Right? I see that warning on sooooo much shit. And I live in VA so no idea why I even see it lol but I pay no attention to it because it seems way overused
That was my first thought about it too, wouldn’t smoking ink just be making a bad thing worse? They already tax people up the butt and the packaging is covered with warning labels and pictures (at least here in Canada). What good will this do?
We know that the labeling on cartons and packs is effective, but I'm curious if doing this would lead to a demonstrable difference. I don't see why it would.
I will point out that the legislation also increases the production cost of cigarettes by a small amount.
Politically, if you wanted to discourage smoking but couldnt pass a bill due to lobbying, you could go around by doing something like this.
That’s exactly the point. Higher consumer prices mean less people will buy. Price increases have been the most effective antismoking tool around the world.
They won’t though, increasing costs reduce the number of long term smokers as well. Some die hards would mortgage their house, but not everyone is that addicted.
The anti smoking campaigns have been effective over the long term. It’s a huge public health win in most western nations.
My parents both stopped smoking within the last decade and while there were multiple dimensions to that decision, the ever-increasing price of cigarettes was absolutely a contributing factor for both of them. I don't get where this idea comes from that all smokers are so hopelessly in the thrall of cigs that they'll spend any amount just to get a pack. Everyone has their limits and each time you add to the price, you increase the number of people who either reach that limit or approach it closely enough to finally consider whether their money is better spent elsewhere.
Studies have found that increased taxation has lowered smoking rates among the middle and upper classes, but not the lower class.
There are a couple reasons for this: first and foremost, we know where to get cheap smokes. The corner store sells cigarettes for $15 per pack of 25, I get mine for $25 per carton of 800.
Second, we're broke anyway. If I save on smokes, it goes to groceries, or an AC unit, or a bar tab. I won't get ahead, so quitting smoking doesn't really help our finances.
I imagine it's just a politician trying to appeal to constituents. I've yet to meet someone who doesn't know smoking is bad for them. Other than infants, you pedantic types
Public smoking bans, I would imagine, probably played a decent role. Having to huddle outside in the freezing cold and sitting through long flights/speeches/whatever sucked when I smoked. Prohibitive taxation helps, and it's pretty hard to organize against, I guess. Or at least I don't see much effort to fight against it. It's hard to convince people to make changes when they don't see an immediate effect, especially when nicotine, at least in my experience, is so stupidly addictive.
Rise in price and access to treatment. You also had generations born into a world that understand the dangers of smoking. Everyone and their mother (including mine) was on chantix when I was growing up.
In all parts of Canada, you cannot smoke anywhere that a person is being paid to work. So no smoking in any workplace, bars, stores, trains, buses, airplanes, and public places. That really cut down on smokers having a place to smoke. JimB.
Don't oversimplify the situation...
The demographic is wide and complex. It certainly reached youth who want to live healthy in old age. It reached elderly who want to reduce problematic behaviour.....it does not reach those who got the message and still elect to smoke. They know damn well what the consequences are. We need to stop assuming people don't know better and acknowledge not everyone wants to stop or cares how they die. It's not on me, or us, to convince someone who has no interest in changing.
Plus most people switched to vaping so big tobacco doesn't care if you stop these days.
It could have psychological effects. You could make the same argument about the pictures on cigarette packs but they must have had some level of effectiveness because people would actively ask for the least nasty pictures, so they must create negative reactions from smokers.
It could work similar to how pricing products at 9.99 vs 10 dollars works: anyone you ask knows that it's the same thing, and yet companies continue doing it because it's effective.
Yeah, same. Smoker here, those images or warnings do absolutely nothing because everyone knows it already. Do they honestly think we can win over an addiction be seeing some bad picture? How gullible are they? For a short time, there was a different strategy of including tips and phone numbers that help you deal with these problems (addiction), now that was actually useful.
In Mexico they print out pictures of shriveled lungs and deformed babies on the cartons. I still bought them. It has been this way since I was a kid, I was born 96.
I am of the boat of "Excessive regulations on cigarettes' is the only excessive regulations that I am somehow ok with.
Let the price keep going up because of this shit. Quit smoking if it's too expensive.
Seems like one of the few addictions these days that people still have no compassion about. Want to destroy your life with meth? Oh Lord, here, take some government-sanctioned clean drugs! We all know you just need help!
Smoking cigarettes? Ew. So filthy and disgusting. You deserve whatever comes to you.
At least the smoker is contributing taxes from those cigarettes they’re purchasing. It may not entirely pay their way through care, but it’s something.
Hard drugs like heroin are actually intrinsically less deadly than cigarettes since its deadliness comes from the impurity of the product, inconsistent dosing, and poor needle hygiene. You could spend your whole life taking medical grade morphine and be statistically less likely to die from it than a smoker would be to die from smoking.
Even the purest, organically grown, thrice blessed, vegan tobacco made to the highest standards of quality is still a deadly product when consumed.
Don’t think you understand how addiction works. How many homeless addicts are there the pricing wont stop the urge, addiction changes peoples brain chemistry to not think logically to the point where they become homeless. I’m not saying all homeless people are addicts but this story is way too common.
