Should the Government be promoting vaping as a way to quit smoking when the World Health Organisation is warning the industry is targeting young people and getting children addicted. Photo / 123 rf
To vape or not to vape?
The Herald on Wednesday had a dichotomy of views. In one report, we hear the Government is going to buy a whole lot more vapes, supposedly as a way to get people to rid themselves of nicotine addiction by quitting smoking. And in a second report, we have the World Health Organisation telling us that vapes are highly addictive forms of nicotine and they are a danger, in particular to youngsters, of getting dependent on this rotten substance.
So am I missing something? Mind you, if their family is earning $65,000, they won’t be able to afford vapes anyway. Perhaps that’s a sneaky trick by the Government to help the health system with its anti-smoking message or is it just that once more they have lost the plot?
Neil Anderson, Algies Bay.
Heads in the sand?
So we have a story on how the Government intends to purchase in bulk vapes with pod strength of up to 28.5mg/ml of nicotine.
In the same story, the group General Practitioners Aotearoa calls this move “naive”.
Then in the World pages, there is the story of how E-cigarettes are sparking global alarm over an alarming new wave of nicotine addiction, by aggressively targeting young people and getting children addicted.
Who is pulling the wool over whose eyes? Whose ostrich head is firmly buried in the sand? The New Zealand Government? The World Health Organisation? The tobacco companies? The increasing number of new vapers?
Medical professionals have long sounded serious alarm about the negative health effects and the addictive power of nicotine. Either we are very slow learners or the medical aspects are less important than the political and commercial imperatives.
Nigel Meek, Raglan.
Times are tough
The Government is dogged in attributing the ills of the country to individuals and the past Government, but they need to understand that:
People are poor because there is not enough work.
They are not spending as much because they don’t have the money.
Some are homeless because there isn’t adequate, safe, affordable housing.
They are not using emergency accommodation because they are denied it.
Everyone is paying too much for energy to make the Government’s balance sheet look better.
And they are paying too much for water because the coalition repealed Three Waters.
The coalition has the power to tackle these things but their priorities are wrong. They have cancelled projects across infrastructure and housing, and stalled the economy.
However much they punch down, or point and shout at local government or past regimes. They have failed the country. They need to sort themselves out.
Alexandra Bonham, Auckland.
Political screen test
I read with interest the article regarding the risk of foreign interference in local elections (Oct 6).
As an average Kiwi, I find the candidate election process, at both local body and national levels, to be somewhat of a lottery. This may be why a number of people don’t vote.
The candidates table all the good stuff you might get if you choose them. However, they are largely unknown.
When companies are recruiting, they typically do thorough background and reference checks on potential employees and, increasingly, random drug tests.
In addition to this, new employees can be placed on a 90-day probation period to ensure suitability for the role.
Maybe candidates who stand for public office to represent the people who vote for them should be subject to such a screening process, including a criminal and civil background check. The findings could then be published as part of their bio. If a candidate didn’t want to agree to this, they need not apply for the role.
This would serve to give the average Kiwi a lot more confidence in the character of the person they are voting for and enable them to make a more informed decision.
David Cole, Warkworth.
Watch your mouth
I guess it’s little wonder that politics will always attract the overconfident, overbearing types of personality. But those like Stuart Nash need to remember that they are there primarily to represent the people, not to get as much as they can out of the system, such as taxpayer-funded trips and so on.
We don’t need vulgar, foul-mouthed types as representatives.
Paul Beck, West Harbour.
Government (in)action
I totally agree with your correspondent (Oct 8) about the appropriate ways to protest.
With correct protest in mind, I wrote to my electorate MP about the Government (in)action regarding Palestine.
It has been frustrating that, 11 days later, there has not been even a computer-generated acknowledgement of my email.
The right way to protest deserves some response.
Judy Lawry, Pukekohe.
A grim statistic
To paraphrase Joseph Stalin’s cynical observation: A broken window is a disgrace. Sixty thousand killed in Palestine is a statistic
Chris Cottingham, Te Henga.