coughin'
June 21, 2011 10:40 AM Subscribe
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today unveiled the nine disturbing health warnings required to appear on every pack of cigarettes sold in the United States and in every cigarette advertisement. (pdf)
The warnings represent the most significant changes to cigarette labels in more than 25 years and are required to be placed on all cigarette packs, cartons and ads no later than September 2012.
The warnings represent the most significant changes to cigarette labels in more than 25 years and are required to be placed on all cigarette packs, cartons and ads no later than September 2012.
WAIT WAIT WAIT
You mean smoking tobacco is BAD FOR YOU? Why didn't anybody tell me this earlier?!?!?
posted by entropicamericana at 10:43 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
You mean smoking tobacco is BAD FOR YOU? Why didn't anybody tell me this earlier?!?!?
posted by entropicamericana at 10:43 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
WARNING: Quitting smoking now greatly reduces serious risks to your health.
Too bad I quit years ago.
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2011 [22 favorites]
Too bad I quit years ago.
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2011 [22 favorites]
What's the point of this? Are they supposed to be disturbing or repulsive? They're not. Is this just another one of those things where a profitable industry pretends to do something just to get the do-gooders off its back?
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:44 AM on June 21, 2011
But what about my T-Zone?! My doctor told me that Camels are the best for the T-Zone!
posted by NoMich at 10:45 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by NoMich at 10:45 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
That t-shirt was clearly photoshopped. It originally read 'S' for Superman.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:47 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:47 AM on June 21, 2011
I truly believe that photos of the 10 senators who take the most Big Tobacco money would be far, far more offputting than any warning or gory disease photo.
posted by Lyn Never at 10:48 AM on June 21, 2011 [21 favorites]
posted by Lyn Never at 10:48 AM on June 21, 2011 [21 favorites]
Well this doughy dude wearing a t-shirt that say "I QUIT" certainly convinced me. Colorado has been showing these PSAs where you see horror movie style QUICK CUTS of a dude with lung cancer/ a woman with no jaw/ and so on with a screeching tone that I think it maybe a little more convincing.
I dunno, I guess if you buy into the idea that tobacco companies are marketing towards 11-15 year olds the best thing you could do is tap into what is genuinely uncool and just sort of a pain in the ass, like what Sweden did (unintentionally) with heroin addicts.
posted by boo_radley at 10:48 AM on June 21, 2011
I dunno, I guess if you buy into the idea that tobacco companies are marketing towards 11-15 year olds the best thing you could do is tap into what is genuinely uncool and just sort of a pain in the ass, like what Sweden did (unintentionally) with heroin addicts.
posted by boo_radley at 10:48 AM on June 21, 2011
Is this just another one of those things where a profitable industry pretends to do something just to get the do-gooders off its back?
The FDA?
posted by DU at 10:49 AM on June 21, 2011
The FDA?
posted by DU at 10:49 AM on June 21, 2011
The thing that got me to quit was going on a date with an awesome guy who didn't want to kiss me because I smoked. We're now married and it's been 7 years since I quit.
Scaring me about my health had no impact. Making me think I wouldn't get laid? Okay, I'm out.
posted by desjardins at 10:51 AM on June 21, 2011 [17 favorites]
Scaring me about my health had no impact. Making me think I wouldn't get laid? Okay, I'm out.
posted by desjardins at 10:51 AM on June 21, 2011 [17 favorites]
Is this just another one of those things where a profitable industry pretends to do something just to get the do-gooders off its back?
How could you get that from an FPP beginning 'The US Food and Drug Administration...'? The FDA is an agency of the government, you know. Getting this basic thing wrong pretty much invalidates the rest of your opinion.
posted by anigbrowl at 10:52 AM on June 21, 2011
How could you get that from an FPP beginning 'The US Food and Drug Administration...'? The FDA is an agency of the government, you know. Getting this basic thing wrong pretty much invalidates the rest of your opinion.
posted by anigbrowl at 10:52 AM on June 21, 2011
WARNING: TOBAMACA causes Socialism!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:54 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:54 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
> Meh. They should feature piles of cash, electronics, and sports cars with a reminder of all the cool stuff you could buy if you didn't piss your money away on smokes.
That was how my dad quit. He'd tried a few different things (this was back in the mid-'80s), but once he started stuffing the money he would have spent on smokes into a jar, watching it pile up and turn into a set of golf clubs and a nice ring for my mom became addictive.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:55 AM on June 21, 2011
That was how my dad quit. He'd tried a few different things (this was back in the mid-'80s), but once he started stuffing the money he would have spent on smokes into a jar, watching it pile up and turn into a set of golf clubs and a nice ring for my mom became addictive.
posted by The Card Cheat at 10:55 AM on June 21, 2011
Hah. Slides 11 and 12, with the NICU baby, are personally awesome for me. I guess I might as well start smoking, since I already had to deal with that!
posted by gurple at 10:55 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by gurple at 10:55 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
these are not particularly good--surely the FDA has the funds to get some better designers? Canada's were well done, I'm curious as to why the US' look so half-assed.
posted by Hoopo at 10:56 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Hoopo at 10:56 AM on June 21, 2011
I was always a fan of Tibor Kalman's proposal to unbrand cigarettes.
posted by Sreiny at 10:56 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
posted by Sreiny at 10:56 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
I'd much prefer a small board and speaker that have the guy from UHF's Wheel of Fish yell "STUUUUUPIID! SO STUPID!"
At least, that's what plays in my head everytime I see people under the age of 70 or so smoking.
posted by cavalier at 10:57 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
At least, that's what plays in my head everytime I see people under the age of 70 or so smoking.
posted by cavalier at 10:57 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
I was always a fan of Tibor Kalman's proposal to unbrand cigarettes.
Australia is doing exactly that.
posted by zamboni at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [6 favorites]
Australia is doing exactly that.
posted by zamboni at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [6 favorites]
I saw some studies a while ago (google is failing me right now, a contentious subject) showing that more aggressive warnings on cigarette packets actually increase rates of smoking - the narrative being that they create stress which smokers deal with through cigarettes.
posted by doteatop at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by doteatop at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
I can't wait to see the warning labels when they legalize & tax marijuana.
posted by mattbucher at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [20 favorites]
posted by mattbucher at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [20 favorites]
At least there is something unsavory on the package, but I fully support the unbranding concept.
posted by josher71 at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by josher71 at 10:58 AM on June 21, 2011
Meh. They should feature piles of cash, electronics, and sports cars with a reminder of all the cool stuff you could buy if you didn't piss your money away on smokes.
I quit my pack-a-day habit January 1, 2003. I think I was paying ~$4.50 a pack. Let's just call it $5.
3093 days * $5.00 = $15,465.00.
If I'd put that in a jar and saved it (instead of spending it on chewing gum), I'd have enough to buy this Porsche.
posted by notyou at 11:00 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
I quit my pack-a-day habit January 1, 2003. I think I was paying ~$4.50 a pack. Let's just call it $5.
3093 days * $5.00 = $15,465.00.
If I'd put that in a jar and saved it (instead of spending it on chewing gum), I'd have enough to buy this Porsche.
posted by notyou at 11:00 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
At least you americans get nicely designed warnings, adverts almost. All we get in europe are warnings like this.
Set in Arial of all typefaces.
posted by Sourisnoire at 11:00 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Set in Arial of all typefaces.
posted by Sourisnoire at 11:00 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
I can't wait to see the warning labels when they legalize & tax marijuana.
MARIJUANA MAKES YOU LESS PRODUCTIVE
posted by Trurl at 11:01 AM on June 21, 2011 [6 favorites]
MARIJUANA MAKES YOU LESS PRODUCTIVE
posted by Trurl at 11:01 AM on June 21, 2011 [6 favorites]
NYC has some similar ads on the subways and I find them really disturbing and depressing. My commute is already depressing enough without pictures of dying people. At least these target people who smoke and don't punish innocent bystanders like me.
posted by melissam at 11:01 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by melissam at 11:01 AM on June 21, 2011
I think packs should only be available in a special container at the gas station where you have to spread open an articulated rib cage and rummage about in the slippery, tar-reeking fake lungs to obtain a package. Then a recording of Ron the Tracheotomy Guy says through his voicebox, "Thank you for your continued patronage, your tumor cells and our wallets throb with delight ... ah ... ah ... ahhhh."
posted by adipocere at 11:03 AM on June 21, 2011 [14 favorites]
posted by adipocere at 11:03 AM on June 21, 2011 [14 favorites]
At least you americans get nicely designed warnings, adverts almost
Really? I find a lot of these look like amateur Photoshop jobs.
posted by Hoopo at 11:03 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
Really? I find a lot of these look like amateur Photoshop jobs.
posted by Hoopo at 11:03 AM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Why does anybody think that changing these will help?
posted by Confess, Fletch at 11:04 AM on June 21, 2011
Why does anybody think that changing these will help?
posted by Confess, Fletch at 11:04 AM on June 21, 2011
I can't help but wonder if the number of people dissuaded from smoking because of a more prominent "This is bad for you" label is greater than the people who be more tempted to start because a more prominent labels make smoking "more rebellious."
