title: The costs and benefits of a cigarette ban.
abstract: The death toll from tobacco is staggering: it might contribute to one billion premature deaths over the course of the 21st century. In 'The case for banning cigarettes', Kalle Grill and Kristin Voigt argue that the well-being and equality benefits of a complete ban on cigarettes more than justify the restrictions on autonomy that such a ban would impose. Their argument depends on two crucial simplifications: an assumption that the ban would be effective and the restriction of the analysis to a comparison with the status quo, rather than a broader range of policy options. I argue that despite the authors' claims, these two simplifications make it impossible for their argument to 'bring into focus the fundamental normative issues' surrounding a possible cigarette ban, since they dramatically overstate the benefits and obscure the most significant costs of such a ban.
authors.forename: Mathieu
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Doucet
mesh_terms: D003132:Commerce / Q000191:economics* / Q000941:ethics; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D006801:Humans; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D011640:Public Policy; D012907:Smoking / Q000191:economics* / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000523:psychology; D000074606:Smoking Prevention / Q000191:economics* / Q000941:ethics; D012922:Social Change; D062789:Tobacco Products / Q000191:economics* / Q000600:supply & distribution
keywords: Autonomy; Ethics; Public Health Ethics; Substance Abusers/Users of Controlled Substances