New Graphic Warning Labels on Cigarettes: Scary Enough to Quit?

[claire]

The problem is, the pictures are nonsense. There is no proven, direct causal link between smoking and the things they depict: we all know smokers who don't have just the three (black) teeth in their mouths; most of them aren't walking around with the gangrenous foot in the photo and so on. I'm quite sure that smoking doesn't have health benefits, but I am sure that the pictures cease to have any real effect. One here (Bailey, I'm sure you've seen this VERY SCARY one) has just a pair of slightly wrinkled hands. Whoa! Off to flush the smokes.

Personally, I'm utterly sick of the widening of the net of what is unacceptable or abusive. There was once a time that educating your children, teaching them to read, feeding them decently and helping them to become valuable members of society, capable of making a positive contribution, treating them well et c were all considered positives. But all that pales to nothing if you happen to smoke within 200 metres of them--makes me a child abuser unfit to parent. What a crock. Intolerance is so much more damaging to the fabric of society than a few ciggies.

[TomTomKent]

There are few sirect causal links, but in most cases what the current UK labelling states is correct: "Smoking greatly increases the risk of..." The increase of risk to a lot of diseases have been proven beyond reasonable doubt. However, as science is not stationary that does not mean better research may shed new light, probably by isolating where the increase of risk comes from supplying the causal link. (Or there is always the risk of new research showing a different trend, but there would be a lot of evidence to overturn).

It is far from a nonsense.

[babybird67]

intolerance doesn't give a child lung cancer or asthma.

[glyn]

The problem is, the pictures are nonsense. There is no proven, direct causal link between smoking and the things they depict: we all know smokers who don't have just the three (black) teeth in their mouths; most of them aren't walking around with the gangrenous foot in the photo and so on. I'm quite sure that smoking doesn't have health benefits, but I am sure that the pictures cease to have any real effect. One here (Bailey, I'm sure you've seen this VERY SCARY one) has just a pair of slightly wrinkled hands. Whoa! Off to flush the smokes.

Personally, I'm utterly sick of the widening of the net of what is unacceptable or abusive. There was once a time that educating your children, teaching them to read, feeding them decently and helping them to become valuable members of society, capable of making a positive contribution, treating them well et c were all considered positives. But all that pales to nothing if you happen to smoke within 200 metres of them--makes me a child abuser unfit to parent. What a crock. Intolerance is so much more damaging to the fabric of society than a few ciggies.

I agree with you entirely Claire,but there are those who would wish to dictate to us all exactly how we should live.They know better,the same people who told us to "drinka pinta milk a day" now tell us its unhealthy,the people who told us sacharinne was a healthier alternative than sugar,now inform us sacharine could be a contributory cause of certain cancers. My advice is Eat,drink and be merry (and smoke if u wish) for tommorrow we may die....and one day "tommorow "Will come-for each and every one of us.
And if smoking within 200 metres of a child makes the smoker a child abuser,does it also make the motorist who spews out his petrol or deisel lfumes into the atmosphere and drives within the 200 metre radius of a child, a child abuser too?
It would be a little ironic to give up smoking,only to die from the effects of the predicted Swine flu/pig flu epidemic the very next day.
Not that I am endorsing smoking ,by any means.but there far too much lecturing going on these days,and similarly to you,Im sick and tired of it.

[Phil H]

In my youth, in an agricultural English county, people lived life-styles (things they ate and drank) and smoked - pipes, ciggies, cigars and with very strong tobacco - and yet they lived in many cases to ripe old ages.

I think it was the BALANCE that helped - they walked everywhere, didn't drive, got lots of fresh air, lived outdoors a lot, did more physical things (washing day in the 50s and before started early and was hard work with podgers and poshers and wash-boards); didn't become couch potatoes and were early to rise, early to bed. Perhaps all that compensated for the niccotine, fats, alcohol etc they imbibed.

On smoking I remember the ads on TV from the 50s/early 60s - "You're never alone with a Strand!"; "cool as a mountain stream."

Its a different world.

Phil

[DirectorDave]

Not a chance they would make me quit.....we have had them in the UK for quite a while.

In the UK smokers contribute more in taxes to the NHS than they take out and die earlier reducing care costs.

People should be made aware of the detrimental effects smoking can have on health, and helped to quit if they wish to.

Smoking is fantastic......thats why we do it.

[Ally]

I really do not get the whine about how hard it is to quit. I smoked for a year in college, decided it was nasty and my clothes stank and my hair stank and my mouth tasted like an ashtray every morning and quit. Every once in a while, for the nostalgia factor, I'll have a puff off a friend when I am good and margaritaed, but it's not like I am crack shaking on the street the next day to get a pack.

My best friend is a smoker, and she once quit for 8 months..and then went back. Which tells me it is not purely a chemical or physical addiction, it's a behavior that people are too weak to just put down and be done with it.

The only way this will work is a sort of behavior modification tactic, if that's how they are looking at it. Reinforcing the negative consequence every time they do it. There is a difference between "knowing" something is bad for you, and having that knowledge reinforced every time you go to get the hit of the pleasure. There was a study done where they hit (rats?) some kind of animal with an electric jolt every time they went to eat, and eventually they quit eating completely to avoid the negative reinforcement.

This is the equivalent of the electric jolt--but wouldn't it be cool if they could do an actual taser hit every time you bought a pack?

[Errata]

I really do not get the whine about how hard it is to quit. I smoked for a year in college, decided it was nasty and my clothes stank and my hair stank and my mouth tasted like an ashtray every morning and quit. Every once in a while, for the nostalgia factor, I'll have a puff off a friend when I am good and margaritaed, but it's not like I am crack shaking on the street the next day to get a pack.

