Cigarette Packs to Include Corpses, Diseased Lungs

[Refugee 7]

Modest one-liners of smoking's dangers included on cigarette packs may soon turn into gory images and messages that will cover nearly half the pack.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration unveiled 36 labels Wednesday, which are aimed at ramping up efforts to warn smokers of smoking's fatal consequences. These labels exercise the agency's new authority over tobacco products, and the most significant change in cigarette warnings since companies were forced to add the mandatory Surgeon General's warning in 1965.

Some of the proposed images include a man smoking from a tracheotomy hole, a cadaver with a warning about deadly lung disease, and a pained infant exposed to smoke.

For decades, federal regulators and health experts have warned that cigarettes are deadly. But Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, called the amped measure "a timely and much-needed shot in the arm.

"The current warnings are more than 25 years old, go unnoticed on the side of cigarette packs and fail to effectively communicate the serious health risks of smoking," said Myers.

Previous studies also suggest that graphic health warnings displayed in other countries work better than text warnings in motivating smokers to quit and nonsmokers not to start.

Although overall smoking rates have declined since the 1960s, health officials said that rates have leveled off in the last decade. About 21 percent of U.S. adults and nearly 20 percent of high school students smoke cigarettes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"Today marks an important milestone in protecting our children and the health of the American public," Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said Wednesday.

The FDA will accept public comment on the proposed labels through January 2011, and will select nine labels to put in place by June 2011. The agency will then require all manufacturers to use the labels on all U.S. sold cigarettes by October 22, 2012.

"When the rule takes effect, the health consequences of smoking will be obvious every time someone picks up a pack of cigarettes," said FDA commissioner, Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg.

[nurktwin 2,143]

BULLSHIT. ppl that smoke know what's in store for them, maybe. putting corpses on packs will not change a thing. the Gov should stop giving raises to themselves for these dumbass studies and use the money for real things. i live in America and have rights, and 1 of those rights is to smoke. how about if all ppl eat outside in the cold while the smokers get to stay inside at the restaurants and bars???????

[Refugee 7]

You want to kill yourself by smoking, go right ahead, I have no objections to that. BUT... if you want to pollute MY lungs with your nonsense, go outside. I have rights, too.

[AngelDream 16]

I'm with Benny on this, us that smoke KNOW the dangers, what are the pics gonna do....gross us out???? Those pictures aren't gonna change anything, it's all a ploy for more money, they'll raise the prices of packs in the long run because it will cost the Gov. more to put those pics on there. BUT, if a kid 15 or 16 years old comes to me and says "I think I'll start smoking", I'll tell them DON'T, it's not worth it. I've seen sooo many pics of lungs that the damage of smoking does from A&P classes in college, but I still haven't quit, so I don't think putting those pics on packs will do anything, the Surgeon General statements haven't.

Just my 2 cents worth......

[nurktwin 2,143]

sorry ref, you go outside!!! i have the same rights!!

[AngelDream 16]

Just wanted to add, I don't smoke in the presence of ppl that are concerned about 2nd hand smoke.....little isabelle's mom smokes and goes outside, she has asked none of us to smoke with the baby in the room and we abide by her wishes....

[Wildflower15 0]

I completely agree with Ref a million percent!!! I hate second hand smoke and I completely agree that it should only be allowed outside. Even when I smell the smoke on my sister sometimes it makes me sick. I don't see how people argue that they have the right to smoke where ever when it is harming others (especially in closed spaces)!! Yes you have the right to choose to smoke, so do it where you live and are only harming yourselves. Tell me something that us non-smokes do to smokers that harms them??...nothing.

In regards to the article I think the pictures are stupid. We've all seen black lungs and know what they look like. If a death warning on a package isn't going to stop someone from something I don't think pictures will do much either.

[Refugee 7]

I agree, Sierra. You want to smoke, smoke in your own house.

Nurk, yes you have rights, but none of them include hurting my asthmatic lungs. Just because you can't or won't stop smoking is your problem, not mine.

[nurktwin 2,143]

true ref, but on the other hand, you can stay home and in your environment too. don't use your belief's to try and rule the world, that's just not going to happen. And wildflower15, you aren't completely innocent of anything either, you probably polute the earth more than i do with waste water, trash, plastics and everything else that you use. so don't judge me on what i do, look at yourselves 1st. then stop and think.

