Plain Packaging on Cigarettes

[Butts]

Listening to Radio 4 on the way to work tonight I was interested to hear The Government has partially backtracked on this issue.

Previously almost dismissing it out of hand they are now to take steps so the measure can be introduced as soon as an investigation has concluded in relation to youngsters being less attracted to dowdy packs. Apparently early signs from Australia the pioneers in this field have shown no drop in sales despite the roll out of the new packaging. No doubt this will have no bearing on the final decision :roll:

As far as I am aware "weed" and other such drugs do not come in fancy packaging, but this has not hindered their sales

Is this merely a token gesture to appease ASH and it's fellow zealots ?

 

[Clip]

If I am honest the packets that they have in Oz will probably make them more attractive to kids over here as theyre pretty gory and you can get stickers now that go over the packets so there wont be a change.

They have to be seen to be doing something though as it does kills thousands each year and hospitalises a lot more.

And I am a smoker saying that

 

[Butts]

If I am honest the packets that they have in Oz will probably make them more attractive to kids over here as theyre pretty gory and you can get stickers now that go over the packets so there wont be a change.

They have to be seen to be doing something though as it does kills thousands each year and hospitalises a lot more.

And I am a smoker saying that

Would it be suprising to most non-smokers and perhaps even smokers that there are Ten Million of us in the UK - a huge minority interest

If the measures undertaken in Australia are unproductive whats the point in bringing them in over here.

It would be interesting to see the figures as to the benefit to the UK economy that smoking provides in terms of:

Taxation
Employment
Money saved on Pensions and Social Security Payments from those who peg it early.

If these savings as I suspect far outweigh the cost to the NHS in billions, should non-smokers not be grateful

 

[SS4]

Will it just have the brand name and the amount on the front? It's a shame the talk is about back-pedalling/a u-turn when evidence came in supporting the opposite though.

 

[Butts]

Will it just have the brand name and the amount on the front? It's a shame the talk is about back-pedalling/a u-turn when evidence came in supporting the opposite though.

It has a huge "gore picture" with perhaps space for the Brand - come to think of it thats hardly plain !!

 

[Clip]

Would it be suprising to most non-smokers and perhaps even smokers that there are Ten Million of us in the UK - a huge minority interest

If the measures undertaken in Australia are unproductive whats the point in bringing them in over here.

It would be interesting to see the figures as to the benefit to the UK economy that smoking provides in terms of:

Taxation
Employment
Money saved on Pensions and Social Security Payments from those who peg it early.

If these savings as I suspect far outweigh the cost to the NHS in billions, should non-smokers not be grateful

I agree - what is the point but, they have to be seen to be doing something - along with the plans to ban smoking on hospital grounds that they were talking about this week - instead trying to assist people to quit whilst they are in.


You mention costs to the NHS but how much does it cost to treat someone with a smoking related illness? Do you know? Does anyone? If not then its not a decent arguement to push.

No matter what you say or how you try to spin it, tabs kill. In fact its probably the biggest killer this country has and the hurt and hardship that it causes has no price on it because you just cant count the cost. And if the plain packets stops a few thousand from starting smoking and a few more thousand per year quitting smoking then thats a good thing.

 

[Butts]

You mention costs to the NHS but how much does it cost to treat someone with a smoking related illness? Do you know? Does anyone? If not then its not a decent arguement to push.

Perhaps if more people knew the answer to this question the non-smokers among them would be down on their knees giving thanks for the fact people smoke, and the smokers may not feel so guilty

 

[Harpers Tate]

Here is an astounding statistic.

100% of smokers die.

Here is another.

100% of non-smokers die.

===============================

The "cost to the NHS" argument has never, in my (admittedly not comprehensive, by any means) experience been properly evaluated as an equation.

I have no doubt that there are true financial costs to "the nation" (be it the NHS or otherwise) brought about by smoking.

I have never, though, seen any statistical evaluation of the savings and revenues to "the nation" that smoking brings. Revenues in terms of taxes and employment; savings in respect of such things as state pension, late-life care, dementia, treatment for other degenerative diseases such as arthiritis and so on. Etc. Etc.

