This is one of the most bizarre posts i've ever read on gaf. I just told you this in the very post you are quoting.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
US court blocks graphic cigarette warnings
- Thread starter sazzy
- Start date
- Status
This is one of the most bizarre posts i've ever read on gaf. I just told you this in the very post you are quoting.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
A couple of reasons that I can think of:
Alcohol is more "of the people" then tobacco is these days. Cigarettes in particular are sold by a few large brands, whereas alcohol seems a lot more generic and widespread.
Alcohol doesn't require that you already have a dependence on it before the good physiological effects kick in. There are some studies showing that smoking calms you down by filling the nicotine craving; it doesn't do anything for you until you've developed that need.
It's only because of second hand smoke that tobacco is vilified. When you are drinking, the most I have to fear is that you are stupid enough to get into a car. When you are smoking, I have to breath in potential cancer and tar when I'm not the one smoking.
Well, for one, alcohol causes around 75,000 deaths in the U.S. annually while tobacco causes 443,000 (49,000 of which are second-hand). Those alcohol deaths are entirely misuse. 394,000 of the tobacco deaths are people using the product exactly as it was intended.
Smoking does not have entertainment factor. It only exists because of evil corporations and addiction.
Alcohol and soda have other uses/taste good.
It kind of sucks that the society has only accepted those negative drugs. Alcohol is a downer, Nicotine and Caffeine will just relieve you of the need.
Some Ecstasy would at least get people happy.
(Reuters) - Alcohol causes nearly 4 percent of deaths worldwide, more than AIDS, tuberculosis or violence, the World Health Organization warned on Friday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/us-alcohol-idUSTRE71A2FM20110211
A new study by London's Imperial College's chair of neuropsychopharmacology, David Nutt, claims that the three most dangerous drugs in the world are alcohol, heroin, and cocaine -- in that order.
http://www.dailytech.com/Study+Alcohol+is+Deadliest+Drug+More+Dangerous+Than+Heroin/article20038.htm
Well Obama hasn't been able to get any of his federal judge appointments through, being successfully blocked by Congress 80% of the time. So you have a lot of old and unfriendly faces in the strangest of places.
This is also where favors and friendships and alliances come into play. All you need is to be able to convince someone to consider your point of view. Or convince them to accept that it isn't really their call and assure them that they can safely pass the buck.
People have been using tobacco for thousands of years. It's only recently that they've been keeling over. The problem isn't the drug, it's the usage, the abuse, the modern factory production, the social pressures causing people to seek this form of stimulation, etc.
"Downer" and "depressant" don't mean that they depress you, though.
There are 4 major things within our control that have a huge impact on our health.
1) Diet
2) Exercise
3) Smoking
4) Drinking
Don't smoke, drink in moderation (no more than 2 drinks in a sitting), eat a varied diet with low refined sugars and low trans fats, and get as much physical activity as you can and you'll be just about as healthy as you can be.
The research basically says if you live by this general rule, without having to micromanage any details, you will likely be as healthy as you can be. Almost nobody lives by this very simple rule. Instead, everyone wants a magic pill to make them healthy while they continue to treat their body horribly.
AdventureRacing
Member
Aren't their studies showing that alcohol isn't that bad for you (or in fact can be good depnding on what/how much you consume)?
Alcohol is never good for you when you're getting drunk. 1 or 2 drinks is fine, potentially even good for you, but if you're getting drunk then you've passed that point and it's bad for you.
empty vessel
Member
This is a terrible decision. Not only does it depend upon the ridiculous, counterrevolutionary idea that state-created entities have constitutional rights as against the collective citizenry, it also straightforwardly misapplies the alleged test for when they apply: According to the opinion itself, "The First Amendment requires the government not only to state a substantial interest justifying a regulation on commercial speech, but also to show that its regulation directly advances that goal." That standard would be easily met here. This is just more of the anti-regulatory ideology of the right. (The two judges in the majority were Republican appointees.)
No they couldn't, not without the Court's explicit approval.
Congress could pass a law excluding cigarettes from free speech protection, but unless the Supreme Court agrees, and I do not think they would, then that law would be struck down as unconstitutional with a quickness.
Lumination
'enry 'ollins
I don't disagree, but you do you really think this whole scare tactic thing will never cross that line? I just feel like we MIGHT be deterring the uninformed (are there that many uninformed about cigarette harm in this day and age) by treating smokers as less and less human. I walk to work in nyc everyday, and I'm getting tired of seeing the same ad that says, "The smug should die of lung cancer." It's pretty extreme.
Some people like to smoke, whether they like the taste of tobacco or the social effects of smoking. To wave it all off and blame it all on the big evil corporations is a bit of exaggeration, no? Especially when the "other uses" of alcohol is essentially the same as what I outlined just now.
AdventureRacing
Member
I know but my point is that unlike cigarettes alcohol isn't bad for you no matter what. I was just respinding to the people asking why alcohol shouldn't be put in the same basket as smokes.