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:06 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:06 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Aw, poor smokers. I've been puffing e-cigs for the past six months and haven't looked back. The best part is being able to smoke indoors, my smoke ring skills have exploded. Plus being able to puff on a plethora of flavors like watermelon, caramel apple, and banana nut bread is nice.
posted by mullingitover at 11:07 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by mullingitover at 11:07 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
I can't wait to see the warning labels when they legalize & tax marijuana.
MARIJUANA MAKES YOU INSUFFERABLE.
posted by Pastabagel at 11:07 AM on June 21, 2011 [23 favorites]
MARIJUANA MAKES YOU INSUFFERABLE.
posted by Pastabagel at 11:07 AM on June 21, 2011 [23 favorites]
Every incremental advance towards a healthier society is always accompanied by a loud "meh" thread (online or off) about how ineffective it is. I wish they'd just outlaw smoking once and for all so we could avoid the endless "well *I'M* too cool to be swayed by advertising* apologetics.
posted by DU at 11:09 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by DU at 11:09 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Marijuana is the only thing that makes some of us at ALL sufferable.
posted by TheRedArmy at 11:09 AM on June 21, 2011 [9 favorites]
posted by TheRedArmy at 11:09 AM on June 21, 2011 [9 favorites]
I've got a 'friend' who calls randomly and I've found I can only tolerate talking to him if I've recently been elected to high office.
posted by palidor at 11:10 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by palidor at 11:10 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
I dunno, I guess if you buy into the idea that tobacco companies are marketing towards 11-15 year olds the best thing you could do is tap into what is genuinely uncool and just sort of a pain in the ass, like what Sweden did (unintentionally) with heroin addicts.
What does this mean? I'm curious, and a google search isn't being helpful.
posted by Ideal Impulse at 11:11 AM on June 21, 2011
What does this mean? I'm curious, and a google search isn't being helpful.
posted by Ideal Impulse at 11:11 AM on June 21, 2011
> Marijuana is the only thing that makes some of us at ALL sufferable.
And/or booze.
posted by The Card Cheat at 11:12 AM on June 21, 2011
And/or booze.
posted by The Card Cheat at 11:12 AM on June 21, 2011
And, usually.
posted by TheRedArmy at 11:12 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by TheRedArmy at 11:12 AM on June 21, 2011
The smoking rate in the United States declined steadily from 1965 to 2005, but it has plateaued since then. I assume they're trying to bust through whatever barrier antismoking efforts have reached.
And I'm also curious to hear what Sweden did to make heroin "uncool".
posted by Salvor Hardin at 11:13 AM on June 21, 2011
And I'm also curious to hear what Sweden did to make heroin "uncool".
posted by Salvor Hardin at 11:13 AM on June 21, 2011
How long will it be before some enterprising company markets some sort of fancy cover for a pack of cigarettes, which perhaps looks like a candy wrapper or a deck of cards (a cover that performs a similar function as the soda brand sleeves that slip over a can of beer)?
/longrhetoricalquestion
posted by datawrangler at 11:14 AM on June 21, 2011
/longrhetoricalquestion
posted by datawrangler at 11:14 AM on June 21, 2011
mattbucher: "I can't wait to see the warning labels when they legalize & tax marijuana."
MAY INCREASE ENJOYMENT OF BAD MUSIC
posted by schmod at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011 [14 favorites]
MAY INCREASE ENJOYMENT OF BAD MUSIC
posted by schmod at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011 [14 favorites]
Since part of the appeal of smoking is that it makes you look cool and keeps you thin, why not just put pictures of ugly overweight people on the packs?
posted by tommasz at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by tommasz at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011
New hotness: the return of the classy cigarette case
posted by 2bucksplus at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
posted by 2bucksplus at 11:15 AM on June 21, 2011 [5 favorites]
I was looking at the pictures and smoking a cig at the same time! Had no effect on me whatsoever. Bad person?
posted by Sweetmag at 11:17 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Sweetmag at 11:17 AM on June 21, 2011
How long will it be before some enterprising company markets some sort of fancy cover for a pack of cigarettes, which perhaps looks like a candy wrapper or a deck of cards (a cover that performs a similar function as the soda brand sleeves that slip over a can of beer)?
Alternately, how long before cigarette cases come back into fashion? I don't even smoke anymore, but some cigarette cases are quite beautiful.
posted by Hoopo at 11:22 AM on June 21, 2011
Alternately, how long before cigarette cases come back into fashion? I don't even smoke anymore, but some cigarette cases are quite beautiful.
posted by Hoopo at 11:22 AM on June 21, 2011
Right this second my mother-in-law is getting a PET scan to see if how far her lung cancer has spread. I'm sitting on her couch a thousand miles away from my own home with my baby daughter waiting for her to come back so we can hear the results as a family.
I loathe obscene gestures, but lately, whenever I get sad and I'm alone I've been flipping twin birds as hard as I can, one for tobacco and one for cancer. I know that it is doing absolutely nothing for the current situation, but it makes me feel better.
And that's how I feel about this campaign. It's designed to look like something is getting done, and it's probably the product of someone trying to make some kind of a difference, no matter how futile. It's less about smokers and more about the people who want less smokers.
I'm absolutely sure that this campaign would have had zero effect on my mother-in-law's smoking. It took the luxury of time during retirement for her to finally quit for good.
Seeing these feeble warnings just make me angry. They're an empty gesture. Me and my family are probably going to lose good years with an awesome person due to tobacco. I want something better to make sure that fewer people have to deal with the awful, stupid thing that is lung cancer. I have no idea what that will be, but this is not it.
posted by Alison at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
I loathe obscene gestures, but lately, whenever I get sad and I'm alone I've been flipping twin birds as hard as I can, one for tobacco and one for cancer. I know that it is doing absolutely nothing for the current situation, but it makes me feel better.
And that's how I feel about this campaign. It's designed to look like something is getting done, and it's probably the product of someone trying to make some kind of a difference, no matter how futile. It's less about smokers and more about the people who want less smokers.
I'm absolutely sure that this campaign would have had zero effect on my mother-in-law's smoking. It took the luxury of time during retirement for her to finally quit for good.
Seeing these feeble warnings just make me angry. They're an empty gesture. Me and my family are probably going to lose good years with an awesome person due to tobacco. I want something better to make sure that fewer people have to deal with the awful, stupid thing that is lung cancer. I have no idea what that will be, but this is not it.
posted by Alison at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
Though of us who have been poor enough as to have been rolling our own cigarettes have been fashionably carrying our own cigarette cases all along.
though then, after years of having enough money that we started buying the real ones but still carrying them in a case, we also just quit smoking cold turkey all together a month ago -- and am still pretty much an asshole about it sometimes so pardon us if we bite your head off
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011
though then, after years of having enough money that we started buying the real ones but still carrying them in a case, we also just quit smoking cold turkey all together a month ago -- and am still pretty much an asshole about it sometimes so pardon us if we bite your head off
posted by MCMikeNamara at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011
Horselover Phattie: "> Alternately, how long before cigarette cases come back into fashion?
I've seen them on the front counter in convenience stores all over my city. Soon, there will be iPhone case integration."
I have a nice flask with a built-in cigarette case.
posted by mullingitover at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011
I've seen them on the front counter in convenience stores all over my city. Soon, there will be iPhone case integration."
I have a nice flask with a built-in cigarette case.
posted by mullingitover at 11:26 AM on June 21, 2011
These labels make me feel like the FDA has been taking cues from fringe abortion protestors who wave signs with pictures of dead fetuses. It's going too far. What's next, buckle up billboards with pictures of gory accidents?
When I go to the store or read a magazine, I don't really care to see images that could be right at home on rotten.com.
posted by MegoSteve at 11:28 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
When I go to the store or read a magazine, I don't really care to see images that could be right at home on rotten.com.
posted by MegoSteve at 11:28 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
I have a nice flask with a built-in cigarette case.
