I can share my politically correct answer and say that our freedoms which are protected by the Constitution should continue to be respected and allow the sale of toxic subtances in any drugstore and as such, protect the rights of smokers. But as a healthcare professional, I will say that I feel very strongly about imposing restrictions to the sale of tobacco and its derivative products. I'd like to see a universal system of care that considers high risk behaviors and makes provisions to pass the cost of medical care to those individuals who regard their own health with minimum concern. Tobacco users know the consequences of using the product, still they insist on putting those toxins in their system and exposing others to second hand smoking. Tobacco chewing is another health problem that causes mouth cancer among younger users.
Despite all of the above personal concerns, I think local governments need to find ways to curve down the access to tobacco products and find ways to hold businesses accountable for contributing to the high cost of providing healthcare to individuals who smoke. One way is to pass laws such as the one in Boston. Drugstores rely on big profit margins generated by alcohol and tobacco sales, but are not held responsible to sharing on the high cost of treating chronic illnesses resulting from the use of those products. Why should the tax payer pay for those who end up with COPD, lung cancer, etc due to their smoking habits? I prefer to see the drugstore sharing on the cost, and if they do not want this, then they should eliminate tobacco from their inventory.
Comment Reply
I can share my politically correct answer and say that our freedoms which are protected by the Constitution should continue to be respected and allow the sale of toxic subtances in any drugstore and as such, protect the rights of smokers. But as a healthcare professional, I will say that I feel very strongly about imposing restrictions to the sale of tobacco and its derivative products. I'd like to see a universal system of care that considers high risk behaviors and makes provisions to pass the cost of medical care to those individuals who regard their own health with minimum concern. Tobacco users know the consequences of using the product, still they insist on putting those toxins in their system and exposing others to second hand smoking. Tobacco chewing is another health problem that causes mouth cancer among younger users.
Despite all of the above personal concerns, I think local governments need to find ways to curve down the access to tobacco products and find ways to hold businesses accountable for contributing to the high cost of providing healthcare to individuals who smoke. One way is to pass laws such as the one in Boston. Drugstores rely on big profit margins generated by alcohol and tobacco sales, but are not held responsible to sharing on the high cost of treating chronic illnesses resulting from the use of those products. Why should the tax payer pay for those who end up with COPD, lung cancer, etc due to their smoking habits? I prefer to see the drugstore sharing on the cost, and if they do not want this, then they should eliminate tobacco from their inventory.
December 15, 2008 - 11:32pmThis Comment
Reply