New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

SLAM: debunk creationism, pseudoscience, and superstitions. Discuss logic and morality.

Moderator: Alyrium Denryle

User avatar
FSTargetDrone
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7878
Joined: 2004-04-10 06:10pm
Location: Drone HQ, Pennsylvania, USA

New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by FSTargetDrone »

Note that the Tobacco Labelling Resource Centre web page that is linked at the bottom of the article contains GRAPHIC imagery.

From MSN:
Get Ready for Gruesome Cigarette Warnings

Graphic images of diseased body parts could become the norm on packaging.

By Jennifer Thomas, HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, Aug. 27 (HealthDay News) - Would a gruesome picture of a cancer-ravaged mouth with rotting teeth make you think twice about buying a pack of cigarettes?

That's the goal of new federal regulations expected to go into effect within three years. The rules will require tobacco companies to cover at least half of the front and back of packages with graphic—and possibly gruesome—images illustrating the dangers of smoking.

If U.S. regulations are modeled after those already in place in Canada and other countries, the warnings will be shocking: blackened lungs, gangrenous feet, bleeding brains and people breathing through tracheotomies.

Though hard to look at, the more graphic the image, the more effective in discouraging smoking, said Stanton Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco and director of the university's Center for Tobacco Control, Research and Education.

"The graphic warnings really work," Glantz said. "They substantially increase the likelihood someone will quit smoking. They substantially decrease the chances a kid will smoke. And they really screw up the ability of the tobacco industry to use the packaging as a marketing tool."

Over the last decade, countries as varied as Canada, Australia, Chile, Brazil, Iran and Singapore, among others, have adopted graphic warnings on tobacco products. Some are downright disturbing: in Brazil, cigarette packages come with pictures of dead babies and a gangrened foot with blackened toes.

In the United States, the authority to force packaging changes was granted on June 22, when President Barack Obama, who has struggled with cigarette addiction since he was a teen, signed into law the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. The landmark legislation gives the U.S. Food and Drug Administration broad new authority to regulate the marketing of tobacco products.

Under the law, the FDA has two years to issue specifics about the new graphic warnings tobacco products will be required to carry. Tobacco companies then have 18 months to get them onto packages.

Currently, the United States has some of the weakest requirements for cigarette package warnings in the world, said David Hammond, an assistant professor in the department of health studies at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada. The text-only warnings on packages have changed little since 1984.

"Consumers in many Third World countries are getting more and better information about the risks of cigarettes off their packs," Hammond said.

With much at stake for tobacco companies, there will be much wrangling over the details, Glantz said.

Yet research shows the FDA shouldn't compromise, Glantz said. The more frightening the image, the greater the anti-smoking effect, he said.

Despite some research that has suggested images that are too stomach-turning may backfire because people eventually ignore them, new research is showing the most graphic images pack the most punch, said Jeremy Kees, an assistant professor of marketing at Villanova University.

In a yet-to-be published study, Kees had 541 adult smokers in the United States and Canada view a mild image of a smoker's mouth with yellowed teeth; a moderately graphic image of a diseased mouth; and a third photo of a grotesque, disfigured mouth.

The most disturbing photo evoked the most fear, prompting more smokers to say they intended to quit, Kees said.

While the new regulations may also include no-nonsense, text warnings such as "Smoking Makes You Impotent" and "Smoking Kills," the images will have the broadest reach, Hammond said.

Non-English speakers can understand the picture of a diseased mouth, as can people who are illiterate. Smokers tend to have lower literacy levels, Hammond noted.

And kids will get the message too, potentially stopping them from ever lighting up. "You have 4-year-olds and 5-year-olds who can understand that picture," Hammond said.

Elsewhere, graphic warnings seem to be helping to drive down smoking rates. In Canada, about 13 percent of the population smokes daily, a 5 percent drop since the graphic warnings were adopted in 2000, Hammond said.

About 21 percent of the U.S. population smokes daily, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

While powerful, the gruesome warnings won't get everyone to quit.

"Nicotine is highly addictive," Hammond said. "Health warnings are not a magic bullet, but they help move people closer to quitting and provide a constant reminder of why many people want to change."

The Tobacco Labelling Resource Centre has images of cigarette packages from around the world.
Again, fair warning, GRAPHIC imagery at the link above.

