Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Australian lawmakers want to put pictures of cancerous lungs and gangrenous feet on cigarette packages   (story.news.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

2815 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Jun 2004 at 5:32 PM (17 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



186 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2004-06-25 6:01:48 PM  
The politicians should be forced to put nuclear mushroom clouds and their arrrest records on all their campaign ads.
 
2004-06-25 6:02:22 PM  
This totally deserves a hero tag. Most smokers believe they can quit anytime, when it is so damn far from the truth.

My father quit smoking at 45, and at 71 developed lung cancer from the smoking he did earlier in his life. Lung cancer is also one of the worst ways you can die.

Gee, and smoking provides you with so many benefits!!
 
2004-06-25 6:02:30 PM  
Miss Friday:

When the law first came in, a lot of people were buying cardboard sleeves that slid over your pack with pics of flowers or mock-ups of the old packs...but not too many people bought proper cigarette cases. Once the shock value was over, I think most smokers ignored them. As I said, I think it's more deterence that stoppage that's the goal.
 
2004-06-25 6:02:44 PM  
For the record, I could care less if people smoke (cigs or weed), or drank. My body isn't the property of the state, therefore they should have no say over what I put into it so long as I'm not violating anyone else's rights.

fark this shiat.
 
2004-06-25 6:02:53 PM  
[image from packetwarp.com too old to be available]
 
2004-06-25 6:04:21 PM  
You smoke, you're a pariah.

Only by the non-smokers. And to the smokers, well, what do we care? We're committing suicide anyway; who cares if you don't like us.

Oh, and we're killing you, too, so we have smug satisfaction to boot.
 
2004-06-25 6:05:15 PM  
Someone please point to ONE study that concludes second-hand smoke kills. I'm looking for a link, here.

Come on, someone can find one can't they?
 
2004-06-25 6:05:24 PM  
I expect there to be warning labels on alcohol then.

Let's show decaying livers.

Let's show DUI scenes.

Let's show photographs of dead bodies from alcohol poisoning.

Turnabout is fair play, people.


What? "Use this product as intended for your entire life and none of these things has a chance in hell of happening?"
 
2004-06-25 6:07:52 PM  
First thing that came to mind was Dennis Leary, but once I arrived in the thread, it was clear that it was not meant to be as I was beaten like a prisoner at Abu Gharib.

(anti-war hippie k? thx)
 
2004-06-25 6:08:21 PM  
Vanadium:
You don't tend to find such studies in blogs. You can hundreds of them in peer-reviewed journals if you care to look. Just stop by or write your nearest school of public health (Berkley and U Minn are both very good) and they can point you in the right direction.
 
2004-06-25 6:08:22 PM  
MacGabhain, say that after you've had seven people close to you die because of a drunk driver.
 
2004-06-25 6:08:26 PM  
I don't mind people smoking near me if they allow me to elbow them in the face every time I feel like doing a bit of shadow boxing.
 
2004-06-25 6:08:28 PM  
Let's show decaying livers.

Isn't Mezcal spanish for decaying liver?
 
2004-06-25 6:09:00 PM  
"The experience in Canada showed there was a three percent drop in smoking," Trish Worth, parliamentary secretary for health, told reporters.

Only 3%? Geez, what a waste of time, money, and effort. Stupid asshats.
 
2004-06-25 6:09:55 PM  
This is Jean Calment, the oldest FARKing person to ever walk the face of this planet (with documentation).
[image from aeiveos.com too old to be available]
SHE SMOKED FOR 105 YEARS!!

Smoking has very little to do with anything. And people who think it does are the same people who think the asbestos in their attic is going to give them mesothelioma, and that there is global warming, and were the same people who called saccharin the work of the devil, and who probably think nutrasweet causes you to go into a coma.
 
2004-06-25 6:10:58 PM  
ArcadianRefugee:

I don't think there will ever be a serious black market demand for cigarettes. Besides, even if there is, they will still be a lot harder to obtain than they are now. Either way, the tax payer wins.


Deveyn:

I guess by definition the years before you die are your last years. However, I've seen plenty of people in their late 30's and early 40's with lung cancer, most likely caused by smoking. Have you ever seen someone die from cancer? Have you ever seen someone's face when you tell them they have cancer? It's funny, none of those people ever say "Well, ya gotta die of something." Or some other smart comment that you hear a lot of smoking apologists come out with.

Spigi
 
2004-06-25 6:12:04 PM  
Thanks, Brockway , have ypou heard that theory about how the earth is flat?
 
2004-06-25 6:12:25 PM  
I don't think there will ever be a serious black market demand for cigarettes.