Ah yes, the Vicemaster 2000
posted by Hoopo at 11:29 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
Ah yes, the Vicemaster 2000
posted by Hoopo at 11:29 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
My brother once told me "Yeah, smoking is bad and all, and I thought about stopping... but Dad always said nobody likes a quitter."
He actually did quit. So that's cool; I like him, and too many of my relatives have died from cancer already. But seriously: Do we still need warnings? Is there anyone out there who DOESN'T know this already? How many people keep smoking simply because they don't want to give in to the preachy OH GOD DON'T DO IT crowd?
posted by caution live frogs at 11:30 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
He actually did quit. So that's cool; I like him, and too many of my relatives have died from cancer already. But seriously: Do we still need warnings? Is there anyone out there who DOESN'T know this already? How many people keep smoking simply because they don't want to give in to the preachy OH GOD DON'T DO IT crowd?
posted by caution live frogs at 11:30 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Just more governmental bureaucracy crap. We all saw pictures of bad lungs back in high school. That's not gonna get people to quit -- those who are fully nicotine addictive. They ought to put one of those 800 number on the packs. . It's like a Viagra ad on a pron site. At least, offer people some help, for God's sake.
posted by Seekerofsplendor at 11:31 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Seekerofsplendor at 11:31 AM on June 21, 2011
anigbrowl: "How could you get that from an FPP beginning 'The US Food and Drug Administration...'? The FDA is an agency of the government, you know."
This would be a strong point if you could somehow show that there was a strict and respected boundary between government agencies and the companies they regulate. Presuming the opposite may be wrong, but isn't stupid.
posted by idiopath at 11:33 AM on June 21, 2011
This would be a strong point if you could somehow show that there was a strict and respected boundary between government agencies and the companies they regulate. Presuming the opposite may be wrong, but isn't stupid.
posted by idiopath at 11:33 AM on June 21, 2011
Get with the times FDA. Pretty soon we will all be getting vat grown lungs. Smoke 'em if you got 'em!
posted by Ad hominem at 11:37 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by Ad hominem at 11:37 AM on June 21, 2011
Alternately, how long before cigarette cases come back into fashion?
That's what happened here in BC. Also there was a brief market in stickers designed to cover the warning with snarky comments, which I've long forgotten. I remember friends favouring some warnings over others (the impotence warning was particularly unpopular among men in their 20s) and requesting them at the counter. Eventually though, we all just ignored them.
posted by Lorin at 11:39 AM on June 21, 2011
That's what happened here in BC. Also there was a brief market in stickers designed to cover the warning with snarky comments, which I've long forgotten. I remember friends favouring some warnings over others (the impotence warning was particularly unpopular among men in their 20s) and requesting them at the counter. Eventually though, we all just ignored them.
posted by Lorin at 11:39 AM on June 21, 2011
I saw some studies a while ago (google is failing me right now, a contentious subject) showing that more aggressive warnings on cigarette packets actually increase rates of smoking - the narrative being that they create stress which smokers deal with through cigarettes.
It tends to be the opposite, with aggressive warnings increasing the amount of thought a smoker gives to individual acts of smoking. I recall a paper with early results from when warnings in Canada or Australia were strengthened a few years ago. Many smokers reported that the warnings had encouraged them to occasionally forgo a cigarette, or even discuss potential health risks with other smokers. There may be some desensitization to the warnings after time, but that only works against the idea that they might increase tobacco consumption.
The key problem with smoking is that some people will continue to smoke regardless of the ill-effects. The decline in prevalence that began in the 1950s (more or less, depending on when findings such as those of the Doll studies became widely known) appears to have slowed recently (in the UK, possibly elsewhere). A hardcore of smokers - who tend to be poorer and middle-aged - are not swayed by any information and only marginally by pricing. They typically began smoking in their teens and might only disappear when they die and are not replaced by new recruits. Maybe the best warnings on cigarette packets is to have pictures of poor middle-aged people captioned "average smoker".
posted by Jehan at 11:45 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
It tends to be the opposite, with aggressive warnings increasing the amount of thought a smoker gives to individual acts of smoking. I recall a paper with early results from when warnings in Canada or Australia were strengthened a few years ago. Many smokers reported that the warnings had encouraged them to occasionally forgo a cigarette, or even discuss potential health risks with other smokers. There may be some desensitization to the warnings after time, but that only works against the idea that they might increase tobacco consumption.
The key problem with smoking is that some people will continue to smoke regardless of the ill-effects. The decline in prevalence that began in the 1950s (more or less, depending on when findings such as those of the Doll studies became widely known) appears to have slowed recently (in the UK, possibly elsewhere). A hardcore of smokers - who tend to be poorer and middle-aged - are not swayed by any information and only marginally by pricing. They typically began smoking in their teens and might only disappear when they die and are not replaced by new recruits. Maybe the best warnings on cigarette packets is to have pictures of poor middle-aged people captioned "average smoker".
posted by Jehan at 11:45 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Marijuana makes Planet Earth amazing.
posted by LordSludge at 11:45 AM on June 21, 2011
posted by LordSludge at 11:45 AM on June 21, 2011
What's next, buckle up billboards with pictures of gory accidents?
What, you weren't forced to watch Red Asphalt in Driver's Ed?
posted by muddgirl at 11:49 AM on June 21, 2011
What, you weren't forced to watch Red Asphalt in Driver's Ed?
posted by muddgirl at 11:49 AM on June 21, 2011
Good for you MCMikeNamara. I'll still step outside with you at meet-ups, though. We'll just use that time to make fun of everyone's hair, instead of poisoning ourselves. Or, really, we'll just poison ourselves with all that exhaust down there. But when you come up with some other use for the cigarette case, let me know, cause I've got about a half dozen beautiful ones cluttering up a drawer. My favorite is the one that lit the lighter when you snapped it closed. I loved that one. I wonder if it still works? I can use it set straw wrappers on fire, maybe?
For me, honestly, it was the marginalizing of smoking and the making social outcasts of smokers that led me to having my last cigarette ever. I miss blowing smoke rings. I miss the Marshall McGeararty lounge and the smoking couch in the cigar shop across the street from my office. I miss carrying a nice hefty lighter and those cigarette cases. I guess I was less a smoker and more a poseur.
I don't know that scary pictures or frowning babies will really dissuade smokers. Most of the really hardcore smokers I know--who are all, at present, not smoking--still plan when they will have their next cigarette. Some of the not so hardcore smokers I know--who are, at present, not smoking--still occasionally buy a pack of cigarettes, just to, you know, fiddle with them while waiting for the bus.
posted by crush-onastick at 11:50 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
For me, honestly, it was the marginalizing of smoking and the making social outcasts of smokers that led me to having my last cigarette ever. I miss blowing smoke rings. I miss the Marshall McGeararty lounge and the smoking couch in the cigar shop across the street from my office. I miss carrying a nice hefty lighter and those cigarette cases. I guess I was less a smoker and more a poseur.
I don't know that scary pictures or frowning babies will really dissuade smokers. Most of the really hardcore smokers I know--who are all, at present, not smoking--still plan when they will have their next cigarette. Some of the not so hardcore smokers I know--who are, at present, not smoking--still occasionally buy a pack of cigarettes, just to, you know, fiddle with them while waiting for the bus.
posted by crush-onastick at 11:50 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
And I guess the duty free cigarettes will still have no warnings at all, just the unadulterated branded design.
I still don't get the crusade, though. I'm no more in favor of preventing people from smoking than I am in favor of preventing them from eating unhealthily. I am in favor of not allowing smokers to poison other people, so I get bans on indoor smoking in public places. I don't really get the outdoor smoking bans, though. As best I can tell, studies attempting to find a link between the sort of ephemeral secondhand smoke one might be exposed to outdoors and health issues are inconclusive at best.
posted by wierdo at 11:54 AM on June 21, 2011
I still don't get the crusade, though. I'm no more in favor of preventing people from smoking than I am in favor of preventing them from eating unhealthily. I am in favor of not allowing smokers to poison other people, so I get bans on indoor smoking in public places. I don't really get the outdoor smoking bans, though. As best I can tell, studies attempting to find a link between the sort of ephemeral secondhand smoke one might be exposed to outdoors and health issues are inconclusive at best.
posted by wierdo at 11:54 AM on June 21, 2011
The thing that got me to quit was going on a date with an awesome guy who didn't want to kiss me because I smoked. We're now married and it's been 7 years since I quit.
Amen. Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray. I've been involved with three women who smoked, and it was -impossible- to get rid of the smell. It was in their hair, their clothes, on their skin, yecch.