I accidentally once saw one of these kinds of warnings while looking up something else. Once was enough. I vaguely recall some anti-smoking posters either in high school or college, but it's not something we see much of in the US. I'm all for this--if tobacco companies can use attractive, healthy-looking models and the like in their advertisements, then this is a nice counterbalance.
Image
User avatar
Max
Jedi Knight
Posts: 780
Joined: 2005-02-02 12:38pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Max »

North America's labels seem far too tame when compared to Brazil's and Thailand's...
Loading...
Image
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Molyneux »

Fucking hell...just ban them or stop this stupid shit. Taxing cigarettes is fine, putting disturbing pictures on them is just stupid.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12267
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Surlethe »

Molyneux wrote:Fucking hell...just ban them or stop this stupid shit. Taxing cigarettes is fine, putting disturbing pictures on them is just stupid.
Why? Because you say so?
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
FSTargetDrone
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7878
Joined: 2004-04-10 06:10pm
Location: Drone HQ, Pennsylvania, USA

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by FSTargetDrone »

Molyneux wrote:Fucking hell...just ban them or stop this stupid shit. Taxing cigarettes is fine, putting disturbing pictures on them is just stupid.
Because they are essentially trying to frighten people into not smoking? Evidently, this practice works to some extent, so, why not do it? Nobody who buys cigarettes is going to look at the text warnings on the package more than once. But all it takes is a glance to see a grisly image and then people might think twice about buying cigarettes, especially people just starting to smoke.

It's not much different than making a graphic film showing the dangers of using cell phones to send text messages while driving. It's meant to shock people and in this case, hopefully change self-destructive behavior.

In any case, I'm afraid that tobacco lobbyists may get it toned down, or there might be objections from some group that is offended that such images are displayed in stores.
Image
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Molyneux »

FSTargetDrone wrote:
Molyneux wrote:Fucking hell...just ban them or stop this stupid shit. Taxing cigarettes is fine, putting disturbing pictures on them is just stupid.
Because they are essentially trying to frighten people into not smoking?
That's exactly why I have a problem with it. It's an attempt to turn people off from smoking with an un-thinking, visceral reaction, and I can't stand emotionally-manipulative things like that.

If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Galvatron
Decepticon Leader
Posts: 6662
Joined: 2002-07-12 12:27am
Location: Kill! Smash! Destroy! Rend! Mangle! Distort!

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Galvatron »

As someone who is struggling with a minor cigarette addiction (in social situations), I have no problem with this. That said, I and the other smokers I know will probably take a cynical attitude and start comparing each others' disturbing pictures like they're baseball cards. It isn't that we celebrate our habit, but we realize that such measures are lost on us. If they prevent young people from starting, however, then I'm all for it.
Molyneux wrote:Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
That's a fantastic idea.
User avatar
Lusankya
ChiCom
Posts: 4163
Joined: 2002-07-13 03:04am
Location: 人间天堂
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Lusankya »

Molyneux wrote:If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
You are aware that smoking affects people other than the smoker, aren't you?
"I would say that the above post is off-topic, except that I'm not sure what the topic of this thread is, and I don't think anybody else is sure either."
- Darth Wong
Free Durian - Last updated 27 Dec
"Why does it look like you are in China or something?" - havokeff
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7954
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by ray245 »

Lusankya wrote:
Molyneux wrote:If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
You are aware that smoking affects people other than the smoker, aren't you?
Meh, I was drilled into my head that the effects of second-hand smoke should never be used as a valid argument in any debate by my debate coach.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
Count Chocula
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1821
Joined: 2008-08-19 01:34pm
Location: You've asked me for my sacrifice, and I am winter born

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Count Chocula »

Back at my old job, when I was travelling to Canada every other month, I absolutely loved buying the Canadian cigs with the graphic tooth-falling-out-black-lung-hacking-guy-limp-dick-cigarette pictures on the packs. I bought Export A Green Death cigs by the carton just so I could show my friends and coworkers back in the USA what those wacky Canucks thought was aversive marketing!

As Denis Leary said about cigarette labels,
...you could have cigarettes that come in a black pack, with a skull and a crossbone on the front, called 'Tumors,' and smokers'd be lined up around the block going 'I can't wait to get my hands on these fuckin' things...'
Frankly, I'd find it amusing.
Image
The only people who were safe were the legion; after one of their AT-ATs got painted dayglo pink with scarlet go faster stripes, they identified the perpetrators and exacted revenge. - Eleventh Century Remnant

Lord Monckton is my heeerrooo

"Yeah, well, fuck them. I never said I liked the Moros." - Shroom Man 777
User avatar
Lusankya
ChiCom
Posts: 4163
Joined: 2002-07-13 03:04am
Location: 人间天堂
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Lusankya »

ray245 wrote:
Lusankya wrote:Meh, I was drilled into my head that the effects of second-hand smoke should never be used as a valid argument in any debate by my debate coach.
Why?
"I would say that the above post is off-topic, except that I'm not sure what the topic of this thread is, and I don't think anybody else is sure either."
- Darth Wong
Free Durian - Last updated 27 Dec
"Why does it look like you are in China or something?" - havokeff
User avatar
Tanasinn
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1765
Joined: 2007-01-21 10:10pm
Location: Void Zone

