from the How-much-did-folks-at-Stonehenge-smoke? dept.
In a sign that maybe there is hope for the survival of the human race, The Guardian reports that the number of cigarette smokers in the UK has dropped to less than 17%, the lowest number in half a century.
In 1974, over 50% of men in Britain were smokers; that had fallen to just 19.1% in England in 2015. Similarly, just over 40% of women smoked back then; last year it was only 14.9%.
There are now just 7.2 million adults in England who smoke. They are far outnumbered by 14.6 million ex-smokers. It is the first time that under 17% of the population are smokers and is down from the 19.3% seen as recently as 2012.
Interestingly the success rate for people trying to quit has jumped from 13.6% to around 20%.
Some of this may reflect the price of smokes - which look to be between £8 and £10 ($13 US) for a pack of twenty. (Canadian prices are sitting around $9-10 CDN)
And, in the interest of what passes for "balance" these days, there are groups that will dispute the health risks of smoking tobacco.
Disclaimer: Smoked for twenty+ years, mostly plain Camels. Yummmm..... Quit cold turkey.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:49PM
Quitting smoking is the easiest thing in the world.
I've done it a thousand times!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @03:30AM
This is the FIRST POST! How can it be "redundant"?
(Score: 1) by sce7mjm on Wednesday September 21 2016, @06:26AM
I quit 20 times a day. Beat that!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 20 2016, @04:56PM
I dispute the hazards of smoking, only in that a bad thing is exaggerated to make it look even worse.
Back when the internet was relatively new, I got into a chat channel. Some little girl started chatting me up. I suspected that it was a vice cop, trying to set me up, but as things went along, I decided she probably really was a kid.
The pertinent part of that chat was, her grandma had died. Or, maybe great grandma. She blamed it on being married to a smoker for six months, like 70 years ago.
Smoking is bad, no argument here. But, an octogenarian doesn't die because she breathed some tobacco smoke decades ago. The brainwashing kids are put through today is just plain stupid.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:13PM
> I dispute the hazards of smoking, only in that a bad thing is exaggerated to make it look even worse.
Do you realize you just did exactly what you are complaining about?
You exaggerated a bad thing (judging reality based on being fed a warped view) to judge reality based on being fed an exaggerated narrative. The only difference is that instead of believing this kid on the internet, you disbelieved her. Either way you made a judgment of reality based on exposure to an exaggerated narrative.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:15PM
My takeaway was that he just outed himself as a pedo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:20PM
Low hanging fruit.
Yeah, double-entendre that, bitches!
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday September 20 2016, @08:28PM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Fruit [wikipedia.org]
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:22PM
Do you realize you just did exactly what you are complaining about?
Perhaps he did, but perhaps you made it all up.
There are enough examples of this sort of thing being conducted, with full government backing, that dismissing the revelation because your twisted differentiation of a couple of words like "warped view" and "exaggerated narrative", is not only a disservice, but also something of an argument about angels dancing on pin heads.
Small data is blown up into huge policy very frequently. Sometimes this small data finds its way into federal law even before the ink has dried on the non-repeatable study. The trend is lamented here on SN quite regularly.
Yet you dismiss it out of hand because ONLY ONE anecdotal incident was quoted.
-Claim: Consuming cholesterol leads to high serum cholesterol. Bad Science lead to 30 years of bogus (and ineffective) medical advice.
-Claim: Exposure to sunlight leads to skin cancer. The actual data only addressed severe sunburns during adolescence.
-Claim: Salt is bad for you. No, not really, it turns out. The entire medical profession got in line and saluted.
-Claim: Marijuana leads to reefer madness. Suddenly we have a DEA that now prevents research on marijuana.
-Claim: Any alcohol is bad for you. We amended the constitution.
This tendency isn't only in the area of medical issues. Junk science (and "social research") drives much of the law in many countries.
-Fuel from Corn is a good idea!! Its mandated by law in the US. Wait, its a horrible idea. Shaddup! its still the law.
-Hair strand analysis can catch criminals! FBI testifies in thousands of convictions. It was all junk science.
-Bullet lead analysis: Ditto.
Feelings and thoughts are outlawed in the EU and the US. Legislatures vote to make increasing numbers of thing a "hate crime", not once realizing that voting to penalize something they hate is also a hate crime.
I disagree with Runaway in one respect: Kids these days seem to be far better equipped to see through the bullshit. In their life time they've seen so many cases of laws and medical and social edicts based on junk science that they are much more skeptical than when Runaway and I were as youngsters.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @11:39PM
with only a few sunburns when I was younger (and spf30 was good for a full day...) I can vouch that sun damage today significantly ages the skin each burn you get.
Additionally it has a tendency to create 'red spots' that don't go away after the skin is healed, and exaggerate wrinkles, areas around hair follicles, etc on the skin.