Evaluate all of that on a statistical basis and present it all, and then - and only then - will I start to pay real attention.

 

[radamfi]

I hate smoking but I think there is now enough regulation to protect those who don't want to be close to tobacco smoke. More importantly, smoking is now socially unacceptable. Everyone now knows the health risks. Of course, give help to those who want to stop, but anyone who wants to continue to smoke should be allowed to do so. Same goes for other potentially harmful substances such as alcohol, cannabis, ecstasy pills, Toilet Duck etc. Provide the information and eduction, and then, as long as nobody else gets hurt, people should be able to do whatever they want, even if it kills them.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Something must be done!

This is just gesture politics to appease the Daily Mail, a.n.other, etc

(and I have never smoked)

 

[Butts]

I hate smoking but I think there is now enough regulation to protect those who don't want to be close to tobacco smoke. More importantly, smoking is now socially unacceptable. Everyone now knows the health risks. Of course, give help to those who want to stop, but anyone who wants to continue to smoke should be allowed to do so. Same goes for other potentially harmful substances such as alcohol, cannabis, ecstasy pills, Toilet Duck etc. Provide the information and eduction, and then, as long as nobody else gets hurt, people should be able to do whatever they want, even if it kills them.

Well said that man.....but one thing puzzles me "Toilet Duck" - they don't do something immoral with it's weird shaped end do they
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Here is an astounding statistic.

100% of smokers die.

Here is another.

100% of non-smokers die.

===============================

The "cost to the NHS" argument has never, in my (admittedly not comprehensive, by any means) experience been properly evaluated as an equation.

I have no doubt that there are true financial costs to "the nation" (be it the NHS or otherwise) brought about by smoking.

I have never, though, seen any statistical evaluation of the savings and revenues to "the nation" that smoking brings. Revenues in terms of taxes and employment; savings in respect of such things as state pension, late-life care, dementia, treatment for other degenerative diseases such as arthiritis and so on. Etc. Etc.

Evaluate all of that on a statistical basis and present it all, and then - and only then - will I start to pay real attention.

Here's another one.....

Smoking kills 50% of it's users some of them prematurely

And another......

Excise Duty and VAT raised approximately 12 Billion pounds per year....

Cost to NHS Four or Five Billion.......

I'll let someone else do the maths :roll:

 

[Harlesden]

The packaging is totally irrelevant. If youngsters want to smoke, they will smoke.
In my opinion, whoever in this government somehow believes that underage smokers are in any way influenced by the appearance of the box the product comes in needs a trip to the funny farm as they are obviously drastically out of touch with reality.

 

[BlythPower]

Well said that man.....but one thing puzzles me "Toilet Duck" - they don't do something immoral with it's weird shaped end do they

Drink!

 

[radamfi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eRhWT4fYmk

 

[SS4]

Here's another one.....

Smoking kills 50% of it's users some of them prematurely

And another......

Excise Duty and VAT raised approximately 12 Billion pounds per year....

Cost to NHS Four or Five Billion.......

I'll let someone else do the maths :roll:

Where did you get those figures from? Especially the cost to the NHS. Does this include cumulative effects of second hand smoke for example (who's sufferers will have not paid a penny)

 

[Clip]

Perhaps if more people knew the answer to this question the non-smokers among them would be down on their knees giving thanks for the fact people smoke, and the smokers may not feel so guilty

Not really. And why should they. Smoking is horrid and I say this as a smoker who can't bare kissing me lass when she has had one and vice versa.

I enjoy smoking but come on, have some level headed thought about what you're posting!

You're just angry at what you percieve to be persecution of smokers for no reason cos it costs a lot.

 

[Butts]

Not really. And why should they. Smoking is horrid and I say this as a smoker who can't bare kissing me lass when she has had one and vice versa.

I enjoy smoking but come on, have some level headed thought about what you're posting!

You're just angry at what you percieve to be persecution of smokers for no reason cos it costs a lot.

I'm just annoyed 10 million people are discriminated against and not satisfied with them being almost totally ostracised are being pushed further and further to the margins in the pursuit of what is after all a lawful activity.

