Standardised Cigarette Packaging

[Slab]

Lots of different reports in the media today, here's the BBC's

Do we need this step to deter new smokers? Are fag packets currently 'glitzy' as claimed (just looked at the packet in my pocket and I wouldn't call it remotely glitzy)

Need to remember that packets wont by visible at all in the shops prior to purchase anyway and I'm not sure smokers are brandishing the packet to their non smoking friends in the same way they do with their new phone

For me its unnecessary and any reduction in numbers will probably come from other efforts but get attributed to this

 

[SHiiBBZ]

I'd like to say no, but at about 16 I bought a packet of Davidoff because the packet was cool.

 

[GB72]

As a now pretty much ex smoker, most of these anti smoking ideas are a waste of time. Pretty much everyone who smokes or thinks about smoking knows the risks, the danger and how horrible and nasty a habit it is but they do it anyway. Kids smoke due to peer pressure or because they think it is cool, simple. Packaging may influence initial brand choice but not the decision whether to take up the habit. All that this does is make the production costs cheaper.

 

[Marty420]

Waste of time. People will smoke because they want to. The amount of money the government make from tax on cigarettes funds things like the NHS. If people give up smoking, the money lost will have to be added to something else which will affect everyone, not just smokers.

Whats next? Plain beer cans and spirit bottles? Plain fast food packaging? Plain fat people?....the list is endless.

 

[JCW]

Ban it all together , that be the best move , dirty habit that cost millions in health cost the there is the rubbish and smells it leaves behind not to mention the damage it cost by people who stubbed fags out on other peoples property , I will not miss the dirty habit , sooner the better , e fags to , banned them :thup:

 

[bluewolf]

Waste of time. People will smoke because they want to. The amount of money the government make from tax on cigarettes funds things like the NHS. If people give up smoking, the money lost will have to be added to something else which will affect everyone, not just smokers.

Whats next? Plain beer cans and spirit bottles? Plain fast food packaging? Plain fat people?....the list is endless.

I take it that you do appreciate the circular nature of your argument?

Anyway, the next problem with the Yoof will be those electronic ciggie things. I've seen quite a few <16 yr olds with those and no one bats an eyelid.. They aren't even doing the ciggie phase now.. Straight to the watermelon flavour E-Cigs..

 

[Blue in Munich]

Ban it all together , that be the best move , dirty habit that cost millions in health cost the there is the rubbish and smells it leaves behind not to mention the damage it cost by people who stubbed fags out on other peoples property , I will not miss the dirty habit , sooner the better , e fags to , banned them :thup:

Cost of NHS £100 billion pa
Cost of smoking related diseases £2 billion pa
Revenue raise from cigarettes £10 billion pa

So the smokers actually raise a £8 billion pa surplus, so your comment is about as accurate as the tosh you post on football.

However on the latest figure booze only raises £2 billion pa yet the costs are estimated at £25 billion pa……

 

[bluewolf]

Cost of NHS £100 billion pa
Cost of smoking related diseases £2 billion pa
Revenue raise from cigarettes £10 billion pa

So the smokers actually raise a £8 billion pa surplus, so your comment is about as accurate as the tosh you post on football.

However on the latest figure booze only raises £2 billion pa yet the costs are estimated at £25 billion pa……

Sorry to go all "forum" on you, but do you have a link to the "Booze raises only £2 Billion.. Its a startling statistic if true

 

[Blue in Munich]

Sorry to go all "forum" on you, but do you have a link to the "Booze raises only £2 Billion.. Its a startling statistic if true

You're absolutely right to; the article mentions sums in billions but I missed that they switched to percentages on the chart they produced It is in fact 10 billion for booze as well, but still a deficit of 15 billion over the estimated costs. The figures were from HMRC. I'd picked up the initial smoking ones from a different site, but the HMRC figures confirms that as 10 billion raised.

Apologies for the faux pas.

 

[bluewolf]

You're absolutely right to; the article mentions sums in billions but I missed that they switched to percentages on the chart they produced It is in fact 10 billion for booze as well, but still a deficit of 15 billion over the estimated costs. The figures were from HMRC. I'd picked up the initial smoking ones from a different site, but the HMRC figures confirms that as 10 billion raised.

Apologies for the faux pas.

