France to quit making cigarettes as last factory prepares to close The last remaining factory making cigarettes in France is set to close by the end of 2023, the site’s owner told its employees this week.
Issued on: 01/10/2023 - 09:08
The Manufacture Corse des Tabacs (Macotab), on the Mediterranean island of Corsica, is the last to manufacture cigarettes in France since the closure of another in the centre of the country in 2016.
Around 30 employees work at the Corsican site, down from 143 in the early 1980s.
The factory makes cigarettes on behalf of industry giant Philip Morris, which recently signalled it was ending the contract.
Contraband packets have also cut into legal sales, according to the factory’s owner Seita, the former French state-owned tobacco monopoly that is now part of the British company Imperial Tobacco.
Seita had already closed France’s last tobacco processing factory in 2019, in the traditional growing region of the Dordogne in the south-west.
Some former factories in Marseille and Lyon have found new as cultural and exhibition spaces, or even a university.
Kicking the habit Efforts by authorities to curb smoking and its health hazards, not least by prohibiting puffing in restaurants and cafes and banning ads for cigarettes, have prompted sharp reductions in cigarette sales in recent years.
Smoking remains the main cause of avoidable deaths in France, according to Santé Publique France health agency, which estimates 75,000 tobacco deaths each year.
The bulk of European production these days is in Germany and Poland.
What the FUCK is a French man supposed to do after sex now?
more sex
that’s “more of zee sex” to you buddy
Oh, hon hon, oui monsieur.
Mentelgen
Always the answer
You ever eat a crêpe after a good ménage?
Suck another cock?
Implied homophobia GTFO
You act like wine and a baguette isn’t already at their bedside
Except the baguette is all wet now, I don’t want to eat it
That is just frosting
Smoke a baguette maybe?
Crème the brûlée?
Buy Italian cigarettes?
Roll a doob.
Hit a fat cloud on his vape
Close the grave again.
Doggy style?
Carbs.
Wait, my vision of a man wearing a striped shirt and a beret smoking a cigarette is not actually what French people are like?
Not anymore. It’s all changing for the worse. I hear they’re coming after the baguettes next. The mimes are speechless.
Sacré bleu!
No accent on the e
Maybe that is the mime speaking for the first time since childhood.
I can’t find any source of the spelling or meaning of the phrase that does not have an accent over the e other than Wikipedia, which has both depending on who made the edit. You sure 'bout that?
It was originally Sacré dieu(sacred god), but since it’s blasphemy it became Sacrebleu. Sacrebleu on Wikitionary
I’m Quebecois, French is my first language ;)
It is either sacrebleu or sacré bleu, but both are correct
Well steal my onions and call me Jacques!
No no that’s still accurate, it’s just that the cigarettes are imported now.
How can they truly be French and not smoke Gauloises I ask you?
Your link is broken, here’s the correct one : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gauloises_001.jpg
You see?
You see?
Uh… what?
Your link is working as well as mine. At least on kbin.
Jokes aside, I swear they really do walk around with baguettes in hand. 3 days in Paris, sitting at multiple cafes, and we saw it in the morning, at lunch, in the evening. Men, Women, Children, well dressed, poorly dressed (for a Parisian), black, white, brown, blue, green, every combination in between, we’d see someone walking around with baguettes. I’ve lived in multiple cities and visited even more in the US and Europe. Never have I seen so many people walking around with bread!
People eat bread and pick it up from their local bakery then walk home with it instead of stuffing it in the trunk of their SUV to drive two blocks. What do you expect.
You’re right of course, nor was I making any judgements. I loved seeing it! It made me smile. As did the quintessential “scowling french waiter” standing 15ft in front of us on the other side of the side walk, with apron and and all. And despite a previous poster’s comment about their infamous cultural rudeness, these slightly overweight, non-french speaking Americans didn’t experience any overt rudeness at all. If they were bad mouthing us quietly in french they did a great job of hiding it. [shrug]
I would visit Paris again in a heartbeat; though I would never fly Air France nor pass through CDG if you paid me. Such a horrible experience. Guess we’ll fly BA into LHR and take the chunnel or a ferry for the experience.
That’s because fresh baguettes are damn hard to beat.
And hard to eat if they aren’t fresh anymore.
They also live up their their infamous cultural rudeness.
The bagetttes make my poor mouth sore after a couple of days as well. I much prefer the breads in northern Europe.
