Iceland Considers Making Cigarettes Prescription-Only

Photo: Hendrike (CC)

Photo: Hendrike (CC)

Cigarettes seem like the last thing a doctor would prescribe, but Iceland may be moving to outlaw the sale of cigarettes in stores and only allowing pharmacists to dispense them. The proposal was written in hopes of reducing the amount of smokers and emphasizing the health concerns rather than the marketing tactics. Those with a prescription for cigarettes will be considered addicts getting the chemicals their bodies have become accustomed to. The Guardian reports:

Iceland is considering banning the sale of cigarettes and making them a prescription-only product.

The parliament in Reykjavik is to debate a proposal that would outlaw the sale of cigarettes in normal shops. Only pharmacies would be allowed to dispense them – initially to those aged 20 and up, and eventually only to those with a valid medical certificate.

The radical initiative is part of a 10-year plan that also aims to ban smoking in all public places, including pavements and parks, and in cars where children are present. Iceland also wants to follow Australia’s lead by forcing tobacco manufacturers to sell cigarettes in plain, brown packaging plastered with health warnings rather than branding.

[Continues at The Guardian]

, , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Anonymous

    I find this less obnoxious then the new Canadian-style packaging being put on cigarettes in the states, but I still dont understand why there seems to be this obsession with smoker’s health.  If someone wants to smoke and they’re in the designated 4ft square smoking box I’m sure we’re planning on enforcing and at least five billion feet from any place of business, what do you care?  If they want to damage their lungs and increase their chances of specific types of cancer, let them.  It’s their personal choice and you really have no right to tell them whether they can or not.  You dont have to like it, just accept their right to their own decision. 

    What’s next?  Policing people who eat fast food…oh wait…

  • RoboKy

    I find this less obnoxious then the new Canadian-style packaging being put on cigarettes in the states, but I still dont understand why there seems to be this obsession with smoker’s health.  If someone wants to smoke and they’re in the designated 4ft square smoking box I’m sure we’re planning on enforcing and at least five billion feet from any place of business, what do you care?  If they want to damage their lungs and increase their chances of specific types of cancer, let them.  It’s their personal choice and you really have no right to tell them whether they can or not.  You dont have to like it, just accept their right to their own decision. 

    What’s next?  Policing people who eat fast food…oh wait…

    • mighty one

      because it takes time off someones  life to care for that future cancer patient. thats like killing the nurse a little bit too with labor. time is money but money is not time.

      • MoralDrift

        the nurse wouldnt have a job without all those cancer patients

        • Anarchy Pony

          Well goddamn it you’re right! We gotta give people cancer so new jobs can be created.
          Why, if you repeal the EPA then it would open up all kinds o jobs, by creating a demand for medical professionals to care for the people ruined by pollution.

          Grow the fuck up. Jobs are shit and useless, and the economy NEEDS to burn to the ground.

          • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

            isnt it obvious that the number of known carcinogens that are “only kinda carcinogenic” that are in all the foods in the US? I wonder why cancer rates are so much higher now… and I dont buy the excuse of “we all live longer, so cancer  wasnt a big problem in the past”… people get cancer at all ages

        • Mr. Coffee

          I see your logic, but logic be damned when it comes to cancer.

    • MoralDrift

      Yeah I dont get it either. They are always bitching about caring for the elderly….so let people smoke then it’ll decrease your numbers of retirees.

      • RoboKy

        Yup, because that’s exactly what I said.  I want them to smoke because I dont give a shit and want the elderly to die off.  Oh wait, that’s not what I said at all. 

        I frankly think smoking is pretty disgusting and have lost relatives to cancer brought on by years of smoking, but whether for good or for ill, smoking isnt yet illegal, so each and every person has the right to smoke regardless of whether or not you or I find is asinine or morally offensive.
         
        And to all that talk of medical costs rising because of future cancer patients: sadly, there are always going to be people who do perfectly legal things that harm themselves and become very ill later in life because of it.  You can educate people the best you can and make sure information about the harm these practices bring is easily available, but after that, it’s entirely up to the individual.  You have to take the good with the bad.  That’s how it should work in a free society.  You cant keep deciding for people what is “healthy” and what isnt for others.  If they want to ignore medical science, it’s their choice.  As long as what they’re doing is only harming themselves, then it’s entirely up to them. 

        And mighty one’s argument is ridiculous.  Nurses are nurses because they either wanted to be or they wanted a job, how is it a nurse doing her job killing her?  She chose that profession.

