If there’s one thing that public health like to do, it’s to provide advice on how we, the Proles, live our day to day lives. This advice, which always ranges from the “no shit sherlock” to the “what the hell are you thinking” type. The vast majority of such “advice” is pretty much common bloody sense. Thing is, nanny seems to think us Proles don’t have any, so they have to spoon-feed us guidance on a regular basis, just so we don’t forget who’s in charge.
You’d think with an overabundance of nannying that they might, once in a while, get tired of endlessly telling us how we can live our lives, but no. The latest in nanny’s toolkit is of course where you can (or more to the point can’t) use an e-cigarette. You will of course remember that the “guidance” from Public Health England was released, without much fanfare – likely because they were at yet another “conference” – and I had a thorough read of and comment of it. Of course, most of it could be classified as pure common sense.
That was before a recent PHE blog post. Of course, it coincides with “Stoptober” – the annual campaign that is happily seeing diminishing returns on costs. Well, what do you expect? There’s a big elephant in the room that makes the “quit smoking” campaigns of public health rather laughable. Of course, the sock puppet charity ASH is bemoaning the fact that stop smoking services are at risk of “becoming invisible” – I think the phrase you are looking for there is “obsolete”:
Unsurprisingly, ASH Scotland didn’t bother to reply. But then, you wouldn’t expect them to admit that e-cigs are actually doing what they have been trying to get people to do for years through various lobbying and policy “recommendations” (nigh on all of which have been implemented).
The thing is, Scotland’s SSS have been in decline for years, as have many others across the UK. Imagine the joy when I heard that Smokefree South West lost their funding and were going to close in six months. Those folks were one of the worst when it came to peddling utter fuckwittery whenever a story about e-cigs made the radio waves. I’ve said before, I have no problem with the work that SSS do but the decline in their use speaks volumes about the current situation. Smokers are simply not using them and no amount of cajoling or bullying from the state funded sockpuppets is changing their mind, I for one am glad of that. Let the people make their own choices on their own terms.
Now we have yet another public health bod doing the self-same thing, only it’s being termed as “guidance”.
Use of e-cigarettes (vaping) in the home: a guide for parents
So parents aren’t capable of making their own choices and rules inside their own homes! Gosh, the nerve of these people!
In contrast to the known harm from secondhand smoke, there’s no evidence so far of harm to bystanders from exposure to e-cigarette vapour and experts have assessed the risks to be extremely low
I still contest the supposed “harms” from second-hand smoke and I abhor the frenzy surrounding it as a method to impose Orwellian rules on us Proles. But then, when this whole thing started folk were quite willing to believe the chutzpah. Of course, you would expect the extent of this guidance to consist of “it’s really none of our business”, but no. It doesn’t. It’s a masterful piece of wibbling.
We know that younger children watch and copy adults. If they see an adult vaping in front of them, there is a chance that they will want to try it out themselves. To remove this risk, e-cigarettes should be kept out of the reach of children.
Firstly, if someone brings a kid into my home it is not my responsibility to be a role model end of story. My responsibility for a visitor under my roof is to make sure they can walk back out again without any undue harm. My roof, my rule as they say in Westeros.
Secondly, anyone with any bloody sense will do just that. I mean the contents of the cupboard under my kitchen sink is far more lethal than an e-cigarette and the bottles have “keep out of reach of children” printed all over them. It’s common sense. We don’t need nanny to tell us what is already on a bloody label!
A parent who quits smoking in favour of vaping is one fewer smoking role model. However while they will no longer be modelling smoking, they will be modelling vaping. For those who find that allowing vaping indoors helps maintain a smokefree home, they might find it helpful to permit it. But those who don’t have a problem in keeping their home smokefree might want to consider what can be gained from permitting vaping indoors.
Three key points in this paragraph. One, smokers don’t envisage themselves as role models to anyone but their own offspring. Public health has this bizarre notion that collectively we are entirely responsible for the welfare of everyone’s kids. Don’t get me wrong, kids are great. As long as I can give ’em back at the end of the day.
The reference to “modelling vaping” is their way of saying “it’ll entice kids to try it” – you know, the whole “Children™” argument. Thing is, ever since this “war” on smoking (and in the US it’s a war on vaping too), who has done the most to publicise it? That’s right. Public Health. Genius isn’t it?
The final note in that paragraph is basically saying, if you were a smoker and are trying to keep a “smokefree” home then it’s best if you don’t allow anyone to vape indoors either.
Let me make it plain for you public health fuck knuckles.
IT IS NOT UP TO YOU WHAT HAPPENS IN MY HOME.
But then, as has become abundantly clear – especially in the recent months – tobacco control and public health aren’t ‘happy’ unless they are making other peoples lives an utter misery, built entirely on social prejudices and greed and preys on the opinions of anti-social bigots, so it’s hardly surprising.
It should be no surprise that PHE spent our money of producing this wishy washy guidance. Why in the name of all that’s unholy do they feel it necessary to tell us what to do in our homes? Thing is, there’s enough leeway in the guidance that any self-righteous do-gooder can point to PHE as an excuse for banning vaping and smoking in private homes.
The support of ASH in this case is just another example of how they really are not a friend to vapers. They view e-cigs as stick to bash smokers with, then once the smokers are well and truly gone they’ll turn their attentions to vapers too. No, this guidance is over-cautious and a load of tripe to boot.
These are our so-called “friends” who, by and large, support bans on vaping, have no intention of actually standing up and doing what is right instead of what is easy and I didn’t expect they’d eagerly tweet advice which advocated occasions where vaping bans are appropriate in private homes so soon. It is after all, part of their master plan.
Wasn’t this once actually about health?