Sir, – Risteárd Mulcahy is someone who, throughout his career, has hugely advanced our knowledge of the adverse health effects of smoking.
I was surprised when I read his letter (November 1st) and must challenge the views expressed.
He asks, “Surely we should be allowed to smoke as long as we do not bring harm to others?” This seems to imply that an individual’s smoking brings harm only to him/herself. Apart from the obvious harm of passive smoking, there are three other harms that must be considered: First, the psychological harm to friends and immediate family that inevitably follows the untimely illness or death of a smoker. Second, the societal harm caused by the premature loss of the monetary and intellectual contribution of a unique individual to that society. Third, and perhaps most important, the harm caused to members of the next generation who see a smoker continuing to smoke and who consequently take up the habit themselves.
Risteárd Mulcahy decries the nanny state, suggesting that the government and medical profession have done enough – in his own words, “Smokers have been well warned”. Would he also dispense with seat-belt legislation?
I firmly believe that efforts should continue to create a society and atmosphere where smokers find it harder to smoke. I for one would like to be cared for by a nanny state that makes these efforts. – Yours, etc,