The Round Table (Rational Pagans Forum)

Science & The Supernatural: A Discussion of the World Around us - Based on Science with an Interest in the Supernatural ...
It is currently 27 May 2020, 04:21

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Forum rules


Please note: Discussion here should be relatively civil. Attack the post, not the poster. Thanks!



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: 04 Jan 2008, 19:28 
Offline
Grand Poobah
User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2007, 11:26
Posts: 5793
Location: Buffalo, NY
One of the two local supermarket chains has just decided to stop selling tobacco products.

Quote:
Wegmans To Stop Selling Tobacco Products

Posted by: Addie Bradshaw, News Reporter
Posted by: Maria Sisti, Assignment Editor

Created: 1/4/2008 8:31:45 AM
Updated: 1/4/2008 4:53:59 PM


ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) -- A Rochester-based supermarket chain says it will stop selling tobacco products as of February 10th.

Officials at Wegmans sent a letter to employees this week informing them of the move.

Wegmans says that tobacco products have been quite profitable for the company, although sales have declined somewhat in recent years.

Wegmans says health concerns outweigh any profits the company gets from tobacco products.

"So many of the things we do really begin as employee initiatives and ripple out to the community as a whole," Wegmans spokeswoman Ann McCarthy said.

Wegmans will also offer a smoking cessation program to employees who want to quit.

While many customers said they approve of the decision, some, including two non-smokers, said it was unfair.

"It's a personal opinion. They should have their choice," Darrell Moyer said about smokers.

"If you're going to start to eliminate things and take things out, then what next?" Marsha Strell questioned. "They got rid of cigarettes, maybe they'll get rid of beer."

While cancer prevention expert James Marshall said that's a valid point, he says research shows that cigarettes kill many more people.

"Think about three large aircraft liners crashing every single day of the year," Marshall said. "That's tobacco's toll. Alcohol is not even close to that."

Wegmans owns more than 70 stores in five states, most of them in the western half of upstate New York.

Tops, another Western New York chain, said it has no plans to stop tobacco sales.


While I am perfectly happy with this plan (there are still plenty of places to purchase tobacco, and each company has a right to not sell what they don't want to) I'm torn because I am aganst pharmacies not providing birth control etc based on moral grounds. In those cases, however, if there is another place to easily get the BC then it'd be ok, but...

On the one hand, people will vote with their feet, and on the other hand, there are plenty of places to buy the stuff, and free markets and consumer rights and...[/i]

damn slippery slopes...

Opinions? On the lack of tobacco and on the right to not sell something that is perfectly legal based on personal grounds in both a 'easy to find elsewhere' case and a 'only one for miles' case?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 04 Jan 2008, 21:24 
Offline
Neighbor of the Beast

Joined: 03 Nov 2007, 09:17
Posts: 667
On this one I do not classify it in the same category as birth control. Tobacco is a luxury (an addictive one) but it has no medical value in and of itself, whereas a Birth Control pill can and does have therapeutic value. Tobacco is not a regulated medicine, birth control is.

I do not feel that a store should be required to carry anything. I also do not believe that a pharmacy should be required to carry anything either, though the reason to refuse to sell birth control is lame and (in my opinion) a violation of both the professional standards pharmacists SHOULD ascribe to and better business practices. There are certain drugs, especially those with very low sales values or high addiction rates, that a pharmacy should be allowed to refuse to sell. Otherwise, they can end up being forced into a money losing situation or violations of the law.

Tobacco, on the other hand, has a proven negative value and the company at least understands that this will cost them sales.

After all, it comes down to:

"...people will vote with their feet..." -Jess


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2008, 16:18 
Offline
First Circle Initiate

Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 16:26
Posts: 131
Location: San Fernando Valley, California
HavenMage wrote:
On this one I do not classify it in the same category as birth control. Tobacco is a luxury (an addictive one) but it has no medical value in and of itself, whereas a Birth Control pill can and does have therapeutic value. Tobacco is not a regulated medicine, birth control is.


I would also draw a distinction between refusing to provide something because it has been proven to be harmful, and refusing to provide something on nebulous "moral" grounds with no basis in fact.

_________________
"Any experience which teaches you something new has not been a complete waste of time."

--Me


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 06 Jan 2008, 17:20 
Offline
Neighbor of the Beast

Joined: 03 Nov 2007, 09:17
Posts: 667
I also draw the same conclusion, though I am in the habit of not voicing it since it is rarely nebulous to those that believe it...and for the most part I don't feel the obligation or desire to point it out to them


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group