Thailand Will Have World's Largest Warning Labels On Cigarette Packs

[spectre324]

Come on guys, you need to stop hating on every single thing the government does, if anything this is a good step forward. Of course there is A LOT more that can be done (e.g. heavy tax on tobacco).

do you Really think that "words" are going to stop smokers? how about the Gov't authorizing the sale of cigs at the airports? only people will change, not anything the Gov't does.

[Fookhaht]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes.

Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

Edited February 2, 2013 by Fookhaht

[sirchai]

The size of the warnings, which are dominated by scary photos that show the unhealthy consequences of smoking, will be expanded to cover 85 per cent of the pack, up from the current 55 per cent, Public Health Minister Pradit Sinthawanarong said yesterday.

In Australia, the warnings cover 82.5 per cent of the pack.

Uruguay and Sri Lanka have 80 per cent, and Brunei and Canada 75 per cent.

Thailand will become the hugest cigarette warning hub of the world. Amazing, how people are wasting their time.

[Pimay1]

Come on guys, you need to stop hating on every single thing the government does, if anything this is a good step forward. Of course there is A LOT more that can be done (e.g. heavy tax on tobacco).

I don't think anyone hates the government (in this case) for their actions. What I hate is the hypocrisy of all governments that continue to allow a product that has been proven (apparently!) to cause death to its users to be sold across the counter only for the tax return it puts into the coffers of that country.

The decals they intend to use (covering 85% of the packet instead of the current 55%) won't, IMHO as a smoker myself, deter anyone more than it does at present. Personally, I use a cigarette case; I have used that for years to stop the soft packets getting crushed in my pockets, and not because of the pictures, so it really doesn't mean anything to me.....................

smoking does not CAUSE death. It causes cancer and other diseases.

It is well proven that natural tobacco is much less harmful than cigarettes. Partially because smoke much less of it. So the right thing would be to get the chemical crap out of the cigarettes. Than I would say, with the pictures on the packs everyone know what he does. So for grown up people it is their own decision if they want to smoke, drink, eat too much etc etc. Don't need the country messing around in my privacy.

(I am not smoking I stopped a few years ago).

"smoking does not CAUSE death. It causes cancer and other diseases"

Yep, have to agree with you on that h90! Maybe should have said contributes to instead of causes..............

Congrats for being able to give it up, wish I could................. Willpowers off on holiday.......

Edit for typo

I purchased EGO electronic cigarette six months ago (I know they are banned here but you can still buy them) and haven't smoked a cigarette since. Had a two pack a day habit. Stopped coughing, not short of breath, much more power for anything I want to do and they are odorless.

[sirchai]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes. Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

Marlboro man, who died of cancer and never smoked. (Cigarettes, aehh)

[Bagwan]

Look around your local 7/11 and take note of all the rubbish that they sell. Confectionery, biscuits and cakes fill most of the shelves and then you move on to skin whitening creams. They hardly contribute to maintaining a healthy body of acceptable shape and proportion, so why pick on tobacco? There are more dangers in modern life than that that should be tackled.

Up until a few years ago I used to have a general health checkup every year. On the last occasion that I bothered the doctor pronounced me fit as a fiddle and forecast a long life as the chest X-ray was clear, the ECG showed no abnormality and my blood pressure spot on. He then asked me if I still smoked and I admitted that I did. He put on his serious face and told me that smoking was very dangerous. I replied that to attend the hospital I had ridden a motor cycle 8 kilometres along Sukhumvit Road and on leaving the hospital would travel a similar distance. Try doing that 20 times per day for 60 years and see how long you survive I told him. I passed my three quarters of a century a couple of years ago and am still hale, hearty and sprightly. I recognise smoking is not a good idea and currently am trying to stop but after 4 or 5 days I buy a packet before giving up yet again when I have finished them off. My addiction has nothing to do with nicotine but rather in having something to do with my hands. Smoking calms me believe it or not much the same as pot is supposed to although I have never tried cannabis. I read some time ago a contention by some guru that cigarettes are, for many, a nipple substitute. An interesting thought. If true maybe ladies would like to help out the hopelessly addicted.

