By Isle of Wight Observer
Dear Editor,
David Holmes levels the accusation against politicians of bullying people into stopping smoking (Holmsey, June 19) – is that reasonable? Until the 1950s/’60s, the majority of doctors smoked and promoted the habit. An iconic study of their life expectancy was game changing. However, the fact that harm was taking place continued to be denied by a self-interested tobacco industry. The definition of bullying generally includes ‘a real or perceived power imbalance’. With smoking, surely, it was the individual against big business.
The dilemma is that smoking does not solely affect individuals, but families, the health service, etc, and smoke especially damages children. Smoking is a powerful addiction that disproportionately affects the disadvantaged. David Hockney was a prominent campaigner against smoking restrictions that I would suggest the majority now support. Another measure that was initially opposed is seat belts. It was argued that this should be a personal decision, but the measure is now generally accepted, and a reduction in injuries has saved public money.
Should politicians act on other issues that affect more than the individual, e.g. problem gambling? Should they stand up to the gambling industry and earn a charge of bullying from Holmsey, or kowtow?
Paul Bingham, Newport