FDA warnings on cigarette packs will have graphics

[skinsfan07]

Saw this on twitter the other day and it made me laugh. (I'm not a cig smoker. I'm a recreational smoker of sorts. lol)

"Props to all the people purposely shortening their lives by smoking cigarettes! Keep at it!"

[Special K]

Then they are too stupid to be helped.

You've just described half of the American public.

[Thiebear]

Why not put electrodes in each pack so it shocks you when you open it.

(the lucky cig) is the one that gets yah.

[GhostofSparta]

I'll admit up front, I come into this with 2 biases: I'm allergic to tobacco, and my family was torn apart by alcohol.

I still don't see how the general public can allow this "tobacoo=evil, beer=good" dichotomy to exist. I'm allergic to tobacco, and I look and act like I have asthma any time I'm around the stuff. And I don't have asthma. But alcohol is so much worse for you than tobacco, and it's celebrated in our society. Drunk driving, domestic violence, and bar fights harm more people than 2nd hand smoke. Alcoholism destroys more families than a smoking addiction. If you smoke 10 cigarettes in a night you don't have a hangover the next day. And yet, tobacco ads are banned in most forms of media and alcohol is a major player in every set of Super Bowl commercials. So now we're going to spend more money putting graphic images on tobacco products because smokers are "too stupid" to know the risks and it's "for the children," but alcohol can get away with "Don't drink and drive" and "drink responsibly"? No warnings about stomach cancer, liver damage, no pictures of DUI/DWI accidents, nothing?

Yes, it pisses me off too that smokers get a 5 minute break to go feed their addiction, but is that the only reason that they're the only group we're allowed to constantly annoy with how they're making a stupid choice?

[artmonkforHOF]

Apparently other countries such as Canada already implement this technique and it is effective

yes we implement it, but it is not effective at all. Studies have come out showing teen smoking is on the rise after the graphic warning label packs came out. Most studies pointed out that kids think the photos are "funny" and collect them like trading cards. Yo would see kids in stores, asking for a pack of smokes, but saying "no, not that one, get me the one next to it with the rotten teeth on it." This is the main reason why a new law came into effect, which makes it illegal to display tobacco anywhere. So now when you walk into a corner store in the great white North, you wont see a wall of smokes behind the person at the counter, you will now see a wall with a bunch of hinged grey plastic covers that hide all the smokes. Before this approach, Health Canada made companies take words like "light" or "smooth" off of all their products.

so in an attempt to curb smoking with graphic warnings, teen smoking has increased and I now have to go through a 10 minute ordeal every time I walk into a new store to buy my brand of smokes (I smoke a not-so-common brand, some stores don't even stock it). Sometimes after 10 minutes of looking, they have similar product but not the one I am looking for, and all this could be solved if I could either A) look at the packs displayed or tell the cashier I want my "product name of smokes" but since it is not a common brand, most cashiers didn't know what my pack was called before they took the name off.

For those who think wiping out smoking would be a good thing, I have to ask where do you think all the tax revenue that used to come from tobacco will come from? I suggest taxing healthy things like gym memberships, since the people who use gyms likely will live longer and in turn be more of a burden on social programs since they will have little to no income, but require more and more social services as they age. A lot of people tend to look at a single guy in his 40's who smokes and drinks as not contributing anything to society, but in fact it is the opposite, because that single unhealthy guy is paying a lot in taxes, and might not live to 65 which would mean there is less strain on social security.

I have no problem with people wanting to eliminate smoking, as long as those same people realize that everyone's taxes would have to raise significantly to cover the shortfall.

[Special K]

yes we implement it, but it is not effective at all. Studies have come out showing teen smoking is on the rise after the graphic warning label packs came out. Most studies pointed out that kids think the photos are "funny" and collect them like trading cards. Yo would see kids in stores, asking for a pack of smokes, but saying "no, not that one, get me the one next to it with the rotten teeth on it." This is the main reason why a new law came into effect, which makes it illegal to display tobacco anywhere. So now when you walk into a corner store in the great white North, you wont see a wall of smokes behind the person at the counter, you will now see a wall with a bunch of hinged grey plastic covers that hide all the smokes. Before this approach, Health Canada made companies take words like "light" or "smooth" off of all their products.

so in an attempt to curb smoking with graphic warnings, teen smoking has increased and I now have to go through a 10 minute ordeal every time I walk into a new store to buy my brand of smokes (I smoke a not-so-common brand, some stores don't even stock it). Sometimes after 10 minutes of looking, they have similar product but not the one I am looking for, and all this could be solved if I could either A) look at the packs displayed or tell the cashier I want my "product name of smokes" but since it is not a common brand, most cashiers didn't know what my pack was called before they took the name off.