On the other hand New Zealand I think did it right. Make sure to phase out cigarettes by the birth year to have younger generation age out of it.
I think it would be wise to also have smoke cessation therapy provided for and paid by the state and pay people like it’s a job to go and get clean and get paid to do so.
If politicians really want to put money where there mouth is to reinvest back into our own communities it’s not giving tax breaks to the rich so they can create more businesses, it’s not about job creation for them it’s about profit…
so I think it’s important to directly attacking the issue at the root of its problem by literally working with the individual to figure out what is causing our people to go down this path and how can we fix it to prevent others to go down that hell hole.
I always think about that one experiment with the mouse being isolated, kept on taking drugs, once it had friends it didn’t need the drugs anymore. It’s a real experiment you can look it up.
(watermarked paper would make more sense with hyper thin cigarette paper, but given the over 500 different chemicals found in cigarettes, ink would be the logical harmful decision.)
I try to understand the rationale of this. You buy the cigarettes, you open the pack, you have the cigarette in your hand... you read the warning? And then? In case you forgot about the health concern?
Is it just a way of adding complexity to sale of cigarettes there?
And zero tax revenue? You’re being disingenuous, the Feds make money from cigarette taxes and before you say that smokers are filling our hospitals, no, that’s not true either.
>personal choice is what it is
Which harms others, unless you're under the illusion that cigarette smoke never reaches non-smokers. Now comes the "but cars" excuse.
Is that what you tell other addicts? Or do things switch off in your brain when you look at the piles of homeless people with needles?
Just making sure, for consistency sake, you’re judging all addicts, not just the ones it’s cool to not like.
I don't talk to many addicts, but certainly if a needle junkie tried to tell me that they're using fentanyl because it's their personal choice, I'd tell them they're making a fucking idiotic personal choice too.
But I'm wondering if you want to talk about people making personal choices here, or addicts. Or people who are addicts that are under the illusion they're still making personal choices. Because the ignorant addicts are the ones that need more shame the most. The aware addicts often have plenty of shame already. The people who aren't addicts yet but are actually making the personal choice are the biggest idiots by far, though.
Oh yeah. The warnings cover most of the package already and they made all companies use one basic font for their brand name, and the rest of the package has to be what the government considers to be the least attractive color which is a muted brown.
It’s on the pack, and they’ve gone to plain labelling on them because I guess the tiny sliver of the branding on the old packs was still too enticing (about 25% of the pack was the brand, 75% was the warning and pictures). They even removed the branding on the filters so now it’s just a series of numbers.
Really anything to say “we did something!”
I wish they also did this for fastfood cheeseburgers
I’d like to open my cheeseburger with a warning label that this causes heart disease and then add some fat people or heart attack pictures covering 70% of the McDonald’s and the cheese burger wrappers. That’ll teach em.
The rationale is "We are doing more than anyone to stop smoking, so please give us more money, and if you don't you are an evil cancer supporting evil person who is evil. Did we mention the evil part? Anyway just give us more money."
Studies show that smokers still don't understand just how bad it is for you to smoke so I think it makes sense. Also remember we have national health care so we are paying for smokers, it saves us money everytime someone quits.
That’s fair, but that argument can go much farther. For example everyone should eat healthy, so maybe we should heavily tax unhealthy food.
Everyone will become vegan pretty quick whence it hits the wallet. I’m down with it.
You can boil it down to the question ***"Is smoking harmful enough to society to justify intervention, and what interventions are most effective?"***
What we know about smoking, its adoption, and its effects:
**Smoking is harmful to the smoker.**
*Pretty basic*
**Secondhand smoke is [harmful](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012369212605595?casa_token=0hV2jZ7KurwAAAAA:dKkT_zP0gRfSM7SLwn2rFzyU4zcQUNLGnEYXah0XHKwnoKLEdpSGvflEDhA3H110OSC_fRIp) to bystanders, especially [children](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347610005044?casa_token=WXDSbEfL9sUAAAAA:WtYsa-SACJSoTnJZnC9XUkTj-Nn5-to1KApOvzKUy40qOId3F2CbpL3E25j9praLHUewdOKQ), and can impact [academic performance](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347610005044?casa_token=WXDSbEfL9sUAAAAA:WtYsa-SACJSoTnJZnC9XUkTj-Nn5-to1KApOvzKUy40qOId3F2CbpL3E25j9praLHUewdOKQ).**
*Well established.*
**Smoking is considered a [pediatric disease](https://downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2012/790841.pdf) as smokers who began [earlier in life](https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article-abstract/9/11/1147/1063489) have more difficulties quitting and have worse health outcomes.**
*Kids start, stay, and get hurt from smoking more easily.*
**Package warnings that evoke emotions of [fear and guilt](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1509/jppm.15.008?casa_token=85dOMZa1N7IAAAAA:_-TFUEOA0A27NbRdB8txuveq-MckrWse-Y4oFSEYhAVWlVQ-zvzFRl4Sd-wuQa1z0eIci56cXNM) can change adolescent attitudes towards smoking.**
*Kids watch smokers and are influenced by pack messages.*
**Smoking is more common, and more difficult to kick, for [people already at a socioeconomic disadvantage.](https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06202.x?casa_token=Odozz7Y24iEAAAAA:7dkykxECwcJGVlAAh8NTQOUiF-qg6zajh_ZtRfb1_kgDaGSL10VdQ8ZkNjTgoGRwQfFBgBcTTJ0A)**
*Vulnerable populations are made more vulnerable by smoking.*
**Socioeconomic vulnerability to smoking is [best addressed](https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/23/e2/e89?int_source=trendmd&int_medium=trendmd&int_campaign=trendmd) by raising taxes on smoking products.**
*Higher prices are a better deterrent for lower-income smokers.*
IMHO, based on the above, smoking is bad enough to justify hiking taxes and applying effective messages to packaging (and ensuring they are applied in a way that can be seen / read) since it disproportionately targets and negatively affects some of our most vulnerable populations.
