FDA Issues Graphic Cigarette Labels

Unless you work in a casino... thankfully you can avoid the worst of it.. and the smoking sections.. smell like an ashtray from 30 feet away

For my shop the smoking ban has actually been a bad thing, as the restaurant/sports bar next door has outdoor seating and a big TV. Some days you can hardly get in the door of the bike shop without reeking of smoke for the rest of the day.

I want some of the tax revenue that is collected on cigs to go toward city beautification projects including butt removal and more public places to properly dispose of butts and litter. I can tolerate the smoke, it's the litter that really gets me.

mad_machine wrote: Unless you work in a casino... thankfully you can avoid the worst of it.. and the smoking sections.. smell like an ashtray from 30 feet away

Don't work in a casino. Many jobs come with inherent dangers. If the danger existed when you accepted the position then you willingly put yourself in the position. If the place converted from non-smoking to smoking after you took the job then I have sympathy.

I also think trying to have smoking and non-smoking sections is futile, you are right the smell carries no matter what. I do think business owners should be allowed to establish that they are either a smoking or non smoking establishment. If they choose to be smoking then once again it is up to non smokers to vote with their wallets and not patronize the establishment.

EastCoastMojo wrote: For my shop the smoking ban has actually been a bad thing, as the restaurant/sports bar next door has outdoor seating and a big TV. Some days you can hardly get in the door of the bike shop without reeking of smoke for the rest of the day. I want some of the tax revenue that is collected on cigs to go toward city beautification projects including butt removal and more public places to properly dispose of butts and litter. I can tolerate the smoke, it's the litter that really gets me.

Completely different but valid point. Everyone wants to push the smokers out of the way without setting up facilities to manage the waste. Setting up smoking areas with no butt cans etc. In NJ the law is no smoking within 50 feet of any building entrance so that is supposed to help eliminate the "gauntlet of smoke" effect that you are experiencing.

But yes people should be self policing on the clean up, but the type of people who aren't isnt necessarily a smoker or non smoker issue, these people would litter no matter what if they have that little regard.

I agree with you there. My Grandmother lives about a mile or so from a major traffic light. JUST far enough that people who light up at the light are beginning to flick their butts out the window.. it is damn near impossible to get those butts out of the grass

mad_machine wrote: it is damn near impossible to get those butts out of the grass

These work surprisingly well, we have a long road frontage on our property and elderly neighbors, so we pick the ditch weekly. I have picked up an almost full (of rain) 40oz with one, so they are pretty strong, and agile enough to dig a butt out of the weeds.

That wasn't rain. That was recycled water, but it wasn't rain.

They're trying to go a step further with it down here, (Australia), by lobbying to introduce plain packaging, (doing away with any brand identity at all - just the grotesque graphic labels.)

I don't smoke, but my sentiments on the matter echo those of JThw8.

Dear Lobbyists:

We get it, they're bad for us.

Now let all the grown ups make their own decisions.

aircooled wrote:

I actually smoked a pack of these. They were a real hit with my friends who were/are smokers. We know what it is we're doing to ourselves. I don't particularly like the addiction and to think of how much money I could be spending on cars instead is not a pleasant thought, but I also don't like what I go through when I've tried to quit.

To whomever said smokers pay higher premiums:

Not if your health insurance is provided through your place of employment. The premium is so high because they don't exclude anything and are covering lard-asses, smokers, diabetic's, etc.

My insurance provided through work is nearly 3x time as expensive as what I can buy on the open market, but not 3x as good.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with this campaign, just wanted to point that out.

In reply to Trans_Maro:

thank you.....the people who think the gov't needs to tell us how to live our lives to the letter need to leave the country, travel back in time, and join up with Hitler or Stalin......

You guys prolly think I'm from New Hampshire don't ya?

yamaha wrote: In reply to Trans_Maro: thank you.....the people who think the gov't needs to tell us how to live our lives to the letter need to leave the country, travel back in time, and join up with Hitler or Stalin...... You guys prolly think I'm from New Hampshire don't ya?

zero to hitler in less than two full pages. awesome!

0-Hitler. Is that our new measure of thread dissolution?

I'd love to see overweight folks treated with the same level of intense attention that smokers enjoy. If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander, no?

I think that threatening labels are a deterrent to new smokers rather than to existing smokers.

Tom Heath wrote: I'd love to see overweight folks treated with the same level of intense attention that smokers enjoy. If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander, no?

They should be.

I just read an article yesterday that talks about the "new" liver disease. Basically being obese is now being linked to weird mental problems because of a failing liver, the extra fat is causing the liver to degrade into a type of cirohsis (sp?) somewhat related to what happens to alcoholics.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/06/16/liver.disease.ep/index.html

As an occasional pipe smoker, I found it ironic when I saw an employee of my local tobacco shop taking a smoke break outside. Apparently, the tobacco shop does not like cigarette smoke inside because cigarettes just smell gross.

As I write this, I’m chomping on a piece of nicotine gum…I have empathy for smokers, non smokes, and those progressing through the cessation process.

Quite a while ago, I watched a regularly scheduled segment on a TV show where a doctor answers viewer questions. The subject of smoking cessation came up and I fully anticipated a pretty dismissive response from the doctor…I assumed he’d feel his many years in medical school could be put to better use than to counsel idiots that continue to smoke despite the known hazards.