[shrug] we really didn’t experience the rudeness they are so famous for. But I’m not denying it’s a thing. Either way, I enjoy both styles of bread very much.
Yes monsieur.
Well you still have 50% of the adult population regularly smoking so nothing change on this part.
“Heuh heuh”
background bistro accordion music gets louder
When I went to Paris this summer, lots of locals were smoking. The odor of Paris was urine and cigarettes.
Nothing speaks “city of love” like the smell of stale piss and burnt tobacco at the Eiffel Tower!
lol
Kicking the habit Efforts by authorities to curb smoking and its health hazards, not least by prohibiting puffing in restaurants and cafes and banning ads for cigarettes, have prompted sharp reductions in cigarette sales in recent years.
While I support bans in restaurants and cafes, I don’t support prohibition, which is what a lot of Western nations are aiming at. We learned our lesson during the alcohol prohibition years in America, and for the last 70 years around the world with marijuana prohibition. The social effects are far worse when forcing recreational drugs underground. Educate support addiction programs, but don’t ban.
Ban use in public in general. I don’t want to be forced to walk through a cloud of cigarette smoke in front of a train station or waiting at a traffic light any more than in a restaurant. People can do what they want at home but constantly having to deal with drug addicts polluting the air around me shouldn’t be accepted.
Now do cars
I don’t need a cigarette to get to work or the grocery store.
Congratulations on discovering false equivalency.
Neither do you need a car in a well planned city.
Cool, I don’t live in a well planned city and I would have to immigrate out of the country to do so, or wait likely decades for reforms to make their way here. In the mean time, I’ll still need a car. I don’t need to smoke a cig in public.
Nah mate. Just rip up the streets and relay them yourself, it’s so simple smh.
I would need to drive to move to a different city. Checkmate.
Shame living in a city absolutely sucks.
Removed by mod
To people completely lacking social skills and with below average intelligence, maybe.
Or to anyone who can’t focus when there’s a shitload of background noise, or anyone who doesn’t want to have to share a one-bedroom apartment with 3 other people just to be able to afford rent, or anyone who has difficulty in large crowds…
I’ve lived in a city before and I fucking hated it.
Europe is working on it. They will ban the sale of new gas powered vehicles by 2035
When this was announced, my opinion was that only hobbyists would even be interested in gas powered cars by 2035. I have to admit I thought the transition to electric vehicles would pick up pace a little quicker more suddenly than it has so far, but there’s still time to have my prediction come true.
Weren’t they by 2032 earlier and 2030 before that?
… and CARB states in the US
Bruh keep it in your fuck cars community. The rest of the world has bigger shit to deal with.
We learned our lesson during the alcohol prohibition years in America.
We’re not America and we’re not banning alcohol, nor are we banning the drug in tobacco that people smoke it for.
So it is an entirely different scenario to either American prohibition or to cannabis.
deleted by creator
I agree … Prohibition doesn’t work.
But making it very difficult and expensive to maintain an addictive habit would much better.
The same would go for alcohol. If alcohol was more regulated, more controlled, not sold in public houses or businesses (including bars) and the price increased, taxed more with taxes going towards addiction treatment, education and medical assistance for those affected by alcohol … less people would drink alcohol.
If you have a culture where you freely allow businesses to promote, sell and provide an addictive substance that provides little to no health benefit … especially if it makes high profits … companies will want to encourage a culture of making their substance widely acceptable.
Alcohol looks acceptable because it’s promoted, advertised and normalized everywhere. If it weren’t, less people would be drinking.
Advertising of smoking is highly regulated and discouraged now … smoking is no longer normalized … which is why people smoke less.
Now that would be fascinating. Britain has a deeply entrenched drinking culture. Regularly getting drunk to the point of vomiting and passing is very common. The managers where I work all live away and stay in hotels when they visit my town every other week. They all go out and get wasted on a Wednesday night (with company funds, totally legitimately) and often don’t come into work Thursday so they can drive home in the afternoon when they sober up. All totally normal.
Ban advertising, pub drinking and cheap supermarket booze. Inflate the price and run a massive anti-drinking campaign. It’d be interesting to see how long it’d take for the tide to turn. Also, if we end up going the way of America during prohibition with illicit alcohol flooding the streets, how long that would take to die down and for people to accept it.
