Originally Posted By 999HAUNTS Looks like it's official..in 2012 makers will have to choose one of the following labels. Some aren't that shocking, really, but a few are. What do you think? <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44171861/ns/health-cancer/?gt1=43001" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44...t1=43001</a>
Originally Posted By -em I think its a stupid idea that I don't see many people going "oh I've ignored the warnings for years but this picture of a dead guy will make me quit" I think we need to stop playing "mommy" and spend the millions doing actual good To me it'd be like forcing McDs to put pics of morbidly obese people and their medical issues on the boxes of big macs -em
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost I have to agree with em. I was a long time smoker and quite frankly all the warnings in the world meant little to me. I remember when there was a brand of cigarettes that gave away coupons with each pack sort of like green stamps. Even back then we used to joke that we were saving them up to pay for the surgery. Smoking is an addiction. It is a very strong addiction. People die everyday of drug OD, and you have to wonder, if they see that why did they ever start. It is a much deeper drive then just life or death. I would never call it an illness because that, to me, is just a cop out. It is an addiction. It is extremely difficult to stop and those that are willing to look the possibility of death in the face daily just to do it, have a much stronger drive to continue smoking then to live. It's that simple. Does anyone really think that putting a bunch of actors on cigarettes, laying around looking dead, are going to amount to anything under that type of influence? Humans have a major flaw in their wiring. We believe that the bad stuff happens to other people. Until we realize and care, that it could be us, nothing is going to alter the desire for that cigarette.
Originally Posted By avimagine Well for personal reasons i'm very very anti-substance abuse. I really think we need much harsher penalities for those who are unwilling to stop. We should make rehab free. I think say tripling the taxes on cigarettes may help a bit more then these photos.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Some smart entrepreneur is going to make big money selling pack-wrappers that people can use to hide those photos.
Originally Posted By TXDISNEYNERD RT - I was thinking the same thing. It isn't going to stop anyone from actually buying them, but they will want to buy something to put them in so they don't have to look at those disturbing pics.
Originally Posted By 999HAUNTS Funny, but my first thought was that some joker might start collecting the whole set.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>so they don't have to look at those disturbing pics.<<< Funny, but I didn't find them all that disturbing. When I quit in the late 90's they were trying everything. Even had Brook Shields in tight jeans saying..."lips that touch cigarettes will never touch mine". That was almost laughable. Who cares, and was I supposed to believe that if I quit Brooks would show up at my door...lips at the ready? The promotion that struck me the most was a very simple one. No one said a word but it flashed from one picture to the next of animals. Each one with a lit cigarette in their mouths. There were dogs, cats, ducks, horses, chickens and many others shown. At the end of the commercial were the words..."It's not natural for you either". All I could say was, man, you are right. I remembered that ad during the beginning when it was the hardest. For me, it helped a lot. Along with drugs like Wellbutrin and the Patch. Maybe it was just me but I never responded well to threats.
Originally Posted By avimagine Well there goes my extortion scheme for goofyernmost. I think people will just become destintized. Here in Ontario they have huge warning labels (black and white larger then the brand label itself), people just bought sleaves (tartan seemed popular at first). Also retailers cannot display cigs, they need to be kept behind generic grey doors with only the price displayed. If you get convicted of selling to a minor you get to "proudly' display a sign that says something like I was convicted of selling cigarettes to minors and cannot sell cigarettes in Ontario". You then need to cover the display with black cloth just to "prove the point". Beaurocracy rocks!
Originally Posted By iamsally I wish warning labels worked but alas, my sister continued to smoke until she lapsed into a coma 3 days before she died of lung cancer. And my other sister smoked an additional 5 years after that. I never smoked but have observed that people quit when they are ready. Period! But this does remind me of the movie "Crazy People" where they come up with the campaign that puts the warnings in the adds themselves. *Pulminary disease, maybe. Flavor definately.* Paraphrazed, I do not remember the exact line. >>>>To me it'd be like forcing McDs to put pics of morbidly obese people and their medical issues on the boxes of big macs<<<< Big 10-4 to that) And I find the pack-wrappers just plain commical. Whoda thought?
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost It also has to do with the fact that, in all probability, the people that do these ads or warnings don't smoke and never have. It is the same logic that has people saying to obese people...well just stop eating so much and get exercise...nothing too it. They lose sight of the reality that people don't jog to get thin...they jog because they are thin. If food, for example, is a substitute for loneliness, how do you give it up. If smoking is a substitute for high self esteem, how do you give it up. If alcohol is a substitute for happiness, how do you give it up. Over simplification, defined by those that really don't know, is a waste of effort. You have got to know what the reasons for self destruction are before you can find a way to alter that action. It is never just a physical addiction. It is, I believe, 99% mental addiction. People that smoke to much, drink to much or eat to much are not stupid. They know what they are doing to themselves and are powerless to stop it because there is a reason for their addiction that needs to be addressed before a light will show at the end of the tunnel. To quit any of the things mentioned above one has to truly want too. They cannot do it for someone else and there has to be reason, reward, if you will, at the end of the process
Originally Posted By iamsally I do find this interesting: The tobacco companies said the corpse photo is actually an actor with a fake scar, while the healthy lungs were sanitized to make the diseased organ look worse. Pot: "Hey kettle, you're black!!!!" Let's face it. The campaign for cigarettes has been one of the most manipulative/misrepresentative ever.
Originally Posted By tashajilek We had had these ad's for sometime now here in Canada. In fact all the cigarettes are now hidden in stores so the general public does not see them. They also keep hiking up the prices, they are a minimum of $10 a pack now. All these attemps doesnt really make a diffrence at all.
Originally Posted By YumaJohn This is all so ridiculous. The people that truly make money on cigarettes is the government. This is why they continue to be legal. If Philip Morris woke up one morning and said "We have seen the light! We will no longer sell cigarettes in the state of California" the blow to the revenue of the state would send it over the edge.More than it is already. I think cigs should be banned outright, but it will NEVER happen as long as the people in charge make so much money from them.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Banning the sale of cigarettes will have exactly the same effect as prohibition. The continued limitations of locations where smoking is acceptable coupled with social stigma will eventually stem the tide. It has come a long way in just 20 years, in fact, an amazingly long way. When you get to the point where you can outlaw smoking in bars, I think you have pretty much won the war. All you have to do now is wait for the players to retire. The tobacco states are going to be the slowest to adapt these rules, but from what I can tell, here in the Carolina's, it has made some strong headway.
Originally Posted By mele I think the new labels are incredibly stupid. I get that people don't care about their health...but what always amazes me is how women (or men) can smoke when they know it will ruin their skin, teeth, hair and give them the most disgusting, raspy voices. Plus all of the phlegm hocking...I just don't get it. Many women start smoking to stay thin and try so hard to be sexy...and yet they make themselves completely and irreparably unattractive thru years of smoke. Makes no sense to me.
Originally Posted By CuriousConstance "This is all so ridiculous. The people that truly make money on cigarettes is the government. This is why they continue to be legal. If Philip Morris woke up one morning and said "We have seen the light! We will no longer sell cigarettes in the state of California" the blow to the revenue of the state would send it over the edge.More than it is already. I think cigs should be banned outright, but it will NEVER happen as long as the people in charge make so much money from them." I live in Oregon, and we use a lot of our cigarette tax to help fund the state medicaid since cigarette smokers cause such a tax on health care in general.
Originally Posted By avimagine tasha, I never knew that Our ads are just white text on a black background though. Smokin' is cool dontcha know just like other forms of substance abuse?
