New Zealand wants a young, smoke-free generation

New Zealand wants a young, smoke-free generation

A completely smoke-free future. This is the goal of the New Zealand government, which has announced a strict action plan: the gradual increase in the age at which smoking becomes legal (which could even become Banning the sale of cigarettes to anyone born after 2004), The marked reduction of the permissible level of nicotine in tobacco products, the minimum selling price of tobacco, the limitation of places where cigarettes and the like can be sold.

“About 4,500 New Zealanders die every year from tobacco,” Health Minister Aisha Virral explained. Smoking is to blame One in every four cancer deaths in New Zealand. “We need to make rapid progress in order to be able to reach the goal of eliminating smoking by 2025. We need a new approach.”

The anti-smoking plan has been welcomed by many public health organizations. As the CEO of the company explained Cancer SocietyLucy Ellwood, The number of tobacco retailers is Four times higher in low-income communitiesWhere the number of smokers is greater. “This stark inequality is the reason why we need to protect future generations from the harms of tobacco,” he said. “Tobacco is the most harmful consumer product in history, and it should be phased out.”

Smoking rates are also higher among Maori and New Zealand Pacifica. “For a long time The tobacco industry has made our people addicted“This deprives them of their money before they have to bury them,” said Shane Cowenata Bradbrooke, who has long advocated the need to free Maori communities from smoking. “I can’t wait to make smoking truly a fading sector in this corner of the world.”

Ma There are also those who criticize This initiative feared the failure of small dairy stores (which also sell tobacco) and the possibility of feeding the black market. The right-wing political party ACT also said that reducing nicotine content could prompt smokers to buy more cigarettes and smoke. There are also those who question whether it is right for the government to interfere so much with people’s choices.

Source: The Informant