The last one quit. I married her. :)
posted by DWRoelands at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Amen. Kissing a smoker is like licking an ashtray. I've been involved with three women who smoked, and it was -impossible- to get rid of the smell. It was in their hair, their clothes, on their skin, yecch.
The last one quit. I married her. :)
posted by DWRoelands at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
This is what happens when you get well-intentioned, well-educated federal bureaucrats trying to lower the prevalence of what is a predominantly blue-collar habit: something targeted essentially at the creators of the campaign rather than most people who actually smoke.
Looking at the numbers, the "average smoker," if there can be said to be such a person, is a male American Indian or Alaskan Native below the poverty line with a GED. Somehow, the idea that such a person would modify their behavior to the point of abandoning an addictive and allegedly pleasant substance seems... implausible.
posted by valkyryn at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011
Looking at the numbers, the "average smoker," if there can be said to be such a person, is a male American Indian or Alaskan Native below the poverty line with a GED. Somehow, the idea that such a person would modify their behavior to the point of abandoning an addictive and allegedly pleasant substance seems... implausible.
posted by valkyryn at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011
adipocere: "I think packs should only be available in a special container at the gas station where you have to spread open an articulated rib cage and rummage about in the slippery, tar-reeking fake lungs to obtain a package. Then a recording of Ron the Tracheotomy Guy says through his voicebox, "Thank you for your continued patronage, your tumor cells and our wallets throb with delight ... ah ... ah ... ahhhh.""
Why does this sound like something out of a Philip K Dick novel?
posted by symbioid at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
Why does this sound like something out of a Philip K Dick novel?
posted by symbioid at 11:58 AM on June 21, 2011 [3 favorites]
But when you come up with some other use for the cigarette case, let me know, cause I've got about a half dozen beautiful ones cluttering up a drawer
My wife uses hers as a wallet to hold ID cards and bank cards. Swears by it.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:07 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
My wife uses hers as a wallet to hold ID cards and bank cards. Swears by it.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:07 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
RE: Cigarette accouterments and their appeal. Definitely something I know about -- I swear I kept smoking a couple of extra months because I found a cool working Zippo on the ground a few months ago.
In fact, the more I read about e-cigarettes the more tempted I am. Because, even though I used to think they were ridiculous, nicotine + gadgetry suddenly seems like a recipe invented for me.
(I admit I am probably considering it more because I miss nicotine...and something to do with my hands...)
crush, as for making fun of folks at bars/meetups (non-Mefites, of course), that will never be a habit I give up.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:09 PM on June 21, 2011
In fact, the more I read about e-cigarettes the more tempted I am. Because, even though I used to think they were ridiculous, nicotine + gadgetry suddenly seems like a recipe invented for me.
(I admit I am probably considering it more because I miss nicotine...and something to do with my hands...)
crush, as for making fun of folks at bars/meetups (non-Mefites, of course), that will never be a habit I give up.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:09 PM on June 21, 2011
oh totally. other people's hair. TINCC has great hair!
posted by crush-onastick at 12:27 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by crush-onastick at 12:27 PM on June 21, 2011
Looking at the numbers, the "average smoker," if there can be said to be such a person, is a male American Indian or Alaskan Native below the poverty line with a GED. Somehow, the idea that such a person would modify their behavior to the point of abandoning an addictive and allegedly pleasant substance seems... implausible.
At first I thought you were going to say that the rhetoric of these warnings isn't really well-targeted to the average smoker, which seems reasonable, but then you transitioned into saying that your "average smoker" has low impulse control on the basis of his demographic status? Am I reading you right?
posted by invitapriore at 12:31 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
At first I thought you were going to say that the rhetoric of these warnings isn't really well-targeted to the average smoker, which seems reasonable, but then you transitioned into saying that your "average smoker" has low impulse control on the basis of his demographic status? Am I reading you right?
posted by invitapriore at 12:31 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Cool! Collect them all. Trade with your friends. Put the empty packs in a neat binder. I.m going out to buy a carton. Hope i don't get any doubles. ( Do they come with a stick of gum?)
posted by Gungho at 12:58 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by Gungho at 12:58 PM on June 21, 2011
I can't wait to see the warning labels when they legalize & tax marijuana.
Marijuana: Um... uh... wait... shit, we had a really good idea for something to put here.
posted by davidjmcgee at 1:02 PM on June 21, 2011
Marijuana: Um... uh... wait... shit, we had a really good idea for something to put here.
posted by davidjmcgee at 1:02 PM on June 21, 2011
Faint of Butt writes "What's the point of this? Are they supposed to be disturbing or repulsive? They're not. Is this just another one of those things where a profitable industry pretends to do something just to get the do-gooders off its back?"
Many people do find the warnings here disturbing; at least enough to request warning packaging from their vendor that they figure doesn't apply (impotence in the case of women and pregnancy in the case of men).
Confess, Fletch writes "Why does anybody think that changing these will help?"
Tobacco companies are against it and it essentially doesn't cost them anything so they obviously think it'll have some negative effect on their business.
Alison writes "I'm absolutely sure that this campaign would have had zero effect on my mother-in-law's smoking."
Probably true. Much of this kind of thing is aimed at prevent people from starting and to encourage people who have already decided to quit.
Alison writes "They're an empty gesture."
One of the key benefits of this kind of packaging restriction is it reduces the amount of branding by any particular company.
crush-onastick writes "But when you come up with some other use for the cigarette case, let me know, cause I've got about a half dozen beautiful ones cluttering up a drawer. "
They keep a moderate weekend's condom supply safe from damage. Also individual portions of lube.
posted by Mitheral at 1:03 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Many people do find the warnings here disturbing; at least enough to request warning packaging from their vendor that they figure doesn't apply (impotence in the case of women and pregnancy in the case of men).
Confess, Fletch writes "Why does anybody think that changing these will help?"
Tobacco companies are against it and it essentially doesn't cost them anything so they obviously think it'll have some negative effect on their business.
Alison writes "I'm absolutely sure that this campaign would have had zero effect on my mother-in-law's smoking."
Probably true. Much of this kind of thing is aimed at prevent people from starting and to encourage people who have already decided to quit.
Alison writes "They're an empty gesture."
One of the key benefits of this kind of packaging restriction is it reduces the amount of branding by any particular company.
crush-onastick writes "But when you come up with some other use for the cigarette case, let me know, cause I've got about a half dozen beautiful ones cluttering up a drawer. "
They keep a moderate weekend's condom supply safe from damage. Also individual portions of lube.
posted by Mitheral at 1:03 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Looking at the numbers, the "average smoker," if there can be said to be such a person, is a male American Indian or Alaskan Native below the poverty line with a GED. Somehow, the idea that such a person would modify their behavior to the point of abandoning an addictive and allegedly pleasant substance seems... implausible.
Looking at the numbers, saying that the "average smoker" can be said to be a male American Indian/Alaska native is not accurate. One of every four whites is a smoker; one of every four African-Americans is a smoker; one of every five Hispanics is a smoker; and Asians/Pacific Islanders are closing in on the Hispanic numbers. There are numerically more of all of those in the population than there are American Indians. And if you lived anywhere in the South you would see very quickly that smoking is an equal opportunity addiction that all colors and creeds enjoy.
posted by blucevalo at 1:03 PM on June 21, 2011
Looking at the numbers, saying that the "average smoker" can be said to be a male American Indian/Alaska native is not accurate. One of every four whites is a smoker; one of every four African-Americans is a smoker; one of every five Hispanics is a smoker; and Asians/Pacific Islanders are closing in on the Hispanic numbers. There are numerically more of all of those in the population than there are American Indians. And if you lived anywhere in the South you would see very quickly that smoking is an equal opportunity addiction that all colors and creeds enjoy.
posted by blucevalo at 1:03 PM on June 21, 2011
Speaking as a smoker: When you're poor and have a relatively shitty life, you can look at it like this:
1. Quit smoking. This will be difficult and annoying. It will save you money, but it will also be an additional difficult, annoying thing to deal with in a life that is already shitty and annoying. Immediate bad thing, definitely occurring.
2. Don't quit smoking. This will cost you money that you're already spending so you've already adjusted your budget to deal with it; it will (possibly? probably?) result in you eventually getting health problems. Possible bad thing, occurring at a significant delay and thus easy to ignore.
It's nothing to do with accusing poor people of having "poor impulse control," it's looking at it from a perspective in which it's not about impulse control but about choosing whether to put yourself through immediate shit for delayed gratification, in a situation where your life is already not that great so you'd just be making it worse.
posted by titus n. owl at 1:19 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
1. Quit smoking. This will be difficult and annoying. It will save you money, but it will also be an additional difficult, annoying thing to deal with in a life that is already shitty and annoying. Immediate bad thing, definitely occurring.