But it’ll never happen. No politician is even going to think about limiting the availability of alcohol in this country. They’d be so unpopular it’d be political suicide for them and their party.
A lot also drink alcohol because it is about the only thing that can help them relax after a shitty day of work in this society.
Inflating the price will have plenty of people on edge, all while those managers can still go on a alcohol bender, just at every 4 weeks instead.
But making it very difficult and expensive to maintain an addictive habit would much better.
Harmful to others habbit.
Alcohol looks acceptable because it’s promoted, advertised and normalized everywhere. If it weren’t, less people would be drinking.
Also alchohol is a drug, that creates dagerous behaviour. And more addictive than some banned drugs.
Yep, all the while alcoholism is at all time highs, so much so that they had to rebrand it as social drinking. Alcohol, still allowed to advertise every where, and can sell fruit flavors, but tobacco…nope. Tobacco should be left alone at this point. The majority of people don’t smoke, like like 7% in the USA, this includes all tobacco users. Prohibition just creates blackmarkets and death.
Alcohol, still allowed to advertise every where, and can sell fruit flavors, but tobacco…nope.
Tell that to the vape industry. Nothing more disgusting than walking through a cloud of shit that smells like cotton candy.
Yeah, a kid was just kicked off my sons siccer team for vaping in school - someone failed somewhere that he was able to develop a habit
He’s not vaping as a habit, dude is just trying to look cool. A ton of those kids vape 0mg juices, because they can’t handle the amount of nicotine you can get from vaping.
I’m sure he looked cool getting caught alone in the school bathroom vamping, and being kicked off the team. Which do you think is the coolest, being ostracized or kicked off the team? Maybe walking home by himself because his former buddies on the team think he’s a dumbass?
deleted by creator
Well, the soccer kids. I imagine he had others, but who knows if he succeeded in switching cliques
Alcohol, still allowed to advertise every where
Actually alcohol advertising is pretty limited in Europe due to EU wide regulations and some countries have even stricter rules, ranging from “not in public spaces” to straight up “no alcohol advertising at all”
Also I would point out alcohol is a big cusine thing and has been for centuries and you’re nuts if you’re upset schnapps are a thing but not strawberry cigarettes. Also like, flavoured vapes totally exist?
It used to be restricted in Sweden. Now of days, commercials on TV are 50% for online casinos, and 50% for alcohol. On billboards, they just write “non-alcoholic” text, yet the exact same bottles are primarily sold with alcohol.
I don’t think either should be regulated like it is, but the idea with tobacco was that kids are drawn to it but somehow not alcohol with their fruity flavors. It’s a bullshit double standard. And flavored cigars are what they went after…no kid is smoking an $8 acid cigar.
Same thing: tax the hell out of both. Vice taxes are too low. It may not help current users but it should help over time by discouraging new users.
I do drink alcohol sometimes, so yes I’m advocating more pain on myself. It won’t effect me since as an occasional drinker, it just won’t add up, but lets try anyway. I have kids who will need to make such decisions
Vice taxes are insane already. You sound like you have no clue how much taxes is pulled already from tobacco and alcohol taxes.
What should be taxed to hell is fast food and sugary shit. Obesity is our number one killer now and has been for a while.
Ok. Sure, junk food is horrible for people’s health, not least because it can seem like the cheapest way to eat. If it no longer being cheap encourages people to make healthier choices, I’m all for it. As someone who would pay more in multiple of these categories, I’m still all for it
Fuck that. Vice taxes are taxes on poor people. Make healthcare actually affordable and maybe people could get help with their addictions instead of getting punished by the government.
i will be a cigarette smuggler in this modern age
Practice not being startled.
It’s weird there’s such a push to ban cigarettes while smoking marijuana is becoming more acceptable.
People simply smoke a lot more cigs than pot per day. If you smoked 10-20 joints a day for many years your lungs and body would be wrecked too.
That amount would quite possibly make you unable to continue using weed via Cannabis hyperemesis syndrome. Killed at least two folks too.
deleted by creator
Never heard of that before, I will do a little reading. Always nice to learn new things.
You have an article to link to that, that is peer reviewed by a medical board and scientists that this claim is real?
https://www.cmaj.ca/content/194/46/E1576#:~:text=Andrews’%20study%20was%20the%20first,at%20least%20one%20CHS%20attack.