I've only just picked myself up off the floor mate.. My family put that much into the tax pot over Christmas alone

Cheers :thup:

Edit.. Just thought I'd add - My wife is an ex A&E Nurse, and the effect that alcohol has on our health service is astounding.. Bouncers on the doors of hospitals. Rock bottom morale of Nurses and Doctors who have to endure some of the worst abuse I've ever seen.. That doesn't even take into account the time and treatment.. Shocking..

 

[Foxholer]

BIM. That's the Direct Cost to the NHS and receipts from HMRC.

There are other slightly less direct costs - depending on stance. ASH list them here http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_121.pdf.

The relevant bits are....

<quote>
Research commissioned by ASH has shown that the total cost to society (in England) is
approximately £12.9 billion a year.
This includes the cost to the NHS of treating diseases
caused by smoking in England which is approximately £2 billion a year.

Other costs include:
• loss in productivity due to premature deaths (£3bn)
• cost to businesses of smoking breaks (£5bn)
• smoking-related sick days (£1bn)
• social care costs of older smokers (£1.1bn)
• costs of fires caused by smokers’ materials (£391m)

</quote>
I wouldn't include 100% of all those referenced (though the figures may already allow for that), but there's certainly a bit more than simply Revenue in and NHS Costs out - where the Revenue in certainly 'beats' the Direct Costs out.

The other issue, if smoking was eliminated tonight, is that the costs will continue until all current smokers expire! Probably 50 years of significant, but decreasing, costs.

 

[c1973]

I don't smoke anymore. I'm glad I don't, it's a disgusting habbit. But it was a habbit I freely chose to partake in. I'm also glad there is help available to those wishing to quit and I'm glad we are made aware of the dangers.

But, to all those folks banging the 'ban it' drum, I hope you realise they'll be after alcohol, sugar, take aways, fast food etc etc etc once they're finished hounding fags. I hope you keep that in mind when the 'social conscience police' come after your particular vice/pleasure looking to ban it and make you the social leper that smokers are being made to be.

Rant over.

 

[Foxholer]

I don't smoke anymore. I'm glad I don't, it's a disgusting habbit. But it was a habbit I freely chose to partake in. I'm also glad there is help available to those wishing to quit and I'm glad we are made aware of the dangers.

But, to all those folks banging the 'ban it' drum, I hope you realise they'll be after alcohol, sugar, take aways, fast food etc etc etc once they're finished hounding fags. I hope you keep that in mind when the 'social conscience police' come after your particular vice/pleasure looking to ban it and make you the social leper that smokers are being made to be.

Rant over.

While there's certainly some social and economic costs with alcohol, there's also significant social and economic benefits too. So there's no way that alcohol will be banned imo. If they didn't learn the consequences of attempting that during Prohibition, then there's little hope!

Smoking has very few social/economic benefits - tax raising aside!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/BEER-HELPING-PEOPLE-SINCE-12x16/dp/B000O7MB92

 

[Rooter]

Smoking has very few social/economic benefits - tax raising aside!

OK, its a 2011 article, but 80,000 people are employed in jobs that rely on the tobacco industry.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...o-facts-ten-things-to-know-about-smoking.html

 

[palindromicbob]

It'll make the job easier for bootleg cig makers.

I think the Republic of Ireland has a good policy. No cigarette packs visible in shops and only sell in 20's. Put of the guys that would buy the occasional 10 and removes the appeal created by the packages.

I know I've tried quitting before and went to get fuel. Greeting me behind the counter was the beautiful colourful wall of nicotine death sticks and I'd ended up walking out with a tank full of diesel and a 20 deck.

 

[Smiffy]

Hopefully they won't bring this in in Belgium, where I always get mine from.
50g pouch of Drum over here is about £17.00
In Belgium it's £5.00. What's not to like????

 

[Slab]

Saw a sentiment that I thought was quite apt:

Illegal drug use seems to have no problem getting new 'recruits' and it doesn't come in 'glitzy' branded packaging

 

[bernix]

21st september last year (a quite memorable day for me as it is the birthday of my late father, my wife & my boss !!) i was standing on the 18th tee of the new course at st. andrews. my playing partner, a chain smoking american, offered my a cigarette and up to now it was my last

yahoo-ya-boy-ya, i finally quit smoking !!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Elderly guy in a local village died recently.
Cigarette, bed, sleep, house fire. Another smoking related death.
Thankfully the young family next door were rescued.

 

[palindromicbob]

Elderly guy in a local village died recently.
Cigarette, bed, sleep, house fire. Another smoking related death.
Thankfully the young family next door were rescued.

No amount of legislation will account for idiots.