I appreciate that non smokers, and probably the more rabid of those are former smokers, heartily dislike inhaling tobacco fumes and make every effort not to give offence and I would hope that other smokers do likewise.

[Fozfromoz]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes. Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

I took the post from Koto, who obviously displays an anti smoking stance as he has changed his picture during this discussion, as an inference that smokers may not be too bright. I merely bought up a case of someone who was bright, as a smoker.

Some people need to realise smokers are smokers, not serial killers. Not being illegal and all.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Fozfromoz

[Chua]

When are they going to put a picture obese belly fat on a cartons of donuts, french fries, pizza and litres of sugar-filled sodas?

Edited February 2, 2013 by Chua

[sirchai]

When are they going to put a picture obese belly fat on a cartons of donuts, french fries, pizza and litres of sugar-filled sodas?

And on some English books, kids are using here.....

[h90]

Come on guys, you need to stop hating on every single thing the government does, if anything this is a good step forward. Of course there is A LOT more that can be done (e.g. heavy tax on tobacco).

I don't think anyone hates the government (in this case) for their actions. What I hate is the hypocrisy of all governments that continue to allow a product that has been proven (apparently!) to cause death to its users to be sold across the counter only for the tax return it puts into the coffers of that country.

The decals they intend to use (covering 85% of the packet instead of the current 55%) won't, IMHO as a smoker myself, deter anyone more than it does at present. Personally, I use a cigarette case; I have used that for years to stop the soft packets getting crushed in my pockets, and not because of the pictures, so it really doesn't mean anything to me.....................

smoking does not CAUSE death. It causes cancer and other diseases.

It is well proven that natural tobacco is much less harmful than cigarettes. Partially because smoke much less of it. So the right thing would be to get the chemical crap out of the cigarettes. Than I would say, with the pictures on the packs everyone know what he does. So for grown up people it is their own decision if they want to smoke, drink, eat too much etc etc. Don't need the country messing around in my privacy.

(I am not smoking I stopped a few years ago).

"smoking does not CAUSE death. It causes cancer and other diseases"

Yep, have to agree with you on that h90! Maybe should have said contributes to instead of causes..............

Congrats for being able to give it up, wish I could................. Willpowers off on holiday.......

Edit for typo

Don't do it on holidays :-) not worth the hassle....

Else it is surprisingly easy to do. Do a real soul searching if you really want to stop.

Unless you aren't sure, don't try it.

Make the decision from which date you won't smoke anymore. And start only if you are really sure...not a half heart "I'll try to maybe stop smoking".

Than on that date you stop. Just try to get thru the day till the evening every day....

It makes it easier if you have something that takes your attention....sport, reading, computer game, drinking, whatever.

You'll have to eat more....to be hungry at the same time isn't a good idea....

After one week you have won. But that week needs will power.

[Thai at Heart]

This is something that costs the Govt nothing but makes it look like they are doing something.

Actually, by not being pro-active, it costs the government a bundle. I don't know what the government health-care costs are for the tens of thousands in hospitals and cancer hospices for smoking-related cancer victims, but I'm sure it's substantial and it has finally gotten someone's attention.

It's simply prudent economics to get the population off the world's most addictive substance (nicotine) and experiencing the dire consequences of its habitual use. Same scenario which played itself out in the west, decades ago.

If everyone is willing to pay the increased taxes to make too the difference. Great.

[h90]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes.

Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

Nonsense, it was well known in the 1930s. Hitler wanted to forbid smoking, but he wanted to wait until the war is over, not taking the only joy away from the people.

[phuketjock]

This is something that costs the Govt nothing but makes it look like they are doing something.

Actually, by not being pro-active, it costs the government a bundle. I don't know what the government health-care costs are for the tens of thousands in hospitals and cancer hospices for smoking-related cancer victims, but I'm sure it's substantial and it has finally gotten someone's attention.