It’s a real disorder, but we’re just recently getting to the point where it’s even legal to study cannabis use so data is sparse. What we do know is that there’s a subset of heavy users that develop a persistent vomiting disorder and cessation of cannabinoids clears it up. My brother in law’s brother has it and he has to be careful with some chemicals in foods that mimic cannabinoids even.
I don’t find it weird at all. Cannabis is less harmful, less addictive, and subjectively, I find it way more fun.
Tobacco (nicotine) is hyper addictive to the point where people gradually get chemically compelled to smoke just about all the time. Arguably maybe caffeine is similarly compelling (I certainly drink caffeine all day), but most people consider caffeine to be pretty benign. Cigarettes are one of the hardest soft drugs to quit.
The long-term health effects of cannabis probably need to be studied more, but prohibition has actually made it harder to do just that. Now that the laws around weed have relaxed a little bit, it’ll be much easier for people to legitimately do the scientific studies needed to show how cannabis affects the human body, how it affects the mind and mood, how additive it is compared to other common drugs, how it is typically used, and what effects legalization has on society compared to decades of criminalization.
The thing that I find truly weird, and actually pretty upsetting, is that I can stop by one of the many dispensaries around here and pick up weed flower or a 10-pack of cannabis gummies for like 15 bucks, but in other parts of the country there are people sitting in jail for less.
I mean breathing in smoke seems is bad for you no matter what.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yeah…I was addicted to pot and smoked daily for 12 years and I beg to differ.
deleted by creator
I agree. The control freaks have had their way many times before and it never turns out well for anyone outside of the 1%. This is a great litmus test for finding them. There are many more sensible regulations that could be employed still to preserve users’ health while also making their habit less disruptive to others, and little-to-no evidence that prohibition would be better than any of them. Which makes me think prohibitionists are most likely ill-informed or are acting under ulterior motivations (traditionally hierarchical religious beliefs have often motivated prohibitions).
I think the bans in restaurants and cafes have been very successful, personally. I’d also like to see legislation on ingredients and other further action. As well as support programs. These are the things that materially help people, not prohibition and black markets.
Luckily, despite France’s many poor decisions in recent history, so far as I am aware they are courting regulation seriously and not prohibition, and these authoritarian comments we see in the Anglosphere have no weight on the domestic conversation in France.
Those “control freaks” only exist in your imagination, look at the reality around you. Almost everyone’s up for legalization of cannabis.
Tobacco users however are a huge burden on national health programs (ok except on the US, where people are just expected to cough up all their family’s money before they die idk)
And there are more effective ways to deal with that burden than prohibition, is my thesis. Looking at the actual science, prohibition would rip away the method that many depressed and anxious people are using to self-medicate and would leave them no replacement for it. That would have tremendous public health ramifications. That would cause real suffering to people who are often already victims.
Those “control freaks” only exist in your imagination
Do you deny that there are prohibitionists? If so, then this very thread proves you wrong. If not, then you do agree with me. Maybe this attack on my character wasn’t the best approach for your argument?
Almost everyone’s up for legalization of cannabis.
I don’t think that is quite so obvious. In recent threads on the topic of smoking, I have seen many people adding that they would like to see bans on cannabis smoking and that there other methods of consumption available. Many of these people pointed to edibles, which I consider dangerously ill-informed, because THC is processed differently and has different effects when eaten (it acts on traditional psychedelic pathways). Additionally, even in US states where it is “legalized,” there are many jurisdictions where it is still illegal to provide or consume - that’s not what a near unanimous consensus looks like.
Totally missed your reply.
“Actual science”?! Show me one single scientific article that defends tobacco usage for depression or anxiety. I’ll be waiting.
As for prohibitionists, if you keep digging for long enough you’re bound to come up with a couple nutjobs that do support banning tobacco. The thing with these fringe extremists is that they’re irrelevant, up until the moment you go up to them and give them a loudspeaker just so that you can come back crying “see I told you they exist, they’re coming for me”.
As for cannabis, note that I brought it up to point out that the “zeitgeist” is NOT prohibition, in fact it’s the opposite. The fact that it’s still illegal in some places speaks more to how out of tune some politicians and even the courts are with the rest of society.
Just one? I don’t keep them on deck, but that’s easy enough. Here you go:
Conclusions These findings inform the concomitant conditions of MDD and smoking and support the use of self-medication with smoking to counteract depression.