2. Don't quit smoking. This will cost you money that you're already spending so you've already adjusted your budget to deal with it; it will (possibly? probably?) result in you eventually getting health problems. Possible bad thing, occurring at a significant delay and thus easy to ignore.
It's nothing to do with accusing poor people of having "poor impulse control," it's looking at it from a perspective in which it's not about impulse control but about choosing whether to put yourself through immediate shit for delayed gratification, in a situation where your life is already not that great so you'd just be making it worse.
posted by titus n. owl at 1:19 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
How could you get that from an FPP beginning 'The US Food and Drug Administration...'? The FDA is an agency of the government, you know. Getting this basic thing wrong pretty much invalidates the rest of your opinion.
You're right, of course; I did pretty much skim past the FDA part. But nevertheless, considering the amount of corporate influence in American government, I'm convinced that these particular designs were created with the full approval of the tobacco industry at every step of the way. They're just so toothless.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:20 PM on June 21, 2011
You're right, of course; I did pretty much skim past the FDA part. But nevertheless, considering the amount of corporate influence in American government, I'm convinced that these particular designs were created with the full approval of the tobacco industry at every step of the way. They're just so toothless.
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:20 PM on June 21, 2011
I just quit smoking. From a pack a day menthol smoker to nicotine-free since April 19.
Just had to say that.
These probably won't do much to discourage many smokers to quit but maybe stop someone from starting. I don't really know. They are kind of gross though, the mouth cancer one especially. Tobacco Mouth, I guess.
posted by IvoShandor at 1:28 PM on June 21, 2011
Just had to say that.
These probably won't do much to discourage many smokers to quit but maybe stop someone from starting. I don't really know. They are kind of gross though, the mouth cancer one especially. Tobacco Mouth, I guess.
posted by IvoShandor at 1:28 PM on June 21, 2011
New packaging.
Though selling cigarettes like this might prove to be effective.
posted by mazola at 1:29 PM on June 21, 2011
Though selling cigarettes like this might prove to be effective.
posted by mazola at 1:29 PM on June 21, 2011
How's this for irony: This thread is making me want a cigarette. Good thing there aren't any around and it's not legal for the convenience store to sell loosies. (Spend $6 on a pack of cigarettes, what? I'll give you two bucks)
Speaking of loosies, why is it that it's perfectly legal to sell a cigarette sized cigar individually, but not a single cigarette? I would love it if I could walk to the convenience store and buy a single cigarette. It's enough trouble that I wouldn't do it often, but convenient enough I could enjoy the flavor of a fine Camel once every couple of months.
posted by wierdo at 1:43 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Speaking of loosies, why is it that it's perfectly legal to sell a cigarette sized cigar individually, but not a single cigarette? I would love it if I could walk to the convenience store and buy a single cigarette. It's enough trouble that I wouldn't do it often, but convenient enough I could enjoy the flavor of a fine Camel once every couple of months.
posted by wierdo at 1:43 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
Metafilter: all that exhaust down there.
posted by herbplarfegan at 1:50 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by herbplarfegan at 1:50 PM on June 21, 2011
To everyone who has quit: Congratulations. You have my respect, empathy and jealousy.
As a 1 - 1 1/2 pack a day smoker for the last 25 years, I don't see these warnings as having any effect on when or if I will quit.
I hate being a smoker and have tried to quit many, many times. I've had several terrible experiences during that time that should have helped me, but they didn't. I'm a stone-cold nicotine junkie and some slightly distasteful pictures on the pack aren't going to change that.
However, if this campaign stops even one kid from getting slaved-up to big tobacco, then I'm all for it.
posted by double block and bleed at 1:51 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
As a 1 - 1 1/2 pack a day smoker for the last 25 years, I don't see these warnings as having any effect on when or if I will quit.
I hate being a smoker and have tried to quit many, many times. I've had several terrible experiences during that time that should have helped me, but they didn't. I'm a stone-cold nicotine junkie and some slightly distasteful pictures on the pack aren't going to change that.
However, if this campaign stops even one kid from getting slaved-up to big tobacco, then I'm all for it.
posted by double block and bleed at 1:51 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
I can't help but wonder if the number of people dissuaded from smoking because of a more prominent "This is bad for you" label is greater than the people who be more tempted to start because a more prominent labels make smoking "more rebellious."
I seriously doubt it will have a measurable effect at all. Rebellion is the number one reason people pick up the habit, and it will keep going strong, based on the tone of many comments here.
Clicking on the pdf made me nervous at first, as I remembered posters of missing lips and lung tumors in high school health class. These pictures, however, look like the result of a lot of hard work to keep them from being offensive. I mean... a cartoon baby. It's a joke. Kids who are interested in looking cool and tough will laugh at these and not look back. I know I would have. There would immediately have been jokes about "may cause torso zippers" and "smoking makes this woman cry" and then we would have smoked delicious cigarettes.
posted by heatvision at 2:03 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
I seriously doubt it will have a measurable effect at all. Rebellion is the number one reason people pick up the habit, and it will keep going strong, based on the tone of many comments here.
Clicking on the pdf made me nervous at first, as I remembered posters of missing lips and lung tumors in high school health class. These pictures, however, look like the result of a lot of hard work to keep them from being offensive. I mean... a cartoon baby. It's a joke. Kids who are interested in looking cool and tough will laugh at these and not look back. I know I would have. There would immediately have been jokes about "may cause torso zippers" and "smoking makes this woman cry" and then we would have smoked delicious cigarettes.
posted by heatvision at 2:03 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
I do think that the warnings will serve to get the word out about increased risk of stroke and heart disease among smokers. I don't think those risks are widely known; when people talk about the health problems associated with smoking, they generally refer to lung cancer and emphysema.
My partner had a stroke at age 40 after 20 years of smoking. That was it for him; he used the time in the hospital for tobacco withdrawal and hasn't had a smoke in 3 1/2 years. Both my grandmothers were killed by lung cancer. I don't know what the best way is to get people to quit, so I vote we try all of them we can think of. I fucking hate cigarettes.
posted by WorkingMyWayHome at 2:25 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
My partner had a stroke at age 40 after 20 years of smoking. That was it for him; he used the time in the hospital for tobacco withdrawal and hasn't had a smoke in 3 1/2 years. Both my grandmothers were killed by lung cancer. I don't know what the best way is to get people to quit, so I vote we try all of them we can think of. I fucking hate cigarettes.
posted by WorkingMyWayHome at 2:25 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
The public already has an exaggerated understanding of the risks of cigarette smoking (and few are aware of the benefits). So IMO, if the point of the labels is to make consumers better informed, then they should include information that makes smoking seem less dangerous. On the other hand, if the point of the labels is simply to manipulate people, then they should be even more disturbing and sensational. Like put a picture of that chimp attack lady on there.
posted by dgaicun at 2:29 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by dgaicun at 2:29 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
That's what you get when you don't keep up with your donations.
(Although it's just as likely that their focus groups showed that smokers prefer the new packaging)
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 2:38 PM on June 21, 2011
(Although it's just as likely that their focus groups showed that smokers prefer the new packaging)
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 2:38 PM on June 21, 2011
Meh. They should feature piles of cash, electronics, and sports cars with a reminder of all the cool stuff you could buy if you didn't piss your money away on smokes.
This is exactly correct. Our chimp brains recognize one rule above all else: "reward good behavior". This is orders of magnitude better than "punish bad behavior", which has its place, and can be useful, but isn't nearly as useful as "reward good behavior".
These pictures probably can't hurt, but I don't seem them making a big difference. I was a smoker for 15 years, and the most annoying thing ever ever ever for a smoker is to listen to someone tell you how bad your behavior is. It backfires, and smokers will ignore the chiding and light up an extra one out of spite.
posted by zardoz at 2:41 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
This is exactly correct. Our chimp brains recognize one rule above all else: "reward good behavior". This is orders of magnitude better than "punish bad behavior", which has its place, and can be useful, but isn't nearly as useful as "reward good behavior".
These pictures probably can't hurt, but I don't seem them making a big difference. I was a smoker for 15 years, and the most annoying thing ever ever ever for a smoker is to listen to someone tell you how bad your behavior is. It backfires, and smokers will ignore the chiding and light up an extra one out of spite.
posted by zardoz at 2:41 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
I don't mind the warnings. Like many have said, they won't affect my desire to quit one way or the other.