        • MoralDrift

          I didn’t intend to be offensive, I’m simply pointing out that we have a top-heavy population problem when it comes to age and if someones personal choices lead them to a shorter life…than so be it. I’m not advocating any kind of population control, just saying that we so often hear from the same groups, people, governments that population control is vital…..and so is smoking cessation…I call BS, the war on smoking is one against personal freedom but it doesnt help that tobacco companies make cigs worse than they have to be

  • mighty one

    because it takes time off someones  life to care for that future cancer patient. thats like killing the nurse a little bit too with labor. time is money but money is not time.

  • mighty one

    because it takes time off someones  life to care for that future cancer patient. thats like killing the nurse a little bit too with labor. time is money but money is not time.

  • mighty one

    assisted suicide 

  • mighty one

    assisted suicide 

  • Anonymous

    Yeah I dont get it either. They are always bitching about caring for the elderly….so let people smoke then it’ll decrease your numbers of retirees.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah I dont get it either. They are always bitching about caring for the elderly….so let people smoke then it’ll decrease your numbers of retirees.

  • mighty one

    assisted suicide 

  • Anonymous

    the nurse wouldnt have a job without all those cancer patients

  • Anonymous

    the nurse wouldnt have a job without all those cancer patients

  • Anonymous

    Yup, because that’s exactly what I said.  I want them to smoke because I dont give a shit and want the elderly to die off.  Oh wait, that’s not what I said at all. 

    I frankly think smoking is pretty disgusting and have lost relatives to cancer brought on by years of smoking, but whether for good or for ill, smoking isnt yet illegal, so each and every person has the right to smoke regardless of whether or not you or I find is asinine or morally offensive.
     
    And to all that talk of medical costs rising because of future cancer patients: sadly, there are always going to be people who do perfectly legal things that harm themselves and become very ill later in life because of it.  You can educate people the best you can and make sure information about the harm these practices bring is easily available, but after that, it’s entirely up to the individual.  You have to take the good with the bad.  That’s how it should work in a free society.  You cant keep deciding for people what is “healthy” and what isnt for others.  If they want to ignore medical science, it’s their choice.  As long as what they’re doing is only harming themselves, then it’s entirely up to them. 

    And mighty one’s argument is ridiculous.  Nurses are nurses because they either wanted to be or they wanted a job, how is it a nurse doing her job killing her?  She chose that profession.

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t intend to be offensive, I’m simply pointing out that we have a top-heavy population problem when it comes to age and if someones personal choices lead them to a shorter life…than so be it. I’m not advocating any kind of population control, just saying that we so often hear from the same groups, people, governments that population control is vital…..and so is smoking cessation…I call BS, the war on smoking is one against personal freedom but it doesnt help that tobacco companies make cigs worse than they have to be

  • DeepCough

    This really makes no sense. It’s one thing to prescribe alcohol, because, for all the social problems it causes, it certainly does have medicinal properties; and while I am willing to agree that the medical marijuana laws in California are something of a scam that bring money to a select few people, that doesn’t change the fact that Cannabis has medicinal properties. The problem with even the idea of prescribing cigarettes is that there is NOTHING MEDICINAL about them. Cigarettes are a thoroughly processed product, virtually unrecognizable from a hand-rolled cigarette using real tobacco: cigarettes are as impure as a black market product that is artificially cut with adulterants as crack cocaine. If people actually smoked real tobacco, and did not expose their alveoli sacs to the suppressant fumes by inhaling it into their lungs, you would most definitely see a reduction in disease. The indigenous tribes of the American continent did not have high incidences of cancer and disease because of tobacco–probably because they smoked REAL tobacco and chiefed on it as one would do with a pipe and a cigar. Furthermore, Iceland ought to be familiar with the fact that the reason why cigarettes are “addictive” is because the delivery mechanism uses ammonia to give smokers that “nicotine buzz,” which is tantamount to huffing Windex or other such cleaners.

  • DeepCough

    This really makes no sense. It’s one thing to prescribe alcohol, because, for all the social problems it causes, it certainly does have medicinal properties; and while I am willing to agree that the medical marijuana laws in California are something of a scam that bring money to a select few people, that doesn’t change the fact that Cannabis has medicinal properties. The problem with even the idea of prescribing cigarettes is that there is NOTHING MEDICINAL about them. Cigarettes are a thoroughly processed product, virtually unrecognizable from a hand-rolled cigarette using real tobacco: cigarettes are as impure as a black market product that is artificially cut with adulterants as crack cocaine. If people actually smoked real tobacco, and did not expose their alveoli sacs to the suppressant fumes by inhaling it into their lungs, you would most definitely see a reduction in disease. The indigenous tribes of the American continent did not have high incidences of cancer and disease because of tobacco–probably because they smoked REAL tobacco and chiefed on it as one would do with a pipe and a cigar. Furthermore, Iceland ought to be familiar with the fact that the reason why cigarettes are “addictive” is because the delivery mechanism uses ammonia to give smokers that “nicotine buzz,” which is tantamount to huffing Windex or other such cleaners.