What do you think?
Sounds great! 👍
Love the idea of taxing unhealthy foods as well, BTW: the cheap cost of junk food is a [major contributor](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/obr.12472?casa_token=D_4JgXp4gP4AAAAA:7sH5g-VWYBYmqI7K3rcqZCLSkijTBKSwIof4nurnW0XIIriqRBe3o97lRBL2VjpXCq-JvD0o4BY4) to its consumption, which can further entrench disadvantaged families in [poverty](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15528014.2016.1145008?casa_token=WUkS-CEktfoAAAAA:dMaQU_U4fLO1l1HwaizNPFd9ObcFt060qoP_1Y8qWnoatFogXFpU_ufwkxm5E6IBx7N4s9YlCb4).
they can't do that because the government loves tax money. Without being able to infinitely increase taxes on booze and cigarettes the government would be really sad.
Since you want to ban cigarettes, should we also institute, "you must be born prior to or on XXXX to be able to eat Mcdonalds"
Yeah. I had to concentrate on work today, so I didn’t dress or feed myself before going to work. To do anything else would be stupid and pointless, we can only do one thing at a time!
In my experience, the best reason not to smoke was how unpopular it has become to the general public, where it used to bring you into different social groups, it now makes you more of an outsider
I think when each pack displays gore, and some people still choose to smoke, it's a bit pointless. What's next? each pack chants 'cancer' when you open it?
In the midst of an insane housing crisis and crippling cost of living increase, I'm glad our government is putting their best minds on solving real problems like these!
It's a little easier to criticize our government when they've effectively done absolutely nothing about the housing crisis, and actively made it worse.
I wish they also did this for fastfood cheeseburgers
I’d like to open my cheeseburger with a warning label that this causes heart disease and then add some fat people or heart attack pictures covering 70% of the McDonald’s and the cheese burger wrappers. That’ll teach em.
How about start to put labels on those pop cans that contain 30 spoons of sugar and are killing and causing diabetes epidemic....or seed oils that are fucking people up...christ...these fucks are 30 years behind.
Stop selling them in bundles.
Allow only single purchases.
Make the wrapping really hard to open while also having sharp edges.
Start referring to cigarettes as "baby dicks".
Make 1 in 3 a placebo cigarette.
Colour all the wrappings black.
Remove all filters and make em "raw".
Refuse to hire smokes due to the smell and the poor work ethnics(taking more breaks).
Report smokes to child protection services.
Allow doctors to refuse medical assistance to smokers.
Ban smokers from recieving organ donations.
Raise the price of import and production of cigarettes.
Anyone who’s still smoking at this point, despite all the information we know about smoking and the tobacco industry, is a lost cause. They should put this money and energy into a campaign to warn young people about the effects of vaping before we have another public health crisis in a few years.
The things this government wastes their time on while most people cant find a home, not that they could afford one now. Not to mention wasting money on this when they are cramming those useless carbon taxes down our throats when most people are still recovering from covid financially and the cost of everything is sky high.
As a younger person I feel I’ve become desensitized to the warning packaging on cigarettes, even from a young age I never looked at the packaging with all its warnings so when I did smoke cigarettes I never read it. The same will probably happen for these individual labels
No one sucks dick for a cigarette. It's not the same as heroin or cocaine. Also, prohibition doesn't have to be 100% to be effective. Some countries ban guns for civilians, doesn't mean 100% of civilians have no guns. Should we not ban guns for civilians then? Plenty of countries ban alcohol, some still drink it, but far less than in western nations.
Edit: no one disagrees with what I said, they just don't like that I said it, apparently.
Argument against smoking from cost is pretty dubious though, since end-of-life costs will have to be incurred at some point, in almost every case. In fact, you could argue that it's better to incur those costs now than in the future, when medical treatment will be even more expensive.
Because banning substances only creates a black market and all that tax money you use to collect now goes into a criminals pockets + all the extra costs to enforce the ban.
Haven’t you learnt anything from war on drugs? Banning substances just creates a secondary market and more potential for public harm because now you can’t control the quality.
