Letter: Glamour of the wartime weed
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Lynne Reid Banks (letter, 8 March) is right to say that smokers always knew the risks. We strongly suspected that smoking was not good for our health - we Second World War servicewomen called cigarettes "cancer tubes". But we went on smoking.
It helped one stay awake on night duty, and it was so much the done thing that to refuse a proffered fag was tantamount to refusing to shake a proffered hand. To smoke was doggedly seen (anyway by the youngest of us) as risque rather than risky, and being a non-smoker was priggish.
Every public space reeked of smoke. Characters in films, books and advertisements (not only those plugging tobacco products) had their interest and glamour enhanced by the way they handled the weed. Jewelled lighters and cases were a first choice as birthday and Christmas presents.
To fasten all blame on the tobacco companies is to evade responsibilities more widely shared.
ANNE GLYN-JONES
Topsham, Devon
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
0Comments