Prohibition causes problems when there aren’t substitutions, but there are less dangerous ways to consume nicotine and less deadly things to smoke.
You drinking alcohol doesn’t affect my health. You smoking cigarettes does - even in your own 4 walls, unless you have a few hundred meters distance from every neighbor. So I do support the idea of completely forbidding smoking - but I concede it’s not very practical and can’t really be done. Forbidding it in public spaces and restaurants / bars however, and whereever smoke will be blown to people who don’t like it? Yes, at least the legislation to enforce that would be very welcome.
Thank you armchair analyst, but governments will move on ignoring you, we dont like lung cancer sorry
The taxes collected through cigarette sales more than cover their costs on the healthcare system. Don’t act like governments actually care about the health of their citizens, either, it’s just about production maximization and writing policy to help their friends.
Ask yourself why full tobacco bans are becoming so popular now, instead of any other time in the past 50 years since we learned how harmful smoking is. It’s because big tobacco companies have pivoted and cornered the E-Cig market now, which is much more profitable than traditional cigarettes. The only difference is that small/independent farms can’t grow disposable vapes like they can with tobacco.
Ask yourself why full tobacco bans are becoming so popular now, instead of any other time in the past 50 years since we learned how harmful smoking is. It’s because big tobacco companies have pivoted and cornered the E-Cig market now, which is much more profitable than traditional cigarettes
You have the cause and effect on this backwards. More and more laws were passed restricting smoking, so number of smokers went down, so companies pivoted to vaping.
Smoking is ok because I can treat my lung cancer from it’s tax money, thank you analyst
You’re advocating for a habit that has no benefit to society because “look what happened before!” It should be banned for sale. Full stop.
deleted by creator
You think those 3 things are equal?
deleted by creator
What was that point?
deleted by creator
I am not a regular coffee drinker, but I bet there are MANY people who think coffee/caffeine provides a benefit to society.
Granted, that may only be because people got addicted in the first place. But I figure there’s a reason coffee is often free in an office.
Yeah but beer tastes nice. Burning tar does not.
deleted by creator
personally, i find the taste of ciggies to be much much better than the taste of coffee
Have you tried them both at the same time? You need good coffee, obviously.
Pipe tobacco is one of the best smelling things ever.
Nobody mentioned addiction, which is irrelevant since smoking only has disadvantages. You created a strawman argument then you doubted the proven benefits of coffee and red wine, which is even part of the mediterranean diet. You argue in bad faith and you are also uneducated, make us all a favour and leave.
deleted by creator
I also like to keep my caffeine drinks less disruptive to the organism. Am I right, fellow earth-born humans?
Coffee isn’t great either. Tea is a much better way to get caffeine.
Citation needed. Coffee is understood to be generally good for you.
ciggarettes were recommended by doctors for years too
If tobacco/nicotine itself isn’t banned then this could potentially get a lot of chainsmokers to switch to a relatively healthier form of smoking like dry herb vaporizers.
or they will smoke some herbs and it will be natural
The idea of safe/safer smoking is silly.
Maybe to people who don’t know anything about smoking. Some substances are less addictive than others to smoke thus theres less compulsion to put smoke into your lungs constantly. Dry herb vaporization smoke is also absolutely measurably safer than traditional combustion smoke as its far less hot and no ash, carbon tar, burned fuel byproducts from lighter or wick, none of that is getting in the smoke only the low vapor point plant oils and terpenes you actually want in there. Thus making it much cleaner and less full of carcinogens. You can really feel the difference on the lungs. Also the smell isn’t nearly as bad either almost unnoticable which is a win for non-smokers in the area.
The idea that a chain smoker who goes through 2 packs a day will suffer the exact same degree of health issues as someone who vaporizes half a gram of weed once or twice a day is silly.
Damn straight. But sadly weed is is still illegal in most countries, including France
Is it safer than not smoking anything?