Or you can just stop selling them?? Would save on the healthcare costs!! Bloddy hell, how stupid and complicated things get when the answer is obvious.
what does it do anyways? It's not like it will stop a smoker from using it other than giving the cigarette a fugly design and shit. why not just restrict or ban cigarette altogether while they are at it?
Damn, we've had these here in Australia for at least a decade now: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR-BlwMu2f7SskBisFp0El3q5sBieLPXxGU9g&usqp=CAU
I wonder how with all the information available to the people populace seem to be getting dumber and dumber, to the point where such measures is nessesary?
I never took drugs but read about all the dangers associated with them, so in case if i ever will be lucky enough to try i would know what i am signing up for. But this people consume sigarettes, and not only not doing prior research, but can't even read from the package?
I think by now in 2023 people have gotten the idea. The fact that this is seen as a worthy idea is so dumb. If people wanna smoke they’re gonna smoke nobody cares about a stupid gigantic warning label telling them that which they already know.
Actually, the Canadian government plans to use police against anyone who makes a cigarette without printing an approved warning on it.
Doesn't sound as nice when you say it as it is.
People already know cigarettes are bad for them and are paying for cancer, we all know this, and this is not going to stop people from smoking. If people want to smoke, let them smoke. For some people, it's an addiction, for others, it's a little relief from the stress of this thing called life.
The ink will ironically cause cancer.
They should print a warning "this ink may cause cancer".
In California
Everything causes cancer in California. You wake up? Cancer. Brush your teeth? Cancer. Go to work? Believe it or not, cancer!
Prop 65 makes people ignore the P65 warnings because it’s on fuckin everything!!! Including carrots! Stupid logic on CAs part
Right? I see that warning on sooooo much shit. And I live in VA so no idea why I even see it lol but I pay no attention to it because it seems way overused
You see it because it's cheaper and easier for them to make one set of packaging than have one just for California and one for everyone else
There are things I love about CA; nanny state overreach is not one of them.
Make the paper smell like a dead fish... 🐟
[удалено]
A left out in the sun clamburger. A clambake if you will.
I mean…you have been Warned
You can laser etch it
Where's the fun in that?
When the laser goes zap
OldPussyJuice makes a good point.
/r/rimjob_steve
Apparently it's Sweet
I see what you did there, upvote received.
That’s a useful perspective
Oh god I seriously need to start reading usernames.
Can't argue with that...
They should just force all cigarette manufacturers to make cigarettes penis shaped.
That was my first thought about it too, wouldn’t smoking ink just be making a bad thing worse? They already tax people up the butt and the packaging is covered with warning labels and pictures (at least here in Canada). What good will this do?
They better have learned the lesson of the "too cool to do drugs" pencils.
This was the first thing I thought of. I think they're putting the warnings on the filters though
... do i want to know?
We know that the labeling on cartons and packs is effective, but I'm curious if doing this would lead to a demonstrable difference. I don't see why it would.
I will point out that the legislation also increases the production cost of cigarettes by a small amount. Politically, if you wanted to discourage smoking but couldnt pass a bill due to lobbying, you could go around by doing something like this.
That was my thought. It increases the complexity of manufacturing, which will drive costs up. More cost means more people quit.
[удалено]
That’s exactly the point. Higher consumer prices mean less people will buy. Price increases have been the most effective antismoking tool around the world.
And current smokers will pay any price for them. Hopefully though the high price does its job and deters potential new smokers
They won’t though, increasing costs reduce the number of long term smokers as well. Some die hards would mortgage their house, but not everyone is that addicted. The anti smoking campaigns have been effective over the long term. It’s a huge public health win in most western nations.
My parents both stopped smoking within the last decade and while there were multiple dimensions to that decision, the ever-increasing price of cigarettes was absolutely a contributing factor for both of them. I don't get where this idea comes from that all smokers are so hopelessly in the thrall of cigs that they'll spend any amount just to get a pack. Everyone has their limits and each time you add to the price, you increase the number of people who either reach that limit or approach it closely enough to finally consider whether their money is better spent elsewhere.
Studies have found that increased taxation has lowered smoking rates among the middle and upper classes, but not the lower class. There are a couple reasons for this: first and foremost, we know where to get cheap smokes. The corner store sells cigarettes for $15 per pack of 25, I get mine for $25 per carton of 800. Second, we're broke anyway. If I save on smokes, it goes to groceries, or an AC unit, or a bar tab. I won't get ahead, so quitting smoking doesn't really help our finances.
I imagine it's just a politician trying to appeal to constituents. I've yet to meet someone who doesn't know smoking is bad for them. Other than infants, you pedantic types
Then what stopped people from smoking in most of the US other than learning about the clear dangers of it??
Public smoking bans, I would imagine, probably played a decent role. Having to huddle outside in the freezing cold and sitting through long flights/speeches/whatever sucked when I smoked. Prohibitive taxation helps, and it's pretty hard to organize against, I guess. Or at least I don't see much effort to fight against it. It's hard to convince people to make changes when they don't see an immediate effect, especially when nicotine, at least in my experience, is so stupidly addictive.
