Tale of two letters
Saturday, December 1, 2007 
To outsiders, the smoking debate can appear to be an ideological struggle between, on the one hand, puritannical zealots spouting dubious statistics, and, on the other, indignant libertarians more interested in politics than health. Truth is, the smoking issue is far more than a battle of ideas - it concerns real people.
A few weeks ago I received a letter from the daughter of a Forest supporter who died earlier this year. Writing with barely suppressed anger, she told us:
Sadly, my father died of lung cancer after at least 55 years of smoking. I know he made the choice to smoke but I am sure organisations such as yours encouraged him to continue with his disgusting habit.
I really don't want to share with you how painful and distressing his passing was. My comfort is that I was there at the end. I know you will have plenty of "lies, damn lies and statistics" to back up your theories regarding smoking so I will not bother to encourage them.
I am proud to be a non smoker. Proud my breath does not smell, my skin does not look old, my house is not covered in sticky tar and that my lungs are not struggling for breath. I am in favour of the smoking ban in all public places and enjoy the fresh air.
Yeterday's post brought a very different letter. The writer, a long-term Forest supporter, recently moved with his wife into a retirement flat:
We have both settled in comfortably and quite enjoy it. I'm still smoking ten a day (ish), and despite having smoked since about 1938, am keeping pretty fit. Perhaps the "scotch" and red wine have offset any detrimental effect of "ciggies" and helped me to notch up nearly 85 (in January).
Whenever I have lunch out and finish with a coffee, my hand still automatically goes to my pocket for a "fag", until the awful truth hits me that it's not allowed. Whilst waiting for a bus home I usually have a ciggie sitting in the open air bus shelter. Only a few days ago I did this and had to suffer filthy looks and quiet mutterings which of course strengthen my resolve to carry on smoking.
I'm not going to comment on either letter other than to say that, as ever, there are two sides to every coin - and smoking is no different. John Reid, when he was Health Secretary, understood this. What a pity that more politicians are unable (or unwilling) to appreciate that smoking is not the black and white issue they would like it to be - and legislate accordingly (ie with a degree of common sense and moderation).
Reader Comments (2)
Both letters illustrate well the polarity of the smoking debate. I'm not sure what is meant by 'organisations like Forest' though, but it would be unfair to place blame 'for encouraging smoking' and therefore increasing the risk of lung cancer on organisations that are merely exercising their right to free speech.
Any person's decision to start or continue smoking is their ultimately their own responsibilty. In future years, however, nobody will be able to claim that the absence of health education, warnings or advice was to blame for their decision to start smoking.
Providing it is an informed choice and does not directly infringe on others' health then anyone has the right and freedon to start and continue smoking for as long as their health holds out. We certainly shouldn't be blaming Forest or anyone else for the consequences that may or may not follow.
so far the best site on the subject I have come a cross. i am very impressed with your "take every thing in aproach" and not only do you see both sides but in my (one sided) opinion you also come to the right answer, keep up the good work j horner