I call BS on this. Can you show me the scientific evidence that supports your perception of overall teenage behavior in regards to graphic tobacco warnings? Or are you just making a few observations of people you may know and applying that to the general population as a whole?

A quick Google Scholar search brings up several peer reviewed studies that refute what you are asserting:

http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/4/391.abstract

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/94/8/1442

http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/15/suppl_3/iii19.full

http://www.ajpm-online.net/article/S0749-3797(06)00110-3/abstract

http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/16/2/223.full

[artmonkforHOF]

I think smoking is idiotic but I really don't like this policy. People know what smoking does. Making dumb decisions is one of the great benefits of living in a free society.

thanks for adding some common sense to this argument. Some people think smoking makes you stupid an unable to understand the dangers of smoking. I am a smoker and I am fully aware of the dangers of smoking, I know that it most likely will kill me. Smoking is an addiction, and if anyone does not know about addiction, I kindly suggest that they STFU. Hearing non smokers say "just quit", or "how about trying to stop for a month?" makes me want to punch them in their face for their ignorance.

A lot of people have caffeine addictions and are unaware of it. If you drink coffee or soda everyday, try stopping cold turkey for a week and see how you feel. those aches and pains and general bad mood is your body going through caffeine withdraw. Now multiply those effects by about 4 or 5 million times and you might have an idea how hard it is to quit smoking. Nicotine, and the additives added to smokes make them harder to quit than heroin or cocaine. i know a lot of people who had cocaine problems, ones people would consider a write off, who kicked their habit successfully but can not quit smoking, even when applying the same techniques that got them to quit a harder drug in the first place.

Starting smoking is a dumb decision, but a smoker continuing to smoke does not do it because they are too dumb to understand the consequences, they do it to feed their addiction.

[DRSmith]

Abortion isn't a long term operation. You can and should display pictures of fetuses in garbage cans, in front of abortion clinics, if you think the smoking ads are good.

(I don't smoke BTW. Don't protest in front of abortion clinics either, but if we're going to shield clinics so abortionists can have peace of mind, don't smokers have a right to peace of mind as well?)

Sure, if you're in favor of showing graphic images for smoking, you'd be a hypocrite for not advocating put graphic billboards at abortion clinics, pictures of dead animals with an occasional person at gun shops (make the person look like a burglar, might increase sales LOL), and billboards of gruesome accidents at car dealerships.

You want to educate all those ignorant other people to live healthier, right?

Actually pictures and cars from wrecks are used to drive home the point on drinking and driving

People who hunt put up trophies of what they have killed

The thing that is not often thought through in the abortion debate on this is the person already does not want a child and would you use this on a person who is already struggling with the decision due to being a rape victim, or they are faced with dying themselves and leaving their children behind if they give birth.

[twa]

Falling back to the minor percentages to justify or solicit compassion?

What of the nicotine addicts?

What is the degree of harm

[DRSmith]

Falling back to the minor percentages to justify or solicit compassion?

What of the nicotine addicts?

What is the degree of harm

Nope just stating facts, if someone is an addict I am all for any program to help persons over come any addiction that controls them. For the most part this is not going to have any success on long term smokers.

I am a double cancer survivor and the thing that always struck me was the fact that when I would talk to other patients doing treatments for lung, throat and mouth cancer and were still smoking was their adamant denial smoking caused their cancer.

The thing is will it stop kids from starting, much like having sex ed to help reduce the need for abortion

[twa]

So you would be in favor of graphic abortion pics and Aids ect. for sex ed,abortion counseling and sexual related products?

[DRSmith]

So you would be in favor of graphic abortion pics and Aids ect. for sex ed,abortion counseling and sexual related products?

I would have no problem with explain to teenagers the process of life and showing them the end results but to me that would not have as much impact as having them think about what that developing life could become.

Showing people what life with aids or other diseases looks like also is good because for the most part sex is glamourised and very little is done to show the real negative side effects that can come about

[Thiebear]

I did several case studies on graphic image warnings on tobacco packaging during grad. school tobacco intervention classes. These techniques have been implemented in developing countries with significant success. I'm all for it.

Something like this should lead the article and should be brought up quite often.

[HighOnHendrix]

Put CAT scans from cancer screenings on cell phones.

Cell phones don't cause cancer. They don't cause gas station fires, either.

[HighOnHendrix]

Then they are too stupid to be helped.

You've just described half of the American public.