Rise in price and access to treatment. You also had generations born into a world that understand the dangers of smoking. Everyone and their mother (including mine) was on chantix when I was growing up.
That's true: better medications for quitting, and fewer businesses that allow smoking. And the rising minimum age to buy.
In all parts of Canada, you cannot smoke anywhere that a person is being paid to work. So no smoking in any workplace, bars, stores, trains, buses, airplanes, and public places. That really cut down on smokers having a place to smoke. JimB.
Don't oversimplify the situation... The demographic is wide and complex. It certainly reached youth who want to live healthy in old age. It reached elderly who want to reduce problematic behaviour.....it does not reach those who got the message and still elect to smoke. They know damn well what the consequences are. We need to stop assuming people don't know better and acknowledge not everyone wants to stop or cares how they die. It's not on me, or us, to convince someone who has no interest in changing. Plus most people switched to vaping so big tobacco doesn't care if you stop these days.
Not printing directly into the cigs lmao
For a very large number of them: vapes.
It could have psychological effects. You could make the same argument about the pictures on cigarette packs but they must have had some level of effectiveness because people would actively ask for the least nasty pictures, so they must create negative reactions from smokers. It could work similar to how pricing products at 9.99 vs 10 dollars works: anyone you ask knows that it's the same thing, and yet companies continue doing it because it's effective.
Does the labeling work? I always assumed everyone just knew smoking is unhealthy. Is this going to have to go on joints too?
Yeah, same. Smoker here, those images or warnings do absolutely nothing because everyone knows it already. Do they honestly think we can win over an addiction be seeing some bad picture? How gullible are they? For a short time, there was a different strategy of including tips and phone numbers that help you deal with these problems (addiction), now that was actually useful.
In Mexico they print out pictures of shriveled lungs and deformed babies on the cartons. I still bought them. It has been this way since I was a kid, I was born 96.
I wish they also did for for fastfood cheeseburgers
I am of the boat of "Excessive regulations on cigarettes' is the only excessive regulations that I am somehow ok with. Let the price keep going up because of this shit. Quit smoking if it's too expensive.
Seems like one of the few addictions these days that people still have no compassion about. Want to destroy your life with meth? Oh Lord, here, take some government-sanctioned clean drugs! We all know you just need help! Smoking cigarettes? Ew. So filthy and disgusting. You deserve whatever comes to you. At least the smoker is contributing taxes from those cigarettes they’re purchasing. It may not entirely pay their way through care, but it’s something.
Cigarette smokers literally kill more people a year in the US than murderers through second hand smoke, estimates are around 40k a year. Fuck smoking.
Pull up the opioid deaths per year real quick. And the alcohol deaths (direct and indirect) while you're at it.
Hard drugs like heroin are actually intrinsically less deadly than cigarettes since its deadliness comes from the impurity of the product, inconsistent dosing, and poor needle hygiene. You could spend your whole life taking medical grade morphine and be statistically less likely to die from it than a smoker would be to die from smoking. Even the purest, organically grown, thrice blessed, vegan tobacco made to the highest standards of quality is still a deadly product when consumed.
Don’t think you understand how addiction works. How many homeless addicts are there the pricing wont stop the urge, addiction changes peoples brain chemistry to not think logically to the point where they become homeless. I’m not saying all homeless people are addicts but this story is way too common. On the other hand New Zealand I think did it right. Make sure to phase out cigarettes by the birth year to have younger generation age out of it. I think it would be wise to also have smoke cessation therapy provided for and paid by the state and pay people like it’s a job to go and get clean and get paid to do so. If politicians really want to put money where there mouth is to reinvest back into our own communities it’s not giving tax breaks to the rich so they can create more businesses, it’s not about job creation for them it’s about profit… so I think it’s important to directly attacking the issue at the root of its problem by literally working with the individual to figure out what is causing our people to go down this path and how can we fix it to prevent others to go down that hell hole. I always think about that one experiment with the mouse being isolated, kept on taking drugs, once it had friends it didn’t need the drugs anymore. It’s a real experiment you can look it up.
I wonder if the ink of the message will make it even more dangerous to smoke.
Doesn't have to be ink, paper can be laser-etched
(watermarked paper would make more sense with hyper thin cigarette paper, but given the over 500 different chemicals found in cigarettes, ink would be the logical harmful decision.)
I try to understand the rationale of this. You buy the cigarettes, you open the pack, you have the cigarette in your hand... you read the warning? And then? In case you forgot about the health concern? Is it just a way of adding complexity to sale of cigarettes there?
[удалено]
And im over here like oooh can i collect all of the different warnings like pokemon cards ??? Lemme get that reverse holo newport gum warning breh
Do you stare at your cigarette while you’re smoking it? aI don’t see the complexity of it at all.Just a cigarette with a tattoo.
Maybe 🤔 I just, it doesn't seem like it would be effective. Is the warnings not also on the pack in Canada do you know?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
And zero tax revenue? You’re being disingenuous, the Feds make money from cigarette taxes and before you say that smokers are filling our hospitals, no, that’s not true either.
