home

FDA Seeking Comments on Ugly Cigarette Package Graphics

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 05:59:42 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

If you were a smoker, would this picture on your pack of cigarettes stop you from buying them? Or cause you to quit? That's what the FDA is hoping. Today, it unveiled 36 graphics depicting death and suffering that it proposes be carried on cigarettes, and is seeking public comment.

Comments are being accepted until January. The proposed FDA rule requires the graphics by June, 2011.

< What Party Sends Seniors Running To the Other Side? | AG Holder Says 9/11 Trial Decision Coming Soon >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    FDA Seeking Comments on Ugly Cigarette Package Graphics | 84 comments (84 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    It'll make me buy more (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by roy on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 07:39:57 PM EST
    I've been a casual smoker for about 10 years.  Haven't bought a pack in 3 months.  I look forward to collecting all 36.

    My friends and I will probably trade them like kids with baseball cards.

    You funny. (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 07:49:45 PM EST
    I bet the graphics would affect the young kids of smokers, "Mommy, are you going to die?!"

    Anyway, I quit chewing tobacco years ago when my wife and I were on the road out in the boonies and the only radio station we could pick up was a documentary of sorts about people with cancer of the jaw, throat, etc., from chew.

    After about 15 minutes of the doc, I spit out my chew and dumped the rest of the pouch out the window.

    Gawd I do miss the taste of that stuff!

    Parent

    btw, family lore has it my dad quit smoking (none / 0) (#10)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 07:53:02 PM EST
    when I was about 4 y/o because I asked him if he was going to die from smoking.

    My mom didn't quit and she died from lung cancer about 6 months ago...

    Parent

    No disrespect intended (none / 0) (#11)
    by roy on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 07:58:29 PM EST
    I joke, but I also have an uncle who's had heart surgery and throat cancer, probably linked to his smoking.  He still smokes even though he can't hold the cigarette between his lips.  He has no jaw.

    Parent
    All good, I really did think it was funny. (none / 0) (#13)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:01:27 PM EST
    Whatcha gonna do? Life goes on...

    Parent
    I'll trade 2... (none / 0) (#12)
    by kdog on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:01:18 PM EST
    Smoking can kill yous for a Cigarettes are addictive:)

    I won't get my boxers twisted over it, I don't want the youngsters smoking either, they'll get taxed to death as well as the health risks. It's all getting a bit ridiculous out there, but at least this latest installment won't be too much of a bother.  

    Parent

    What I don't know can't hurt me (none / 0) (#14)
    by roy on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:13:52 PM EST
    When I started in college, we sought the one that said "Cigarette smoke contains carbon monoxide" because they didn't say carbon monoxide was bad for you.  A female friend who didn't quite get it preferred "Smoking By Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth, And Low Birth Weight" because she hoped not to be pregnant.

    Parent
    Hot off the Seneca Nation... (none / 0) (#16)
    by kdog on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:22:51 PM EST
    presses, today's tax protester edition..."SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Smoking causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy."

    Damn those big tobacco lobbies must have fought tooth and nail to keep that grey area in regards to birth defects.  "Senator X, throw me a frickin' bone here, I gave ya Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, and Emphysema!"

    Parent

    I think it will increase sales.... (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:21:58 PM EST
    ....of designer cigarette cases.

    I hate smoking, I don't smoke, I hope nobody again smokes a cigarette, but I think I hate social engineering more.

    Don't spend money on telling us how bad our comforting habits are....spend money on making our lives better so we won't need them....That's the kind of social engineering I like to see.

    Bravo... (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:29:18 PM EST
    but its so much easier to slap a sticker on a pack of butts...our sons/daughters may well end up worse off than us, but Uncle Sam will be damned if they're unemployed and smoking.

    Parent
    It's just education, and (none / 0) (#18)
    by observed on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:38:33 PM EST
    I approve.

    Parent
    You mean (none / 0) (#21)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 09:26:36 PM EST
    people don't know that smoking is bad for them?  Come on....

    Parent
    yes, in terms of specifics (none / 0) (#22)
    by observed on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 09:41:39 PM EST
     odds, exact prognoses,etc.

    Parent
    Wonder if it will increase the sales of those (none / 0) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:46:36 PM EST
    electronic cigarettes, chewing tobacco and those little pouch type things that were shown on 60 minutes a while back.

    Or maybe if pot becomes legal, smokers will just change from one type of smoke to another.  

    Parent

    gosh, (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by cpinva on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 08:44:44 PM EST
    i think they should have a picture of a mushroom cloud on the package. after all, smoking is the root cause of every disease known to mankind, and resulted in both hiroshima and nagaski. turns out, the pilots and crews on both of those B-29 liberators smoked.

