Newsflash: This waste of money won't end smoking!!

1. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 13 years ago

   Recently, images are being added to cigarette packaging.
   
   http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-100 … =page;next
   
   It won't work.
   
   Just thought I'd point out this complete waste of taxpayer money.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      OutWestposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Is the taxpayer even paying for this or is it the cigarette companies?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Even if the companies pay for it - how much money did the FDA blow trying to get the labels put on / designing them?

         replyreport
         1. 57

            OutWestposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I don't know...how much?  Any?

            replyreport
      2. 60

         Richard Sirotaposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I agree with Evan. If the tobacco companies paid for this the cost will be passed on to the consumer.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      KyleBearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It might work. Since the frequency of smoking is already going down steadily, who knows, it might give it an extra boost

      replyreport
   3. 61

      deblippposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      This is very similar to the packaging in Australia, so I imagine there are statistics on its effectiveness Down Under. I wonder what the results are?

      replyreport
   4. 63

      prettydarkhorseposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Even if you put an image of a dead person bec of smoking  or one dying of cancer in the cigarette pack, it wont deter some to smoke, it is an addiction. The reason they are able to look at the image/photo is they are holding the cigarette pack already, LOL

      replyreport
2. 60

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   You will never see the ad: War is addictive.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Ha!
      
      I love that idea!
      
      "Warning - war leads to death and hatred!"

      replyreport
3. 78

   psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

   Smoking is dropping in most demographics (both percentage and frequency), so something is working.

   replyreport
4. 60

   knolyourselfposted 13 years ago

   I am a smoker, five a day for thirty years.
   I consider it a relaxant and health aid.

   replyreport
5. 56

   Edwin Clarkposted 13 years ago

   I don't think it's coming out of taxpayers pockets. But it will come out of smokers' wallets since I'm sure the cigarette companies will past the cost on to them.
   
   Plus I don't think the new packaging will inspire smokers to quit. Parts of Asia has had these types of cigarette packages for ages and it has not changed the minds of smokers.
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      The FDA did have to design and agree to put these on the packaging - the taxpayers DID pay for some of it.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Shucks yeah, that dirty ole government interfering with big businesses right to kill people!

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            By this point, everyone knows that cigs are bad for you.
            
            And if they don't, it's because they can't.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               But if you are addicted it is easy to "forget" a constant reminder does work.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  got stats to back that claim up?

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     John Holdenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Better than that, experience, I smoke.

                     replyreport
6. 0

   Home Girlposted 13 years ago

   People do not care until it hits hard. My husband could not quit until he got really ill, and I mean it - seriously ill.

   replyreport
7. 78

   psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

   Hardly a huge amount I suspect.  More like a bit of time from a person already on salary.

   replyreport
8. 65

   Hendrikaposted 13 years ago

   It does not matter what anyone does, if someone wants to smoke, they are going to smoke.

   replyreport
9. 0

   Home Girlposted 13 years ago

   There is certain amount of stupidity in most of us, I cannot find a better world for that,that ability to ignore facts, to ignore danger, disaster in our life and just continue that   "I-am-going-to-do-it-because-I-like-it-and-do-not-give-a-damn attitude that allows even very smart people ruin their lives over stupid things like smoking,drinking and drugs.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      HattieMattieMaeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Well I was thinking yesterday, they like people smoking because they are getting your tax money. Only marijuana is illegal, yet smoking is and our government is literally making money off of us killing us by legalizing smoking! lol I am a smoker, but so nice to know my government has my health in mind, when they illegalize other substances, but than the biggest addictions they make money off of is Alcohol, and tobacco. They like their money, and don't mind killing people in the process!

      replyreport
10. 75

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    In the book Brandology this specific example (images as a deterrent on cigarettes) was studied. Their findings were that the images had no negative effect on buying impulse and in fact spurred the danger seeking/rebel impulse.
    
    I lived in Buffalo for quite awhile, Canada has had these images for years, my canadian friends would order their cigarettes and the clerk would ask if they had a preference...
    
    "you want the Players with the fetus or the lungs?'

    replyreport
11. 78

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    I think the whole point is that the total cost of smoking *should* be passed to the consumer rather than partially carried by the general taxpayer. That is why tobacco tax goes mainly into healthcare.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Moderndayslaveposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       May I ask where the tax actually goes? In NYC the tax is about $8.00 a pack

       replyreport
12. 78

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    Despite the assertion made here, packaging does sometime effect what smokers know, and reduce population wide smoking rates. 
    
    http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/1 … ii19.short
    http://journals.lww.com/jphmp/Abstract/ … ng.11.aspx
    http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/1 … /i32.short

    replyreport
13. 75

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    Link1: Study is about awareness of health risks in relation to smoking and has no bearing on whether health risks illustrated effects buying.
    
    Link2: Requires subscription - but from abstract" "Of those policies, substantial evidence indicates that higher taxes and clean air laws can have a large impact on smoking rates."
    
    again, nothing about packaging.
    
    Link3: Joe Camels influence on Youth smokers  (again, no correlation to negative buying influence)
    
    Your links in no way support your statement - what were they the top 3 returns in a google search? Did you even read them?

    replyreport
14. 75

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    I dont think neuroscience is necessarily considered authoritative yet.
    
    But, here is a link of interest in relation to the study I referenced
    http://www.neurosciencemarketing.com/bl … rnings.htm

    replyreport
15. 78

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    The abstract is a review paper covering dozena of studies some of which show decreases in population wide decreases and some don't--suggesting that how you do it is important.
    
    And yes, I googled it, which is one step more than just making it up.  I couldn't be bothered digging out my lecture notes from industrial psychology which suggested cost is most effective, no smoking zones second and packaging third.
    
    The other examples were to show that packing in general changes what people know about tobacco and it can make them smoke more (so why not less). 
    
    Something is a waste of money of it doesn't work.  It is lazy to just assume this is true unquestioningly because you like to bitch about how stupid people are--quite the self-fulfilling prophecy.

    replyreport
16. 63

    prettydarkhorseposted 13 years ago

    Perhaps a study about those who stopped smoking can be conducted. This is just my hypothesis : for those who stopped smoking, a big factor in the decision to stop is a real life close experience, like a death of a loved one from smoking related diseases.
    
    As a sidenote, I read that this risk behavior is transferred, a youth who grow up in a home with a smoking adult will likely develop the habit, so a more solid campaign for a value transformation is needed, strengthening of family values, which is difficult.

    replyreport