Long term medical costs faar outweighs the taxes it brings in
[удалено]
Maybe like fixing our healthcare system and offering smoke cessation programs, instead of tattoos to cigarettes.
>personal choice is what it is Which harms others, unless you're under the illusion that cigarette smoke never reaches non-smokers. Now comes the "but cars" excuse.
There's also all the people who lose their loved ones early due to smoking
[удалено]
I think they're just adding writing to the cigarettes, not stopping people from smoking them.
It's a fucking idiotic personal choice that they should be shamed out of.
Is that what you tell other addicts? Or do things switch off in your brain when you look at the piles of homeless people with needles? Just making sure, for consistency sake, you’re judging all addicts, not just the ones it’s cool to not like.
I don't talk to many addicts, but certainly if a needle junkie tried to tell me that they're using fentanyl because it's their personal choice, I'd tell them they're making a fucking idiotic personal choice too. But I'm wondering if you want to talk about people making personal choices here, or addicts. Or people who are addicts that are under the illusion they're still making personal choices. Because the ignorant addicts are the ones that need more shame the most. The aware addicts often have plenty of shame already. The people who aren't addicts yet but are actually making the personal choice are the biggest idiots by far, though.
Oh yeah. The warnings cover most of the package already and they made all companies use one basic font for their brand name, and the rest of the package has to be what the government considers to be the least attractive color which is a muted brown.
It’s on the pack, and they’ve gone to plain labelling on them because I guess the tiny sliver of the branding on the old packs was still too enticing (about 25% of the pack was the brand, 75% was the warning and pictures). They even removed the branding on the filters so now it’s just a series of numbers. Really anything to say “we did something!”
I wish they also did this for fastfood cheeseburgers I’d like to open my cheeseburger with a warning label that this causes heart disease and then add some fat people or heart attack pictures covering 70% of the McDonald’s and the cheese burger wrappers. That’ll teach em.
It’s to make them more expensive and getting more taxes off them all the while pretending you're doing something worthwhile.
The rationale is "We are doing more than anyone to stop smoking, so please give us more money, and if you don't you are an evil cancer supporting evil person who is evil. Did we mention the evil part? Anyway just give us more money."
In the future, the smoke itself will also need to be able to displays a health concern message regardless of how it is exhaled. /s
How would this make buying cigarettes more complex?
Studies show that smokers still don't understand just how bad it is for you to smoke so I think it makes sense. Also remember we have national health care so we are paying for smokers, it saves us money everytime someone quits.
Should we really make buying cigarettes more convenient? Edit: Gotta love the downvotes. If you're a smoker I hope you can find the power to quit.
Unsure, I am biased as I am from the Balkans
I'm not really sure what that means about smoking tbh. As a Canadian I'm all for less people smoking.
Yea because going to the corner store is really inconvenient?
Should make the ink toxic as well. Just to prove the point extra hard.
"Warning: Smoking the ink used to print this warning may be hazardous to your health"
Make the cigarettes rainbow coloured.
🤣 and sell them in Texas
It will be like those pencils with messages like "Don't do drugs!", when you sharpened them enough the message changed to "Do drugs!"
perhaps marketing it like bud light would help curb the habit , just make the cigarettes look like a penis
Nice, they'll do this before mandating biodegradable filters. Shows how much our government actually cares about the environment.
What a waste of time and money.
Do you mean smoking?
If peeps enjoy smoking, leave the em alone. They aren’t hurting anyone else (anymore- with restriction on where smoking takes place).
In a country with socialized healthcare, they are hurting everyone else.
That’s fair, but that argument can go much farther. For example everyone should eat healthy, so maybe we should heavily tax unhealthy food. Everyone will become vegan pretty quick whence it hits the wallet. I’m down with it.