    Oooh look! (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Jen M on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 09:57:47 PM EST
    Collectible cigarette packs!

    Could leave the FDA and Big Tobacco... (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:34:30 AM EST
    exposed to more liability...I know my man Kurt Vonnegut contemplated suing Brown & Williamson for false advertising...

    "Here's the news: I am going to sue the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company, manufacturers of Pall Mall cigarettes, for a billion bucks! Starting when I was only twelve years old, I have never chain-smoked anything but unfiltered Pall Malls. And for many years now, right on the package, Brown & Williamson have promised to kill me.
    But I am eighty-two. Thanks a lot, you dirty rats. The last thing I ever wanted was to be alive when the three most powerful people on the whole planet would be named Bush, Dick and Colon."
    I want a picture... (5.00 / 3) (#79)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:54:02 AM EST
    of a limbless Afghani child next to the federal income tax deduction on my paystub, maybe that will get me to quit funding the death and destruction of others.

    I don't think that (none / 0) (#1)
    by Zorba on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:10:39 PM EST
    this will do any good for the current smokers- it's an addiction, and a powerful one.  Maybe it will help the youngsters who have not yet tried smoking but are thinking about it, although I doubt it.  Young brains are not like mature brains- they are not really capable of contemplating the true consequences of their actions, particularly if those consequences are far in the future.  Probably a waste of time and money.

    Hmm...i thought this was (none / 0) (#2)
    by observed on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:12:52 PM EST
    already proven effective

    Parent
    I hope it works, observed (none / 0) (#3)
    by Zorba on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:22:16 PM EST
    I'm just not optimistic.  OTOH, if it causes just some smokers to give it up, and some youngsters not to start, it may well be worth it.  I have a friend whose father wound up with emphysema, on oxygen, the whole bit.  The friend himself was still smoking until his father died, and his relatives and friends basically harassed him until he stopped.

    Parent
    These programs have already (none / 0) (#5)
    by observed on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:25:57 PM EST
    been tried. Evidence exists

    Parent
    Yup, worldwide (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:34:07 PM EST
    Our current warning is just about the mildest in the developed world.

    Parent
    yea but (none / 0) (#58)
    by CST on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:15:47 AM EST
    we have one of the lower smoking rates in the developed world too.

    Parent
    Me too (none / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:23:45 PM EST
    At the very least, I think it ought to have some impact on new smokers.

    Parent
    I call it the smoking ":ABC" program: (none / 0) (#7)
    by observed on Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 06:56:15 PM EST
    Abstinence Before Cancer.

    Parent
    Next we'll have stickers on all alcohol bottles (none / 0) (#24)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 07:31:46 AM EST


    Nah... (none / 0) (#27)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 07:51:30 AM EST
    That's crazy talk...they serve alcohol at government shindigs...wouldn't wanna make any visiting diplomats puke on their escargot with a pic of an alcoholic's diseased liver on the bottle of vino.

    We still got Coors commercials on tv, Lucky Strike ads are long gone....different rules different vices.  You'll see pics of fat cativity-ridden kids on the Coke bottle before they mess with the booze.

    Parent

    It is crazy talk (none / 0) (#29)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:30:16 AM EST
    Next thing you know they won't be serving happy meals in San Fransisco, oh wait, lol.

    Parent
    The irony is... (none / 0) (#35)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:38:40 AM EST
    they can still sell the poison burgers to minors...the little Chinese piece of plastic was the healthiest thing in the box!  Way to go Frisco!

    Parent
    Maybe they could put a sticker of a fat kid (none / 0) (#40)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:49:55 AM EST
    on the meal as a warning. :)

    Parent
    change the name (none / 0) (#42)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:50:43 AM EST
    to "Chubby Meals"

    Parent
    We could start a whole cottage industry... (none / 0) (#45)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:55:25 AM EST
    Madison Ave. job stimulus, coming up with nanny-state stickers for anything and everything.

    Parent
    Current rule: all stickers must be made (none / 0) (#62)
    by MO Blue on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:22:34 AM EST
    in China. They may change that rule to S. Korea since it looks like we are goings to sign a trade agreement with them soon. It is O.K. if U.S. stimulus money is used to build the factories there and train them on how to get U.S, business etc.

    Parent
    Happy Heffer Meals (none / 0) (#50)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:59:15 AM EST


    Parent
    Lard Lunches (none / 0) (#53)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:04:18 AM EST


    Parent
    If the stickershock program... (none / 0) (#56)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:08:40 AM EST
    is too successful, Social Security is in serious trouble.  If we all live to be non-smoking, non-drinking, rice cake eating 108 year olds the system will collapse.