In my view it's gone to far

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Packaging on cigarettes and labelling on alcoholic drinks do not make any difference whatsoever as to what is contained inside both of these product packaging and containers. It is what is contained inside that has the health hazards.

 

[SS4]

I'm just annoyed 10 million people are discriminated against and not satisfied with them being almost totally ostracised are being pushed further and further to the margins in the pursuit of what is after all a lawful activity.

In my view it's gone to far

I wonder how many other harmful activities are legal when they affect everyone around them?

 

[Trog]

I'm just annoyed 10 million people are discriminated against and not satisfied with them being almost totally ostracised are being pushed further and further to the margins in the pursuit of what is after all a lawful activity.

In my view it's gone to far

Have you considered that changing the pack costs you nothing and does not alter the contents. If that change keeps those pushing anti smoking law happy for a year or so, thus delaying their next demand which might be something with a real affect on you. Could a tasteless packet design be a price worth paying.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I wonder how many other harmful activities are legal when they affect everyone around them?

Driving perhaps? Plenty of pedestrians are killed (upwards of 400 a year in the UK I believe) as a consequence of other people driving motor vehicles, which is legal. I guess you could argue that bad or reckless driving is not legal, but there will still be plenty of pedestrians killed in accidents where the driver was not reckless.

 

[SS4]

Driving perhaps? Plenty of pedestrians are killed (upwards of 400 a year in the UK I believe) as a consequence of other people driving motor vehicles, which is legal. I guess you could argue that bad or reckless driving is not legal, but there will still be plenty of pedestrians killed in accidents where the driver was not reckless.

Yeah, that's a good example actually.

 

[Nym]

Yeah, that's a good example actually.

One could also argue;

Increases in heating costs, burning of any fossil fuel (PM10, PM25, COx, NOx etc. emissions), Destruction of natural enviroment, nuclear testing, failures of the education system...

And of course, much closer to home; Alcaholism...

 

[radamfi]

In short, living causes harm. In other words, it is unethical to have children and the human race should be allowed to die out.

 

[Butts]

Does anyone share my view that the prevalence of smokers in lower socio-economic groups enables the anti-smoking brigade to have a virtual free hand with no hindrance or articulate challenge, to do effectively whatever they like.

 

[radamfi]

Does anyone share my view that the prevalence of smokers in lower socio-economic groups enables the anti-smoking brigade to have a virtual free hand with no hindrance or articulate challenge, to do effectively whatever they like.

Undoubtedly. I work and socialise with professional/highly educated people so I rarely come into contact with smokers. The notion of smoking doesn't really come into play, so restrictions against smoking can be imposed without it affecting our lives.

 

[Butts]

Undoubtedly. I work and socialise with professional/highly educated people so I rarely come into contact with smokers. The notion of smoking doesn't really come into play, so restrictions against smoking can be imposed without it affecting our lives.

Is there a correlation between education and smoking ....were onto "Boris Territory" almost....

Or is it more accurate to identify the correlation as to being "politically correct"

 

[radamfi]

Is there a correlation between education and smoking ....were onto "Boris Territory" almost....

Or is it more accurate to identify the correlation as to being "politically correct"

To be more precise, it depends on the kind of education. People who have done mathematics, engineering or science degrees are highly unlikely to smoke. Medicine may be different, given the high number of doctors you see smoking. People who have done more 'arty' degrees such as Media Studies, English Literature or Sociology are more likely to smoke.

If you haven't gone to university at all, you are of course far more likely to smoke.

A quick Google shows this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_tobacco_consumption

which compares the general smoking rate in the US in 2005 (20%) with those with degrees (under 12%) and men with post-graduate degrees having a rate of 6.9%.

 

[richw]

With the shutter doors in front of a cigarette display now anyway surely the packaging is irrelevant as you cant see it before you buy.

I am a non smoker, but smokers don't bother me as long as they show respect where smoking, e.g. if I am stood in a queue with no option for non smokers to avoid that really annoys me, but in general it doesn't bother me.

 

[GWRtom]

Perhaps the Government should mind it's own business, and stop regulating peoples private lives?

I seriously doubt that plain packaging has any effect at all, when it comes to people smoking.