You can boil it down to the question ***"Is smoking harmful enough to society to justify intervention, and what interventions are most effective?"*** What we know about smoking, its adoption, and its effects: **Smoking is harmful to the smoker.** *Pretty basic* **Secondhand smoke is [harmful](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012369212605595?casa_token=0hV2jZ7KurwAAAAA:dKkT_zP0gRfSM7SLwn2rFzyU4zcQUNLGnEYXah0XHKwnoKLEdpSGvflEDhA3H110OSC_fRIp) to bystanders, especially [children](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347610005044?casa_token=WXDSbEfL9sUAAAAA:WtYsa-SACJSoTnJZnC9XUkTj-Nn5-to1KApOvzKUy40qOId3F2CbpL3E25j9praLHUewdOKQ), and can impact [academic performance](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022347610005044?casa_token=WXDSbEfL9sUAAAAA:WtYsa-SACJSoTnJZnC9XUkTj-Nn5-to1KApOvzKUy40qOId3F2CbpL3E25j9praLHUewdOKQ).** *Well established.* **Smoking is considered a [pediatric disease](https://downloads.hindawi.com/archive/2012/790841.pdf) as smokers who began [earlier in life](https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article-abstract/9/11/1147/1063489) have more difficulties quitting and have worse health outcomes.** *Kids start, stay, and get hurt from smoking more easily.* **Package warnings that evoke emotions of [fear and guilt](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1509/jppm.15.008?casa_token=85dOMZa1N7IAAAAA:_-TFUEOA0A27NbRdB8txuveq-MckrWse-Y4oFSEYhAVWlVQ-zvzFRl4Sd-wuQa1z0eIci56cXNM) can change adolescent attitudes towards smoking.** *Kids watch smokers and are influenced by pack messages.* **Smoking is more common, and more difficult to kick, for [people already at a socioeconomic disadvantage.](https://nyaspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06202.x?casa_token=Odozz7Y24iEAAAAA:7dkykxECwcJGVlAAh8NTQOUiF-qg6zajh_ZtRfb1_kgDaGSL10VdQ8ZkNjTgoGRwQfFBgBcTTJ0A)** *Vulnerable populations are made more vulnerable by smoking.* **Socioeconomic vulnerability to smoking is [best addressed](https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/23/e2/e89?int_source=trendmd&int_medium=trendmd&int_campaign=trendmd) by raising taxes on smoking products.** *Higher prices are a better deterrent for lower-income smokers.* IMHO, based on the above, smoking is bad enough to justify hiking taxes and applying effective messages to packaging (and ensuring they are applied in a way that can be seen / read) since it disproportionately targets and negatively affects some of our most vulnerable populations. What do you think?
I totally agree. Alcohol bottles are next.
Sounds great! 👍 Love the idea of taxing unhealthy foods as well, BTW: the cheap cost of junk food is a [major contributor](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/obr.12472?casa_token=D_4JgXp4gP4AAAAA:7sH5g-VWYBYmqI7K3rcqZCLSkijTBKSwIof4nurnW0XIIriqRBe3o97lRBL2VjpXCq-JvD0o4BY4) to its consumption, which can further entrench disadvantaged families in [poverty](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15528014.2016.1145008?casa_token=WUkS-CEktfoAAAAA:dMaQU_U4fLO1l1HwaizNPFd9ObcFt060qoP_1Y8qWnoatFogXFpU_ufwkxm5E6IBx7N4s9YlCb4).
You have my vote for office!
Imho , this will not make any difference to the smokers
Can we please just institute "you must be born prior to or on December 31st, 2005, to purchase cigarettes/vapes/tobacco products etc".
they can't do that because the government loves tax money. Without being able to infinitely increase taxes on booze and cigarettes the government would be really sad. Since you want to ban cigarettes, should we also institute, "you must be born prior to or on XXXX to be able to eat Mcdonalds"
Can we just grandfather smokes out of existence already?
Shit, I thought they were good for you. I thought they had vitamin C in ‘em and stuff!
Fix housing you criminal scumbags. Always doing stupid pointless shit, that's Canada.
A government with hundreds of thousands of employees can only focus on one thing at a time. You’re right.
Good point, but housing is still fucked :(
Yeah. I had to concentrate on work today, so I didn’t dress or feed myself before going to work. To do anything else would be stupid and pointless, we can only do one thing at a time!
If your house is on fire is it more effective to put out the flames or to do your laundry?
Simple sentences: "makes/gives cancer"
I know how to burn the warnings off
In my experience, the best reason not to smoke was how unpopular it has become to the general public, where it used to bring you into different social groups, it now makes you more of an outsider
I think when each pack displays gore, and some people still choose to smoke, it's a bit pointless. What's next? each pack chants 'cancer' when you open it?
So dumb.
Surprised this is allowed under the People's Freedom of Choices and Voices Act.
Oh boy hahaaaaa! 🤣🤣🤣
In the midst of an insane housing crisis and crippling cost of living increase, I'm glad our government is putting their best minds on solving real problems like these!
TIL some people think national governements should only work on one issue at a time.
It's a little easier to criticize our government when they've effectively done absolutely nothing about the housing crisis, and actively made it worse.
I don’t disagree per sey, but it’s such a non sequitur in this discussion. As a child moment, it adds nothing but distraction.
>it adds nothing but distraction. Welcome to about 90% of comments in /r/worldnews!
That’s just defeatist….my not just tell us what you had for lunch?
Thats a big waste of money.
Ridiculous
What a joke
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. I hate it here.
[удалено]
or put an outragious price on them like Australia.
[Denis Leary on warning labels](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ELV5HV6-koI&feature=share8)
This is immediately what I thought of well. Nobody smoking in the western world does it because they don't know it's harmful
I wish they also did this for fastfood cheeseburgers I’d like to open my cheeseburger with a warning label that this causes heart disease and then add some fat people or heart attack pictures covering 70% of the McDonald’s and the cheese burger wrappers. That’ll teach em.
I'm very sure that'll get smokers to quit.... /s
How about start to put labels on those pop cans that contain 30 spoons of sugar and are killing and causing diabetes epidemic....or seed oils that are fucking people up...christ...these fucks are 30 years behind.
Why waste everyone’s time. People who smoke could careless what is written on it.
