Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Strap *this* to the back of your cat.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                                             

Cigarette Warnings

Embarass people into stopping smoking
  (-2)
(-2)
  [vote for,
against]

As amusing as the the new style warnings on cigarette packets are (my personal favorite is smoking will cause you to die a slow painful lingering death, or words to that effect), they seem to be having little effect on the number of people smoking (no one i know has given up thus far!). If the government really want to discourage smoking, why not change the packaging to read things like "i smoke to compensate my tiny todger", or "i smoke because i have a pathetic lack of will power", or even "i still smoke because i am so blindingly studid that even the old style packaging complete with death threats didn't stop me". These messages should be printed on the packaging, as well as on each ciggarette (which could be coloured pink or be wrapped in glittery tinsel!), as i am sure this would remove any "cool" conceptions of smoking!. I am aware that all smoking halfbakers will probably fishbone me automatically (no smoking in the bakery though i hope!), but hopefully there are enough non smokers who like this idea!
MikeOliver, Apr 19 2003

Keeping Warnings Ineffective http://www.quit.org...ndI/fandi/c05s6.htm
How the tobacco industry fights efective pack warnings; the Australian experience [jpk, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

What the warning lable doesn't tell you http://www.acsh.org.../smoking/index.html
ACSH's pamphlet on the vast gap between what the warning label tells you and what the facts are [jpk, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

Canada's graphic warning labels are effective http://tobaccofreek...se.php3?Display=432
Research shows that Canada's new graphic pack warning labels are effective [jpk]

Research findings on warning labels http://www.ash.org..../html/warnings.html
summary of findings from a number of studies on the effectiveness of health warnings [jpk, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

(?) Research findings on warning labels http://www.ash.org..../html/warnings.html
summary of findings from a number of studies on the effectiveness of health warnings [jpk, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 05 2004]

Death Cigarettes http://www.alastair...ages/cigarettes.htm
Picture of a packet of Death Cigarettes.
If you've ever seen any of the Silk Cut ads in the UK, go and see the linked page of Silk Cut ads. Quite interesting. [hippo, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004]

Warnings we'd like to see http://www.sptimes....d_you_to_know.shtml
What one person's tobacco death looks like. A warning you probably won't be seeing on a cigarette pack any time soon. [jpk, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 05 2004]

Warnings we'd like to see http://www.sptimes....d_you_to_know.shtml
What one person's tobacco death looks like. A warning you probably won't be seeing on a cigarette pack any time soon. [jpk, Oct 21 2004]

[link]






       Hmm
MikeOliver, Apr 19 2003
  

       Hitler was kicked out of school at age 8 for smoking. Look what happened. You should be ashamed of your elf.
thumbwax, Apr 19 2003
  

       A sound bite chip could bellow out a warning each time a cigarette is removed.
FarmerJohn, Apr 19 2003
  

       Baked (in a way) in Canada. Health Canada puts some really scary looking warnings on some of the packs, one has a photo of the inside of a diseased lung.
krelnik, Apr 19 2003
  

       And you’re right; it doesn't seem to be working.   

       //If the government really want to discourage smoking//
No government, of any political persuasion, wants to discourage smoking; it's far too good a cash cow.
angel, Apr 19 2003
  

       Warnings on packets just do not work. The damage from smoking is much too insidious. If the smoker could somehow be made aware of the stench of their breath.
The Kat, Apr 19 2003
  

       I am a smoker and I thank you [Mike Oliver] for the laugh. I would love to see this baked!!
Pericles, Apr 19 2003
  

       While you're at it, why don't you lobby to put warning labels on bags of heroin?
snarfyguy, Apr 19 2003
  

       Believe it or not, we've had this discussion before. We've still yet to arrive at a resolution.
snarfyguy, Apr 19 2003
  

       krelnik, i am well aware that there are already warnings on cigarette packets, did you actually read the text. Equally i am aware this is not working!!!! I am not suggesting whether or not smoking should be discouraged, but with the ban on advertising and the new style warnings, it is apparent that someone wants to discourage it! This would be a way of doing it!
MikeOliver, Apr 20 2003
  

       Q. is the ban on advertising only in the UK?
po, Apr 20 2003
  

       Europe i think! They are moving quite a few grand prix because of it!   