Why don't we have warnings on other stuff that's bad for you? Like if you order foie gras in a restaurant, there's a picture of a obese, bloated corpse of a person and it says "eating fatty food will make you obese and kill you". Or maybe on every snickers bar and coke can, a picture of a person with a rotting foot and it says "adult onset diabetes causes loss of appendages". Or maybe on the dashboard of every car, pictures of mangled bodies from terrible car wrecks, and it says "driving leads to collisions, which kill entire families".
I don't know. Actually, the worst part of buying cigarettes is sometimes getting a disapproving look from the cashier. It makes me feel bad. That does more than all the pictures of diseased lungs in the world.
posted by King Bee at 2:47 PM on June 21, 2011
Why don't we have warnings on other stuff that's bad for you? Like if you order foie gras in a restaurant, there's a picture of a obese, bloated corpse of a person and it says "eating fatty food will make you obese and kill you". Or maybe on every snickers bar and coke can, a picture of a person with a rotting foot and it says "adult onset diabetes causes loss of appendages". Or maybe on the dashboard of every car, pictures of mangled bodies from terrible car wrecks, and it says "driving leads to collisions, which kill entire families".
I don't know. Actually, the worst part of buying cigarettes is sometimes getting a disapproving look from the cashier. It makes me feel bad. That does more than all the pictures of diseased lungs in the world.
posted by King Bee at 2:47 PM on June 21, 2011
MARIJUANA MAKES YOU LESS PRODUCTIVE
Would that be considered a warning against or an advertisement for?
posted by quin at 2:48 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
Would that be considered a warning against or an advertisement for?
posted by quin at 2:48 PM on June 21, 2011 [2 favorites]
All it took to make me quit was realizing that those nicotine fits I was feeling every hour or so was me constantly going through withdrawal, and the relaxation and good feelings I had when smoking was just me feeding those withdrawal symptoms. Really, I read the book, and that was the takeaway that got me pissed enough to put them down and never pick them back up again.
I just quit smoking. From a pack a day menthol smoker to nicotine-free since April 19.
If your experience is anything like mine, you are about to develop super powers; the first is that you are going to suddenly find yourself able to go up stairs much faster and walk for ages without feeling winded. It might be a good time to take on some outdoor project to eat up the nervous energy you are going to be filled with. I took on the ever encroaching tree line in my back yard and used the entire summer after I quit to wage a war of attrition against those damned plants.
Later, in a couple more months, you are going to realize that you can smell everything. Like, absurd stuff; food from a half mile away and the like.
It's both amazing and more than a little creepy, walking through a grocery store will suddenly become a moving (and expensive) experience..
Assuming you can stay quit, in about two years the smell of cigarettes will probably make you physically sick.
posted by quin at 2:59 PM on June 21, 2011 [4 favorites]
I just quit smoking. From a pack a day menthol smoker to nicotine-free since April 19.
If your experience is anything like mine, you are about to develop super powers; the first is that you are going to suddenly find yourself able to go up stairs much faster and walk for ages without feeling winded. It might be a good time to take on some outdoor project to eat up the nervous energy you are going to be filled with. I took on the ever encroaching tree line in my back yard and used the entire summer after I quit to wage a war of attrition against those damned plants.
Later, in a couple more months, you are going to realize that you can smell everything. Like, absurd stuff; food from a half mile away and the like.
It's both amazing and more than a little creepy, walking through a grocery store will suddenly become a moving (and expensive) experience..
Assuming you can stay quit, in about two years the smell of cigarettes will probably make you physically sick.
posted by quin at 2:59 PM on June 21, 2011 [4 favorites]
Why don't we have warnings on other stuff that's bad for you? Like if you order foie gras in a restaurant, there's a picture of a obese, bloated corpse of a person and it says "eating fatty food will make you obese and kill you"
Foie Gras? How about an obese bloated corpse of a person with an obese, bloated corpse of a duck in its mouth?
posted by Hoopo at 3:15 PM on June 21, 2011
Foie Gras? How about an obese bloated corpse of a person with an obese, bloated corpse of a duck in its mouth?
posted by Hoopo at 3:15 PM on June 21, 2011
Unlike foie gras, the negative impact of smoking has a significant negative impact on the economy. And the government would probably outright outlaw it except that they know that alternative is worse.
posted by GuyZero at 3:33 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by GuyZero at 3:33 PM on June 21, 2011
The big guy opening his shirt on the "I Quit" t-shirt is really, really going to deter you from lighting up another one right now. Just because you won't be able to smoke while you're laughing.
They have much nastier ones in the UK. Guy with big throat cancer in plain view, now that is a bit more effective in terms of shock tactics than big guy in t-shirt. IMHO.
posted by bitteschoen at 3:35 PM on June 21, 2011
They have much nastier ones in the UK. Guy with big throat cancer in plain view, now that is a bit more effective in terms of shock tactics than big guy in t-shirt. IMHO.
posted by bitteschoen at 3:35 PM on June 21, 2011
Unlike foie gras, the negative impact of smoking has a significant negative impact on the economy.
Don't taxes on tobacco generate revenue for the government? I'm not saying that the health care costs aren't more than the revenue. The surgeon general tells me that about 440,000 people die each year from tobacco/smoking related illnesses, which they claim is about 20% of all deaths in the US each year. By comparison, obesity related deaths comes to about 300,000, which (if the 20% figure above is correct) is about 14% of all deaths. It's a smaller proportion to be sure, but certainly if we're to be worried about the costs of smoking to society, we should consider the costs of obesity. There's no sin tax on butter, mayonnaise, and sugar.
Hell, in 2005, the health care costs due to car accident related injuries and deaths exceeded $99 billion. That is quite a lot. Shouldn't we be doing something to stop people from driving? Or, rather, should they drive more carefully? Perhaps people should just not everywhere all the time? If you're not on the road, you can't crash your car.
I guess tobacco use is just more preventable. You can just say to people "DO NOT SMOKE EVAR", and all people have to do is not smoke. To avoid being obese, you have to watch what you eat, exercise, etc. If you decide to give up driving all the time, you have to sort of reassess your day-to-day activities, and probably budget time for other ways to get to work and so forth. It's a daily thing you have to be mindful of, whereas if you don't smoke, you just don't smoke. If no one smokes, then no one is subjected to (even secondhand) cigarette smoke. It's also easier to get addicted to cigarettes than it is to foie gras, but I have found (in my own experience) it's pretty easy to get addicting to being lazy and eating food that isn't particularly healthy.
I would rather they just make the damned things illegal, but not because I can't control myself and quit. I'm just getting sick of the "frog in the pot of boiling water" thing they're doing with cigarettes. They sure learned their lesson from prohibition in the 1920s.
posted by King Bee at 4:36 PM on June 21, 2011
Don't taxes on tobacco generate revenue for the government? I'm not saying that the health care costs aren't more than the revenue. The surgeon general tells me that about 440,000 people die each year from tobacco/smoking related illnesses, which they claim is about 20% of all deaths in the US each year. By comparison, obesity related deaths comes to about 300,000, which (if the 20% figure above is correct) is about 14% of all deaths. It's a smaller proportion to be sure, but certainly if we're to be worried about the costs of smoking to society, we should consider the costs of obesity. There's no sin tax on butter, mayonnaise, and sugar.
Hell, in 2005, the health care costs due to car accident related injuries and deaths exceeded $99 billion. That is quite a lot. Shouldn't we be doing something to stop people from driving? Or, rather, should they drive more carefully? Perhaps people should just not everywhere all the time? If you're not on the road, you can't crash your car.
I guess tobacco use is just more preventable. You can just say to people "DO NOT SMOKE EVAR", and all people have to do is not smoke. To avoid being obese, you have to watch what you eat, exercise, etc. If you decide to give up driving all the time, you have to sort of reassess your day-to-day activities, and probably budget time for other ways to get to work and so forth. It's a daily thing you have to be mindful of, whereas if you don't smoke, you just don't smoke. If no one smokes, then no one is subjected to (even secondhand) cigarette smoke. It's also easier to get addicted to cigarettes than it is to foie gras, but I have found (in my own experience) it's pretty easy to get addicting to being lazy and eating food that isn't particularly healthy.
I would rather they just make the damned things illegal, but not because I can't control myself and quit. I'm just getting sick of the "frog in the pot of boiling water" thing they're doing with cigarettes. They sure learned their lesson from prohibition in the 1920s.
posted by King Bee at 4:36 PM on June 21, 2011
Those graphic labels are fairly pissweak. Australia has had far more gruesome warnings since 2006.
http://www.quitnow.gov.au/internet/quitnow/publishing.nsf/Content/5C8355B3D05B0F65CA257825000D07C5/$File/mouth-throat-cancer.pdf
http://www.quitnow.gov.au/internet/quitnow/publishing.nsf/Content/5C8355B3D05B0F65CA257825000D07C5/$File/peripheral-vascular-disease.pdf
And we're banning all branding from 1 January 2012. Which Big Tobacco just hates.
