Terminalcoffee discussion

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nationa...

Comments? Effective? Won't make a difference?

Here's a slideshow of the different labels...

http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/La...

In behavioral science terms, they are antecedents, and thus are limited in power. Antecedents with immediate and high probability consequences following the behavior in question are effective. Otherwise, they are most often ignored.

And when you throw in the addictive quality of tobacco, it makes them even less likely to have any effect.

I am amazed whenever I see what people pay for cigarettes these days, and how they continue to smoke. It's crazy.

I think the images are gross, and may help for awhile.

But then, I never understood the appeal of cigarettes to start with. They're stinky, they make your mouth taste awful, they turn your fingers yellow, they make you cough like you're going to hack up a lung, and they're expensive. The kids who smoked them were the creepy losers at school. Why on earth would that be appealing?

I think they should just, I don't know, put a picture of gross things on cigarette packages. Like Carrot Top, maybe, or ugly bugs, or Kevin James naked.

As I get older I get more sensitive to cigarette smoke. Even outdoors. Stay the fuck away from me, smokers.

I've never noticed them...do we have new warning labels? Honestly, I smoke (a little, maybe 3-4 times a day), but I've never looked at the pack.

(I hate the smell too RA, I never smoke indoors and always stay down wind of anyone I'm with so it's not blowing their way. I'm thinking of quiting this summer. We're going on a cruise with Honey's mom, and I can't smoke around her. So, if I don't smoke for a week I may as well quit, right?)

I doubt that the warnings will have a huge impact. It may deter some, but the smoking addict (my husband is clearly addicted) will probably glaze right over the warnings. I won't, however. They will give me yet another argument to (nag) get him to quit, but overall no, little to no lasting effect.

Honestly, I swear I've never even seen them, I'll look when I go out to the car next and see if there is anything different on my Marb Light 100's...

If I haven't even noticed, I don't see how it would be a deterrent to a hard core smoker, a pack a day person is going to be a lot less likely to be influenced by some dumb warning label than a 3 ciggs a day girl like me!

I'm a smoker (half a pack a day, unless it's a really bad day), and it's a nasty habit that I know I need to quit. I picked it up in college and it has been really hard to quit, since I live with two other smokers (and we do smoke outside). I don't know how much the packaging will affect change; it's a decision you make for specific and personal reasons when you decide to finally quit, and I don't think having something you already know reiterated, even graphically, is going to help. If anything, it's going to piss off the really long-term, 2-pack-a-day crowd and they will continue to do it out of spite as well as habit. As far as my own quitting motivators: I don't want to age hideously, smell bad or waste 50 bucks a week, so the serious health effects they are highlighting is actually a more distant motivator (at least mentally) compared to those things.

I don't think they'll have any effect. Some of them are grosser than others. Some of them aren't visually disgusting at all. Prices for cigarettes are so high now that if you're still smoking, a picture isn't going to make you stop. I don't understand how street beggars can afford smokes. Are they bumming them? Or just spending all their begging money on them?

They tend to make more money begging than you would imagine...at least that is often the case.

As a 30-year pack-a-day smoker and the daughter of a 55-year two-pack-a-day smoker, I can tell you that the new labels might affect someone just beginning to take up smoking, but they won't do a damn thing for the addicted ones, which are most smokers after a surprisingly small amount of time.

They don't have any effect. None.

My husband smokes and there is a horrible picture of a damaged heart sitting on my kitchen table right now. He doesn't even see them. In fact, I tend not to see them either. One becomes inured to them.

Lobstergirl wrote: "I don't understand how street beggars can afford smokes. Are they bumming them? Or just spending all their begging money on them?"

They might pick butts out of public ashtrays and then empty out the tobacco and roll fresh cigarettes.

Or, they just smoke the butts, Michael. I know, gross, but they do. My step-son spent a year on the street (his choice). He used to do that, made me sick.

New labels haven't kicked in yet, at least not on the pack in my car I bought last week. (Takes me a week to smoke em and they get all stale...)

Haven't seen them show up here yet, either.

Well, shit... if they're doing this on ciggies, why not add a picture of diabetic legs or feet to candy bars and sodas while they're at it... or maybe even open heart surgery on pizza boxes or burger containers... or maybe liposuction... Dumb.

Candy bars, sodas, pizza, and burgers in moderation won't kill you.