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Tanasinn »

Probably a smoker. :)
Truth fears no trial.
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12267
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Surlethe »

Molyneux wrote:That's exactly why I have a problem with it. It's an attempt to turn people off from smoking with an un-thinking, visceral reaction, and I can't stand emotionally-manipulative things like that.
That's what all advertising is. Would you support banning all advertising?
If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
Sure, that's a great idea - and in fast food restaurants, too. It would at least counter the fast food industry's domination of the advertising market.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Winston Blake
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2529
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
Location: Australia

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Winston Blake »

Molyneux wrote:
FSTargetDrone wrote:Because they are essentially trying to frighten people into not smoking?
That's exactly why I have a problem with it. It's an attempt to turn people off from smoking with an un-thinking, visceral reaction, and I can't stand emotionally-manipulative things like that.

If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
Just because putting scary images on tobacco packaging is emotionally influential doesn't means it's dishonest. The message 'smoking will cause you health problems' is accurate and well-supported. People may claim to 'know the risks', yet their knowledge of them is distant, inaccurate and incomplete. In other words, they're 'aware' but still ignorant. Gory images showing what smoking victims live through every day helps 'fill in' that ignorance, making an accurate judgment possible.

You make it sound as if deciding to take up smoking is a purely rational decision based on weighing the pros and cons. But people who take up smoking do it for irrational, emotionally-manipulated reasons such as peer pressure, cultural momentum and a 'mature' self-image. If someone chooses to smoke but is repulsed when faced with the consequences, then you can't call that a rational decision.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by loomer »

Molyneux wrote: If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap. Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
I would love to buy Fat Man Masturbating Furiously brand chips.

Also, don't forget that you'd have people who find morbidly obese people sexy, so you'd end up getting semen all over the snack food aisles.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Molyneux »

Surlethe wrote:
Molyneux wrote:That's exactly why I have a problem with it. It's an attempt to turn people off from smoking with an un-thinking, visceral reaction, and I can't stand emotionally-manipulative things like that.
That's what all advertising is. Would you support banning all advertising?
I disagree with your assertion that all advertising is intentionally emotionally manipulative - but yes, I would support exactly that.

...Well not really. As happy as I would be if the concept were wiped from existence, I couldn't support a ban. Advertising falls under the heading of things that I find reprehensible, but worthy of legal protection....like, say, the KKK.

Something can be both legal and deserving of condemnation.
Billy Mays is still on my "piss on his grave should the opportunity present itself" list.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Lusankya
ChiCom
Posts: 4163
Joined: 2002-07-13 03:04am
Location: 人间天堂
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Lusankya »

Molyneux wrote:...Well not really. As happy as I would be if the concept were wiped from existence, I couldn't support a ban. Advertising falls under the heading of things that I find reprehensible, but worthy of legal protection....like, say, the KKK.
How then do you propose that people with something to sell inform everyone else that they have something to sell without advertising? Advertising includes everything from the Superbowl ads, right down to a three line notice in the local newspaper that says "3 kittens for sale, 1F, 2M, desexed, wormed, $150 ea. Call Sharon on +61xxxxxxxx". Do you seriously find the last one in any way reprehensible? The main difference between the two is the level of sophistication.

Aside from that, this kind of emotionally manipulative advertising saves lives. Are you saying that being emotionally manipulative is so horrible and so reprehensible that it is worth sacrificing lives or condemning children to be born with congenital abnormalities, allergies and asthma in order to avoid it?
"I would say that the above post is off-topic, except that I'm not sure what the topic of this thread is, and I don't think anybody else is sure either."
- Darth Wong
Free Durian - Last updated 27 Dec
"Why does it look like you are in China or something?" - havokeff
User avatar
ray245
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7954
Joined: 2005-06-10 11:30pm

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by ray245 »

Lusankya wrote:
ray245 wrote:
Lusankya wrote:Meh, I was drilled into my head that the effects of second-hand smoke should never be used as a valid argument in any debate by my debate coach.
Why?
He argued that the effects of second hand smoke cannot be conclusively proven.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.
User avatar
SilverWingedSeraph
Jedi Knight
Posts: 965
Joined: 2007-02-15 11:56am
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by SilverWingedSeraph »

ray245 wrote:He argued that the effects of second hand smoke cannot be conclusively proven.
Ohhh... so he's just an idiot, then.
  /l、
゙(゚、 。 7
 l、゙ ~ヽ
 じしf_, )ノ
User avatar
Commander 598
Jedi Knight
Posts: 767
Joined: 2006-06-07 08:16pm
Location: Northern Louisiana Swamp
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Commander 598 »