BTW, how much does a pack of ciggies cost in the US? They're about $15 in Aus.
posted by wilful at 5:06 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
http://www.quitnow.gov.au/internet/quitnow/publishing.nsf/Content/5C8355B3D05B0F65CA257825000D07C5/$File/mouth-throat-cancer.pdf
http://www.quitnow.gov.au/internet/quitnow/publishing.nsf/Content/5C8355B3D05B0F65CA257825000D07C5/$File/peripheral-vascular-disease.pdf
And we're banning all branding from 1 January 2012. Which Big Tobacco just hates.
BTW, how much does a pack of ciggies cost in the US? They're about $15 in Aus.
posted by wilful at 5:06 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
wilful: it changes from state to state. In Texas, where I live, a pack of Natural American Spirit "mellow" (which means "light") is about $5.80 after all the taxes (if I buy them at the place that sells them as cheap as I can find them). In NYC, some brands go for more than $11 per pack.
posted by King Bee at 5:09 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by King Bee at 5:09 PM on June 21, 2011
US$5.60 for Camels in Indiana.
Is that $15 in Australian or U.S. dollars? I don't know what the exchange rate is between the two.
posted by double block and bleed at 5:15 PM on June 21, 2011
Is that $15 in Australian or U.S. dollars? I don't know what the exchange rate is between the two.
posted by double block and bleed at 5:15 PM on June 21, 2011
dbab: it's about 1 to 1 right now. $15 AUS is about $16 USD.
posted by King Bee at 5:16 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by King Bee at 5:16 PM on June 21, 2011
You can also do simple things to decrease your chances of having a car accident: Wearing seatbelts, buying a car with airbags and anti-lock brakes, driving defensively, avoiding drunk and distracted driving, etc. There is no way to making smoking safer for yourself.
posted by raysmj at 5:49 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by raysmj at 5:49 PM on June 21, 2011
Our chimp brains recognize one rule above all else: "reward good behavior".
That's exactly what another campaign down under is emphasising - in my opinion, with a better grasp of motivation than all the gory pictures & messages of impending doom.
Female version of the ad - can't find a better resolution version, sorry.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:52 PM on June 21, 2011
That's exactly what another campaign down under is emphasising - in my opinion, with a better grasp of motivation than all the gory pictures & messages of impending doom.
Female version of the ad - can't find a better resolution version, sorry.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:52 PM on June 21, 2011
Love the institutionalization of paternalism.
Compare decades of smoking cigs to decades of breathing the carcinogens in the exhaust of cars and diesel trucks.
Or to the "hot particles" in the air we're all breathing today as a result of Fukushima (MUCH riskier than smoking). Any plans for murals on the sides of nuclear plants? Nah, that's a risk that's acceptable to the State ... one we've all been conditioned to accept.
Any plans for warning wrappers on so-called leadership that displaces discussion of real concerns with dog-and-pony shows like The Weiner Crisis?
posted by Twang at 5:57 PM on June 21, 2011
Compare decades of smoking cigs to decades of breathing the carcinogens in the exhaust of cars and diesel trucks.
Or to the "hot particles" in the air we're all breathing today as a result of Fukushima (MUCH riskier than smoking). Any plans for murals on the sides of nuclear plants? Nah, that's a risk that's acceptable to the State ... one we've all been conditioned to accept.
Any plans for warning wrappers on so-called leadership that displaces discussion of real concerns with dog-and-pony shows like The Weiner Crisis?
posted by Twang at 5:57 PM on June 21, 2011
There is no way to making smoking safer for yourself.
"There is no such thing as a safer cigarette" rhetoric aside, there is a difference between smoking 5 additive-free cigarettes a day versus smoking 2 packs of Camels every day.
posted by King Bee at 5:57 PM on June 21, 2011
"There is no such thing as a safer cigarette" rhetoric aside, there is a difference between smoking 5 additive-free cigarettes a day versus smoking 2 packs of Camels every day.
posted by King Bee at 5:57 PM on June 21, 2011
Also, these things reduce the amount of tar that enters your lungs as you smoke. That is, by anyone's definition, a "safer" cigarette.
posted by King Bee at 6:10 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by King Bee at 6:10 PM on June 21, 2011
So many ignorant smokers in here carping on about how this couldn't possibly reduce smoking.
Guess what? It does and is has (scroll down to "A12.1.3 Evidence about the effects of health warnings").
I quote (emphasis mine): "In May 2009 the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project released a comprehensive assessment of the impact of health warnings internationally.29 The ITC Project is an ongoing international study that now covers 19 countries around the world.30 This report evaluates health warnings on tobacco products (including text and graphic warnings).
There is no doubt that warnings have an impact on smokers.
They are frequently noticed and read (or looked at) and they sometimes invoke thought about the harms of smoking and thoughts about quitting; and they occasionally lead to smokers forgoing cigarettes they would otherwise have smoked. Some smokers also take steps to avoid stronger warnings, this being more so for graphic than text warnings. In all cases studied, new warnings (strengthened either with increased size and or use of graphics) have been more effective in stimulating targeted reactions than those they replaced. Some of this effect is due to novelty, but it is clear that objectively stronger messages persistently evoke greater levels of responses than weaker ones.
Introduction of stronger health warnings has been shown to have increased knowledge of the subject matter contained in the warnings both in Canada29, 32 and in Australia in 1987,22 in 199511, 200633 and in 2009.28, 29 "
If anyone whining about this has better evidence that warnings work, I'd _love_ to see it.
posted by smoke at 6:12 PM on June 21, 2011
Guess what? It does and is has (scroll down to "A12.1.3 Evidence about the effects of health warnings").
I quote (emphasis mine): "In May 2009 the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project released a comprehensive assessment of the impact of health warnings internationally.29 The ITC Project is an ongoing international study that now covers 19 countries around the world.30 This report evaluates health warnings on tobacco products (including text and graphic warnings).
There is no doubt that warnings have an impact on smokers.
They are frequently noticed and read (or looked at) and they sometimes invoke thought about the harms of smoking and thoughts about quitting; and they occasionally lead to smokers forgoing cigarettes they would otherwise have smoked. Some smokers also take steps to avoid stronger warnings, this being more so for graphic than text warnings. In all cases studied, new warnings (strengthened either with increased size and or use of graphics) have been more effective in stimulating targeted reactions than those they replaced. Some of this effect is due to novelty, but it is clear that objectively stronger messages persistently evoke greater levels of responses than weaker ones.
Introduction of stronger health warnings has been shown to have increased knowledge of the subject matter contained in the warnings both in Canada29, 32 and in Australia in 1987,22 in 199511, 200633 and in 2009.28, 29 "
If anyone whining about this has better evidence that warnings work, I'd _love_ to see it.
posted by smoke at 6:12 PM on June 21, 2011
in 199511, 200633
And I'd love to see how they pulled data from the future!
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:21 PM on June 21, 2011
And I'd love to see how they pulled data from the future!
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:21 PM on June 21, 2011
King Bee: Believe what you want to believe, but there have been plenty of studies showing that "light" cigarettes are not safer, and claims to that effect by tobacco companies have long since been banned.
posted by raysmj at 6:33 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by raysmj at 6:33 PM on June 21, 2011
Causal smoking, or smoking just a few per day or on the weeks, is also not safer. The only thing that's safer is not smoking at all.
posted by raysmj at 6:38 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by raysmj at 6:38 PM on June 21, 2011
Taking less tar into your lungs is safer than taking more tar into your lungs. Hence, smoking fewer cigarettes is safer than smoking many more cigarettes. Smoking no cigarettes would be best, I'm not denying that.
posted by King Bee at 7:00 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by King Bee at 7:00 PM on June 21, 2011
Causal smoking, or smoking just a few per day or on the weeks, is also not safer. The only thing that's safer is not smoking at all.
wait, how is less smoking not better than more smoking? I'm honestly confused by this. The study you linked to only says that light smoking isn't good and raises your risk of health problems, not that it's the same as smoking more...doesn't it?
If anyone whining about this has better evidence that warnings work, I'd _love_ to see it.