I have a real problem with the idea that the government's role should be to help and protect people. I believe that the government should merely provide the conditions in which people can help and protect themselves. The printed warnings and numerous studies linking smoking with cancer more than satisfy those conditions. People should still be free to choose whether or not to put a legal substance into their bodies. I don't believe that most people are stupid; doing a dumb thing does not in itself make one stupid. I do believe, however, that we are trending in the direction of dumbing down our society with a combination of laziness and letting others make our decisions for us (by gov't, saftey/health advocates, etc.). I don't know if that trend will lead to 1984 or Idiocracy, but I don't like the thought of ending up as either.

[juvie3]

At first I was shocked, which made me think it would be pretty effective. But after seeing the graphics a few more times from different websites and news articles, I just became jaded. Which begs the question:

WHAT'S WORST?

1) Putting out graphic photos of people dying of cancer to stop people from smoking, but failing

or

2) Putting out graphic photos of people dying of cancer to stop people from smoking, but we become indifferent

[Hubbs]

Thank You For Smoking becomes real life.

[NavyDave]

Well you would have to weigh that in the balance the tax revenues vs the cost in terms of health care dollars, lost time in the work place due to smokers going for a smoke

Some States are having a cow because of fewer people smoking which is cutting into their tax revenue. It has never been about educating children about smoking it was just another money grab. DC was caught years ago using the money as christmas bonuses to DC government workers

[mardi gras skin]

I'll admit up front, I come into this with 2 biases: I'm allergic to tobacco, and my family was torn apart by alcohol.

I still don't see how the general public can allow this "tobacoo=evil, beer=good" dichotomy to exist. I'm allergic to tobacco, and I look and act like I have asthma any time I'm around the stuff. And I don't have asthma. But alcohol is so much worse for you than tobacco, and it's celebrated in our society. Drunk driving, domestic violence, and bar fights harm more people than 2nd hand smoke. Alcoholism destroys more families than a smoking addiction. If you smoke 10 cigarettes in a night you don't have a hangover the next day. And yet, tobacco ads are banned in most forms of media and alcohol is a major player in every set of Super Bowl commercials. So now we're going to spend more money putting graphic images on tobacco products because smokers are "too stupid" to know the risks and it's "for the children," but alcohol can get away with "Don't drink and drive" and "drink responsibly"? No warnings about stomach cancer, liver damage, no pictures of DUI/DWI accidents, nothing?

Yes, it pisses me off too that smokers get a 5 minute break to go feed their addiction, but is that the only reason that they're the only group we're allowed to constantly annoy with how they're making a stupid choice?

I agree completely. Smokers annoy the hell out of me but it was a drunk driver that killed my favorite uncle. The pass alcohol gets from all this regulation is hypocritical.

[DRSmith]

Some States are having a cow because of fewer people smoking which is cutting into their tax revenue. It has never been about educating children about smoking it was just another money grab. DC was caught years ago using the money as christmas bonuses to DC government workers

There are so many other things they can replace it with, taxes on alcohol, fast food, all you can eat buffets, soda and chips

[#98QBKiller]

Damn, I quit smoking too early. I would've loved to pull out a pack of these ****ers in front of someone:

Also, Brazil has even more graphic images on their cig packs, check them out here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022721-10391704.html

[HailGreen28]

Actually pictures and cars from wrecks are used to drive home the point on drinking and driving

People who hunt put up trophies of what they have killed

The thing that is not often thought through in the abortion debate on this is the person already does not want a child and would you use this on a person who is already struggling with the decision due to being a rape victim, or they are faced with dying themselves and leaving their children behind if they give birth.

Ah, the "take the exception and apply it to the general" tactic.

Then how dare they put graphic images up for cigarette smokers, when most smokers don't end up like the above pictures.

If you're going to apply a standard to one example, apply it to them all. Otherwise, you're a hypocrite.

[Hubbs]

Also, Brazil has even more graphic images on their cig packs, check them out here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20022721-10391704.html

Okay, so this seems to be one of those pictures:

So apparently we have some Mentos, baby blueberries, those little red candies that are really hot, alcohol, a creepy decomposing hand, bleeding lips, weird kinda-sorta there sideburns, and a guy who might be dead. Damn you, cigarettes! Why did you turn this man into a minty-fresh, sugar-loving, lip-biting, bad haircut-wearing, dead, alcoholic future Captain Hook?

[HighOnHendrix]

There are so many other things they can replace it with, taxes on alcohol, fast food, all you can eat buffets, soda and chips

[HighOnHendrix]

Warning graphic fail.