I wasn't intending to write about Lou Reed again.
Hundreds of people – fans, music critics, journalists – have had their say online and in print all week so there's very little to add.
Apart from this.
If you believe the Tobacco Control mantra that children must be protected from the sight of a cigarette pack or the influence of an actor smoking on screen (to list just two examples), how come thousands of people like me didn't experiment with drugs in our youth?
I was 14 when I first heard Lou Reed and the Velvet Underground.
The lyrics of 'Walk On The Wild Side' and 'Make Up' (a lesser-known but equally catchy song about New York transsexuals) may not have been fully understood by an innocent schoolboy living in Fife, but there was nothing ambiguous about a track called 'Heroin'.
There was no doubt about the meaning of 'I'm Waiting for the Man', 'Venus in Furs' and other songs either.
Did they encourage me to take drugs or dabble in S&M? What do you think?!
So my point is this: if you believe – like Tobacco Control campaigners – that teenagers are so easily influenced by what they see and hear, it follows that we should restrict or regulate the records they can be exposed to as well.
The same argument could be used in relation to the packaging.
I like a good album cover as much as anyone but I have never bought an LP, cassette or CD because I liked the cover.
That includes the 12" single of Blondie's breakthrough hit 'Denis'. I bought it because I loved the record. The cover was a bonus!
It's the music – not the packaging – that counts.
The same is true of cigarettes. It's not the pack that matters but the little sticks inside. No amount of 'research' can obscure that simple fact.
So why treat teenagers like idiots?
As my 16-year-old daughter often says to me, "I'm not a moron, Dad."