It's simply prudent economics to get the population off the world's most addictive substance (nicotine) and experiencing the dire consequences of its habitual use. Same scenario which played itself out in the west, decades ago.

Sorry Fookhaht, but you are talking rubbish, as I have already stated in a previous post on this thread, in the UK

alone government revenue from tobacco tax is way more than the total cost of the NHS.

I would think that as there is not much of a free public health service here in Thailand that any tobacco tax revenue

would cover any public health costs several times over. Your " Same scenario which played itself out in the west ,

decades ago. " is nonsense.

[Bagwan]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes.

Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

How about revoking Sir Walter Raleigh's knighthood? He brought the phenomenon of smoking to Europe from the New World so why don't we do what we normally do regarding things that we disagree with. Blame the USA.

[Fookhaht]

When are they going to put a picture obese belly fat on a cartons of donuts, french fries, pizza and litres of sugar-filled sodas?

Because you can see those fat bellies in real life, everywhere, everyday. Thais are among Asia's fattest Asians. 30% of population. Just 5.7% behind rotund Americans!

Edited February 2, 2013 by Fookhaht

[Robby nz]

This is something that costs the Govt nothing but makes it look like they are doing something.

Actually, by not being pro-active, it costs the government a bundle. I don't know what the government health-care costs are for the tens of thousands in hospitals and cancer hospices for smoking-related cancer victims, but I'm sure it's substantial and it has finally gotten someone's attention.

It's simply prudent economics to get the population off the world's most addictive substance (nicotine) and experiencing the dire consequences of its habitual use. Same scenario which played itself out in the west, decades ago.

If everyone is willing to pay the increased taxes to make too the difference. Great.

In actual fact the Govt will not be paying for any change in cigarette packaging so therefore no cost to them.

The health costs and income from tax will not change unless sales really drop.

However even if that is the case the tax drop should be relative to the drop in health care costs.

[Fookhaht]

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes.

Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

How about revoking Sir Walter Raleigh's knighthood? He brought the phenomenon of smoking to Europe from the New World so why don't we do what we normally do regarding things that we disagree with. Blame the USA.

Naw, this scandal is clearly a British thing by your own admittance. He shoulda left well-enough alone....

Edited February 2, 2013 by Fookhaht

[Fookhaht]

How about revoking Sir Walter Raleigh's knighthood? He brought the phenomenon of smoking to Europe from the New World so why don't we do what we normally do regarding things that we disagree with. Blame the USA.

At least the USA, 40 years ago, was out in the forefront of reducing smoking among the population by pouring millions of dollars into anti-smoking campaigns (warning on packaging, anti-smoking TV ads, pulling tobacco company ads off the air, banning advertising at sports events, etc.). All of this, while at the same time, providing millions of dollars in subsidies to tobacco farmers to keep them in business.

Yes, as said in a previous post, governments are the greatest hypocrites. And it's the taxpayer who gets the biggest shaft--paying for opposing government programs.

Edited February 2, 2013 by Fookhaht

[ballpoint]

The solution is simple; "Smoker's roulette". By law, at least one cigarette in every packet will have a small, indetectable, explosive device placed at a random position within it - nothing dangerous, just a loud bang, a blackened face, the splayed remains of the cigarette, and perhaps a wah wah wah waaah noise triggered from the packet, supplied by the sound man of a Thai soap opera. Most smokers will become nervous wrecks, flinching with every cigarette they light, until they decide it just isn't worth it. On the plus side, for those who do manage to carry on, they will no longer be ostracised by society, banished to their smoking rooms and car parks, but will actually be sought out - "come and watch, he's lighting a cigarette". For these diehards, the size of the charge could be increased every year. Eventually the old "yes, it will probably kill me, but I can't give it up" will still hold true, just with a shorter time frame.