  • SF2K01

    Medical Tobacco? Since when? Why not just mandate healthier ciggs with less chemicals?

    • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

      I always wondered if the cancer link in cigarettes was due to the ridiculous number of additives in them, and had nothing(or little) to do with the tobacco. I don’t particularly know the medicinal effects… tobacco is an ancient drug… and used to be a ritual medicine (before it was industrialized)…. I guess what I’m getting at is: what are they going to be prescribing this for (aside from tobacco withdrawal?)

      • DeepCough

        As fucking annoying as those “Truth” ads are, denigrating cigarettes, they are correct: cigarettes are injected with all sorts of nasty additives, some of them just to keep the cigarette lit for an extended period
        of time (as a joint smoker, I don’t see anything really natural about the way cigarettes stay lit).

  • Anonymous

    Medical Tobacco? Since when? Why not just mandate healthier ciggs with less chemicals?

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    I always wondered if the cancer link in cigarettes was due to the ridiculous number of additives in them, and had nothing(or little) to do with the tobacco. I don’t particularly know the medicinal effects… tobacco is an ancient drug… and used to be a ritual medicine (before it was industrialized)…. I guess what I’m getting at is: what are they going to be prescribing this for (aside from tobacco withdrawal?)

  • DeepCough

    As fucking annoying as those “Truth” ads are, denigrating cigarettes, they are correct: cigarettes are injected with all sorts of nasty additives, some of them just to keep the cigarette lit for an extended period
    of time (as a joint smoker, I don’t see anything really natural about the way cigarettes stay lit).

  • Anarchy Wolf

    Well goddamn it you’re right! We gotta give people cancer so new jobs can be created.
    Why, if you repeal the EPA then it would open up all kinds o jobs, by creating a demand for medical professionals to care for the people ruined by pollution.

    Grow the fuck up. Jobs are shit and useless, and the economy NEEDS to burn to the ground.

  • Mr. Coffee

    I see your logic, but logic be damned when it comes to cancer.

  • GoodDoktorBad

    More “big brother” crap. If you smoke, be considerate and keep it to yourself. Ban public smoking if you must.

    Prescription only laws only line doctors pockets. 

  • Anonymous

    More “big brother” crap. If you smoke, be considerate and keep it to yourself. Ban public smoking if you must.

    Prescription only laws only line doctors pockets. 

  • JoiquimCouteau

    Lol @ the thought of tobacco dispensaries 

  • Anonymous

    Lol @ the thought of tobacco dispensaries 

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    isnt it obvious that the number of known carcinogens that are “only kinda carcinogenic” that are in all the foods in the US? I wonder why cancer rates are so much higher now… and I dont buy the excuse of “we all live longer, so cancer  wasnt a big problem in the past”… people get cancer at all ages

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=748182869 Josh Davis

    Okay as a smoker I support this. I really know it sucks to smoke it dose absolutely nothing for me except pacify my ass. I’d rather expand my mind with DMT. I think this is something that should be done. It will stop people from passing on the habit. Once you start smoking you realize there were times you should of stood up but you sat down lighted up and didn’t give a rats ass. Maybe if we curtailed this we’d curtail some of the apathy. Also many popular brands of carbonated drinks contain chemicals that pacify. It would just be easier to take those ingredients out than prescribe them. Also whatever happend to Coke 2 (coke with half the sugar) damn it there is too much sugar in that stuff. Everyone drinks it gets so fat I just can’t stand all these fat chicks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=748182869 Josh Davis

    Okay as a smoker I support this. I really know it sucks to smoke it dose absolutely nothing for me except pacify my ass. I’d rather expand my mind with DMT. I think this is something that should be done. It will stop people from passing on the habit. Once you start smoking you realize there were times you should of stood up but you sat down lighted up and didn’t give a rats ass. Maybe if we curtailed this we’d curtail some of the apathy. Also many popular brands of carbonated drinks contain chemicals that pacify. It would just be easier to take those ingredients out than prescribe them. Also whatever happend to Coke 2 (coke with half the sugar) damn it there is too much sugar in that stuff. Everyone drinks it gets so fat I just can’t stand all these fat chicks.