Bullshiat. Go to the NY Gov's website or any good search and you'll find that the black market has EXPANDED since the tax hikes. They have a task force specifically for this now.
 
2004-06-25 6:12:48 PM  
Vanadium:
In what was was the asshole who drove drunk using alchohol as intended?
I'm personally of the opinion that any action taken while voluntarily under the legal-defined influence of any recreational drug, alchohol included, should be considered under the law as pre-meditated and intentional, thus making that horrible incident seven counts of 1st degree murder. That doesn't make having a glass of wine over dinner or a couple of beers during the Super Bowl the least bit harmful to anyone.
 
2004-06-25 6:13:09 PM  
let us people that want to smoke do it - yeah perhaps only in our homes or cars say, but don't screw with my rights to make choices related to my body because you don't 'like it'. These images on cig packs are a waste of time and money, you can't tax anything to death.. the prices on cigs went up here so I just started growing my own tobacco.
 
2004-06-25 6:14:04 PM  
Here, I'll even help:

Black Market in NY over Cigs
 
2004-06-25 6:14:42 PM  
Cancer merchant! Cancer merchant! Cancer merchant!
 
2004-06-25 6:14:44 PM  
Mulambo:

Yeah, and not just tobacco.
 
2004-06-25 6:17:03 PM  
Old news in Canada
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]
[image from dfl.org.za too old to be available]
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]
 
2004-06-25 6:17:21 PM  
don't screw with my rights to make choices related to my body because you don't 'like it'

But when you need that 1/2 million dollar lung transplant, my taxes are supposed to pay for it?
I have never met someone who truly smokes because they like it - just a lot of people so addicted that they can't even think about quitting.
 
2004-06-25 6:18:15 PM  
(Thanks, Vanadium, but that was going to be *my* next post....)

:)

/ex-NYer
 
2004-06-25 6:18:44 PM  
Sorry, but my point stands that by initiating force (through "sin" taxes, forcing manufacturers to include labels the government decides upon, or all-out prohibition) against a section of the population in order to get them to quit a drug never works.

History is on my perspective's side, not theirs.
 
2004-06-25 6:18:53 PM  
Your taxes pay for transplants?? What country do you live in?
 
2004-06-25 6:19:13 PM  
So when are they going to start shooting random people in the head?
 
2004-06-25 6:19:53 PM  
spigi, I have seen people die of cancer from no fault of their own and it's a horrible thing.

However I have no sympathy for people who die of cancer they inflict on themselves through smoking.

Any idiot knows smoking is bad for you. It's farking SMOKE, for chrissakes. There is not a single instance where inhaling smoke can be considered healthy. Add to that the barrage of information from all sides telling you that smoking is bad, mmmkay? Nobody smoking now can claim ignorance of the consequences.

The choices I make to shorten my life are exactly that, choices. I really don't have any desire to live into the so-called "golden years," mostly because I have no children, and never will. My perspective is different than most. However when I choose to have a cigar, I make sure it's outside and away from people who can't or won't appreciate it. One thing I can't stand is smokers who think it's perfectly ok for them to inflict their choice upon others.

I can see your point though. There are those who will suddenly regret the choices they made that resulted in cancer.

And for them I have only one thing to say.

Bed. Made. Lie.
 
2004-06-25 6:20:07 PM  
But when you need that 1/2 million dollar lung transplant, my taxes are supposed to pay for it?

Nope. I don't believe you should be made to pay for my own vices. Nor should I pay for yours.
 
2004-06-25 6:20:11 PM  
But when you need that 1/2 million dollar lung transplant, my taxes are supposed to pay for it?

They tax cigs massively as is. When people stop buying cigs, where you think that lost tax money is gonna come from? Gov't would have to tax something else, so it would STILL come from the tax-payer.
 
2004-06-25 6:22:26 PM  
Since smokers clearly don't care about how bad their habit is to their own health, appearance, personality, breath, etc. maybe the packages should say "Congratulations asswipe, you're slowly killing all the people around you."

Maybe one or two of the people who are stupid enough to smoke will think twice.

I doubt it, since smokers are clearly among the least considerate people on the planet, but it can't hurt.
 
2004-06-25 6:23:43 PM  
Tellin' you right now, the only people that benefit from the Government telling them what's right and wrong to consume is, you guessed it, the Government. Why else do you think they passed a shiatload of these taxes when the economy was low?

Common sense, people. Think about it.

When was the last time you saw a benefit from a "sin" tax, personally?

Exactly.
 
2004-06-25 6:24:37 PM  
Raising taxes to insane amounts will only generate a whole new generation of drunk indians with the cute tax loophole they get.
 