Slackbladder
Member
Putting pics of diseased lungs on cig packets isn't scaremongering it's information, awareness etc. If this information scares you then that's just a by-product of being informed. But as others have said, anyone who smokes now must know the harm they are doing to themselves.
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
God, this is counter projective considering how much money the taxes in cigarettes generate.
EdgecrusherLSU
Neo Member
Having graphic images of various smoking related health problems on the packs has always seemed like extreme anti-smoking propaganda to me.
I don't like the idea of the government or corporations doing these sorts of things to save me from myself.
I don't like the idea of the government or corporations doing these sorts of things to save me from myself.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
I think the pics are more aimed at stopping kids from starting to smoke than stopping people who already do.
Manos: The Hans of Fate
Banned
You mean like Anti-Drug Ads?
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Yes? I wasn't claiming they're effective, just explaining the reason for introducing them.
Do you also dislike the idea of government funded awareness campaigns and TV adverts which also highlight the dangers of smoking?
What's wrong with "government or corporations doing these sorts of things to save" lives?
freenudemacusers
Member
It would probably warp the child's mind, turning them into a bloodthirsty serial killer
EdgecrusherLSU
Neo Member
I'm okay with raising awareness and those sorts of things. But forcing a legally sold product to campaign against itself with these graphic images is crossing a line.
They already have a health risk warning just like any product that carries a health risk.
CrunchyFrog
Member
And my tax money has to go towards paying for your chemo as a result of your decision to willingly and with full knowledge put your health at risk for the sake of a stupid recreational drug. :/
But I agree with the decision, as fear-mongering such as that is just over the line. Give the people information, not fear and bombastic emotion.
Might leave an impression about what smoking can do to him.
empty vessel
Member
You don't have to agree with the decision to disagree with the action. The decision says what it is constitutionally impermissible. You don't have to express agreement with it to take issue with the method.
Rubbish King
The gift that keeps on giving
....SMH
When you first start smoking, the reason you continue is because of the head buzz. It's a nice, pleasant floaty feeling, and it's much better if you're also drinking at the time. That's how I got started (I smoked for about five years). After a few weeks, you don't get that same buzz anymore, and at that point, it's about satisfying the craving.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I've seen studies that purported that moderate drinkers outlive everyone, including non-drinkers, even when controlling for things like former alcoholism in non-drinkers.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/199398.php
I think it's a good ruling, and I despise smoking.
All this stuff about putting pictures on it is stupid.
If you want to make smoking illegal, just make it illegal. Don't take all these ridiculous measures that aren't going to do anything. The problem is that legislators want to be seen as being against smoking, but they don't have the political courage to actually call for a ban.
Even putting the pictures on the packages wouldn't do much good. You'd just increase the sales of cigarette cases.
All this stuff about putting pictures on it is stupid.
If you want to make smoking illegal, just make it illegal. Don't take all these ridiculous measures that aren't going to do anything. The problem is that legislators want to be seen as being against smoking, but they don't have the political courage to actually call for a ban.
Even putting the pictures on the packages wouldn't do much good. You'd just increase the sales of cigarette cases.
empty vessel
Member
That would explain why tobacco companies are spending a lot of money fighting it tooth and nail. Because it would have no effect on their sales or even be good for them.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
god this argument irritates me.
you can have a big mac semi regularly with no ill health effects if you otherwise have a balanced diet. It's nutrition, somewhat shitty nutrition, but cigarettes make you die and do nothing else. Not only do they kill you, but they also help kill those around you.
This is not true for Big Macs, or alcohol (let's not count drunk driving here, since that's illegal anyway).
Americas 'free speech' idea is fucking strange here. Can't believe this was successfully blocked.
Mammoth Jones
Member
When I'm walking in a city and have a guy blowing his smoke exhaust directly in my face I get furious.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Is it fair to say that smokers are more demonised in the US than any other country? Because thats the impression I get.
I keep seeing this reaction. Yeah, that's the point. Kids should be slightly traumatized when they see a pack of cigarettes. It might save them from being significantly more traumatized by cancer later in life.
18% of deaths in the UK (of people over 35) are caused by smoking: http://www.ic.nhs.uk/news-and-event...arch-2007/one-in-six-deaths-caused-by-smoking
This is what drives me nuts. State created entities having the same rights as natural citizens. They also have lower responsibilities because they can be dissolved. Shit is so far out of balance.
Lamel
Banned
Well for one think blowing alcohol into peoples faces doesn't give them cancer along with you.
Abortion is bad, but a product that is a main proven cause of cancer among americans isn't?
America is fucking stupid. Yet another issue we fall behind the world on...
yea, we can win dumb fucking sports no body heard of, but those countries still have great health care,great education, and proper gun control.
America is fucking stupid. Yet another issue we fall behind the world on...
yea, we can win dumb fucking sports no body heard of, but those countries still have great health care,great education, and proper gun control.
Yep, I really think this country is horrible. Everything is just so backwards. Anyone know if Canada is alright?
your sarcastic meter is broken...lol
- Status