My best friend is a smoker, and she once quit for 8 months..and then went back. Which tells me it is not purely a chemical or physical addiction, it's a behavior that people are too weak to just put down and be done with it.

The only way this will work is a sort of behavior modification tactic, if that's how they are looking at it. Reinforcing the negative consequence every time they do it. There is a difference between "knowing" something is bad for you, and having that knowledge reinforced every time you go to get the hit of the pleasure. There was a study done where they hit (rats?) some kind of animal with an electric jolt every time they went to eat, and eventually they quit eating completely to avoid the negative reinforcement.

This is the equivalent of the electric jolt--but wouldn't it be cool if they could do an actual taser hit every time you bought a pack?

Well, to be fair, it is a combination of both. Cigarettes really are very addictive. On par with heroin if the scientists can be believed. But the physical addiction is much shorter than other substances. When a person quits smoking, all of the nicotine is out of their system in about 48 hours, and all of the nicotine receptors snap back pretty quickly, with another couple of days or so. So if you can quit for a week, the physical addiction should be gone. Except oddly the digestive system, which trains itself to work in concert with nicotine, so eating is kind of a thing for a few months after quitting.

Unfortunately, most smokers have a huge psychological addiction to the cigarettes. People smoke more when they are stressed or upset. Cigarettes calm their nerves. People who start smoking early enough never really learn to handle stress without the chemical crutch. Since quitting smoking is a very stressful event, it becomes a cyclical process. Now in theory, quitting smoking should free up enough money to get a therapist to teach you to handle stress, but it never really works like that.

It is both a matter of will, and not. You quit smoking easily, and that's great. Some people can do that. Personally, I have a highly addictive personality. It goes along with being bipolar. I have gotten addicted to every substance I ever tried, including medication that was in fact prescribed to me. After almost killing myself on prescription painkillers after surgery, I learned very quickly not to try things. But cigarettes are my last vice. And to be frank, even though I know I HAVE to quit, the idea is terrifying.

[cappuccina]

Cigarettes are very adddictive for a lot of people; studies show it (....sorry Ally....we each have things that are difficult for us to change....for some it is cigarettes...other people have other issues)...For example....I could get on your case, Ally as to why you need to drink....I don't need to drink - why do you....see how nasty this sounds??

Sadly, I don't think the pics will help the hard core addicts....not even enclosing a piece of petrified lung tissue from an actual dead smoker would help them...

Errata...pls. PM me; I have some really good info. for you...

[Ally]

I don't need to drink. If you smoked as often as I drank (alcohol I presume we are talking about not water) you wouldn't go through an entire pack in a year.

See I don't "need" to do anything. I do everything in moderation, when I want, and control my indulgences without letting them control me.

[Abby Normal]

And of course there is Mark Twain's great line -- "It's easy to quit smoking. I've done it hundreds of times."

c.d.

Or this:

Non-smoker: You should really quit smoking.

Smoker: (indignantly) I have never been a quitter!

[cappuccina]

I see, Ally....you still don't get it...

Ah, but you do need to do certain things...Try going for an entire day without insulting someone! You certainly are not moderate about proclaiming yourself a superior human being. Wait a minute...I just had an epiphany, since you have no children of your own, you feel you don't need to be a role model for anyone...Now, I get it...

[Limehouse]

There is no doubt that the hammering home of the message that smoking is harmful has reduced the smoker population by an enormous amount. When I was small most adults smoked and many people started smoking at a very young age - perhaps eleven or tweleve.

When I was a teenager - in the 1970s - I was very much in the monority as a non-smoker. It was common to sit in a cinema and watch the film through a fug of fag smoke and you'd go home with your clothes and hair reeking of smoke. People even smoked in shops.

Gradually though the message started getting through. There were adverts on TV warning you of the dangers of smoking and articles in newspapers and magazines. Slogans appeared on fag packets and on advertisements for fags. Many people successfully gave up smoking.

However - I don't know whether additional hard-hitting images and warning slogans would reduce the amount of smokers further. The reducation of public places in which people are allowed to smoke has possibly helped some people cut down. However - I know that there is still a lot of concern about young women who are taking up smoking at a younger age and smoking more fags than young men. Additionally - there are just too many people smoking canabis - which is very harmful to physical and mental health. A much stronger message needs to go out about the dangers of prolonged canabis abuse.

Finally - the thing that is most alarming to me is the harm being done by the 24/7 availability of cheap alcohol. The cost to the health service of people suffering short-term illness and injuries due to the consumption of too much booze - and the cost of treating a huge increase in long-term health problems caused by alcohol addiction - is growing year on year and the financial costs are just one issue. There are huge social costs to families and neighbourhoods from the abuse of alcohol. I am just so weary of sitting with young people and hearing how their lives have beeb lighted by one or bth parents' abuse of alcohol. I am weary too of hearing of just another young person known to me who has ended up in hospital over the weekend because of the over consumption of alcohol.

What's to be done? Well - education and honest information is a good start. However - I fear that there are just too many depressed and unhappy individuals out there for whom alcohol and canabis or tobacco is their comfort.

[cappuccina]

Excellent post, Limehouse!

In the US we also have the added very dangerous but relatively cheap crack and methamphetamines which have wreaked havoc on society as well...

[Ally]

So let me see if I get this straight. Now people who are capable of controlling themselves and not indulging in alcohol, cigarettes or drugs, should apparently be ashamed or keep quiet about the fact that we don't feel the need to constantly give in to our own weaknesses.

Interesting what is considered to be a valuable human trait nowadays. Really, one should be proud that they are too weak to control themselves. We should all encourage human weakness and over-indulgence. We should pat them on the back and go you're only human. That's what makes people great. They exalt in being better than the average animal, until it comes to their own base behaviors, then they want to say that's just human nature.