Cigarette packets should have plain packaging. - Page 2

Taf · 21-11-2010, 10:32

...which of course goes directly to the NHS to treat lung cancer suffererers and no-one else...

...only the ones that smoked and paid the taxes of course

Sirius · 21-11-2010, 10:32

I think advertising would be a mute subject if we charge Â£20.00 a pack. It would reduce the demand dramatically within a month

papa smurf · 21-11-2010, 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

I think advertising would be a mute subject if we charge Â£20.00 a pack. It would kill the demand within a month

no it would just fuel the black market .

**Kymmy** · 21-11-2010, 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

it was when people bought what they could afford dictated by the amount of coin in their pockets ,a bit like they do today .

Adults yes, but we are mainly talking about young people who still don;t seem to realise the cost of items and are still very much driven by brands

Gary L · 21-11-2010, 10:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

when i started smoking as a child - like the rest of my mates i bought the cheapest not the flashiest.

Mine didn't come in any packaging. they were loose ones at 10p each. sold to me by Mr Sangha every morning before I went out to deliver the papers

punky · 21-11-2010, 10:35

People serious think the colour of a cigarette packet will decide whether a child starts smoking or not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

The tobacco companies disagree with you re packaging - link

That link is assessing adults who already smoke not influence non-smoking children into becoming smokers.

If people want to protect children from becoming smokers then there are many other factors that will have an effect before the colour of cigarette packets come into play.

**Kymmy** · 21-11-2010, 10:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taf

...which of course goes directly to the NHS to treat lung cancer suffererers and no-one else...

...only the ones that smoked and paid the taxes of course

With preference to those who have contracted lung cancer through passive smoking

or to those injured because they've been hit by a car driven by someone who took their eyes of the road whilst lighting up

Gary L · 21-11-2010, 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Colorful tins don't give people cancer.....

So colourful packets they come in don't either then?

**Kymmy** · 21-11-2010, 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

So colourful packets they come in don't either then?

Glad to see that you finally agree with the news report..

Gary L · 21-11-2010, 10:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Glad to see that you finally agree with the news report..

I think you're lost somewhere

---------- Post added at 11:42 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------

I've come up with a brilliant idea.

why don't we make it illegal to buy and sell cigarettes to children. ie: those under 18?

**Kymmy** · 21-11-2010, 10:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

I think you're lost somewhere

Nope, I know my way..

Personally I think they should make smoking as cheap as anything but then restrict medical care for cancers to those who have never smoked..

papa smurf · 21-11-2010, 10:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

I think you're lost somewhere

---------- Post added at 11:42 ---------- Previous post was at 11:40 ----------

I've come up with a brilliant idea.

why don't we make it illegal to buy and sell cigarettes to children. ie: those under 18?

they could put signs in shops
if your lucky enough to look under 50 we reserve the right to ask for ID.

**Stuart** · 21-11-2010, 11:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

With preference to those who have contracted lung cancer through passive smoking

or to those injured because they've been hit by a car driven by someone who took their eyes of the road whilst lighting up

What about those injured by car drivers who took their eyes off the road to adjust the radio, or pick up a mint they just dropped?

As for this idea. Well I don't believe for a second that banning colourful packaging will make any difference to the number of child smokers. If it does, we clearly aren't doing enough to educate people of the dangers of tobacco.

Julian · 21-11-2010, 11:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Nope, I know my way..

Personally I think they should make smoking as cheap as anything but then restrict medical care for cancers to those who have never smoked..

Or at least haven't smoked for many years.

Whilst I was an inpatient receiving chemotherapy I witnessed patients wheeling their chemo drips outside to go for a cigarette. I questioned this with the nurses and they said that there was nothing they could do, in the interests of their personal safety.

As a cigarette retailer I would like to see it made illegal for adults to buy cigarettes for under 18's like it is with alcohol. Then raise the minimum age for both to 21.

Also raise the penalties for trafficking.

**Hugh** · 21-11-2010, 11:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by punky

People serious think the colour of a cigarette packet will decide whether a child starts smoking or not?

That link is assessing adults who already smoke not influence non-smoking children into becoming smokers.

If people want to protect children from becoming smokers then there are many other factors that will have an effect before the colour of cigarette packets come into play.

From my previous post and link

Quote:

Systematic and extensive research is carried out by tobacco companies to ensure that cigarette packaging appeals to selected target groups, including young adults and women