Nope. Theres always going to be health affects from putting any kind of smoke into your lungs, no matter what. But on a relative scale of health its definitely much more safe in the long term than chain smoking cigs with all their carcinogens and addatives. Smoking is not a healthy pass time, but some people enjoy it/ do it for medical reasons and are willing to accept inherent risk. Just like how drinking a beer or a shot of vodka once a night after work is still not great for your health long term wise but is objectively much better than binge drinking 24/7.
would it be better if everyone magically stopped drinking and smoking? Yes absolutely. But we live in reality and not lah-lah land, people should be free to make their own decicions on what to ingest as responsible adults, and trying to stop them from doing things with prohibition just encourages them to do it underground with unregulated products from the friendly neighborhood dealer, sales which the state/government doesn’t see a cent in income tax to. At least taxing the shit out of recreational drugs helps keep social services running and keeps otherwise productive members of society out of jail.
Thats not to say legalize everything, hard addictive substances like opioids and heroin and such that have an almost certain destructive impact on anyones life after one use should not be allowed. But leave it up to the individual and tax the lighter less addictive things like tobacco, alcohol, weed, psychadelics, all of which can be used responsibly occasionally in a social setting without a huge risk of addiction and the last two of which can even provide long term psychological benefits/healing when used correctly in the right enviroment.
Keeping opiates illegal just causes the exact problems you’re discussing with the other substances, if not more. Opiates are addictive and potentially dangerous yes. So are most drugs, even the ones you mentioned. Yes it could be argued psychedelics are less harmful, there’s no real risk of overdose and minimal risk of addiction. I’d also rather live in a world where those are legalised if that’s all, rather than the one I’m in now where my country denies cancer patients cannabis but millions of tax payer’s pounds are wasted policing idiots drunk in alcohol every week. But let’s not pretend psychedelics are completely harmless.
Acting like so called “hard” drugs are some kind of black magic powders where one time trying them will have you hooked for life, ready to sell your own Mother as minced beef just to get your next hit is the same crap people used to say about the other drugs you’ve listed, including weed. Plenty of people consume them and lead productive lives.
Consenting adults shouldn’t be stopped from putting anything they want to into their own bodies. It’s called freedom.
If I start repeatedly slamming my own head into a wall, an action that could eventually kill me, as long as I own that wall or have the permission of the wall owner and I’m not getting noise complaints from the neighbours I can legally do it as much as I like.
But I can’t legally take the risk of accidentally overdosing on fentanyl. Despite the fact that legalising the drug would mean I can get my hands on product produced in labs which are licensed and vetted so I can see the strength of the substance and be fairly certain of its purity, making overdose infinitely less likely.
What kind of sense does that make?
It doesn’t make sense. These pro smokers are just trying to legitimize their fucking habit with paragraphs of word salad.
Dude, you’re salty that you have a bad opinion and multiple people are telling you that the real world is more complicated than your ‘just stop selling it’ idealism bullshit. Theres no need to legitimize a habit that people of most cultures throughout history have been doing for thousands of years. Counter arguments you don’t like or want to understand are not word salad. I’ve seen your other comments, ‘f-fuck your empathy bullshit, your promoting baad habiit! You do better filthy smoker!’ Quit being a close minded intolerant dick and get off your high horse.
The discussion this guy is trying to have isn’t based around smoking in the least, its about the distinction between hard and soft drugs and what should be legal and what should not. What ‘doesn’t make sense’ in this context is the arbitrary line society and individuals draw between hard and soft drugs and what should be acceptable to legally sell and tax. Not ‘silly smokers argument for smoking doesn’t make sense’ But you would know that if you bothered to actually read and try to comprehend what people are trying to say, instead of getting defensive and skimming over the ‘word salad’ you don’t like. Unlike you, the guy actually made some good points that I wanted to think on before giving him a real reply. You on the other hand, can get absolutely bent. Consider your ass blocked.
deleted by creator
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. You can’t get everyone to just stop, so you do the less bad thing and things are better.
Pretending that abstinence is the only good solution is lazy and harmful. People are not as simple as a sudoku, and the solutions to helping them are complicated and imperfect.
Well one solution would be to stop selling them.
And create a black market. Now people are still addicted to nicotine and have to deal with criminals to get their previously socially acceptable* fix. Good job, you made it worse.
As I said. Abstinence (and variations thereof) is a stupid and lazy solution, typically asserted by people in positions of privilege who lack the empathy to understand that it isn’t that simple or easy.
Do better.
Oh fuck you with the empathy bullshit. You’re advocating for a harmful habit that has been pushed on people due to its addictive nature. You’re advocating for a harmful habit that not only affects the user but those around them regardless of “quality” ingredients. You’re advocating for the poor smokers not being able to get “safe” cigarettes like the companies that sell them now aren’t criminals in their own right.
