Mixed views on NZ-style smoking ban

Those who start smoking early in adolescence are likely to take up smoking chronically compared with those who start later in life and are able to give up the habit, says Dr Mohanraj. — AFP

THIRTY-year-old Tarrence Tan was a heavy smoker who used to burn through a pack a day. He has been struggling with pain in his throat and a persistent cough that has not gone away for the past two years.

Last week, Tan decided to see a doctor about it and was given an eye-opening diagnosis – his health is in very bad condition due to his nicotine addiction.

“I went to a clinic for a check up, but I was told to go to the hospital because of the seriousness of my condition. Sometimes I even have double vision. My doctor showed me that my sinuses and tonsils are badly inflamed. At that moment I thought, I can’t keep doing this to myself,” he shares.

After meeting grasping the gravity of his situation, Tan says that he is now supportive of implementing a law similar to New Zealand’s in Malaysia.

New Zealand’s new anti-cigarette law is one of the toughest in the world, and will be implemented in stages from 2024. It will start with a reduction of authorised cigarette sellers, reduction of nicotine levels by 2025, and by 2027, those aged 14 and under will never be allowed to purchase cigarettes in their lifetime – effectively, a generational ban.

Before this, Tan felt smoking was a personal freedom that shouldn’t be restricted. However, his views have changed since his diagnosis.

Tan, whose grandfathers both died of cancer, thinks it’s fair for a certain age group not to be given the opportunity to smoke tobacco anymore. He believes that a lack of political will is a hindrance for Malaysia to take proactive steps.

“We’ve been dealing with this problem for so many years. At least the New Zealand government has the ambition to try something radical.”

“A lot of smokers in Malaysia start when they are underage. I myself started when I was underage as well. It’s good that the law is targeting that age group,” Tan admits.

However, he predicts that enforcement will be tough, especially regulating sales in sundry and Mamak shops.

“It will probably be just like before, where kids go to sundry shops and pay RM1 for a cigarette stick,” he explains.

Mohamad Hafiz, 32, calls the law a “brilliant move” by the New Zealand government.

“It should be introduced in Malaysia as well. I think it is fair to say that most parents, even smokers, may agree to this,” he says.

“I used to hate hanging out in open spaces because smoking is allowed in public spaces in Malaysia. I may not be able to reap the benefits but I am very sure my two-year-old son will,” he says.

As a non-smoker, 40-year-old Fareez Zahir also welcomes anti-smoking laws such as those being introduced in New Zealand.

“The medical detriment and addictive nature of smoking far outweigh any arguments of choice or freedom of the individual. Furthermore, sickness and medical complications from smoking are a burden that every taxpayer will have to bear through government funds channelled to hospitals,” he says.

“I am, however, worried about an overly paternalistic government and the potential for a precedent that is less than healthy towards personal freedoms and choice in this country,” he cautions.

Fareez explains that what is needed universally are laws and enforcement protecting the most vulnerable segments of society, and a strong educational and cultural shift away from self-destructive habits.

Some smokers however, are wary about such a law being introduced and how it will impact their current way of life.

Adam Ishak, 32, admits that in the long-term, such a policy would eventually reduce the number of smokers in the country. However, as a smoker, he warns that for many youths, there will always be channels through which they can access tobacco products.

“At the end of the day, I guess it’s a good law to implement but from what I can see, it still won’t be upheld very well because there are always going to be ways for the new generation to circumvent this law, especially if their parents, uncles, aunties, cousins or other older influences also smoke,” he says.

Adam is also worried about a slippery slope, and if such a law will have a significant impact on current smokers.

“As I am a smoker I prefer leniency with smoking regulations. If such a law is implemented in Malaysia, what will happen to other things related to smoking? Will this mean there will be fewer smoking areas and so on? If this law doesn’t affect me, I’m all for it. However, if it affects me I would not support it because for current smokers, it’s more than just a habit,” he says.

A long-time smoker who only wished to be known as Sophia, 32, first started smoking at 14 and was a habitual user by the time she was 19.

“I come from a family of smokers and I grew up with smokers. It would make me very angry if such a law were to be introduced in Malaysia,” she says.

“I know it’s an unhealthy habit, but if I had kids and they also wanted to smoke once they became adults, it would be hypocritical of me to tell them no,” she adds.

Sophia has come to terms with the more restrictive smoking regulations imposed in Malaysia recently, and understands that her habit should not impact other people who share a public space. However, in her view, an outright ban is not the answer.

“Sometimes, when you ban things, people will find a way around it. When I read about the New Zealand law, my thought was that it would make people want it even more – maybe I’m cynical,” she says.

“There may be a backlash, and you may end up with a generation that smuggles cigarettes, or has people buy them quietly on the black market.”

Psychiatrist Datuk Dr Andrew Mohanraj does not believe that a law similar to New Zealand’s will work in Malaysia in the current circumstances.

“Criminalising the sale of cigarettes to entire generations might not be the only intervention available to eventually create a smoke free society,” says Dr Mohanraj, who is also Malaysian Mental Health Association president.

He admits that those who start smoking early in adolescence are likely to take up smoking chronically, compared with those who start later in life and are able to give up smoking. However, he argues that interventions must be designed in a way that make youth no longer feel compelled to take up smoking.

“Campaigns using role models to show that it is no longer ‘cool’ to smoke may work better than the outright ban on sales to entire generations. Such a ban can easily be circumvented in many ways including buying smuggled cigarettes which can be purchased at non-recognised retail sources,” he says.

“Smoking among younger people is already losing its popularity, not so much because of restrictions on purchasing or terrifying public health campaigns, but because it is seen to be no longer attractive to smoke.”

He also warns that an outright generational ban, from a psychological perspective, may conversely create the “forbidden fruit” effect where young people start smoking to show defiance to imposed norms.