We have had the gross packaging for years. Now we are moving to plain packaging. The gross pictures are still there but the branding will be gone. I've never been a smoker, and I am all for attempts to stop people smoking.

Warning, the packaging is very gross.
http://www.ashaust.org.au/lv3/action_...

Those are like horror movie stuff.

Mmmmm, your packaging is lame in comparison.

You know, some of the photos are pretty disgusting, and I could see how that would make them more attractive to kids. A lot of kids love gross stuff.

Why not put a $20 tax on each pack, and have all the revenue go toward Medicaid or other health programs.

That way people who continue to smoke will be pre-funding the medical care they will need when they get cancer and emphysema.

I assume cigarettes are heavily taxed in the USA? Here the tax is 62.5%, making them $11.25 per packet (old data 2007) I wonder if the tax out weighs the medical costs.

These numbers (averaged for all states) are from March 2010, so probably out of date already. I believe in Chicago a brand name pack will cost you $8-10 by now.

Lobstergirl wrote: "Why not put a $20 tax on each pack, and have all the revenue go toward Medicaid or other health programs."

Isn't that how SCHIP gets funded? I like that idea of raising the tax on cigarettes to pay for health programs and I think it's a great tax because anyone who doesn't want to pay it doesn't have to. Huge tax on tobacco = less smokers = better health = good trade off.

I've never heard of smoking causing blindness...

I believe in New York City a pack of cigarettes is close to $15 now with all the taxes.

REALLY? Seriously? That's more than a bag of weed! (not that I buy or smoke it myself...I really like that TV show "Cops")

Michael wrote: "Lobstergirl wrote: "Why not put a $20 tax on each pack, and have all the revenue go toward Medicaid or other health programs."

Isn't that how SCHIP gets funded? I like that idea of raising the t..."

I know federal cigarette taxes do fund SCHIP, I don't know if that's the entirety of its funding.

Weed is cheap in NYC!

$5 or $10 depending on the size...a nickel bag, or a dime bag. I'm so bad ass! I still haven't figured out what a "G" is (in drug speak). I think it's meth (or "ice"), but don't know how much or what it costs.

Makes sense, I suppose those little baggies they're always pulling out of people's cigarette packs could hold a gram.

By the way, meth heads, the cops have figured out the stashing it in your cigarette pack thing...find a new spot! I don't suppose there are a lot of meth heads on goodreads, but since I don't hang out in dark alleys, I'm just doing what I can to educate. :)

Lol, how do you know then, Ames?

You cannot hide drugs from the cops. Unless you are the first person to think of a particular hiding place, they have seen it before. They know exactly where to look.

Yes, COPS used to be my favorite show.

Mine too. I used to watch with my mom.

Cops, Sallers!

Whatcha gonna do when they come for you? Huh, Ames?

Run like hell, because I have an outstanding warrant. Or because I just like to run.

Today, there was lots of swearing, flailing and knife weilding. I eould probably just cry...

Would...stupid nook.

Are you typing on your Nook? I tried but that keyboard is really tiny!

I use a stylus when typing on my Nook. It works better than just using my fingers.

I'll try that Jim!

The keys aren't really smaller than my fingers, it just seems super sensitive and double types letters.

Lobstergirl wrote: "You cannot hide drugs from the cops. Unless you are the first person to think of a particular hiding place, they have seen it before. They know exactly where to look.

Yes, COPS used to be my fav..."

A friend of mine thought he would be "smart" when he was pulled over and had weed in the car. He attempted to eat it (probably learned that from some movie) and, needless to say, did not succeed. He spent Christmas Eve in jail and showed up on our doorstep Christmas morning with a garbage bag full of his personal property and a year of probation. His parents were thrilled.

Amber, you would be surprised how many times I've seen people try to eat drugs on Cops. Once the dude tried to eat a whole cookie of crack (that is a flat round disc of crack before it is broken up into little square pieces "rocks". A "cookie" is pretty big, the diameter was probably 3-3 1/2 inches! Needless to say, he didn't get far before he started coughing and spitting. Idiot! He'd probably die if he ate that much.

By the way, if the cops see you eat it, they just choke you till you spit it out and then take it into evidence, slobber and all.

They choke you?
That doesn't seem like it would go over really well.

Head-lock type choke hold, I saw one do it last night when some chick tried to swallow a rock of crack before they got her out of the car. He played it all off like he was doing it for her own good, but I don't think one rock could kill you. He just wanted his evidence...