    I always kind of thought my smoking, drinking, & fast-food eating was a selfless act of conservation, so those that outlive me don't have to eat catfood.

    Parent

    do you really think it will be (none / 0) (#57)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:12:29 AM EST
    successful.  I guess success would need to be defined.  I dont think it will stop one single person from smoking or buying cigarettes.

    like I said below.  the only ripple effect I see is an uptick in the sales of cigarette cases.
     

    Parent

    Nah... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:19:07 AM EST
    Some people will always wanna smoke...just saying if it were successful beyond our wildest dreams we'd be in real trouble.

    Parent
    Try evidence- based reasoning. (none / 0) (#69)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:27:57 AM EST
    You are flat out wrong.

    Parent
    or he could just pull (1.00 / 0) (#70)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:28:42 AM EST
    out of his a$$ like you do.

    Parent
    And if everyone quits drinking and smoking (none / 0) (#61)
    by republicratitarian on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:22:26 AM EST
    think of all the tax revenue lost. God forbid, excuse me, Allah forbid.

    Parent
    the universal (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:24:03 AM EST
    grumpiness might by itself be worst effect

    Parent
    Whole lot of schools would be closed and (none / 0) (#65)
    by MO Blue on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:25:09 AM EST
    additional services eliminated because you know all those who yell the loudest about eliminating "sin" or taxing it more would never agree to a tax hike.

    Parent
    I KNOW (none / 0) (#67)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:26:41 AM EST
    we could start lotteries in every township.  a friend calls them a tax on the stupid.

    Parent
    I think NY State... (none / 0) (#71)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:32:03 AM EST
    is already freaking out in this regard...cig sales down 27% in NY since the taxman went bonkers...I don't think the budget crunchers are celebrating this:)

    It's been a godsend for PA, VT, and the reservations coffers though, sales down 45% in NY areas bordering these more reasonable governments, and their sales up up up.

    Parent

    Never happen (none / 0) (#59)
    by MO Blue on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:18:12 AM EST
    Their lobbyist are much too strong.

    Parent
    if they are going to do it (none / 0) (#25)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 07:49:29 AM EST
    I say go all out and put up pics of coffins and rotting corpses with cigarettes hanging out of their putrefied lips.

    never do anything half way!

    Why stop with cigs? (none / 0) (#26)
    by Yes2Truth on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 07:49:49 AM EST

    Alcohol beverages are so much more dangerous.  

    um,no (none / 0) (#30)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:32:30 AM EST


    Parent
    um, Yes -- check the facts Jack/dawg (none / 0) (#34)
    by Yes2Truth on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:35:50 AM EST
    Alcohol is far more dangerous.

    Parent
    The difference is (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:43:21 AM EST
    that the dangerous effects of alcohol are apparent almost immediately to everyone who drinks it.

    The danger of cigarettes tends to lurk.

    Parent

    that may be true (none / 0) (#39)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:45:34 AM EST
    but there are far more drinkers than there are smokers

    Parent
    That's not really a relevant response (none / 0) (#44)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:53:21 AM EST
    Just because it is dangerous doesn't mean that we should want to reduce alcohol use.

    You can drink responsibly (and generally safely). You can't do the same with cigarettes.

    Parent

    bull (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:56:48 AM EST
    I have smoked cigarettes responsibly for more than 40 years.  that is I smoke one or two a week. if that.

    Parent
    So far as I know, there is no (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:04:50 AM EST
    epidemiological evidence for alcohol showing that regular use will tend to shorten your life.

    There is such evidence for cigarettes.

    It's like the difference between a poison that accumulates in your body and merely eating high calorie food.

    I am baffled that you can't see the difference.

    Parent

    and I am (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:07:04 AM EST
    baffled that you cant see the only difference is that tobacco is out of fashion and alcohol is not.  yet.


    Parent
    That is clearly not the only difference (none / 0) (#63)
    by andgarden on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:23:08 AM EST
    I explained why above.

    Parent
    and you would be better (none / 0) (#66)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:25:51 AM EST
    off if you only drank that often

    Parent
    I would be better off (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:27:32 AM EST
    if I drank AND smoked whenever I damn well pleased.


    Parent
    There's your first mistake Capt... (none / 0) (#77)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:45:45 AM EST
    thinking you know what is best for you...wherever did you learn such crazy things?

    Parent
    Sure you can... (none / 0) (#47)
    by kdog on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:57:29 AM EST
    the social occasional smoker may be a rarity, but they do exist...an ex-ladyfriend of mine had this ability, have a smoke or two at the bar on Friday night and then not smoke again for weeks or months.

    Parent
    they absolutely do (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:57:55 AM EST
    I am one.  and I know others.

