Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why should sunbeds and not cigarettes be banned? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I see a lot of people demanding that sunbeds should be banned, but I doubt they take the same view with cigarettes.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Okay.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    And?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    because sunbeds aren't taxed as much of course
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    if people want to sit in a sunbed and possibly get skin cancer, let them, its their own problem if they do instead of the government preaching whats right and wrong all the time
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigman_ben)
    if people want to sit in a sunbed and possibly get skin cancer, let them, its their own problem if they do instead of the government preaching whats right and wrong all the time
    But in the end it's the government's (already hugely financially strained) NHS that will have to spend its funds treating the sunbed users that get cancer.
    Offline

    16
    Indeed what the hell happened to freedom let people do what they like.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I can only imagine that several million people being deprived of nicotine might lead to a bit of bother for the economy. In the form of depressed workers and a rapid decrease in tax income...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sunbeds aren't cool.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think the main problem with banning cigarettes is the amount of people that are addicted who will then go to extreme measure to get their hands on cigarettes. People will begin smuggling them into the country and it will become like weed. Sund beds pose a much less problem with banning.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Plus, Cigarettes, unlike Sunbeds, help the British Economy
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellieg33)
    But in the end it's the government's (already hugely financially strained) NHS that will have to spend its funds treating the sunbed users that get cancer.
    Well to be honest (just my opinion) the government and NHS should be lees sympathetic with people who have conditions that they've brought about themselves through smoking, drinking, eating too much, going on sunbeds, taking drugs. Its a tough stance to take but it might be the wake up call people need to make them think about the choices they make, just called willpower and self discipline.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Because there is such a great danger of young people ingnoring the warnings and using them. As sunbeds do a lot of harm for very little time exposed they are pretty bad. young women are especially vunerable - they may think that getting a tan is more important when they can't see any visible side effects, and it's also socially acceptable which will encourage their use.

    **** on the other hand have a big label on them saying how bad they are, and they're not very socially acceptable to the 3/4 of the population don't smoke.
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by bigman_ben)
    Well to be honest (just my opinion) the government and NHS should be lees sympathetic with people who have conditions that they've brought about themselves through smoking, drinking, eating too much, going on sunbeds, taking drugs. Its a tough stance to take but it might be the wake up call people need to make them think about the choices they make, just called willpower and self discipline.
    So for you it's preferable to let people die from a self inflicted condition than discourage them from self inflicting that condition in the first place?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The argument for banning:

    The Welfare State at a quick overview is good. But the problem is what happens to people who continue unhealthy habits despite knowledge that they could need expensive medical treatment. The influence of cigarettes and alcohol is offset by the excise duty charged on them on top of VAT. Why should I as a non tanner be have to pay for the treatment of people's skin cancers when they knew there was a fair risk of it ocurring due to a choice they made. This gives people greater economic freedom.

    The argument against banning:

    If people want to tan they should be able to tan, who is the government to tell them to stop, they have no mandate for such a policy. The law should proscribe as few things as possible for it to work efficiently. This gives people greater social freedom to do what they like.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    So for you it's preferable to let people die from a self inflicted condition than discourage them from self inflicting that condition in the first place?
    Perhaps it is? George Best died prematurely due to alcohol abuse, but i am sure he had a good time on the way.

    Why should the goverment tell people how they should die. If you want to die in a pool of your own vomit while experience ecstasy during a heroin overdose at the age of 27 then who is to say that is a more or less valid way of dying. Are we all required to live to age 90 and die in our sleep.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bigman_ben)
    Well to be honest (just my opinion) the government and NHS should be lees sympathetic with people who have conditions that they've brought about themselves through smoking, drinking, eating too much, going on sunbeds, taking drugs. Its a tough stance to take but it might be the wake up call people need to make them think about the choices they make, just called willpower and self discipline.
    Mmm good point, but these people aren't always thinking straight when they make those decisions, and as taxpayers they're really not going to be happy about not being able to get treatment. Perhaps if the government spent more money on "preaching", as you called it in your first post, then they wouldn't get into these messes in the first place because they might understand the risks a bit more!
    Offline

    10
    (Original post by DeeDub)
    Perhaps it is? George Best died prematurely due to alcohol abuse, but i am sure he had a good time on the way.

    Why should the goverment tell people how they should die. If you want to die in a pool of your own vomit while experience ecstasy during a heroin overdose at the age of 27 then who is to say that is a more or less valid way of dieing. Are we all required to live to age 90 and die in our sleep.
    Damn, 20 years old and you already have a pacemaker.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    So for you it's preferable to let people die from a self inflicted condition than discourage them from self inflicting that condition in the first place?
    The NHS dealing with people who have self induced problems just gives them an excuse cos if they do get ill there's the attitude of "I've paid my national insurance, the NHS can sort me out" without realising that people with genuine illnesses aren't getting the care they need cos some fat git needs liposuction and there isn't a spare bed for them.

    People are spoonfed too much and shouldn't need to have the government to come up with some campaign against not doing this or that, people know that if you sit in the sun too long you burn, eat too much you get fat etc. They make a choice and should be responsible for their actions because their problems don't happen by accident unlike some poor sod who gets cancer through no fault of their own.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lefty Leo)
    Damn, 20 years old and you already have a pacemaker.
    :confused:


    Can people just not be informed of the risk and allowed to come to their own decision.

    I don't smoke or ride a motorcycle because i don't get anything out of it smoking and riding a motorcycle is too dangerous. If people want to smoke and ride a motorcycle good luck to them.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 5, 2009
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
    AtCTs

    Ask the Community Team

    Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

    Welcome Lounge

    Welcome Lounge

    We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.