No the issue is you smoke and don’t like being told that your addiction is objectively bad.
You fucking do better.
deleted by creator
Why is that? Genuine question. Is it just a strength/purity thing?
I don’t dry herb vape, but I do vape cannabis oil.
Personally I’m struggling to find reliable research on the addictive properties of THC especially regarding vaping so unless they mean the quality of hits real good idk, buuut
It will be less carcinogenic and more pleasant on your lungs since it’s vaporizing the THC rather than burning the whole herb. Unless you burn it at max heat anyways…? Visuals: https://youtu.be/VR3j1MJiPd8?si=_JyroHJYy_xQgNDL
I’ve also heard the remains can be used for edibles but idk how that holds…
It was the best method I’ve used for smoking for sure. My double perforated bong doesn’t even come close.
That’s an interesting video. I’m glad to see that the combustion/vaping difference is as wide as I assumed it would be.
On the addiction side, I feel like it’s something you can get addicted to in the same way that you could get addicted to gaming or potato chips. You can mess your life up by having bad priorities when it comes to anything fun.
As far as chemical dependency, I think it’s pretty well known that it’s nothing close to harder drugs. The little leaflets they give out with the medical cannabis here do warn of withdrawals after stopping, along with side effects etc. it can certainly be “habit forming” for me just in the sense that it helps me feel so much better and I want to keep that going. But I have also just stopped using it for weeks (travel) or months (job search) and there were no issues at all.
The addictive properties of THC are worth questioning wether it’s actually addictive or if certain people are susceptible to patterns of behaviour.
Someone with ADHD could latch onto it as a behavioural pattern because it’s helping them focus and relax. Like caffeine in that sense, but caf’ is actually addictive.
I enjoy the habbit as well, but I’ve also never experienced withdrawal or issues while stopping weed and I’ve managed to stop abruptly as a documented experiment.
The point you made about ADHD rings true to me. It’s definitely a behavioral pattern for me, but one that’s kind of nice.
I have also stopped for extended periods without issue. Maybe I feel a little worse for a day or two if I’ve gotten used to daily usage. The only issue I watch is that even though it helps me relax and get to sleep, it either affects my quality of sleep or just makes me need more of it. I can feel a bit hung over from it at times. But it’s really not that bad and I only sometimes avoid it late in the day.
I have not heard of this before ever, I do have a theory though. Combustion is very high heat thousands of degrees F and at this temp range many chemicals get broken down before entering your body. Vaporizing is only a couple hundred degrees and most likely preserves the chemical compounds better. Its not that vaping makes it more addictive, it makes the extraction of the chemicals that interact with your brain more efficent. You are effectively getting more juice per squeeze thus increasing extraction potency.
Combustion is very high heat thousands of degrees F
Paper fire is about 1,500 F (though auto-ignition is lower at about 480 F). I think dry, fibrous plant matter is around the same.
Point taken though, vaporizing is significantly lower.
deleted by creator
Makes sense. Appreciate the info!
deleted by creator
Ironic that back in the 50s physicians used to prescribe smoking as a health benefit! 🙄🤣
*Actors acting as physicians on television
It helps against one disease, as far as I know (believe me I’m a doctor.).
The disease is ulcerative colitis.
Fun fact: Alcohol improves symptom of one disease too. The disease is called essential tremor.
That’s a little outdated info now, isn’t it? UC is helped by the nicotine. So why not get prescribed a patch instead?
That’s true. :) I don’t even know whether they treat UC with nicotine nowadays.
Ironic, isnt it?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t most French smokers roll their own?
Not really. In general, those who rolls their own do this because it’s less expensive
It’s increasingly rare all over. Rolling your own is cheaper but not by much these days. I always preferred the taste of self rolled when I did smoke but most smokers I’ve found, wherever you go, would prefer to smoke pre-rolled if they can
That tobacco is packaged in plants, too.
Well yeah, but the post title is that France will stop manufacturing cigarettes not process tobacco for sale.
As far as I’m aware, 1637 is still made in France. Does this article only refer to pre-rolled cigarettes?
As opposed to cigarettes that haven’t been rolled yet? Isn’t that just called tobacco and papers? Pretty sure cigarettes means cigarettes, but I haven’t read the article
Is this just a profit saving measure?
