Should tobacco companies be forced to place pictures of cancer on cigarette packs?
Based on some recent legal and social debates, do you think that cigarette companies should be forced to put pictures of cancerous tissue on the packs to deter people from smoking?
This link has some more information:
http://www.thecancerblog.com/2006/05/10/cigarette-packs-to-feature-cancer-photos/
Yes
Side Score: 5
|
No
Side Score: 11
|
|
|
|
1
point
|
3
points
This was argued in "Thank You For Smoking." If we place graphic images of cancer on cigarette packs, then there should be images of all negative consequences on all items that may have negative consequences. E.g., pictures of human fat on fattening food, pictures of car accidents on cars, et cetera. Which begs the question: Should there be a surgeon general's warning on these items, too? Side: No
That was a great movie and the character Nick Naylor would be a force to be reckoned with on this site. lol Furthermore, putting these labels on cigarettes just seems useless. I mean, most children are taught about drugs as early as 1st grade! So, if they are reminded constantly in school that drugs are bad, this should steer them away from drugs. Still, some kids hear the messages and pick up cigarettes anyway. But should we really believe that a poison label will make them "uncool" for these teens? No, it would actually make cigarettes cooler for many as in "Cool, you're doing something that could kill you! Youn have no fear! You're awesome!" That's just like reckless driving and binge drinking. Side: No
Not that I really disagree with your argument, but more to play devil's advocate- cigarettes have not other value than to get a buzz and "look cool". One could argue that food and cars have other uses than just a rush and looking good. It seems like the pictures would be very effective to prevent people from smoking or make them quit with no loss to society as a whole. I think the surgeon general's warning is a minimum. Side: yes
1
point
Actually, smokers are generally thinner than nonsmokers, and I believe (but I'm not sure) that smoking cigarettes can treat some diseases. I'm not sure. I'm not disagreeing with your argument, because I have no facts to back it up on and a Google search yielded nothing, but I'd like to look into that further and post any information I find. Side: No
People know smoking causes cancer. Just because we reinforce that fact won't stop people from doing so. A higher cigarette tax would be much more effective. People don't care that they'll die some time in the future, but they do care if they have to blow their paycheck on cigarettes. Side: No
1
point
1
point
Absolutely not! There is simply no reason to do something like that. Besides that...which organ would you opt to depict? The lung, the mouth or the throat? It's absurd to have to pick up a pack of cigarettes and have someone else's illness, which is allegedly connected with cancer, on the pack. Side: No
1
point
1
point
|