The tone of that comment aside, people are likely speaking from their own experience. As a former smoker, I can tell you in my case at least the warnings didn't mean a thing to me and didn't factor in to my decision to quit in the slightest. My friends and I found some of them funny; particularly the "bad teeth" one which people would frequently put over their mouths in the pub for a sight gag. Anyways, I think that in concert with a massive media campaign, bad publicity, and less smoking in public, TV, and movies that smoking is not as desirable or socially acceptable as it once was. It would be very difficult to isolate the effects of warnings on labels from the societal pressure, the hugely increased cost, and the omnipresent concerted campaign to get people to stop smoking.
posted by Hoopo at 7:31 PM on June 21, 2011
wait, how is less smoking not better than more smoking? I'm honestly confused by this. The study you linked to only says that light smoking isn't good and raises your risk of health problems, not that it's the same as smoking more...doesn't it?
If anyone whining about this has better evidence that warnings work, I'd _love_ to see it.
The tone of that comment aside, people are likely speaking from their own experience. As a former smoker, I can tell you in my case at least the warnings didn't mean a thing to me and didn't factor in to my decision to quit in the slightest. My friends and I found some of them funny; particularly the "bad teeth" one which people would frequently put over their mouths in the pub for a sight gag. Anyways, I think that in concert with a massive media campaign, bad publicity, and less smoking in public, TV, and movies that smoking is not as desirable or socially acceptable as it once was. It would be very difficult to isolate the effects of warnings on labels from the societal pressure, the hugely increased cost, and the omnipresent concerted campaign to get people to stop smoking.
posted by Hoopo at 7:31 PM on June 21, 2011
Because people smoke them harder to get the nic fix, is one explanation. But the research shows that it's not healthier. And people are out there claiming that *everyone* knows how bad cigarettes are for you? Go talk to the dingbats who tell you that American Spirit is so much better for you, then do a little research on those, who makes them, etc., etc.
posted by raysmj at 7:35 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by raysmj at 7:35 PM on June 21, 2011
King Bee writes "Hell, in 2005, the health care costs due to car accident related injuries and deaths exceeded $99 billion. That is quite a lot. Shouldn't we be doing something to stop people from driving? Or, rather, should they drive more carefully? Perhaps people should just not everywhere all the time? If you're not on the road, you can't crash your car."
The government does a lot to reduce the fatalities caused by driving. Mandated safety equipment; licensing, minimum bumper heights; street design, traffic enforcement to name a few.
posted by Mitheral at 7:50 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
The government does a lot to reduce the fatalities caused by driving. Mandated safety equipment; licensing, minimum bumper heights; street design, traffic enforcement to name a few.
posted by Mitheral at 7:50 PM on June 21, 2011 [1 favorite]
They mention that the slope tapers off after the 1-4 cig range. Is there any documentation of what this slope looks like regarding the other levels of cig consumption?
posted by josher71 at 7:55 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by josher71 at 7:55 PM on June 21, 2011
Yeah, I guess I'm a dingbat. Sorry. Surely there's no difference between inhaling benzene, formaldehyde, ammonia, and acetone and not inhaling those things. I couldn't find a study where they had subjects inhale those things (outside the context of smoking cigarettes), and a control group that didn't. Weird.
What kinds of cigarettes did the people in your study you cited smoke? I didn't see that.
Anyways, yeah, I'm stupid, because the Santa Fe Natural Tobacco company is owned by RJ Reynolds, so automatically they're evil. Thanks for making me see the light, finally. I guess I'll start smoking 2 packs a day then, just to spite society with the extra cost, since it really makes no difference in my health.
You could have done without that final insult to me, raysmj. But I won't agree that a study that says "smoking lightly is still risky" means "smoking lightly is completely equivalent from a health aspect to smoking heavily". I'd have to be a dingbat to believe that. You're serious though, that you don't see the difference in the "per 100,000 person years" row in the 1-4 per day smokers' column versus the 25+ per day smokers' column? For lung cancer in men, it's 24 versus 266. That is a ridiculous difference. Believe what you want to believe.
on preview: Indeed, Mitheral, they do. Is it enough? Again, maybe we do need warnings in every car about the horrors that abound from crashing.
I'm checking out of this thread, getting too angry. Sorry.
posted by King Bee at 8:02 PM on June 21, 2011
What kinds of cigarettes did the people in your study you cited smoke? I didn't see that.
Anyways, yeah, I'm stupid, because the Santa Fe Natural Tobacco company is owned by RJ Reynolds, so automatically they're evil. Thanks for making me see the light, finally. I guess I'll start smoking 2 packs a day then, just to spite society with the extra cost, since it really makes no difference in my health.
You could have done without that final insult to me, raysmj. But I won't agree that a study that says "smoking lightly is still risky" means "smoking lightly is completely equivalent from a health aspect to smoking heavily". I'd have to be a dingbat to believe that. You're serious though, that you don't see the difference in the "per 100,000 person years" row in the 1-4 per day smokers' column versus the 25+ per day smokers' column? For lung cancer in men, it's 24 versus 266. That is a ridiculous difference. Believe what you want to believe.
on preview: Indeed, Mitheral, they do. Is it enough? Again, maybe we do need warnings in every car about the horrors that abound from crashing.
I'm checking out of this thread, getting too angry. Sorry.
posted by King Bee at 8:02 PM on June 21, 2011
Well, RJR's history as a company speaks for itself, and the packaging on these claimed that smoking in moderation is OK--which, as noted, it's not. RJR has been forced to admit that these claims are utterly false.
posted by raysmj at 8:14 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by raysmj at 8:14 PM on June 21, 2011
Here in Taiwan such images were implemented a year or so ago. As a smoker I can say sometimes they annoy me, which gives me stress, which makes me want to smoke more! =0
posted by rmmcclay at 8:37 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by rmmcclay at 8:37 PM on June 21, 2011
They have these in Australia, and I really dislike them. I'm not a smoker, but when I hang out with smokers I'm already dealing with their secondhand smoke. I don't need to also look at photos of gangrenous feet and diseased lungs.
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 10:28 PM on June 21, 2011
posted by Lovecraft In Brooklyn at 10:28 PM on June 21, 2011
Study of American Spirit.
That study only compares hand-rolled, unfiltered American Spirits with bidis or unspecified "subject's choice" brands, and they don't even attempt to measure health outcomes - only blood nicotine levels. Weak.
I see what you're getting at: no level of smoking is safe. But you seem to be arguing that all levels of smoking are equally deleterious, and none of the studies you've cited have supported that in any way.
posted by dialetheia at 11:19 PM on June 21, 2011
That study only compares hand-rolled, unfiltered American Spirits with bidis or unspecified "subject's choice" brands, and they don't even attempt to measure health outcomes - only blood nicotine levels. Weak.
I see what you're getting at: no level of smoking is safe. But you seem to be arguing that all levels of smoking are equally deleterious, and none of the studies you've cited have supported that in any way.
posted by dialetheia at 11:19 PM on June 21, 2011
So many ignorant smokers in here carping on about how this couldn't possibly reduce smoking.
Guess what? It does and is has
Yeeeah! Beat that straw man!! Get him!
posted by heatvision at 5:51 AM on June 22, 2011
Guess what? It does and is has
Yeeeah! Beat that straw man!! Get him!
posted by heatvision at 5:51 AM on June 22, 2011
We used to carry ugly paper cigarette packs in pretty "cigarette cases" years ago. Looks like there will be a new market for them.
If I still smoked, I'd just come up with a case to put my smokes in - I'd not even bother looking at the pictures - and I doubt that I'm alone.
posted by aryma at 10:14 AM on June 22, 2011
If I still smoked, I'd just come up with a case to put my smokes in - I'd not even bother looking at the pictures - and I doubt that I'm alone.
posted by aryma at 10:14 AM on June 22, 2011
Did you know that nicotine is protective against Parkinson's Disease? It is - Google it.
posted by aryma at 10:15 AM on June 22, 2011
posted by aryma at 10:15 AM on June 22, 2011
The UK equivalent images on fag packets can be seen here.
posted by idiomatika at 11:07 AM on June 22, 2011
posted by idiomatika at 11:07 AM on June 22, 2011
"Fag" means cigarette here, not homosexual, in case American eyebrows are raised at the use of that word
posted by idiomatika at 11:08 AM on June 22, 2011
posted by idiomatika at 11:08 AM on June 22, 2011
WARNING: Cigarettes can cause LUNG CANCER! (Also you live in America, so it's not like you'll be able to have it looked at either)
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 11:52 AM on June 22, 2011
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 11:52 AM on June 22, 2011
« Older The Debut of 40,000 Young Filmmakers | I believe that they should, our education over... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Also, Previously.
posted by Mister Fabulous at 10:43 AM on June 21, 2011