For a less dramatic effect, every packet sold in Thailand should carry the legend "smoking causes dark skin". I guarantee most females, and many of the males too, will stop instantly.

[chuenyongman]

I read somewhere recently that you can only import 25 cigarettes duty free into Australia, Big deal.

[koto]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

Back then, we did not know all the dangers, It was the thing to do for quite sometime, I only quit around 8 years ago, not easy, drugs and booze was easier...

[Pimay1]

The solution is simple; "Smoker's roulette". By law, at least one cigarette in every packet will have a small, indetectable, explosive device placed at a random position within it - nothing dangerous, just a loud bang, a blackened face, the splayed remains of the cigarette, and perhaps a wah wah wah waaah noise triggered from the packet, supplied by the sound man of a Thai soap opera. Most smokers will become nervous wrecks, flinching with every cigarette they light, until they decide it just isn't worth it. On the plus side, for those who do manage to carry on, they will no longer be ostracised by society, banished to their smoking rooms and car parks, but will actually be sought out - "come and watch, he's lighting a cigarette". For these diehards, the size of the charge could be increased every year. Eventually the old "yes, it will probably kill me, but I can't give it up" will still hold true, just with a shorter time frame.

For a less dramatic effect, every packet sold in Thailand should carry the legend "smoking causes dark skin". I guarantee most females, and many of the males too, will stop instantly.

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant idea. The sales would dry up overnight. Edited February 2, 2013 by Pimay1

[vijer]

I predict zero effect on cosumption.

[Andre0720]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

Very intelligent people do very stupid things...

[doctorproc156]

This has zero negative health effects, and it has been proven. Replace cigarettes with this and it will help prevent a lot of cases of cancer.

[chooka]

Since the whole world is so worried about smoking, why do not they spend the billions they spend on advertising campaigns and all other rubbish , spend it on subsidy for NIcarretes and Nicabates and all other new inventions which supposedly help to stop smoking.

Actually I believe the tabaco companies spend the billions on advertising the product so you will buy and make them rich. They won't be spending that money on quit campaigns as it reduces thier profits. I may be wrong.

[grantbkk]

Finally the Government has done something positive with no downside. From the number of people that continue to smoke it necessitates some education on the dangers and consequences of tobacco use. For non smokers and former smokers looking at users usually invokes empathy, pity or hate. Now if this filthy addiction could be confined to residences without children present... Yes I did. Quit in 1977.

[Beetlejuice]

If Governments worldwide are really concerned about the health issues associated with smoking, than they would issue nicotine gum, nicotine patches and other such products free of charge to tobacco addicts. But of course they are reluctant because of the huge tax duties attached to each pack of cigarettes. The warnings are only a ploy as to protect the governments and tobacco companies own asses, just in case people decide to sue. The get out clause is, well, we did warn you, so you smoke at your own risk.

Scary pictures and warnings will never deter the hardened smokers from giving up the weed, and that includes myself. A person has to be a smoker themselves to truly understand how difficult, sometimes impossible for many, to give up the dreaded weed.

The problem is that like with so many other additions and risks, people always believe the worst will happen to someone else and somehow they are immune from the effects of smoking. One of the common excuses is; my grandfather lived to 95 years old and he was a heavy smoker all his life.

It`s all the luck of the draw. The lottery of life.

[Andre0720]

Good luck, they have shown warnings on the packs for some reason increases sales!

One would wonder what that says, about the smoker...

Albert Einstein was a smoker. I believe he was credited as being fairly intelligent.

What a ridiculous statement.

When Albert died (1955) the research on smoking-related lung cancer was in its infancy. If he had had the benefits of research as we do today, he would likely have been a champion of Nicorettes.

Who do you want to pull out of the hat now? Madame Currie? Mark Twain?

In those days, people did not know any better, regardless of levels of intelligence.

Nowadays, all you need to do is learn how to read.....it is WRITTEN on the packs....

[simosiam]

and what about to ban cigarette? Much better ganja then that shit!