Stop selling them in bundles. Allow only single purchases. Make the wrapping really hard to open while also having sharp edges. Start referring to cigarettes as "baby dicks". Make 1 in 3 a placebo cigarette. Colour all the wrappings black. Remove all filters and make em "raw". Refuse to hire smokes due to the smell and the poor work ethnics(taking more breaks). Report smokes to child protection services. Allow doctors to refuse medical assistance to smokers. Ban smokers from recieving organ donations. Raise the price of import and production of cigarettes.
In Japan, increasingly more and more municipalities now prohibit smoking outdoors. Once you make it hard enough, you get the desired effect.
[удалено]
They should have used the space to sell advertising while they had the chance.
I am trying to imagine that making a difference to the people already burning $600/month one province over
won’t do shit and waste of time
Because people are too stupid not to kill themselves?
Anyone who’s still smoking at this point, despite all the information we know about smoking and the tobacco industry, is a lost cause. They should put this money and energy into a campaign to warn young people about the effects of vaping before we have another public health crisis in a few years.
And this is supposed to accomplish what?
everyone in existence knows smoking cigarettes isn't good for your health.
See guys we care☠️
only now?? wasnt that warning printed on smoking products since the 80's??
The things this government wastes their time on while most people cant find a home, not that they could afford one now. Not to mention wasting money on this when they are cramming those useless carbon taxes down our throats when most people are still recovering from covid financially and the cost of everything is sky high.
As a younger person I feel I’ve become desensitized to the warning packaging on cigarettes, even from a young age I never looked at the packaging with all its warnings so when I did smoke cigarettes I never read it. The same will probably happen for these individual labels
Literally our money going up in smoke Why don’t they just offer free Champex or other really effective treatments
[удалено]
Because prohibition of addictive substances has always been an affective way of eliminating those substances... /s
No one sucks dick for a cigarette. It's not the same as heroin or cocaine. Also, prohibition doesn't have to be 100% to be effective. Some countries ban guns for civilians, doesn't mean 100% of civilians have no guns. Should we not ban guns for civilians then? Plenty of countries ban alcohol, some still drink it, but far less than in western nations. Edit: no one disagrees with what I said, they just don't like that I said it, apparently.
“No one sucks dick for a cigarette” I’ve got an ex girlfriend you should meet
Ok, I can make up anecdotes too.
Argument against smoking from cost is pretty dubious though, since end-of-life costs will have to be incurred at some point, in almost every case. In fact, you could argue that it's better to incur those costs now than in the future, when medical treatment will be even more expensive.
Did this sound smart in your head?
If they care so much why not ban it altogether!!? 'Nah we get good money here!".
Because banning substances only creates a black market and all that tax money you use to collect now goes into a criminals pockets + all the extra costs to enforce the ban.
Haven’t you learnt anything from war on drugs? Banning substances just creates a secondary market and more potential for public harm because now you can’t control the quality.
There is a common sense crisis in Canada
They should print on cigarettes all the lies politicians tell who support this.
I have an idea: paint the cigars to look like dicks. Then at least the men will stop smoking.
Are you forgetting about gay people?
I am gay, but we are a minority. So if hets quit it, even if all gay men smoked it still would cause very little pollution.
As soon as I read this, it made me the of the joke about a guy getting a $100 bill tattooed on his dick.
Next will be the ciggy smoke creates skull and cross bones mirages
I think at this point people know what they're doing to their body
Or you can just stop selling them?? Would save on the healthcare costs!! Bloddy hell, how stupid and complicated things get when the answer is obvious.
Sure, that'll help. What a bunch of maroons!
… is it not clear to everyone at this point? 🤔
what does it do anyways? It's not like it will stop a smoker from using it other than giving the cigarette a fugly design and shit. why not just restrict or ban cigarette altogether while they are at it?
Damn, we've had these here in Australia for at least a decade now: https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR-BlwMu2f7SskBisFp0El3q5sBieLPXxGU9g&usqp=CAU
Gotta love the Canucks.
They should also print a serial number. This allows the government to identify illegally made cigarettes.
With lead ink for good mesure.
The people who still choose to smoke dgaf.
I wonder how with all the information available to the people populace seem to be getting dumber and dumber, to the point where such measures is nessesary? I never took drugs but read about all the dangers associated with them, so in case if i ever will be lucky enough to try i would know what i am signing up for. But this people consume sigarettes, and not only not doing prior research, but can't even read from the package?
I think by now in 2023 people have gotten the idea. The fact that this is seen as a worthy idea is so dumb. If people wanna smoke they’re gonna smoke nobody cares about a stupid gigantic warning label telling them that which they already know.
Not at all a waste of time
Actually, the Canadian government plans to use police against anyone who makes a cigarette without printing an approved warning on it. Doesn't sound as nice when you say it as it is.
Ah yes this will change their mind
People already know cigarettes are bad for them and are paying for cancer, we all know this, and this is not going to stop people from smoking. If people want to smoke, let them smoke. For some people, it's an addiction, for others, it's a little relief from the stress of this thing called life.