    Parent
    totally false. Cigarettes (none / 0) (#38)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:45:12 AM EST
    kill far more people

    Parent
    the numbers you are talking about (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:50:03 AM EST
    only refer to direct deaths as in alcohol poisoning.
    they do not include people killed by drunk drivers or people killed by drunken boyfriends or fathers or train engineers or bus drivers etc.

    Parent
    and if you include those, cigs (none / 0) (#43)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:52:50 AM EST
    STILL kill more than 4 times as many.

    Parent
    Victimlessly (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:00:11 AM EST
    You can't kill SOMEONE ELSE on the road with a cigarette ... typically.

    Alcohol on the other hand is responsible for many, many innocent victims.

    I think that's a true difference.

    Parent

    and 2nd hand smoke alone (none / 0) (#72)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:33:19 AM EST
     is killing more.

    Parent
    I was waiting (none / 0) (#73)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:34:23 AM EST
    for THAT one.


    Parent
    why are you so emotional (none / 0) (#74)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:36:21 AM EST
    about discussing these facts?

    Parent
    I loath BS (none / 0) (#75)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:38:49 AM EST


    Parent
    Stop dishing, then. (none / 0) (#76)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:41:51 AM EST


    Parent
    Re: Dishing (none / 0) (#78)
    by vicndabx on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:48:18 AM EST
    Alcohol also contributes significantly to mortality from a wide-range of acute and chronic injuries and diseases (see Table I-6).   In the U.S. in 2001, 75,766 deaths were attributable to alcohol, 40,933 deaths were attributable to acute conditions primarily unintentional injuries such as motor vehicle injuries, and fall injuries, and intentional injuries such as homicide and suicide, and 34,883 deaths were attributable to chronic conditions especially alcoholic liver disease and liver cirrhosis.  Because alcohol attributable deaths resulting from acute conditions occur earlier in the life span than chronic alcohol attributable deaths, they account for nearly twice as many years of productive life lost (e.g., 1,491,317) compared with chronic alcohol attributable deaths (e.g., 788,005).

    Source: NIH

    None of this stuff is good for you, but to use a few cliche's: everything in moderation, to each his own, don't tread on me.

    Parent

    Thanks. It was Howdy's (none / 0) (#82)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 04:56:57 PM EST
     denial about 2nd hand smoke that was the issue. And smoking does cause far more deaths than alcohol.

    Parent
    show me some (none / 0) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:57:31 AM EST
    numbers for that please.

    Parent
    You first. (none / 0) (#52)
    by observed on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 09:00:56 AM EST
    CDC gives about 450,000 for annual smoking deaths..what's your number for alcohol

    Parent
    yes (none / 0) (#36)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:40:15 AM EST


    Parent
    but seriously (none / 0) (#28)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:18:55 AM EST
    what I really think is that it will make these fashionable again.
    oooohhh...pretty.... (none / 0) (#80)
    by sj on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 12:37:06 PM EST


    Parent
    Many countries have done this (none / 0) (#32)
    by LatinoDC on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:34:58 AM EST
    Peru has done this for a while:

    In Canada, 27% of smokers decreased this practice at home.  58% of smokers thought about the consequences of smoking thanks to the images.  44% said the images had increased their desire to stop smoking.

    In Brazil 54% of smokers changed their mind about the consequences of smoking thanks to the images, and 67% of smokers said that warnings in the packages made them wish to stop smoking.

    These are both translations.  Wish I could find the actual studies.

    I obviously don't know how to quote... (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by LatinoDC on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 08:35:40 AM EST


    Parent
    all joking aside (none / 0) (#81)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 12:56:59 PM EST
    I think it might be a totally good investment to go out the first day and buy the whole set and keep them in their cellophane wrapping.  this wont last long and they will definitely be collectors items.
    doesn't help quitting (none / 0) (#83)
    by diogenes on Thu Nov 11, 2010 at 05:19:13 PM EST
    People who are addicted try to quit and can't.  People who never started, like thirteen year olds, are more likely to rebel by using the cigarettes with scary packages to prove how invulnerable they are.  
    love this (none / 0) (#84)
    by Capt Howdy on Fri Nov 12, 2010 at 09:22:24 AM EST
    Las Vegas Casinos Are a Last Bastion for Smokers

    LAS VEGAS -- The notice on the door to the hotel-casino was emphatic. "The Westin Casuarina is a Smoke Free Environment. Thank you for not smoking." Just beyond, four people were hunched over slot machines the other afternoon, wisps of cigarette smoke swirling around them as they happily puffed away.


    FDA Seeking Comments on Ugly Cigarette Package Graphics | 84 comments (84 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment