Search In The AnswerBank
Smoking yourself to death
20:26 on Wed 29/Aug/07
From October next year cigarette packets will have to show graphic pictures such as diseased hearts and lungs. Will this have any effect on the smoker? If this has no effect should cigarette companies pick up the tab for the drain it puts on the health service? It can be argued that they are just as responsible for chronic diseases. What else can a government do to stop people smoking?
1 to 18 of 18
 |
(21:13 on Wed 29/Aug/07)
Won't have any effect at all, about the only deterrent would be making it illegal. How many people actually look at the packets?. |
|
 |
(21:21 on Wed 29/Aug/07)
Question Author
Lonnie you are right. Since the law came in to ban smoking in public places the number of people smoking has reduced by I believe 6%. Maybe they need to go further!
|
|
|
|
(22:47 on Wed 29/Aug/07)
They already say "SMOKING KILLS" etc, they don't take that on so I don't suppose a diseased lung wil make much difference. Prohibition does not work, however we are down to a hard core of smokers where no amount of warnings pictures or otherwise will make any difference, so time to hike the tax up through the roof. I've asked the question before on here, how much would a pack have to be before smokers would consider it prohibitive. Yes I know bootleg yada yada yada.... but what if the cost was unavoidable? Smokers, how much would they need to be to make you give up? |
|
|
|
(23:26 on Wed 29/Aug/07) Many years ago a tv prog showed the pouring from a beaker of the liquid tarry gunge taken from a dead smokers lungs. It was a shocking and revolting piece of film and one which finally made my husband see the sense in giving up. He quit cold turkey shortly after and has never smoked since. He tells people that it was this (an Australian film) that made him stop. I wish they would show it again and often. It would have more effect than still pictures which people will get used to in the same way as the worded warnings. | |
 |
(23:35 on Wed 29/Aug/07) Trouble is when are they going to put pictures of diseased livers on bottles of booze, blocked arteries on burgers. I don't smoke but I find this all very one sided everyone keeps harping on about the drain on the NHS this whole country would come to a stand still without smokers, drinkers and motorists, fags, booze, cars bring in the highest revenue of all other taxes. | |
|
|
(00:02 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
Come on pussnboots. Everyone knows smoking is harmful and kills. Moderation and care on all the other things you mention will help and your argument is weak. Divert attention if you wish. But I lost my father and father in law to lung cancer (the latter terrified and suffocating 6 weeks from late diagnosis of industrial disease). Be sensible and avoid the agony of suffering like this and forcing your loved ones to watch. I imagine very few smokers in the late stages of smoke induced illness will not regret taking up this deadly habit, and more importantly now we all know the harm, not trying to cut down,or better, stopping it. My sister and I have never smoked because we listened as children to our fathers smokers cough. In a perverse way he may have saved us from becoming direct victims of smoking, if not from indirect victims by losing him to this fatal addiction. Just an aside, believe it or not, I visited a medium on an issue and my father came thru. His message to me was about his death from smoking. He said that everyone smoked when he was young and didn't know how harmful it was like they do now. He told my medium that he was concerned for someone (I believe my heavy smoker son) who should stop as the dangers were well known now. He then (upsettingly) asked that I not be angry about what he believed I saw as his preventable death. I did, and do, think this but thought I hid it. Let my tears, my loss, and fear for my son make just one smoker think about what they are doing. |
|
 |
(00:06 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
Not on this smoker no. I can say this with 100% certainty due to the nature of my day job. If that doesn't make me quit (and it really doesn't) then despite obvious health risks and the fact that it's a disgusting habit, I'm not going to. The NHS gets a lot of money from smokers. Where there is supply there is demand. Those of us stupid enough to smoke make our own decisions and I see no reason why marlboro should foot the bill. The goverment can not do anything in my opinion. It is a personal choice and people will stop if and when they want to. |
|
 |
(02:38 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
the pictures are quite unpleasant. When Canada introduced a similar measure a few years ago it did reduce smoking for a while, but it gradually crept back up again, and I think they're now wondering if they should have even worse pictures. Still, even reducing the death rate for a year would be a small plus. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6968580 .stm |
|
|
|
(02:58 on Thu 30/Aug/07) There are graphic warnings in Thailand, and it just means that people ask for cigarettes by brand and warning. The most popular seems to be the couple in bed with the women looking frustrated, the least popular is the rotten teeth. | |
|
|
(09:35 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
OOhhhhh the government want to spell out (again) how bad smoking is for you. But they want all the tax revenue from it.. Can't have it all ways I'm afraid. Ban it totally if it's that bad. |
|
|
|
(09:57 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
a drain on the health service? you will find revenue from tobacco duty far exceeding relative health costs, why not ban smoking totally? the nanny state already has plenty of laws affecting 'crimes' where there is no victim other than the offender, driving not wearing a seat belt, riding a motorcycle without a crash helmet, how about a �30 fixed penalty for eating a doner kebab? or 7 days jail for eating a cream cake? have you seen the cost of treating heart disease? perhaps a similar ratio of tax on all 'dangerous' foods should be levied i suggest the new retail prices should be... bag of chips �20 pork pie �30 jam donut �15 full english breakfast �50 of course because of the dangers of passive gorging certain pungent foods must be consumed outside, chicken vindaloo for example! |
|
|
|
(10:28 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
Helpme - Spot on Lets not forget alcohol. The cause of more heartache, misery, violence, deaths, anti social behaviour than any drug. |
|
|
|
(11:21 on Thu 30/Aug/07) Rabbitygirl, I remember the tar pouring etc. I agree they should replay it a lot more. There have though been a lot of other anti smoking ads that appear very shocking. Remember the one with the dying woman breathing pure oxygen sounding like darth Vader? Or that really gross one with the fat leaking out of cigarettes etc, yuk! | |
|
|
(11:24 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
The gov wond ban smoking it pays too much in revanue! Taxed to high heaven and gov reep it's rewards! sorry, bit sinical view. People are not stupid, smokers are intelligent people, they know the risks, they still smoke because they want to... can't stop it! |
|
 |
(11:25 on Thu 30/Aug/07) The woman with the oxygen cylinder inspired my partner to quit................almost 4 years ago, now. | |
|
|
(11:29 on Thu 30/Aug/07) Helpme, as usual the figures used are the direct costs/revenue. Start to add in the vast indirect costs and you'll find that smoking is not a net contributor. | |
|
|
(11:31 on Thu 30/Aug/07) bet alcohol and fatties cost the NHS more than smokers | |
|
|
(22:00 on Thu 30/Aug/07)
Question Author
What most people seem to forget is the relatives they are leaving behind. The images as outlined above will certainly give you nightmares and having to care for them in the final years/months is unforgettable.
|
1 to 18 of 18
Search In The AnswerBank
Latest posts
0 min ago
in Society & Culture
2 mins ago
in Quizzes & Puzzles
2 mins ago
in ChatterBank
2 mins ago
in Motoring
3 mins ago
in Religion & Spirituality
Kids TV show scene change sound
4 mins ago
in TV