What he actually did was to slow everything down, take a moment to think, stare into the camera, and say “many of my patients smoke and I really feel for them as I know nicotine is far more addictive than most narcotics”. He went on to make several recommends but what was important was that he showed respect and compassion for smokers rather than just write them off as being idiots.

That little segment was profoundly helpful to me whereas all the anti-smoking ordinances and messaging are at best ineffectual if not counterproductive.

I’m not convinced that “we” really want people to quit smoking…”we” say we do but at some deep, dark, unattractive level, smokers may serve the purpose of giving everyone else something to feel superior to. If this weren’t the case, I should certainly be able to think of more than one example of someone actually helping.

Thoughts???

RX Reven' wrote: I’m not convinced that “we” really want people to quit smoking…”we” say we do but at some deep, dark, unattractive level, smokers may serve the purpose of giving everyone else something to feel superior to. If this weren’t the case, I should certainly be able to think of more than one example of someone actually helping. Thoughts???

Absolutely. Its an easy enemy, folks want to hate it. But noone really wants to stop it, for the reasons you mention and the ones I've already brought up (MONEY)

Noone really cares a lick about the health or well being of the smoker, they just want them to not interfere with their own life. Much like many issues brandished about these days its only an issue if you feel the effects and you only care about the effects on YOU, not the greater whole.

And FWIW I'm not being preachy, I'll fully admit #1 concern in my book is me. I fully understand the bits of human nature that make it this way. But its hard for me to care about someones opinion on the subject when that opinion is rooted in what that individual wants and not what is best as a whole (smoking or any other issue for that matter) The fact that most folks don't even fully understand the tax burden that would be created (not to mention the unemployment) by outlawing smoking demonstrates they haven't looked at the issue beyond their own little microcosm of the world.

and just because I hate to keep harping on an issue without some facts behind it here are the tax revenues generated by tobacco taxes through 2008, remember after O took office in 08 the taxes actually increased substantially. Also, lest you browse too quickly, these numbers are in thousands...take the number and multiply by 1000. The revenue is staggering.

What government programs will you loose or how much more tax will you pay to make up for it.

Go thank a smoker.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=403

JThw8 wrote:

friedgreencorrado wrote:

carguy123 wrote: There's quite a difference between a dangerous drug and motorsports, the sun, food, etc.

Dude, I'm not saying you're wrong. I had hoped that the way I worded my post, that you'd actually see that I agree with you. Cig prices will go up, now that companies have to print the images..but those of us who are still addicted will simply bitch & whine..and pay up. And as I mentioned..we'll simply remove the pix from our containers. Jeez, if I didn't quit when Fire Safe Cigarettes were introduced (again, IMO..a cig that won't stay lit is a defective product), I certainly won't quit over *this* nonsense. As I said...I already know about what it's doing to me. I'm just trying to tell you what smokers will actually *do* when this waste of legislation comes out, hoping that you'll see it for the "pretend" attempt to adress the issue, rather than attempt to adress the source of the problem. IMO, this (the new regs, not your personal opinion) reeks of folks who were *never* addicted to something insisting they can understand the addiction. It's a waste. What was it that Lorne Micheals said about the years he'd abdicated Saturday Night Live? "There's nothing more unfunny than people writing jokes about sex and drugs and rock & roll that have no experience with any of it.."? This legislation smacks of the same kind of misunderstanding.

^this It's all just lipservice to make you think the government cares. If they cared, they'd outlaw it, plain and simple, but the staggering amount of tax revenue generated by smoking ensures that they will never outlaw it.

As the kids say..."word up". I have to admit that I'm actually from North Carolina..and that simply outlawing tobacco use would cause bankruptcies for people I know personally, tho.

JThw8 wrote: I remember when I was in the military and they still didn't tax cigarettes, I was able to buy my father his cartons of name brands for $5 instead of the $30 he was paying, so even back then (havent seen $30 cartons in a long time) 5/6ths of the price of smokes was nothing but tax. Raising the prices hasn't discouraged anything, all the warnings in the world won't discourage anything.

Bingo! Just like serious drunks won't stop drinking & driving..we smokers won't stop smoking because of something like this. Especiallly in this day & age. Unlike 30yrs ago, we're used to being pariahs nowdays. We expect meaningless garbage like this every six months. I previously mentioned my hatred of "Fire Safe Cigarettes"..my neighbors have been avoiding that nonsense by rolling their own. I'm tempted to join them, they've given me a few..buying "blanks" and filling them with fresh tobacco is like buying local organic food.

http://www.stuffyourown.com/

As I mentioned in my first post on the thread..this moronic picture crap won't change my behavior. I'm gonna find a nice metal case that makes smoking look even more glamorous to the casual observer. I'm sure that's not what the FDA wanted to acheive when they decided to make tobacco companies waste this much money in the first place..

JThw8 wrote: Heck the warnings weren't even enough to save the cigarette companies from lawsuits from people who claimed they didnt know it was bad. You have to live under a rock to think smoking wont kill you. Warnings won't change it, they'll just (maybe) protect the companies from lawsuits. Raising the prices won't change it. Moving smokers outdoors didn't change it. If you want smoking gone, then outlaw it and be prepared to pass the tax burden on to the non-smokers. And then prepare to have other things you enjoy outlawed in the name of your own safety or the safety of others.

I'm not going to bother to address the "slippery slope" argument at the moment..I'm just trying to talk about this one particular example (the pix) of idiocy.