[Wildflower15 0]

I'm not judging at all, I don't hold grudges against smokers or something, so sorry if it came off that way. I know plenty of people who smoke. I think trash, plastics and water is more tit for tat amongst everyone as far as wasting goes and I don't think it is a good comparison to smoking. There's a difference between everyone harming the environment, you might not recycle while I might not carpool, etc and trapping someone in a building where there are deadly second hand smoke toxins because someone wants a cigarette. It's the fact that second hand smoke can cause immediate to near future detrimental effects to a person's health such as asthma reactions, whereas not recycling one bottle or a million bottles isn't going to make someone start hyperventilating or coughing. Obviously this is a much debated issue and we are both entitled to our own opinions on it. This is just a case were we will not see eye to eye Nurk:)

[nurktwin 2,143]

a much more dangerous situation is inhaling diesel fumes, but i don't see anyone putting corpses or any notifications on buses, trains or anything that runs on fossil fuels, and that's everywhere, not just indoors. shall we stop transportation along with cigs??? why not, lets just shut down the world. damn, we can't do that either. if we go back to primative times, someone will complain there would be smoke from burning trees to cook our food on an open fire. what the hell, we can't win.

[surfnburn 5]

I hope it works. It might turn off new smokers. I don't know if it will be enough for someone with a long term chemical dependency.

[weird monkey 0]

"Cigarette Packs to Include Corpses, Diseased Lungs"

So no actual corpses or diseased lungs in the pack itself? Now that might make an impact.

I see a boom in future sales of sleeves to cover up cigarette packs, much like sleeves for protecting cell phones, iPods, etc... ooooh, fashion statement!

[agirl 0]

I'm glad they're doing it. If it reaches just a few people good and maybe teens won't start. Benny and Lisa, I've never noticed you to be obnoxious smokers.

[heartbreaker1976 2]

Let's put photos of morbidly obese people on candy packages and pop bottles and cheesburger packaging. How about pictures of diseased livers on beer bottles. Government needs to butt out...

[TomFest 576]

Cigarettes are evil. It's sad that they are so addicting that smokers try so hard to defend them. There is no defense. They kill you. Period. I smoked for well over 30 years and have done untold damage to myself and others. There are a thousand good reasons to quit, and only 1 reason not to. Selfishness. I don't say that to upset anyone. I know how difficult it is to quit. I feel your pain. I know you don't even want to quit. I didn't either. I still don't. But you have to. And you know it. And I wish you the best.

If it takes slapping disgusting pictures on the side of the pack, then do it. If it takes adding $10 a pack in taxes. Do it. It's that important.

[Pettyjunkie 0]

LMAO Marcia!! Such a shame...

I'm with ya Ref and Sierra.

[Pawie 6]

My two cents worth.

Since the non smoking generation drive started in the 1980's (at least in Sweden) smokers were treated like paria. That's not fair. It is hard to beat an adicction. Been there. I smoked like a chimney for 16 years but quit 27 years ago. I never looked back.

I quit for many reasons, for myself and my health, and I was a mother to be. I was afraid to get cancer. My throat hurt when I was breathing and I felt like shit.

I have never smoked again.

I have also never complained when people smoke. It is their decision. If they want to smell like that and jeopardize their health I accept it. But i HAVE complained if they can't show respect and decency to smoke where they not affect others.

We all have rights.

One person dies every 1,4 minute in the US due to cigarette smoking. They didn't say the number of deaths of second hand smokers, but there is one (numner), and that alone ought to speak for itself.

On the opposite side, I think it is to go too far to prohibit outdoor smoking. That's another story though.

Every person saved from starting to smoke is a positive thing.

[Beamish 0]

You want to kill yourself by smoking, go right ahead, I have no objections to that. BUT... if you want to pollute MY lungs with your nonsense, go outside. I have rights, too.

Even when I was a smoker, I did not feel entitled to inflict my habit on others- most people dislike breathing noxious fumes and have a right not to be the victim of someone else's addiction. What's with the martyr complex so many smokers front when asked to consider the needs of others ? I don't hear any pot smokers whining about why they can't blaze up at restaurants.

That being said, who are we kidding ? As long as we all drive pollutant-belching cars, we are just as guilty of causing damage to someone's lungs, and cigarettes are legal to buy and smoke. Are pics of diseased lungs really going to scare off dedicated puffers who've already seen those photos before ? Really ? How about pictures of diseased livers and overworked pancreases on every bottle of alcohol ? Bet you'd make a joke about them and keep on drinking. Smokers aren't evil people, they aren't the only ones with injurious habits, and government campaigns to demonize them while ignoring bigger issues rub me the wrong way.

Edited November 12, 2010 by Beamish

[heartbreaker1976 2]

I think it should be 100% up to the owner of the bar/restaurant or whatever establishment if they allow smoking. I used to smoke a lot, but quit 4 years ago. I don't like being around it now. But if I owned a business that the government said I cannot allow smoking in - I would be pissed. Yes, both smokers and non-smokers have rights, but the OWNER of the business has rights too!!!

[TomFest 576]

The point of the bar/restaurant ban is not to protect the owners or patrons - it is to protect the employees who have no choice but to endure the second hand smoke. The only option would be for them to quit, and that is not deemed to be fair or acceptable.