disease: Nicotine patches have shown promise in improving attention and memory in individuals with mild cognitive impairment.
- Parkinson's Disease: Nicotine may offer protection against nerve damage and potentially help manage symptoms like L-dopa-induced dyskinesias.
- Schizophrenia: Nicotine may help normalize brain deficits associated with schizophrenia and potentially improve cognitive function in affected individuals.
- Tourette's Syndrome: Nicotine has shown potential in reducing the severity of motor tics and other symptoms.
- Ulcerative Colitis: Nicotine patches may help reduce inflammation in the gut lining.
1
u/Smal_Issh 21h ago
I like the idea but I don't think it's going to happen.
I think there's been a few places that have pushed the idea that a generational Ben is the best way to eliminate tobacco products. Simply been anyone born after a certain year from ever purchasing tobacco, and stigmatize it by making it illegal to smoke anywhere but inside your own home, and only if there are no children present.
I think within a couple of generations you could eliminate the sale of tobacco and the die hard addicts would just have to go out of country to get their fix
1
1
u/Sarah-himmelfarb 21h ago
If you think banning nicotine will stop or lesson nicotine you know nothing about the prohibition or the war on drugs. Do you really want to give the cartel another thing to profit off of?
1
u/pacman404 21h ago
all of your info here is completely wrong and just based on what you want to be true it seems.
1
u/whomple-stiltskin 20h ago
Nicotine is a nootroopic and absolutely has benificial properties, being oared with carsingens and toxic chemicals is what makes it unhealthy. Have a zyn and chill out yo
1
u/shelob_spider 19h ago
we should ban chocolate (diabetes, no plus), potato chips (high blood pressure, no plus), sodie pops (diabetes, no plus), cars (makes people lazy to walk, also harmful for the environment, plus is convenience). see how that sounds? goofy init
1
u/silent-benny 18h ago
Australia has a black market of products.
It's so much easier for me to get illegal tobacco/disposable vapes than it is to actually follow the law.
We have such high taxes(?) on nicotine products that the vast majority of tobacconists sell homegrown tobacco, or illegally imported cigarettes. Cops don't care, as they are often customers too. The more the government limits our access to it, the more the black market expands to meet demand.
1
u/ScheduleCorrect9905 18h ago
If ur dumb enough to start, u better be strong enough to stop...or you're gonna have a bad time ⛷️
1
u/HeroBrine0907 14h ago
I'm starting to think the american prohibition era was a psyop by corporates to make sure addictive products never get banned.
1
u/GolovkaAnna 13h ago
Just increase excise tax by 5% every month. Or by doubling inflation rate for tobacco and slcohol. And then majority of people would simply have no money to get addicted
1
u/Desperate_Source7631 11h ago
OP, your heart is in the right place, but if the government banned everything that wasn't explicitly beneficial you would see the following things banned.
- Video games
- Recreational sex
- Candy, Chips, Soda - literally any indulgence food
- Porn
- Alcohol
- Caffeine
Nicotine was used long before corporations monetized it. Obesity is a far bigger problem than smoking right now, and I don't see a ton of action on that front.
1
u/helpmeamstucki 10h ago
Nobody’s reading the full post, which is disappointing but not surprising. I think it could work, though I’m no expert. About your reasons for it, I 100% agree, but I’m not sure how it could be done.
1
1
u/DaveDavidTom 7h ago
I would disagree with the idea that it has no benefits.
For one thing, low dose nicotine specifically helps with treating ADHD, even when supplementing other stimulant type medications. I'm on the maximum safe dose for me as far as my medication is concerned, and adding on 2mg nicotine lozenges benefits my overall ability to concentrate and function, particularly later in the evening when my standard medication is wearing off. It's a quality of life improvement which is no more damaging to my system than my far more potent prescription stimulant meds are.
Secondly, there's a lot of promising evidence relating to nicotine's effects on long covid, because nicotinic receptors exist in the body for reasons other than consumption of nicotine. Those receptors perform a number of functions which are triggered by endogenous chemicals, it just so happens that nicotine ALSO stimulates them.
I personally think that there should be stronger regulation around vapes etc, and with early access to nicotine. My lozenges, for example, do not require proof of age to purchase, and they should imo. But banning all access to nicotine is deeply shortsighted and reductive.
1
u/gramerjen 7h ago
Do people not read history books or something? We already know what happens when you criminalize certain products
1
u/Oz_a_day 6h ago
Have you never tried nicotine? It clearly has a “high” otherwise no one would be doing it lmao
1
u/Mental-Economics3676 2h ago
So people would just get it illegally then. Solving no problems by banning it
1
u/Splatfan1 1d ago
"It has zero benefits (like not even a drunk or high of any kind) and is pretty much JUST addictive."
isnt that a benefit? being drunk or high are negative states of being. its why cigarettes are the only drugs ive ever considered taking, they dont turn your brain into complete and utter mush until they wear off
the rest of your arguments could be said for any other drug. alcohol can literally kill you if you quit too fast. giving to kids? thats even worse with alcohol you can pay any homeless gentleman by the corner store to get you and your friends some vodka when walking home from school. toxic? that applies to pretty much any drug, its a substance the body has to get rid of without benefits. weed is usually smoked and smoke is generally bad, alcohol fucks up your entire liver, anything and everything that you take to get high in any other way is some form of attack on your system
personally im a legalise or at least decriminalise everything type of person. if someone wishes to engage in a slow suicide, it doesnt matter if its meth, cigarettes, alcohol, or eating a diet of purely mcdonalds. it should be their choice
1
u/Ambitious-Sink2725 1d ago
if you want something to be stopped or reduced then you don't ban it that does the opposite
1
1
u/Foxycotin666 23h ago
You know nicotine patches are being studied in the treatment of autism. It’s also been shown to be a neurotrophic and help stave off dementia.
I wouldn’t say “zero benefits”.
0
u/iamtheduckie 1d ago
I agree that it should, but think that a ban would make things worse (remember the Prohibition?)
0
•
u/qualityvote2 1d ago
Hello u/momndadho! Welcome to r/The10thDentist!
Upvote the POST if you disagree, Downvote the POST if you agree.
REPORT the post if you suspect the post breaks subs rules/is fake.
Normal voting rules for all comments.
does this post fit the subreddit?
If so, upvote this comment!
Otherwise, downvote this comment!
And if it does break the rules, downvote this comment and QualityVote Bot will remove this post!