SilverWingedSeraph wrote:
ray245 wrote:He argued that the effects of second hand smoke cannot be conclusively proven.
Ohhh... so he's just an idiot, then.
Actually, since he is/was a debate coach, I think it probably has more to do with it being a shitty and easily exploited argument in competitive debates.
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Molyneux »

Lusankya wrote:
Molyneux wrote:...Well not really. As happy as I would be if the concept were wiped from existence, I couldn't support a ban. Advertising falls under the heading of things that I find reprehensible, but worthy of legal protection....like, say, the KKK.
How then do you propose that people with something to sell inform everyone else that they have something to sell without advertising? Advertising includes everything from the Superbowl ads, right down to a three line notice in the local newspaper that says "3 kittens for sale, 1F, 2M, desexed, wormed, $150 ea. Call Sharon on +61xxxxxxxx". Do you seriously find the last one in any way reprehensible? The main difference between the two is the level of sophistication.
I don't know. Do you find the second in any way emotionally manipulative? You know, the reason I find most advertising abhorrent in the first place?
Aside from that, this kind of emotionally manipulative advertising saves lives. Are you saying that being emotionally manipulative is so horrible and so reprehensible that it is worth sacrificing lives or condemning children to be born with congenital abnormalities, allergies and asthma in order to avoid it?
Nice argument, except that you're the first person on this thread to mention the effects of smoking on unborn children - and if that were the stated purpose of this, then I would find that part of the program a defensible evil.

But "sacrificing lives"? At this point, anyone who smokes WILL know that it is a dangerous activity. Every health class I've been in has shown the old bit with black, burned-looking, tar-choked smoker lungs. But everyone for whom smoking is legal is fully capable of choosing to take those risks.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Lusankya
ChiCom
Posts: 4163
Joined: 2002-07-13 03:04am
Location: 人间天堂
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Lusankya »

Molyneux wrote:But "sacrificing lives"? At this point, anyone who smokes WILL know that it is a dangerous activity. Every health class I've been in has shown the old bit with black, burned-looking, tar-choked smoker lungs. But everyone for whom smoking is legal is fully capable of choosing to take those risks.
You are absolutely correct. And people who are harmed through exposure to second hand smoke are leaving their house on a completely voluntary basis, and thus choose to take that risk And the children of smokers should have just chosen to get better parents. After all, I certainly know that most of my successes in life can be traced back to my choice of parents. They really should have known better when they chose theirs.
"I would say that the above post is off-topic, except that I'm not sure what the topic of this thread is, and I don't think anybody else is sure either."
- Darth Wong
Free Durian - Last updated 27 Dec
"Why does it look like you are in China or something?" - havokeff
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Darth Wong »

Molyneux wrote:Fucking hell...just ban them or stop this stupid shit. Taxing cigarettes is fine, putting disturbing pictures on them is just stupid.
Why? Even if you can't prove that it would accomplish anything, what's the harm?

Oh wait, I see the next post ...
That's exactly why I have a problem with it. It's an attempt to turn people off from smoking with an un-thinking, visceral reaction, and I can't stand emotionally-manipulative things like that.
The fact that you personally dislike it does not make it stupid. If it works for even 1% of smokers or prospective smokers, it's worthwhile. If you want to prove it's bad, you'll have to come up with something a helluva lot better than "it's emotionally manipulative". Smoking kills almost a half million fucking people in America and Canada every year, genius. How the fuck does "emotionally manipulative" come anywhere close to that level of social harm, especially when it's so perfectly targeted that it would have zero effect on anyone outside the target group?
If someone knows the risks associated with smoking, and chooses to do so anyway, let them do it without pulling this kind of crap.
Why?
Would you be in favor of displaying pictures of morbidly obese nudes on all snack foods?
Sure. Obesity is another huge health problem. They should also tax junk food and force restaurants to provide calorie and fat counts for all their menu items right on the menu.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Darth Wong »

ray245 wrote:Meh, I was drilled into my head that the effects of second-hand smoke should never be used as a valid argument in any debate by my debate coach.
Your debate coach was probably one of those idiots who completely bought into the tobacco apologist argument that second-hand smoke is harmless because no one could produce a particular kind of evidence for its health effects, never mind the fact that all sorts of other evidence was available. A lot of stupid people bought into that particular line of bullshit a few years back.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Re: New Warnings On Cigarettes Sold In USA

Post by Darth Wong »

Count Chocula wrote:Back at my old job, when I was travelling to Canada every other month, I absolutely loved buying the Canadian cigs with the graphic tooth-falling-out-black-lung-hacking-guy-limp-dick-cigarette pictures on the packs. I bought Export A Green Death cigs by the carton just so I could show my friends and coworkers back in the USA what those wacky Canucks thought was aversive marketing!
Is there some kind of point you're trying to make here? If so, what is it, apart from "I'm a hopeless junkie who won't stop smoking for any reason?"
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Post Reply