While obviously more people's experience is necessary to prove or refute this claim, I will say the sun damage claims unlike most of the others seem backed up both with limited scientific testing and also with the aging and explosure of people we know in our daily lives who place themselves into voluntary high or low sun exposure situations and the results of that on their skin. While there are many individuals who seem resistant to sun damage, especially of darker complexions (although not exclusive to them), the average caucasian person definitely takes significant damage from any time spent in areas with high levels of UV, much of it causing permanent damage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @12:44AM
> Feelings and thoughts are outlawed in the EU and the US.
WTF?
No wonder you see conspiracies everywhere.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @01:17AM
One and one-half words:
alt-right
(Score: 2) by Username on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:12PM
I believe that is the correct term. Stop trying to PC up everything.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:36PM
Online Etymology Dictionary: [etymonline.com]
faggot (n.1)
late 13c., "bundle of twigs bound up," also fagald, faggald, from Old French fagot "bundle of sticks" (13c.), of uncertain origin, probably from Italian faggotto "bundle of sticks," diminutive of Vulgar Latin *facus, from Latin fascis "bundle of wood" (see fasces).
Especially used for burning heretics (emblematic of this from 1550s), so that phrase fire and faggot was used to indicate "punishment of a heretic." Heretics who recanted were required to wear an embroidered figure of a faggot on the sleeve as an emblem and reminder of what they deserved.
faggot (n.2)
"male homosexual," 1914, American English slang, probably from earlier contemptuous term for "woman" (1590s), especially an old and unpleasant one, in reference to faggot (n.1) "bundle of sticks," as something awkward that has to be carried (compare baggage "worthless woman," 1590s). It may also be reinforced by Yiddish faygele "homosexual" (n.), literally "little bird." It also may have roots in British public school slang noun fag "a junior who does certain duties for a senior" (1785), with suggestions of "catamite," from fag (v.). This also spun off a verb (see fag (v.2).
Other obsolete British senses of faggot were "man hired into military service merely to fill out the ranks at muster" (1700) and "vote manufactured for party purposes" (1817).
The explanation that male homosexuals were called faggots because they were burned at the stake as punishment is an etymological urban legend. Burning sometimes was a punishment meted out to homosexuals in Christian Europe (on the suggestion of the Biblical fate of Sodom and Gomorrah), but in England, where parliament had made homosexuality a capital offense in 1533, hanging was the method prescribed. Use of faggot in connection with public executions had long been obscure English historical trivia by the time the word began to be used for "male homosexual" in 20th century American slang, whereas the contemptuous slang word for "woman" (in common with the other possible sources or influences listed here) was in active use early 20c., by D.H. Lawrence and James Joyce, among others.
Ok, so that conspicuously does not include anything about cigarettes. Looking further [etymonline.com]:
fag (n.1)
British slang for "cigarette" (originally, especially, the butt of a smoked cigarette), 1888, probably from fag "loose piece, last remnant of cloth" (late 14c., as in fag-end "extreme end, loose piece," 1610s), which perhaps is related to fag (v.), which could make it a variant of flag (v.).
From the same page, fag (v.):
fag (v.1)
"to droop, decline in strength, become weary" (intransitive), 1520s, of uncertain origin; OED is content with the "common view" that it is an alteration of flag (v.) in its sense of "droop, go limp." Transitive sense of "to make (someone or something) fatigued, tire by labor" is first attested 1826. Related: Fagged; fagging.
Following the link to flag (v.):
flag (v.1)
1540s, "flap about loosely," probably a later variant of Middle English flakken, flacken "to flap, flutter" (late 14c.), which probably is from Old Norse flaka "to flicker, flutter, hang losse," perhaps imitative of something flapping lazily in the wind. Sense of "go limp, droop, become languid" is first recorded 1610s. Related: Flagged; flagging.
And now we know the rest of the story. Bundle of sticks used for burning witches != flapping piece of cloth, so go ahead and bring it back.
(And what else is wood used for? Burning more witches!)
(Score: 2) by Username on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:12PM
How is a cigarette not a stick?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:56PM
The point is, etymologically speaking, that you don't burn witches with them. Thus the bundle of sticks meaning for faggot doesn't apply. Instead, the flappy piece of cloth sense applies which has a different etymology. After all, everybody knows that salvaging cigarettes yields cloth [fallout4.wiki], not wood!
The bundle of sticks and homosexual meanings come from the Romance languages (possibly) by way of (vulgar) Latin fascis > Italian faggotto > Old French fagot. First, a bundle of sticks, then we can see it evolve to come to symbolize a heretic and later morph into usage #2, an unpleasant old woman (burn the witch!). At some point, this evolves to refer to a homosexual man as well. The "junior who does certain duties for a senior" meaning and "man hired into military service merely to fill out the ranks at muster" meaning I take as interesting scenery along the way.