       Ps does anyone know how to pluralise grand prix???
MikeOliver, Apr 20 2003
  

       Grands Prix?
po, Apr 20 2003
  

       chill [kam]
po, Apr 20 2003
  

       //dollar signs on cigarette paper//

Kinda like snorting coke thru a hundred dollar bill? Doesn’t seem to work, does it?
pluterday, Apr 20 2003
  

       Is anyone familiar with what a "cigarrette load" is? I heard about them from my father, they were big in the early fifties --- a novelty item that is placed inside a cigarrette. After the cigarrette is smoked to a certain point, the "load" blows up, embarrassing the smoker with a curled up cigarrette end left in their mouth. Maybe these could be placed in one in every one hundred cigarrettes to discourage smoking?
colaaddict, Apr 20 2003
  

       Yes, the old "exploding cigar" trick. Someone's recently posted that (again) as a means of reducing smoking (or smokers).
snarfyguy, Apr 20 2003
  

       Go kick her ass.
bristolz, Apr 20 2003
  

       Folks, as much as I enjoy a good conspiracy theory, we might try an informed one here.

The history is: the tobacco industry has for over 30 years lobbied hard and successfully to keep warning labels tepid and ineffective: "could be hazardous" and so on.

The effect has been exactly what the industry wanted: enough pretend warning that the industry can use it in court to blame the customer, but nowhere near a accurate warning of what this product does to its customers.
Now, finally, after over 30 years, a few warning labels are beginning to emerge on packs without being watered down by the tobacco industry. The industry is fighting this very hard, it's not used to losing after 30 years, but the new warnings are getting out. And research shows they are effective.

//warnings on packets just do not work

Some warnings don't work, some do. The former are the ones we're all used to, and they're the ones the tobacco industry has gotten weakened. The latter are the recent ones, still by far the exception on packs sold.

The 1965 warning labels on cigarettes are now recognized as a master stroke by the tobacco industry. By accepting weak warnings into federal law, it pre-empted any effective warnings from the states, and locked out any progress on effective warnings for a generation. This became an example of "give an inch, gain a decade" strategy for the industry.

The industry is now fighting to keep the warnings not very effective: e.g. text instead of graphic, so the graphic of the pack or the ad overwhelms the text of the warning, and so on.

// No government, of any political persuasion, wants to discourage smoking; it's far too good a cash cow

This is true of the tobacco client states (Japan, Germany, and the US).

It's not true of most governments. Norway, for instance has mounted an enormously successful campaign that has greatly reduced smoking.

Even within the US, it varies. CA and MA, for instance, have also mounted successful campaigns that have reduced smoking. Other states have virtually gone into a partnership with the tobacco industry.

So it's not that simple.
jpk, Apr 21 2003
  

       Get off our backs please, if we want to enjoy something potentialy dangerous, thats our choice, people do dangerous things for fun all the time. Exp. Survivor - Nascar - Rock climbing - Parachuting - Bunjee jumping - on and on. I think people should not have public access to it (Corporate empire gone), and if someone wants to grow their own, or share it with their friends, let em.... Peace begins with tolerance
TimD, Apr 21 2003
  

       That didn't have to be said, fogfreak. Tobacco companies will not adopt strategies that make their product deliberately unappealing (exploding cigs, humiliating design, etc.). They're trying to make money (duh).
snarfyguy, Apr 21 2003
  

       I remember about 10 years ago Death cigarettes were very popular (see link). They had much more dramatic warnings than were legally necessary at the time but, of course, were sold as 'cool' rather than 'stupid'.
hippo, Apr 22 2003
  

       Sounds to me like a problem with the system, not smokers. What right will they take away next to ease the burden of corrupt financial institutions?
TimD, Apr 22 2003
  

       // if someone wants to grow their own, or share it with their friends, let em

Actually I'm totally in agreement with that.

The industry that got hundreds of millions addicted to product secretly engineered for addiction, that wasn't about growing your own.

And the resulting 10 million dead Americans since 1964, you'd find very few of them who grew their own either.

The product we're talking about is highly engineered by an industry that studied the brain neurochemistry of the customer, and modified the product to be as addictive as possible. We're not talking about homegrown here.

And we're sure not talking about sharing. This industry makes over $100 billion a year on this product. That's not done with sharing.

// Survivor - Nascar - Rock climbing - Parachuting - Bunjee jumping

This is the image the industry likes to project for the product -- a risk like any other, which customers take because they like the product so much.

In fact, most customers of this product don't like the product and want to quit. They don't take risk because they want to, but because they're addicted.

And in fact, it's not a risk like any other. Imagine if bungee jumping killed every third bungee jumper. THAT is the "risk" of the product in question. Imagine if parachuting killed every third parachutist, or rock climbing killed every third climber. How about if NASCAR killed a third of all drivers?

So the industry image: smoking is like adventure sports. You'll see it in millions of dollars of ads the industry buys every year. The reality is different. It's not as fun.
jpk, Apr 22 2003
  

       A bouncer at a Manhattan nightclub died Sunday after he was stabbed in a brawl that police said began when he tried to enforce the city's new ban on smoking in bars and restaurants.
Would that be a smoking-related death?
thumbwax, Apr 22 2003
  

       //if someone wants to grow their own, or share it with their friends//   

       You've hit on the ideal solution: Make it illegal to sell tobacco leaf-derived products for reward (or alternatively it should be very very highly taxed and priced out of the reach of children).   