2004-06-25 6:25:02 PM  
Perducci: slowly killing all the people around you

Really? Again, link please? I bet for every study yo find that agrees with you, I can find one that concludes their is no obvious relation.

Also, why cigarettes? Again, why not up in arms about the millions and millions of automobiles that traffic the road everyday? I can almost guarantee most people produce more pollution driving to work everyday than I do smoking everyday.
 
2004-06-25 6:25:58 PM  
Vanadium

When was the last time you saw a benefit from a "sin" tax, personally?

Hmmm, the last time I paid my taxes? Cause, see, I don't smoke.
 
2004-06-25 6:27:21 PM  
How about pictures of squalling babies, crabs, scabies, AIDS, and VD on porn magazines and tapes.

How about a picture of thousands of dead bodies on Bush's smug asshat face?

IT never ends...
 
2004-06-25 6:27:33 PM  
2004-06-25 06:09:55 PM Brockway: "Smoking has very little to do with anything. And people who think it does are the same people who think the asbestos in their attic is going to give them mesothelioma, [blah, blah, blah]."

Exposure to any carcinogen is like walking across a courtyard frequented by pigeons. You aren't always gonna get shiat upon, but if you keep it up long enough, the odds are good that you'll be dripping with poo, centarian smokers notwithstanding.

/besides, isn't it possible that Jean Calment has some quirky genetics that make her resistant to cancers?
//like that super-german-boy. Only different.
///nuthin'
 
2004-06-25 6:27:58 PM  
Explain, frontierpsychiatry, how it benefitted you when you paid your taxes. How did it make them lower? Are you sure?

I'm really curious here.
 
2004-06-25 6:28:27 PM  
As a person who enjoys cigars and pipes, I must say that any habit that makes you willing to stand in the rain to partake, can't be good for you.
 
2004-06-25 6:29:48 PM  
Guys, did you hear they do this in Canada?
 
BHK
2004-06-25 6:30:24 PM  
Try Eclipse! Get the word out! www.newcig.com. They barely stink, have all the nicotene, and only 20% of the tar. There is *no* second hand smoke. I now enjoy smoking again and they don't cause me to cough up a lung like other brands.
 
2004-06-25 6:30:41 PM  
[image from hc-sc.gc.ca too old to be available]

This one's my favourite, just because you can put it up against your own mouth and make 'scary teeth' faces and animal noises and it never fails to get a chuckle.

(my bags of weed, incidentally, come with a picture of a severly bloated guy who just ate 4 pizzas and two bags of cheetos)
 
BHK
2004-06-25 6:31:50 PM  
Sin taxes are dangerous to all taxpayers. When cut down on the sinning, politicians have to look elsewhere for that revenue and you know that cutting spending is not an option.
 
2004-06-25 6:31:55 PM  
Only semi-related, but since Farkers like to poke fun at mistakes or the like of any kind:

From a UK site:
"Half of all teenagers who are currently smoking will die from diseases caused by tobacco if they continue to smoke. One quarter will die after 70 years of age and one quarter before...."

Apparently, half of them die AT 70.

Still not a bad run, in my book.
 
2004-06-25 6:33:58 PM  
Brockway

You've used one of the hoary old "reasons" smokers come up with to justify their habit. Dig a little deeper, and you'll see it is a common fallacy.

A doctor once explained carcinogens like this to me.

Everyone has the risk of cancer. Even non-smokers. You can probably say "I know a non-smoker who got lung cancer". It is possible, just not that probable.

It's as if everyone has tickets to a "cancer lottery".
So even a non-smoker has the risk, it's just not that big, but a "tiny" minority will get cancer nonetheless.

Now, if you smoke, it's as if you are effectively buying more of these "cancer lottery tickets". More cigarettes/day or the longer you smoke=More tickets, more risk of your "number" coming up, less risk of your number not coming up and remaining cancer free.

So, conversely, this means there is still a chance you will not get cancer, it's just not as great. Jean Calment just was damn lucky enough to beat the odds. You can bet there are many more of her contemporaries who smoked and did die of cancer at a younger age.

Probability and statistics, baby. Actually quite facinating.
That is all.
 
2004-06-25 6:41:43 PM  
i've lit it!
 
2004-06-25 6:42:43 PM  
Fark the asshat who put "ASININE" next to this. This is a HERO idea
 
2004-06-25 6:42:48 PM  
Everyone has the risk of cancer. Even non-smokers. You can probably say "I know a non-smoker who got lung cancer". It is possible, just not that probable.

Correction: not as probable. You make it sound as if non-smokers have a teensy chance of getting lung cancer, while smokers are wallowing in a sea of their dead.

http://www.kidon.com/smoke/percentages3.htm
 
Displayed 50 of 186 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.