The problem is that I'm not readily seeing how Norse flaka > Middle English flakken, which is where they're saying the cigarette meaning of fag came from (originally just the cigarette butt), has anything to do with bundles of sticks.
tl;dr Sticks are made from wood, and you use wood to burn witches. Cigarettes are made from cloth and tobacco, and you can't use them to burn witches. (Well, I suppose you could… or maybe use a lit fag to ignite gasoline-soaked faggots, burning the witch. But you don't burn homosexuals, only witches. Faggots get the noose instead.)
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday September 20 2016, @07:25PM
Cigarettes are made from cloth and tobacco
Should also clarify rolling paper [wikipedia.org]:
Cigarette paper is made from thin and lightweight "rag fibers" (nonwood plant fibers) such as flax, hemp, sisal, rice straw, and esparto.
(Score: 2) by MrNemesis on Tuesday September 20 2016, @07:42PM
Before cigarettes were sold in boxes/packs here, they were sold in cricular bundles wrapped in string or paper, later in tins. These resembled almost exactly bundles of firewood/sticks, or fascines which descend from the same root.
https://www.cgarsltd.co.uk/html/images/Peru-Trip-13/cigar_bundle.jpg [cgarsltd.co.uk] (cigars only I'm afraid, couldn't find one of actual fags)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascine [wikipedia.org]
From the TVTropes definition linked below:
The "British English" sections of some fantabulous online resources are also helpful for anyone feeling like reading more, or understanding how to use the term "wanker" correctly:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/BritishEnglish [tvtropes.org]
http://effingpot.com/chapters/ [effingpot.com]
http://www.peevish.co.uk/slang/f.htm [peevish.co.uk]
(Full-time ex-smoker and part-time reader of etymology dictionaries here so I'm rather fond of the term. I've never heard the "loose piece of cloth" thing before and suspect it's incorrect)
"To paraphrase Nietzsche, I have looked into the abyss and been sick in it."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @12:46AM
So cigarette smokers are fascists, then.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 21 2016, @03:13PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:27PM
Almost 100% of people in mentally institutions smoke. That might account for most of
the people who have not given up!
There is considerable evidence that smoking causes mental illness - but also some evidence
that mental institutions encourage smoking, and some people argue that nicotine is beneficial
for people with schizophrenia - although it may actually be that nicotine withdrawal is not easy
to handle if you are schizophrenic.
If you want statistics, you might need to Google them yourself. I am tired of making them up.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:40PM
At least you're honest! "I am tired of making them up"
Seriously though, this is good and even "vaping" is an improvement....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:41PM
It's definitely one of those things where it's difficult to separate correlation from causation. Schizophrenia might be a good use case for nicotine patches.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @05:54PM
+1, Apt Nickname
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:15PM
Almost 100% of people in mentally institutions smoke. That might account for most of the people who have not given up!
It might, if 17% of the British population is living in mental institutions.
Which explains Brexit.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Wednesday September 21 2016, @08:38AM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday September 21 2016, @03:15PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:19PM
There aren't that many mental institutions around anymore. They farmed all but the very worst cases out to the communities a long time ago. The ones that are left aren't allowed cigarettes.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:11PM
Maybe freeclimbing, or apnea? Can we deliver high-grade heroin for you to try, instead?
Come on, people, stopp quitting smoking! We need you to die (quickly) of something (cheap) before you retire! The budget's balance is at stake!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 20 2016, @06:21PM
Or you young whippersnappers could get an actual fucking job and move out of our basement. 40 is not too old.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @01:36AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @09:36AM
Don't forget that non-smokers eventually die too, and often in as expensive ways (e.g a decade or two in some tax payer funded nursing home for the elderly: http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/social-care-and-support-guide/pages/care-homes.aspx ).
So between someone dying not long after his most productive (for the country) years, and someone dying decades later (after no longer contributing much £££ while taking out more from the NHS and other services) , the former is better for the country especially if the former was contributing in tobacco taxes and duties for much of his/her life.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by curunir_wolf on Tuesday September 20 2016, @07:40PM
The NIH began touting the benefits of switching to vaping some years ago, and a lot of Brits did just that. Not that it accounts for the drop, but it certainly did some of it. It's certainly much safer than smoking, and something that has worked for a lot of people that were unable to quit using other techniques.
Unfortunately, Big Tobacco has gotten wind of it, reminded governments of the huge amount of revenue they will be losing if too many people stop smoking cigarettes, so the campaign is on to ban vaping of all kinds. The FDA released new "deeming regulations" that are intended to do just that - bankrupt anyone making or selling e-cigarettes and anything that could possibly be used to vape e-liquid, and the e-liquid itself even the ones that contain no nicotine, which the FDA also claims is a "tobacco product" (WTF?) in a rather tortured turn of phrases.
NJoy just declared bankruptcy today, siting FDA regulations as part of the reason (they also were not offering the vaping options that people prefer, but still).
I'm looking forward to seeing this [abillionlives.com]. Maybe it will generate enough outrage to keep a FEW vaping companies around.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 21 2016, @04:01PM
It is far easier to blame government regulations for one's failures than to admit that they weren't the savvy business people they thought they were.