       Addicted smokers would argue they have a right to continue to smoke and they have to get it somewhere. They can grow their own. The hassle of growing one's own plant will do everyone a world of good; literally. Keeping one's own plant, grown from seed, would limit the habit. I suppose it's a bit like Saudi Arabia. Hard-core alcoholics can always make a still, but a lack of booze in the shops and pubs cuts general consumption dramatically.   

       Anyway, the lack of a viable cigarette industry would see advertizing stopped overnight. Well maybe not entirely; I can imagine BAT advertising their premium seed blend.
FloridaManatee, Apr 23 2003
  

       Sorry, new to the bakery, but had to log in on this one. I smoke, wish I didn't, but I do. As for someone else paying my medical expenses because I'm stupid enough to smoke.... someone always pays. No matter the country, some are worse than others, there is always a program to subsidize someone elses stupidity. If its not one, than its another.... it will never go away.
westboy2, Apr 23 2003
  

       //Hitler was kicked out of school at age 8 for smoking//

But Conan O'Brien made it seem funnier if Hitler didn't smoke.
"Here is one of the cigarette industry's anti-smoking ads."

Cut to black & white shot of Hitler in bunker, writing something on paper. Nazi guard enters from left.
"Thein cigarettes, mein Fuhrer," he says.
"NEIN!"
Tagline, on black background: "BE LIKE HITLER. DON'T SMOKE."
(sorry about my lack of German spelling)
AfroAssault, Apr 23 2003
  

       -UnaBubba - As the system stands now, I agree.
TimD, Apr 23 2003
  

       So what the ad is realy saying, is be like the people who forged Hitlers mind and made the cigarettes an issue. Of course im not considering the age factor here, he was only 8.
TimD, Apr 23 2003
  

       maybe the warnings on the cig packets are a competition, like "Collect all 5"!   

       tis a possibility...
Geoff69, Oct 06 2003
  

       Wow that has stressed me out, its scary...... I need a cigarette.
Gulherme, Oct 06 2003
  

       People already started to use covers in their packets, so this is all useless...
NeoPiter, Jul 23 2004
  

       how about people merely taking responsibility for their own actions (smoking, guns, mcdonalds, etc) and the govt stop bailing out those who dont (enron, american airlines, welfare recipients,...).
chrish, Jul 30 2004
  

       Personally, I am a non-smoker. I don't really care for it, I also have no problem with it. All this basically boils down to the non-smokers forcing their beliefs on smokers. Something people in this world love to do, anything from religion to government. Somebody is always out there forcing others that their way is best.   

       Children know smoking is going to hurt them. They also know the label on fireworks says "place on ground, light fuse, get away" and how a firework can hurt them. Do you think that embarassing them for lighting fireworks in their hands and throwing them is going to stop them? Doubt it. They're going to find a place where others welcome firework throwing, so they can throw fireworks until they're content. So is the situation today. People ban smoking, smokers congregate in the most inhospitable areas and get pissy at non-smokers for making them go way out of their way.   

       Personally, I think there should be areas where smokers can enjoy a cigarette without giving off "deadly second-hand smoke" to whiny non-smokers. Say, a restaurant split in half by a wall. A portion of an office building dedicated only to smokers. All with vents. I can just imagine a smoker's productivity after a full day's work without a cigarette.   

       Alot of what you hear about smoking, the reasons why, what age, etc. is misleading. Most just want to see what all the fuss is about. As long as there are smokers out there catching the blame for something they won't give up doing and being humiliated or taxed for, there's a kid out there thinking, "This must be something great. I've got to at least try it."   

       You can't just ban smoking alltogether. People will persevere. They will find a way. Any Americans out there remember the Prohibition? It did anything but stop drinking. It made it glamorous. It made anyone who got caught drinking a hero.   

       In short, don't humiliate/tax a smoker. They won't stop, and it will raise curiosity in the habit. Ban it alltogether, and you have another Prohibition.
destructionism, Jul 30 2004
  

       // Red meat is after all the major cause //   

       No - as you point out in the same paragraph, the blinding stupidity of the general public is the major cause.
8th of 7, Sep 08 2016
  

       It appears that all your fishbones were lost in the Great Hard Drive Crash (of 2004, if I recall right).
Vernon, Sep 08 2016
  

       Thanks to our overblown omnipresent media I think people know the score. It's 2016. Smoking, drinking, overeating, base jumping, spearing fish among sharks -- if you wanna do it, do it. If you get munched on or start hacking up blood it's not like you can say you didn't know there were hazards involved. Must we nanny everybody who insists on standing on their motorcycle seat on the freeway?
whatrock, Sep 08 2016
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle