Smoking is an irrational activity but one that I still enjoy it and as long as it is legal, I don't want labels showing me disturbing images. I mean, more people consume alcohol than people smoke so why isn't the government pushing for diseased livers on Ana's fancy wine bottles? Because drinking is fun and smoking is offensive.
I completely support this. One of the best things we can do to fix healthcare in this country is stop unhealthy habits. Whether it's smoking, drinking, or eating junk food.
We've had pictures like this on our cigarette packs for years in my country. In fact, it's obligated to have a caption in bold letters on every pack, saying how dangerous smoking is. They discourage people from picking up the habit, rather than stopping current smokers.
Go ahead and put picture on cigarett packs. We will still smoke.
We all know that smoking is deadly but we still do it, we all have our reasons but your not gona stop oss from doing it, the only one who can is the smoker himself.
Now if you will excuse me im gona buy a pack of smokes :)
Does anyone think these pictures will actually do a damn thing? Smokers won't give a crap, I don't think any smoker of cigarettes doesn't realize that smoking these things every single day and inhaling arsenic and fiber glass into their lungs will probably kill them eventually. Look at Asia they've had these pictures for years! No change at all Asia is still smokin, I'm also sure that kids will love these pictures and probably trade them like baseball cards, just like kids do in England.
in france they have pics, in the Netherlands they have a huge warning on the product. i dont think it has a great affect because 33% of people smoke in the netherlands and france alot more
Cenk brought up an amazing point that she just ignored. If we give in here it won't stop with cigarettes. Why not put diseased livers or grotesque bloody car crashes to curb drinking heavily or drunk driving. She uses bad studies to try to say High Fructose corn syrup isn't bad for you. Common sense says it is, I mean think about it. If you smoke 3 cigarettes a week it's no worse then eating 3 hamburgers a week or drinking 3 drinks, but absolutely ANYTHING in excess is bad for you.
my grant-grandma smokes one pack aday and is fit like a fiddle-
okay maybe she is lucky but what about making paints on cars that you might get crushed in a crahs and be in wheelchair for the rest of you live and many other things , dont treat smokers its their health you dickheads.
EVERYONE knows that smoking is bad for your health. these pictures are not going to do anything.
.
people have a choice, smoke, or don't smoke. they know the risks when they start.
.
find me one person in the entire nation that doesn't know about the negative effects of cigarettes and then i will agree with the pictures. and im not talking about some wacko what doesn't believe the warnings, im talking about someone whose never heard of them.
I can't believe they didn't bring up the anti-abortion campaign that forced women trying to get abortions to look at pictures of aborted fetuses in order to discourage them. I know smoking is bad but I think this is too far, the poison label in Thank You For Smoking was far more tame than this and even it is debatable to a certain extent. Again, going back to the abortion example, some women don't have a choice (health or income wise), smokers do, if we allow this, where does it end?
Years ago, before we introduced the gross images in Canada we had warnings that were just white letters on black.
Discussed with a smoker friend who told me that the packaging was a joke and that smokers knew smoking was harmful and smoked anyway. He knew his addiction was irrational and messages that appealed to reason were useless.
Back then I suggested more visceral images that appealed on an emotional level, just enough to interfere with the compulsion. Turns out they work.
@NightManiacsInc Actually, I couldn't agree more about McDonald's. I have not set foot in one in 30 years mainly because of their exploitation of children.
This is ridiculous. If someone is still stupid enough to start smoking, they should be allowed to do it. Why are Americans so eager to have the government take care of them in every aspect of their life? Are they retarded? We don't need the government to make any more new laws to protect the stupid.
@lifeisforaseason.. sorry for the confusion pal.. I was only referring to the 13% of African Americans in this county that didn't feel were represented correctly in this video, you know, on a per capita basis.. That's all.
This is the dumbest idea ever, why should I have to be bombarded with government propaganda in my role as a consumer? Why don't they make all car companies sell their cars with pictures of horrific car accidents as their paint job? How about showing someone who overdosed on alcohol on all alcoholic beverages? Hell, they might as well put a picture of someone in the hospital with a broken hip on every bunch of bananas, citing the chance you could fall on a peel and die.
What, don't you have this in America yet? We've had these warning pictures of tumours and diseased lungs and stuff on cigarette packets in Australia for years...
@TheYoungTurks but Anna you said showing aborted fetuses to women who want to abort is a bad idea and should not be done.. but you want smokers to see the horrors smoking?
@jujumen Bad analogy. Having an abortion and smoking are not the same. An abortion can be medically beneficial, sometimes necessary for the health of the mother. Smoking is never good for you.
@iowntwocats I have to agree it is not a very good analogy if you are trying to show abortion is the same as smoking, drinking is bad for you too so is race car driving. That is not my point. My point is the reason for objecting to the images as a means of deterrence. Some people don't want abortions so they fight against the right to do so some people don't want smoking so they fight against the right to do so. The reason for fighting against a persons choice is what i'm calling in to question.
@jujumen Trying to deter someone from smoking, is a good thing. Trying to deter someone from having a medical procedure that might save their life is not the same. See what I'm saying. The reason we fight against someones choice to smoke is because that is a harmful activity. Abortions can be harmful, but are not meant to be. Showing fetuses to a woman pre-abortion is sick.
@iowntwocats i totally agree with you. But abortions come in for different reasons smoking does not. Needing an abortion is different from wanting an abortion. That's why i am questioning the reason for opposing the right to choose.
Everyone already knows cigarettes will kill you. Gross ass pictures don't give any more information, they just tug at the heart and fog the mind. I would rather have the warning label that tells me what diseases I could get by smoking. These pictures don't change anything, except now a ton of people will be carrying around pictures of blackened lungs and throats.
im in favor of the warnings if, and only if they put graphic pictures of decaying teeth and diseased gums on every can of soda and every bar of chocolate, bloody car crashes on every bottle of beer, and rush limbaugh's fat fucking face on every perscription pill bottle. and COME ON, anna! what scientific study did you read that said that the jury is out on the over consumption of soda not being a contributing factor in obesity? Seriously. WTF?
The thing about tobacco is that it doesn't just harm you, it harms people around you. If you drink, it's only you that get poisoned. If you smoke, however, everybody near you get some amount of toxins into their system. Based off of that I think that the government should enforce a policy that decreases the problems that tobacco causes.
@Jostedalsosten Thats a valid argument, however if you're going to be making said statement its more notable to refer not to the externality of secondhand smoke but rather to the healthcare cost which rests in the millions to treat the various afflictions caused by long-term smoking. Now,, in regards to the video content I would say that I side with the tobacco company.They are selling a legal product and as such should have some say in product design as long as they comply with warning labels.
Canada has been doing this for a long time.Frankly, if you're an avid smoker, then the warnings aren't going to affect you, these warnings are aimed at raising teen awareness.Lets face it, if you're a smoker, you're probably going to get cancer and you're going to die young.
@NormacHC teens are not going to be affected positively. first of all, anything dangerous is automatically appealing to teens and because they are smart enough to know that you can smoke a couple of cigarettes without getting sick, they are either going to try it or be smart enough to never touch one. in both cases the warnings wont have any effect. if they liked it and they dont care about spending their money on cigarettes, thats when the addiction is going to take over and its too late anyway
Canada Has the smoking warning on there cigarettes packages, they also hide the cigarettes behind the count with flaps with promotional ads on them. People still buy them and people still smoke them. The government is trying not to glorifying the smokes to make them appealing to kids. It also saves the tobacco companies from getting sued because they did warn them.
The pictures won't make a difference for addicted smokers who already chose not to care about their health----this isn't for them, this is for teens who are on the fence between cigarettes being a habit and an addiction. This is to stem the flow on new smokers.
@Jex134 I agree, also in Australia we've had this for ages, I use to sell them working for a local supermarket, mostly it changes the mind's of parents and how they wont be there for their kids if such diseases inflict them.
i think having these pictures are not effective for stopping people from smoking and getting them to quite, but it could be more effective in stopping them starting, we've had images similar to this on packs of fags in the uk for ages, and i dont know anyone who has given up because of them, but it might make people stop and think about it before they buy them and get addicted
@Jex134 I see your point, however I don't see how the pictures are effective. If the students are seeing these pictures, then they've already tried it. As well, for the underaged smokers, they're getting them from other people, so they aren't really seeing the advertising anyway. I think that education before they get to the store to buy a pack is more effective than trying to fix it after they've already tried it.
If they put those on cigarettes they better put rotting livers on bottles of tylenol. Id rather buy products with corpses on them anyways, corpses are badass.
1.) A blastocyst is definitionally not a human being. Killing a human and preventing one from coming into existence are not even remotely the same thing.
2.) There is no evidence that abortions cause cancer whereas 400,000 people die yearly from second hand smoke ALONE, not even counting the actual cigarettes which kill tens of millions.
3.) Regret? Boohoo. Next time use a condom.
4.) Cigs are 100% negative. Sometimes abortions are medically necessary.
@BorgKing001 Again, analogy fail. You are illogical. Are you really going to compare making money from selling carcinogens to nicotine addicts and a 13 year old girl needing an abortion because she was raped by her uncle? Or how about if a woman was going to give birth to a severely deformed anencephalic baby that would die hours after birth anyway? Or what if the woman had cancer and her treatment would kill it? What if she had life threatening complications?
In Australia we have pictures of disgusting diseases on teh ciggarette boxes. Tabacco companies are now fighting a battle to prevent boxes having no advertising what so ever. I would have thought the diseases were more effective however they seem to be pretty worried about this no advertising thing.
i agree that it is harmful and people should be educated about the harm that smoking brings, but i dont think it is up to the company to tell you that our product kills people, i think it should be the peoples responcebility to learn what your doing is bad, and theres already alot of programs, adds, and organizations that give information about the risks of smoking
We've had those warnings in the UK for years, there was no debate here. For the love of God I cant imagine why people try to defend tabacco companies.
Ana talks about educating, but the only use for pictures when it comes to educating is to get things across to those who cannot already read the warning on the cigarettes. I might agree with a skull and crossbones or some such general visual denotation that the product is harmful, but I don't agree that putting graphic imagery on cigarettes is going to help anyone. Hell, I can see it making smokers that can't quit more depressed, knowing exactly how they'll die, seeing it every day.
@dthol778 If you are a drunk then you WILL have numerous liver problems and an increase in violence. So we should out a drunks liver or a car crash on bear bottles now. (The goverment has no right to force a company to say not to use this product minus basic health warnings)
Plus. Why the fuck would any sane person want to become dependent on a drug, to be a little bitch to that drug. I see smokers get into panic when exiting tube stations to get that fix. It's both funny and sad at the same time. And pathetic.
All I know is that anyone who wants to start their addiction voluntarily, knowing of their consequences is fucking stupid, insane, take your pick. It's literally like doing crack, except in this case, crack is legal. Crack meaning cigarettes.
I am a smoker. i know just as every other smoker knows the risks and health hazards of smoking we've seen all of the images before and as insane as it is the fact is we still smoke. I don't think the graphics will make a significant difference. Because of the high price of cigarettes a lot of people don't buy cartons anyway, they won't have that constant reminder by seeing these images. The people who do buy cartons will probably stop. Its not like people will look at the pics and just quit
Cenk I believe you are wrong on this issue. If this was passed into a regulation, it would be a nice change from deregulation of food products (anything that isn't organic) and prescription drugs tested by the companies that make them, with only very light interference from the FDA. That would be progress, and aren't we Progressives?
I don't think this should be required. While the effects of smoking are disgusting and often fatal, the general warning is informative enough. Why must we feel the need to disgust everyone using these with pictures of corpses? They know that they are killing themselves, but they don't need to be subjected to horrific images. The only result that I can see coming out of this is more hand rolled cigarettes.
No matter what you put on there smokers will smoke. Even if they put "STOP FUCKING SMOKING YOU DUMBSHIT MOTHERFUCKER, IT'S GON KILL YOU!!" with a mirror that shows them in a casket all cancered up on there they'll still smoke.
In my opinion, Ana is 100% right and Cenk is 100% wrong. In Canada we have these signs, to try to save lives, most people that smoke will look had that picture and ponder for a second.
people will smoke anyway. I live in canada and the sqeemish ppl just asked for the one with the prego lady on it. Or the kids inhaling second hand smoke. not ALL of the warnings are discusting.
Also, in canada it is illegal to adveritze cigarettes or put them on display where a minor might see them. Grocery stores/gas staions has cupboards or curtain hiding them.
Thats insane! Before we came to civilize in the Americas, the native of the area would pass a pipe around the whole tribe for 1-2 puffs a day, but the pipe has an equivalence of 1 cigarette 100mm. over 500 years later we have people who smokes 2 or more packs a day. Thats why they want you to quit for health reason, ad banning, PSAs and price raises. Now they are stepping it up to ban this addiction.
America is founded on tobacco and should be left like that with some restrictions.
@34601k I think the difference is that they CAN be, i smoked for a while, then just stopped for a while, and haven't started back up since, but for some people it gets so bad that even with a hole in their throat they can't stop, id say your either really lucky you didn't suffer from the unbreakable addiction some people do, or youve got massive willpower that a lot of other people don't have
if cigarettes just harmed the smoker i wouldn't care. but smoking harms the people around them. and scientist are even saying third hand smoke (being around someone who doesn't smoke but lives with one) can have harmful effects.
@rania3830 There is no way to test this theory without having a control. this means you would have to have someone live in a bubble and never be around anything harmful. then you could expose him to third hand smoke, by putting some cloths in the bubble that had been around smoke. If you think smoking is causing you harm from a third party you are need to stay away from all kinds of smoke. Campfires, charcoal, grease fires they all produce the same chemicals as cigs. so stop whining.
The kicker is...all smokers know it's bad for them already. This isn't the 50's...the health concerns are no longer up for debate. It's just plain bad for you. But I don't see them placing pictures of mutilated torsos or cirrhosis on my Bud Light bottles. We're a country of vices, always have been, always will be. And a couple nasty pictures on a cigarette pack won't change a thing.
1. second-hand smoke is almost as bad as smoking it yourself. so, NO, it's not like drinking Pepsi or whatever.
2. regular smokers don't really CARE about the warnings on the cigarette boxes. in fact, they tend to pick the least disgusting boxes at the store - which makes it ironic.
@ElddirEht ummm no idiot, i buy newport and true i dont give a shit what the warnings are but i don't pick the one with the least harmfull warning, no one does that
Total transparency is giving you all the facts. I have a hard time believing the average cigarette smoker reads the surgeon general's warning and realizes "OH MY FUCKING GOD THIS MIGHT GIVE ME HEART DISEASE" . The pictures are just a scare tactic.
It's a big deal because it sets a terrible precedent where the government can make companies obligated to put things other than just plain and correct information on their products.
@yourkie1921 Pictures convey facts - it's not as if those photos are of things that can't and won't happen. It's just another medium. Now, if it were a picture of something that probably WON'T happen because of smoking (for example, an aborted almost-to-term fetus) that was clearly just put there for the sake of grabbing people's attention, then I would see your point because that conveys no fact about the product.
@rrff7755 No kidding. Americans can be so silly. In BC Canada where I am it is illegal even to display the merchandise in the store. It's all locked up out of sight. When you ask for a pack you are given a pack. At first I thought that was going a little too far but then I wondered, why do I think that? It works and it's not egregious. So maybe it's not just Americans that can be silly :P
I don't know about the adults but the kids who would see such packaging would think"Uh, smoking is gross and repulsive", next thing-the whole generation who subconsc]ciously associates smoking with cancer, i.e. actual consequence and not that illusion of freedom and pleasure. I am 100 percent with Ana
@leonia97 Sorry, dependents on the kids. By the way beer does not cause liver problems, it's good for you, but of course in moderate quantities. Same with candy and sugar.
We have the pics in Australia, and while my generation (late ~80s) is pretty good overall with a low percentage of smokers, I'm sure this makes people look twice. The pictures are just gruesome, and you know its true.
I'm not sure what our cigarette companies think about it, but I don't think they have as big a say in politics over here, and they certainly didn't sue the government over it. ^^
I don't want my son looking at dead bodies, holes in someones neck or anything else disturbing. he's sensitive. I teach my son what cigs will do. showing him these pictures is just going to scar and scare him. what's next? pictures of dead babies on liquor bottles?
It's already that way in Canada and there's no problem with it.
Tobacco companies even see that as a way to contest future lawsuit by saying they were already warning their customers with the dangers of smoking their products. So they will be able to say that it was entirely on the smoker's responsibility.
i can see your comparison cenk but i still cannot believe that is your argument. this thing with the pictures has been standard in australia & nz for years and has lowered smoking rates. it works. i guess we care about it more with govt funded healthcare cos our tax dollars are having to pay for idiots who get lung cancer - that perspective might change your tune if that were that case in the US cenk.
Dont belive women guys if u agree with her sooner or later the government is gona make us buy watever they allow us to buy part of bein in america is product buying freedom
I dont smoke ive tried it a couple times but everyone knows smoking is bad for ur health government should not make them do this look at fast food nutrition list they were made to put on there packaging has it stopped from ppl eating this kind of food constantly no!
we have that shit here in canada so im with ana on this people are gunna flipout and take everything to the next level cenk your runnin at 9 when you should be at a 3
im in for cenk fact is that it is a legal product one that has been used for hundreds of years now also to puts dead people on a product you dont agree with is to piss on there graves so to speak
I agree with Cenk. Forcing a product to contain an image other than typographical characters is leading down a path that serves no one any better. People will smoke regardless of what you hit them with. It's an addiction that can not be swayed by a simple image. Plenty of people inhale carcinogens daily from gas pumps to freshly paved roads to cleaners and new plastic. Smoking is by far the worst thing for your health, but in America we don't care about health, we care about comforts.
I'm assuming Cenk, who calls the shots off camera, preplanned the tie, so viewers would be voting. Anna did not look happy at all, even when she tried to smile.
I don't smoke and I'm really sick of seeing these ads in NY "NY quits" They're all so disgusting. Why must they torture everyone? The people smoking ALREADY KNOW THE RISKS, and don't care to really try to quit. Cenk is RIGHT.
So should we have pictures of rotting teeth on Candy packages, Soda Cans? Perhaps all women who get an abortion should get a pamphlet of the fetuses they discarded before getting the procedure performed...Maybe motorcycle ads should have pictures of people who have gotten in motorcycle accidents placed in them... I hope my point was made... I am against the images and I am against smoking. If they enforce this, what's next? Just think about that.
I understand where Cenk is coming from and I do agree in parts. In the UK we have had the shoking images and the warnings on cigarettes for atleast 5 years. It has stopped me from becoming a smoker. whether this process has stopped others from becoming smokers and maybe harming their health can't be a bad thing.
are they gonna require pictures of a liver with cirrhosis on every alcoholic beverage, including in bars and restaurants? no, because people want to enjoy it without having to look at that shit. same for cigarettes. i don't smoke myself, but i say let people live their life how they want.
@Forsakenguitarist90 Agreed... I don't smoke either, but I don't think it's right. We saw all those images in middle school and I am sure it keep a lot of us from smoking, they don't need to put the images on the packages. That's just going overboard. At the end of the day people are going to keep smoking because they are addicted to it.
The difference is if I stand beside you drinking a coke, that doesn't make you fat, well if you are smoking beside me, I am still at a higher risk for cancer, etc
@A5Hellcat and? You have the option to move and NOT stand by me when I smoke. Everyone knows what smoking does to you, everyone knows it's bad and if not a simple google search will educate them. I dont know one person that smokes that thinks its good for them or that wont sit there and tell you how bad it is. I'm getting off my point though.
@A5Hellcat You are at a risk of walking out in the sun. You are risking it by being near cell phones, microwaves. You are in fact risking it by just merely living because, of the off chance that you might naturally grow a cancer.
You still have that choice to not be around smokers just like wearing sunblock or getting screened once in a while.
dude but the girl is such a bitch! but people should take responsiblity if you didnt know that tobbaco can give you lung cancer than its your own damn fault how bout this if you have had a LONG AND TIRING day of work all you wanna do is (maybe) drink a beer and smoke one quick ciggratte when you go to the gas station and it has a picture of rotten lungs u still buy it cuz really u dnt care u dnt want the clerk giving u dirty looks so it shuldnt be i thought we were free i now hear BULLSHIT!
I disagree with Cenk on this one. Tobacco-related illnesses cost the public a LOT of money because many heavy smokers are mostly on the lower spectrum of the social class (those with little or no health insurance).
This doesn't make smoking illegal, so people's freedom is intact. Tobacco companies have been lying to people for decades, whatever we can do to un-do that damage is good. If you see those lungs and still want to smoke, go ahead, but at least you know the consequences.
What are these labels supposed to do that the surgeon generals warning cannot? Educate smokers about what will happen from smoking cigarettes with images? So why isn't text enough to educate anymore? If we allow this what is to stop someone from educating women what will happen in an abortion by covering abortion clinics with pictures of dead fetuses?
The government cannot eliminate selling tobacco because all the tax coming from the product. Another thing with the images, people know that cigs are bad for the body. they obviously don't care what is going to happen to their bodies. In my opinion the labels on the product is unnecessary. ppl know that cig are bad. ppl know what cig will do. I don't think the labels actually affect smokers
Don't they already have images on there? Canada has an images (better then what they have shown there) for years now. They're a image strip across the top of the package.
Google cigarette pack Canada and you can find the images they use and what that packages looks like.
This has no chance. Even non-smokers think the shit is too much. You've heard of second hand smoking, right? Did anybody ever think about a smoker just putting the pack down on a table or somewhere else in public? Imagine empty boxes laying around outside... now imagine a child being exposed to the graphic images incidentally. A parent is not going to be too happy about that. They'll sue the tobacco company over it; so the tobacco companies are right to sue in this situation and they'll win.
@commonloon0: Pity it doesn't actually do much up here, especially since they passed laws that many places selling cigarettes have to keep the actual cigarettes out of sight behind little trap doors.
Heh... it's not propaganda if it's -true-. It's only propaganda if it's false, and yet pushed as truth by powerful interests or the government, as opposed to simply illustrating facts in a clear way.
Yes, cancer and death DOES make people emotional, because they are *terrible* things.
I agree with Cenk 100%, I mean, we talk about "the slippery slope" and this is definitely it. I don't smoke and I think the tobacco companies do a lot of damage to people but ultimately it comes down to personal responsibility. Inform the public about the unhealthy affects of smoking, anti-smoking marketing like the 'Truth' campaign and just let people do what they want and if they get cancer from smoking, that said person SHOULD NOT be able to sue the cigarette company.
If that's the case, why are cigarette companies suing? Believe, they have done their marketing due diligence before they spend millions of dollars fighting against this. The reason why they would spend that kind of money is a result of their research showing that these ads are indeed effective.
@umbdude they r suing because of the new customers of smoking cz if they put the pictures the people who r not familiar with smoking or try it before they will be horrified by the images so they may not use the product. But the smokers which r addicted to smoking they wont stop buying no matter what
nicotine is as addictive or more so than cocaine. not in the least because it is legal. the male news presenter on here is wrong. tobacco companies know that their products kill. If they want to really help, they will make nicotine free cigarettes.
@Invaishir You can accept whatever you are told like a mindless drone all you want, but I won't accept you, a fvcking idiot, calling me stupid. I'll repeat myself. The cancer society uses the same EPA study, that was declared a violation of law for deviating from the scientific procedure and cherry picking their data, to confirm their unsubstantiated beliefs on second hand smoke. The WHO did a survey and concluded ETS is statistically unlikely to cause lung cancer in either children or adults.
Smoking is an irrational activity but one that I still enjoy it and as long as it is legal, I don't want labels showing me disturbing images. I mean, more people consume alcohol than people smoke so why isn't the government pushing for diseased livers on Ana's fancy wine bottles? Because drinking is fun and smoking is offensive.
combat21bravo 5 days ago
I completely support this. One of the best things we can do to fix healthcare in this country is stop unhealthy habits. Whether it's smoking, drinking, or eating junk food.
JImmy4336 2 weeks ago
We've had pictures like this on our cigarette packs for years in my country. In fact, it's obligated to have a caption in bold letters on every pack, saying how dangerous smoking is. They discourage people from picking up the habit, rather than stopping current smokers.
PinkPsych00 4 weeks ago
why isnt the government not putting pics of heart disease on happy meals
guess mcdonalds got good lobbyist
godscuttingyoudown 1 month ago 4
Go ahead and put picture on cigarett packs. We will still smoke.
We all know that smoking is deadly but we still do it, we all have our reasons but your not gona stop oss from doing it, the only one who can is the smoker himself.
Now if you will excuse me im gona buy a pack of smokes :)
TheIcelandicPatriot 2 months ago
Does anyone think these pictures will actually do a damn thing? Smokers won't give a crap, I don't think any smoker of cigarettes doesn't realize that smoking these things every single day and inhaling arsenic and fiber glass into their lungs will probably kill them eventually. Look at Asia they've had these pictures for years! No change at all Asia is still smokin, I'm also sure that kids will love these pictures and probably trade them like baseball cards, just like kids do in England.
SmokingEssy7887 3 months ago
this is bullshit. i completely agree with the dude
TomThumbsBlues1965 3 months ago
It's a folly to suggest banning people from smoking, drinking or shooting up.
Education of the consequences... Tell me that's a bad thing for anyone except the people selling the shit.
ShallowBeThyGames 5 months ago
Either ban personal use of all harmful substances or ban none of them. Any other stance cannot be logically justified.
GrandSupremeDaddyo 5 months ago
in france they have pics, in the Netherlands they have a huge warning on the product. i dont think it has a great affect because 33% of people smoke in the netherlands and france alot more
Mrdutchkid123 5 months ago in playlist More videos from TheYoungTurks
What I still don't get is why are tobaccos legal and cannabis aren't?
2anime4ever 5 months ago
Cenk brought up an amazing point that she just ignored. If we give in here it won't stop with cigarettes. Why not put diseased livers or grotesque bloody car crashes to curb drinking heavily or drunk driving. She uses bad studies to try to say High Fructose corn syrup isn't bad for you. Common sense says it is, I mean think about it. If you smoke 3 cigarettes a week it's no worse then eating 3 hamburgers a week or drinking 3 drinks, but absolutely ANYTHING in excess is bad for you.
Bound4Earth 5 months ago
my grant-grandma smokes one pack aday and is fit like a fiddle-
okay maybe she is lucky but what about making paints on cars that you might get crushed in a crahs and be in wheelchair for the rest of you live and many other things , dont treat smokers its their health you dickheads.
LT0WnWaRi0 5 months ago in playlist Weitere Videos von TheYoungTurks
This is fuckin stupid.
.
EVERYONE knows that smoking is bad for your health. these pictures are not going to do anything.
.
people have a choice, smoke, or don't smoke. they know the risks when they start.
.
find me one person in the entire nation that doesn't know about the negative effects of cigarettes and then i will agree with the pictures. and im not talking about some wacko what doesn't believe the warnings, im talking about someone whose never heard of them.
YukonCornelius1776 5 months ago
I can't believe they didn't bring up the anti-abortion campaign that forced women trying to get abortions to look at pictures of aborted fetuses in order to discourage them. I know smoking is bad but I think this is too far, the poison label in Thank You For Smoking was far more tame than this and even it is debatable to a certain extent. Again, going back to the abortion example, some women don't have a choice (health or income wise), smokers do, if we allow this, where does it end?
TheTaintedWisdom 5 months ago
Years ago, before we introduced the gross images in Canada we had warnings that were just white letters on black.
Discussed with a smoker friend who told me that the packaging was a joke and that smokers knew smoking was harmful and smoked anyway. He knew his addiction was irrational and messages that appealed to reason were useless.
Back then I suggested more visceral images that appealed on an emotional level, just enough to interfere with the compulsion. Turns out they work.
tedtrash 5 months ago
@NightManiacsInc Actually, I couldn't agree more about McDonald's. I have not set foot in one in 30 years mainly because of their exploitation of children.
Same argument applies.
tedtrash 5 months ago
This is ridiculous. If someone is still stupid enough to start smoking, they should be allowed to do it. Why are Americans so eager to have the government take care of them in every aspect of their life? Are they retarded? We don't need the government to make any more new laws to protect the stupid.
MrSafetymeeting 5 months ago
@lifeisforaseason.. sorry for the confusion pal.. I was only referring to the 13% of African Americans in this county that didn't feel were represented correctly in this video, you know, on a per capita basis.. That's all.
treefireguy 6 months ago
This is the dumbest idea ever, why should I have to be bombarded with government propaganda in my role as a consumer? Why don't they make all car companies sell their cars with pictures of horrific car accidents as their paint job? How about showing someone who overdosed on alcohol on all alcoholic beverages? Hell, they might as well put a picture of someone in the hospital with a broken hip on every bunch of bananas, citing the chance you could fall on a peel and die.
Vyna80 6 months ago
Anna's a fucking over emotional woman, go figure.
MaicoMoon 6 months ago
What, don't you have this in America yet? We've had these warning pictures of tumours and diseased lungs and stuff on cigarette packets in Australia for years...
tealovetreeheart 6 months ago
@TheYoungTurks but Anna you said showing aborted fetuses to women who want to abort is a bad idea and should not be done.. but you want smokers to see the horrors smoking?
jujumen 6 months ago
@jujumen Bad analogy. Having an abortion and smoking are not the same. An abortion can be medically beneficial, sometimes necessary for the health of the mother. Smoking is never good for you.
iowntwocats 2 months ago
@iowntwocats I have to agree it is not a very good analogy if you are trying to show abortion is the same as smoking, drinking is bad for you too so is race car driving. That is not my point. My point is the reason for objecting to the images as a means of deterrence. Some people don't want abortions so they fight against the right to do so some people don't want smoking so they fight against the right to do so. The reason for fighting against a persons choice is what i'm calling in to question.
jujumen 2 months ago
@jujumen Trying to deter someone from smoking, is a good thing. Trying to deter someone from having a medical procedure that might save their life is not the same. See what I'm saying. The reason we fight against someones choice to smoke is because that is a harmful activity. Abortions can be harmful, but are not meant to be. Showing fetuses to a woman pre-abortion is sick.
iowntwocats 2 months ago
@iowntwocats i totally agree with you. But abortions come in for different reasons smoking does not. Needing an abortion is different from wanting an abortion. That's why i am questioning the reason for opposing the right to choose.
jujumen 2 months ago
Everyone already knows cigarettes will kill you. Gross ass pictures don't give any more information, they just tug at the heart and fog the mind. I would rather have the warning label that tells me what diseases I could get by smoking. These pictures don't change anything, except now a ton of people will be carrying around pictures of blackened lungs and throats.
fauyd 6 months ago
im in favor of the warnings if, and only if they put graphic pictures of decaying teeth and diseased gums on every can of soda and every bar of chocolate, bloody car crashes on every bottle of beer, and rush limbaugh's fat fucking face on every perscription pill bottle. and COME ON, anna! what scientific study did you read that said that the jury is out on the over consumption of soda not being a contributing factor in obesity? Seriously. WTF?
QuestionReadLearn 6 months ago
people who wanna smoke problably wouldnt even give a shit if those pictures made it but over all i agree with cenk. people just do stupid shit period
superman316k 6 months ago
The thing about tobacco is that it doesn't just harm you, it harms people around you. If you drink, it's only you that get poisoned. If you smoke, however, everybody near you get some amount of toxins into their system. Based off of that I think that the government should enforce a policy that decreases the problems that tobacco causes.
Jostedalsosten 6 months ago
@Jostedalsosten Thats a valid argument, however if you're going to be making said statement its more notable to refer not to the externality of secondhand smoke but rather to the healthcare cost which rests in the millions to treat the various afflictions caused by long-term smoking. Now,, in regards to the video content I would say that I side with the tobacco company.They are selling a legal product and as such should have some say in product design as long as they comply with warning labels.
Bloodian 6 months ago
Here's what i want to know. What's more expensive in the long run, a smoker getting cancer and dying at 65, or a non-smoker living to age 85?
danielcaan 6 months ago
well they aren't gonna put warnings like this on stuff like alcohol or chew. just saying.
panecitaxbeso 6 months ago
Canada has been doing this for a long time.Frankly, if you're an avid smoker, then the warnings aren't going to affect you, these warnings are aimed at raising teen awareness.Lets face it, if you're a smoker, you're probably going to get cancer and you're going to die young.
NormacHC 6 months ago
@NormacHC teens are not going to be affected positively. first of all, anything dangerous is automatically appealing to teens and because they are smart enough to know that you can smoke a couple of cigarettes without getting sick, they are either going to try it or be smart enough to never touch one. in both cases the warnings wont have any effect. if they liked it and they dont care about spending their money on cigarettes, thats when the addiction is going to take over and its too late anyway
schlafanzyk 6 months ago
Canada Has the smoking warning on there cigarettes packages, they also hide the cigarettes behind the count with flaps with promotional ads on them. People still buy them and people still smoke them. The government is trying not to glorifying the smokes to make them appealing to kids. It also saves the tobacco companies from getting sued because they did warn them.
kpfm7 6 months ago
The pictures won't make a difference for addicted smokers who already chose not to care about their health----this isn't for them, this is for teens who are on the fence between cigarettes being a habit and an addiction. This is to stem the flow on new smokers.
Jex134 6 months ago 33
@Jex134 I agree, also in Australia we've had this for ages, I use to sell them working for a local supermarket, mostly it changes the mind's of parents and how they wont be there for their kids if such diseases inflict them.
MotherOfAllBombs1 5 months ago
i think having these pictures are not effective for stopping people from smoking and getting them to quite, but it could be more effective in stopping them starting, we've had images similar to this on packs of fags in the uk for ages, and i dont know anyone who has given up because of them, but it might make people stop and think about it before they buy them and get addicted
mike199134 6 months ago
@Jex134 I see your point, however I don't see how the pictures are effective. If the students are seeing these pictures, then they've already tried it. As well, for the underaged smokers, they're getting them from other people, so they aren't really seeing the advertising anyway. I think that education before they get to the store to buy a pack is more effective than trying to fix it after they've already tried it.
centariprime1 6 months ago
If they put those on cigarettes they better put rotting livers on bottles of tylenol. Id rather buy products with corpses on them anyways, corpses are badass.
roadkill1984 6 months ago
@BorgKing001
1.) A blastocyst is definitionally not a human being. Killing a human and preventing one from coming into existence are not even remotely the same thing.
2.) There is no evidence that abortions cause cancer whereas 400,000 people die yearly from second hand smoke ALONE, not even counting the actual cigarettes which kill tens of millions.
3.) Regret? Boohoo. Next time use a condom.
4.) Cigs are 100% negative. Sometimes abortions are medically necessary.
Bobbiethejean 6 months ago
@Bobbiethejean
1. you disagree with smoking and think its ok to display diseased lungs on the packaging, the resulting consequence of smoking.
2. You agree with abortion and think iits wrong to display aborted fetuses on an abortion clinic.
1 + 2 = Hypocrisy PERIOD
BorgKing001 6 months ago
@BorgKing001 Again, analogy fail. You are illogical. Are you really going to compare making money from selling carcinogens to nicotine addicts and a 13 year old girl needing an abortion because she was raped by her uncle? Or how about if a woman was going to give birth to a severely deformed anencephalic baby that would die hours after birth anyway? Or what if the woman had cancer and her treatment would kill it? What if she had life threatening complications?
Have a cigarette, asshole.
Bobbiethejean 6 months ago
In Australia we have pictures of disgusting diseases on teh ciggarette boxes. Tabacco companies are now fighting a battle to prevent boxes having no advertising what so ever. I would have thought the diseases were more effective however they seem to be pretty worried about this no advertising thing.
angelzpoo 6 months ago
no you shouldnt force them put pictures on it
i agree that it is harmful and people should be educated about the harm that smoking brings, but i dont think it is up to the company to tell you that our product kills people, i think it should be the peoples responcebility to learn what your doing is bad, and theres already alot of programs, adds, and organizations that give information about the risks of smoking
bryanlopez1084 6 months ago
We've had those warnings in the UK for years, there was no debate here. For the love of God I cant imagine why people try to defend tabacco companies.
NBarker1993 6 months ago
Ana talks about educating, but the only use for pictures when it comes to educating is to get things across to those who cannot already read the warning on the cigarettes. I might agree with a skull and crossbones or some such general visual denotation that the product is harmful, but I don't agree that putting graphic imagery on cigarettes is going to help anyone. Hell, I can see it making smokers that can't quit more depressed, knowing exactly how they'll die, seeing it every day.
bebopbountyhead 6 months ago
if ppl wanna smoke, let them smoke. the risks of smoking are blatantly obvious today
chimdichekwa 6 months ago
Its like showing a dead baby or an aborted phetus to a woman about to get one.
All it is there to do is force a guilty conscious on smokers, I'm horrible for doing this I'm disgusting, I'm diseased I'm poisoning myself
I'm ending a life, I'm going to hell, etc etc its apples to apples
bangurdead102 6 months ago
it cost use non smokers tax money for health care for these retarded smokers
dthol778 6 months ago
@dthol778 The same can be applied to those who drink or work in a dangerous job. So stop bitching.
leonia97 6 months ago
@leonia97 not anywhere to smoking smoking casues so much maybe not now but in the future.
And you get addicted so stop being a pussy
dthol778 6 months ago
@dthol778 If you are a drunk then you WILL have numerous liver problems and an increase in violence. So we should out a drunks liver or a car crash on bear bottles now. (The goverment has no right to force a company to say not to use this product minus basic health warnings)
leonia97 6 months ago
@leonia97 self control go to rehab if you got frinking probs not youtubr lol
dthol778 6 months ago
why smoke it does nothing but harm your health
Who cares
dthol778 6 months ago
Plus. Why the fuck would any sane person want to become dependent on a drug, to be a little bitch to that drug. I see smokers get into panic when exiting tube stations to get that fix. It's both funny and sad at the same time. And pathetic.
Domzdream 6 months ago
All I know is that anyone who wants to start their addiction voluntarily, knowing of their consequences is fucking stupid, insane, take your pick. It's literally like doing crack, except in this case, crack is legal. Crack meaning cigarettes.
Domzdream 6 months ago
I am a smoker. i know just as every other smoker knows the risks and health hazards of smoking we've seen all of the images before and as insane as it is the fact is we still smoke. I don't think the graphics will make a significant difference. Because of the high price of cigarettes a lot of people don't buy cartons anyway, they won't have that constant reminder by seeing these images. The people who do buy cartons will probably stop. Its not like people will look at the pics and just quit
pinkkiieee 6 months ago
@pinkkiieee If you want to quit try and smoke Damiana is a spanish herb that relaxes you and helps so many people
it is legal you can buy it at amazon for like 12dollars a pound reason why its not out there is cause it gets you a buzz similar to a high
dthol778 6 months ago
Cenk I believe you are wrong on this issue. If this was passed into a regulation, it would be a nice change from deregulation of food products (anything that isn't organic) and prescription drugs tested by the companies that make them, with only very light interference from the FDA. That would be progress, and aren't we Progressives?
valflyinf 6 months ago
I don't think this should be required. While the effects of smoking are disgusting and often fatal, the general warning is informative enough. Why must we feel the need to disgust everyone using these with pictures of corpses? They know that they are killing themselves, but they don't need to be subjected to horrific images. The only result that I can see coming out of this is more hand rolled cigarettes.
doomfluff 6 months ago
Omg, ask the ASIAN guy in the back... Make it a tie breaker!!!!
acemasterke 6 months ago
I think that I would save the cartons as souvenirs! Gotta collect them ALL!
acemasterke 6 months ago
Anna is such a cunt.
abcdefh1992 6 months ago
No matter what you put on there smokers will smoke. Even if they put "STOP FUCKING SMOKING YOU DUMBSHIT MOTHERFUCKER, IT'S GON KILL YOU!!" with a mirror that shows them in a casket all cancered up on there they'll still smoke.
xTheDynastQueenx 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In my opinion, Ana is 100% right and Cenk is 100% wrong. In Canada we have these signs, to try to save lives, most people that smoke will look had that picture and ponder for a second.
isaacBrockofthe41 6 months ago
people will smoke anyway. I live in canada and the sqeemish ppl just asked for the one with the prego lady on it. Or the kids inhaling second hand smoke. not ALL of the warnings are discusting.
Also, in canada it is illegal to adveritze cigarettes or put them on display where a minor might see them. Grocery stores/gas staions has cupboards or curtain hiding them.
And people sill buy cigarettes.
colleenhilton 6 months ago
Thats insane! Before we came to civilize in the Americas, the native of the area would pass a pipe around the whole tribe for 1-2 puffs a day, but the pipe has an equivalence of 1 cigarette 100mm. over 500 years later we have people who smokes 2 or more packs a day. Thats why they want you to quit for health reason, ad banning, PSAs and price raises. Now they are stepping it up to ban this addiction.
America is founded on tobacco and should be left like that with some restrictions.
scaryred24 6 months ago
weed is illegal but cigarettes (which is more addictive than cocaine) is legal? the FDA should be banning them all together.
rania3830 6 months ago 21
@rania3830 they should all be legal
horbergus 6 months ago
@rania3830 Are you sure cigarettes are that addictive? I quit cold turkey on my first try.
34601k 6 months ago
@34601k
sorry got i got it wrong. cigarettes can actually be more addictive than heroine. not cocaine.
rania3830 6 months ago
@34601k I think the difference is that they CAN be, i smoked for a while, then just stopped for a while, and haven't started back up since, but for some people it gets so bad that even with a hole in their throat they can't stop, id say your either really lucky you didn't suffer from the unbreakable addiction some people do, or youve got massive willpower that a lot of other people don't have
mike199134 6 months ago
@rania3830
No, they FDA shouldn't ban any of those things. Not weed, not cigarettes, not cocaine. Your body, your business.
SSTTEEAALLTTHH 5 months ago
@SSTTEEAALLTTHH
if cigarettes just harmed the smoker i wouldn't care. but smoking harms the people around them. and scientist are even saying third hand smoke (being around someone who doesn't smoke but lives with one) can have harmful effects.
rania3830 5 months ago
@rania3830 There is no way to test this theory without having a control. this means you would have to have someone live in a bubble and never be around anything harmful. then you could expose him to third hand smoke, by putting some cloths in the bubble that had been around smoke. If you think smoking is causing you harm from a third party you are need to stay away from all kinds of smoke. Campfires, charcoal, grease fires they all produce the same chemicals as cigs. so stop whining.
poolboy8888 5 months ago
The kicker is...all smokers know it's bad for them already. This isn't the 50's...the health concerns are no longer up for debate. It's just plain bad for you. But I don't see them placing pictures of mutilated torsos or cirrhosis on my Bud Light bottles. We're a country of vices, always have been, always will be. And a couple nasty pictures on a cigarette pack won't change a thing.
SilasCaiyn 6 months ago
1. second-hand smoke is almost as bad as smoking it yourself. so, NO, it's not like drinking Pepsi or whatever.
2. regular smokers don't really CARE about the warnings on the cigarette boxes. in fact, they tend to pick the least disgusting boxes at the store - which makes it ironic.
ElddirEht 6 months ago
@ElddirEht ummm no idiot, i buy newport and true i dont give a shit what the warnings are but i don't pick the one with the least harmfull warning, no one does that
greenblobo9 6 months ago
@greenblobo9 aha well my friends do
ElddirEht 6 months ago
@DaisyExodus
Total transparency is giving you all the facts. I have a hard time believing the average cigarette smoker reads the surgeon general's warning and realizes "OH MY FUCKING GOD THIS MIGHT GIVE ME HEART DISEASE" . The pictures are just a scare tactic.
It's a big deal because it sets a terrible precedent where the government can make companies obligated to put things other than just plain and correct information on their products.
yourkie1921 6 months ago
@yourkie1921 Pictures convey facts - it's not as if those photos are of things that can't and won't happen. It's just another medium. Now, if it were a picture of something that probably WON'T happen because of smoking (for example, an aborted almost-to-term fetus) that was clearly just put there for the sake of grabbing people's attention, then I would see your point because that conveys no fact about the product.
DaisyExodus 6 months ago
we've had this for at least 5 years in the rest of the developed world.
rrff7755 6 months ago
@rrff7755 No kidding. Americans can be so silly. In BC Canada where I am it is illegal even to display the merchandise in the store. It's all locked up out of sight. When you ask for a pack you are given a pack. At first I thought that was going a little too far but then I wondered, why do I think that? It works and it's not egregious. So maybe it's not just Americans that can be silly :P
donteatthefishsticks 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Why I vote for Ron Paul :
1. Ron Paul will never send Americans to fight & die for Israel & Jew
2. Love my wife. Don't want her to be a widow
Stevie68000 6 months ago
I don't know about the adults but the kids who would see such packaging would think"Uh, smoking is gross and repulsive", next thing-the whole generation who subconsc]ciously associates smoking with cancer, i.e. actual consequence and not that illusion of freedom and pleasure. I am 100 percent with Ana
PR0H0LDEM 6 months ago
@PR0H0LDEM Kids would not give a shit. You can do the same thing with beer because that causes liver troubles. Same with candy and sugar.
leonia97 6 months ago
@leonia97 Sorry, dependents on the kids. By the way beer does not cause liver problems, it's good for you, but of course in moderate quantities. Same with candy and sugar.
PR0H0LDEM 6 months ago
we already have this in Romania, and guess what i have in my other :P hand? yes a cigarette.
bladedaemon666 6 months ago
We have the pics in Australia, and while my generation (late ~80s) is pretty good overall with a low percentage of smokers, I'm sure this makes people look twice. The pictures are just gruesome, and you know its true.
I'm not sure what our cigarette companies think about it, but I don't think they have as big a say in politics over here, and they certainly didn't sue the government over it. ^^
jaxsonbateman 6 months ago
I don't want my son looking at dead bodies, holes in someones neck or anything else disturbing. he's sensitive. I teach my son what cigs will do. showing him these pictures is just going to scar and scare him. what's next? pictures of dead babies on liquor bottles?
alienbeing00 6 months ago
It's already that way in Canada and there's no problem with it.
Tobacco companies even see that as a way to contest future lawsuit by saying they were already warning their customers with the dangers of smoking their products. So they will be able to say that it was entirely on the smoker's responsibility.
jimalbi 6 months ago
Wait a minute... the Chinese dude doesn't get a vote?
GoogleVideoMan 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Weed: WARNING This product will make you laid back and sleepy... "shows picture of a guy just chillin."
GoogleVideoMan 6 months ago
Comment removed
GoogleVideoMan 6 months ago
Comment removed
GoogleVideoMan 6 months ago
Legalize marijuana and put a graphic of someone who has died from it on the label!! oh, wait.....
PHISPIRAL161803399 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Financial Enemy of Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, & America - Jew
1. Goldman Sachs CEO, Lyold Blankfein - Jew
2. IMF Deputy CEO, John Lisky - Jew
3. Ex IMF CEO, Dominic Strauss - Jew
4. World Bank CEO, Robert Zoellick - Jew
5. Ex World Bank CEO, James Woolfesen - Jew
6. Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke - Jew
7. Ex Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan - Jew
8. Obama Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner - Jew
9. George Bush Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson - Jew
Stevie68000 6 months ago
this has been in uk for ever
djdjdijon 6 months ago
they have just brought in generic packaging in australia too and nz is trying to follow but of course the tobacco companies are trying to stop it!
CTKJNZ 6 months ago
i can see your comparison cenk but i still cannot believe that is your argument. this thing with the pictures has been standard in australia & nz for years and has lowered smoking rates. it works. i guess we care about it more with govt funded healthcare cos our tax dollars are having to pay for idiots who get lung cancer - that perspective might change your tune if that were that case in the US cenk.
CTKJNZ 6 months ago
Dont belive women guys if u agree with her sooner or later the government is gona make us buy watever they allow us to buy part of bein in america is product buying freedom
westcoastlife4show 6 months ago
I dont smoke ive tried it a couple times but everyone knows smoking is bad for ur health government should not make them do this look at fast food nutrition list they were made to put on there packaging has it stopped from ppl eating this kind of food constantly no!
westcoastlife4show 6 months ago
People should take responsability. They already have warnings on the packages, ironically I dont smoke but Cenk is right on this one
Atrofia2 6 months ago
I think Cenk is right on this one. Should Mcdonals put pictures of fat people on their Big Mac wraping paper
Atrofia2 6 months ago
we have that shit here in canada so im with ana on this people are gunna flipout and take everything to the next level cenk your runnin at 9 when you should be at a 3
darkesthero 6 months ago
im in for cenk fact is that it is a legal product one that has been used for hundreds of years now also to puts dead people on a product you dont agree with is to piss on there graves so to speak
MrALEXisBORING 6 months ago
these pictures are soft compared the ones here lmao
canadianbeeph 6 months ago
I agree with Cenk. Forcing a product to contain an image other than typographical characters is leading down a path that serves no one any better. People will smoke regardless of what you hit them with. It's an addiction that can not be swayed by a simple image. Plenty of people inhale carcinogens daily from gas pumps to freshly paved roads to cleaners and new plastic. Smoking is by far the worst thing for your health, but in America we don't care about health, we care about comforts.
OutreAnima 6 months ago
I side with Cenk on this one. People are fully capable of reading. They don't need visual aids.
BluesChopper 6 months ago
Cenk is right, there's already warnings. Let's treat adults like adults.
steelersguy74 6 months ago
why did Cenk not ask Steve for being the 5th tie breaker vote !!!
deepanshudutta 6 months ago
@deepanshudutta
I'm assuming Cenk, who calls the shots off camera, preplanned the tie, so viewers would be voting. Anna did not look happy at all, even when she tried to smile.
SomeoneInLA 6 months ago
Let's put pictures of fat people on McDonalds bags.
And gruesome highway accident scenes on bottles of wine.
And pictures of children that died from choking on toy packages.
This is the first step towards that.
I love how the progressive left picks and chooses freedoms.
And no, no one has a right to go out in public and not smell cigarette smoke.
VictoryCough 6 months ago
Cenk is 100% RIGHT!!!
Ana is fucking stupid because people who smoke are going to continue to smoke regardless of wether the warnings are there or not.
Shonenut213 6 months ago 2
@Shonenut213 you're right, they are gonna smoke nontheless but she's not stupid, its just her opinion. and i'm with Cenk 100%
CKMLMA8 6 months ago
@CKMLMA8 I didn't mean she was literally stupid (actually she is pretty smart) I just used "stupid" as an expression.
Shonenut213 6 months ago
I don't smoke and I'm really sick of seeing these ads in NY "NY quits" They're all so disgusting. Why must they torture everyone? The people smoking ALREADY KNOW THE RISKS, and don't care to really try to quit. Cenk is RIGHT.
Rosebud331 6 months ago
So should we have pictures of rotting teeth on Candy packages, Soda Cans? Perhaps all women who get an abortion should get a pamphlet of the fetuses they discarded before getting the procedure performed...Maybe motorcycle ads should have pictures of people who have gotten in motorcycle accidents placed in them... I hope my point was made... I am against the images and I am against smoking. If they enforce this, what's next? Just think about that.
TheCatsLastWord 6 months ago
I voted for the images.
I understand where Cenk is coming from and I do agree in parts. In the UK we have had the shoking images and the warnings on cigarettes for atleast 5 years. It has stopped me from becoming a smoker. whether this process has stopped others from becoming smokers and maybe harming their health can't be a bad thing.
001rgiles 6 months ago
shouldn't there be a picture of a fat guy on every happy meal?
magicpet 6 months ago
I'm on Cenk's side here.
PSNBloodraid 6 months ago
Why not simply outlaw spiking tobacco? Because if only had tobacco then people could quit much easier!
msgerto 6 months ago
are they gonna require pictures of a liver with cirrhosis on every alcoholic beverage, including in bars and restaurants? no, because people want to enjoy it without having to look at that shit. same for cigarettes. i don't smoke myself, but i say let people live their life how they want.
Forsakenguitarist90 6 months ago
@Forsakenguitarist90 Agreed... I don't smoke either, but I don't think it's right. We saw all those images in middle school and I am sure it keep a lot of us from smoking, they don't need to put the images on the packages. That's just going overboard. At the end of the day people are going to keep smoking because they are addicted to it.
TheCatsLastWord 6 months ago
Come on! Corporations are people and have freedom of speech, and the freedom to lie! Come on people.
drrx8 6 months ago
I understand putting rotten lungs etc. But having dead bodies and people with holes in there throats is a bit much. And I dont even smoke! LOL!~
Tent316 6 months ago
I WOULD LOVE A PICTURE OF A FAT KID ON MY COKE CANS!! I WOULD LAUGH SO HARD... OH AND A NEW CAPS LOCK KEY.
DeHavenac 6 months ago
Comment removed
Guildhelm 6 months ago
The difference is if I stand beside you drinking a coke, that doesn't make you fat, well if you are smoking beside me, I am still at a higher risk for cancer, etc
A5Hellcat 6 months ago 30
@A5Hellcat Agreed.
rainxinxblack21 6 months ago
@A5Hellcat So would pictures on cigarette boxes change that?
lilnicky492 6 months ago
@A5Hellcat You have feet...walk away.
TheCatsLastWord 6 months ago
@A5Hellcat and? You have the option to move and NOT stand by me when I smoke. Everyone knows what smoking does to you, everyone knows it's bad and if not a simple google search will educate them. I dont know one person that smokes that thinks its good for them or that wont sit there and tell you how bad it is. I'm getting off my point though.
mynameisethan182 6 months ago
@A5Hellcat You are at a risk of walking out in the sun. You are risking it by being near cell phones, microwaves. You are in fact risking it by just merely living because, of the off chance that you might naturally grow a cancer.
You still have that choice to not be around smokers just like wearing sunblock or getting screened once in a while.
~I am not a smoker.
robobrain10000 6 months ago
dude but the girl is such a bitch! but people should take responsiblity if you didnt know that tobbaco can give you lung cancer than its your own damn fault how bout this if you have had a LONG AND TIRING day of work all you wanna do is (maybe) drink a beer and smoke one quick ciggratte when you go to the gas station and it has a picture of rotten lungs u still buy it cuz really u dnt care u dnt want the clerk giving u dirty looks so it shuldnt be i thought we were free i now hear BULLSHIT!
ferfer18AG 6 months ago
I disagree with Cenk on this one. Tobacco-related illnesses cost the public a LOT of money because many heavy smokers are mostly on the lower spectrum of the social class (those with little or no health insurance).
This doesn't make smoking illegal, so people's freedom is intact. Tobacco companies have been lying to people for decades, whatever we can do to un-do that damage is good. If you see those lungs and still want to smoke, go ahead, but at least you know the consequences.
umbdude 6 months ago
What are these labels supposed to do that the surgeon generals warning cannot? Educate smokers about what will happen from smoking cigarettes with images? So why isn't text enough to educate anymore? If we allow this what is to stop someone from educating women what will happen in an abortion by covering abortion clinics with pictures of dead fetuses?
lilnicky492 6 months ago 9
@lilnicky492 Actually people DO stand outside of these clinics and carry these signs. This is a totally different thing anyway.
rainxinxblack21 6 months ago
@rainxinxblack21 Please explain how it is different, because the way I see it it is the exact same thing.
lilnicky492 6 months ago
The government cannot eliminate selling tobacco because all the tax coming from the product. Another thing with the images, people know that cigs are bad for the body. they obviously don't care what is going to happen to their bodies. In my opinion the labels on the product is unnecessary. ppl know that cig are bad. ppl know what cig will do. I don't think the labels actually affect smokers
ajbirlik 6 months ago
exploding cigs ftw!
mattbau76 6 months ago
Don't they already have images on there? Canada has an images (better then what they have shown there) for years now. They're a image strip across the top of the package.
Google cigarette pack Canada and you can find the images they use and what that packages looks like.
MsSaraella 6 months ago
I am on Anas side. Ana wins.
freshhug 6 months ago
This has no chance. Even non-smokers think the shit is too much. You've heard of second hand smoking, right? Did anybody ever think about a smoker just putting the pack down on a table or somewhere else in public? Imagine empty boxes laying around outside... now imagine a child being exposed to the graphic images incidentally. A parent is not going to be too happy about that. They'll sue the tobacco company over it; so the tobacco companies are right to sue in this situation and they'll win.
TheTruthNJ09 6 months ago
We already have most of these warnings on cigarettes in Canada
commonloon0 6 months ago 40
@commonloon0 Good, another good reason to stay out of Canada.
TheCatsLastWord 6 months ago
@TheCatsLastWord Boo hoo you're so defensive, why are you doing something if you are not comfortable seeing what it can do to you?
commonloon0 6 months ago
@commonloon0: Pity it doesn't actually do much up here, especially since they passed laws that many places selling cigarettes have to keep the actual cigarettes out of sight behind little trap doors.
Heh... it's not propaganda if it's -true-. It's only propaganda if it's false, and yet pushed as truth by powerful interests or the government, as opposed to simply illustrating facts in a clear way.
Yes, cancer and death DOES make people emotional, because they are *terrible* things.
Tigranis 6 months ago
This already happens in the UK
tonymurphy1888 6 months ago
we already have this stuff on our ciggies in england and i have to say it makes absolutly no difference when i buy ciggies.
i just turn the packet over, yes it freaks me out a bit, but i don't care.
Frog869 6 months ago
I agree with Cenk 100%, I mean, we talk about "the slippery slope" and this is definitely it. I don't smoke and I think the tobacco companies do a lot of damage to people but ultimately it comes down to personal responsibility. Inform the public about the unhealthy affects of smoking, anti-smoking marketing like the 'Truth' campaign and just let people do what they want and if they get cancer from smoking, that said person SHOULD NOT be able to sue the cigarette company.
ERAUPRCWA 6 months ago
SMOKER SMOKE NO MATTER WHAT EVEN HE HAVE CANCER SO NO POINT FOR UR SILLY PICS
AbDiNhO70 6 months ago 2
@AbDiNhO70 here here, we already have those pictures in england and it makes no difference
Frog869 6 months ago
@AbDiNhO70
If that's the case, why are cigarette companies suing? Believe, they have done their marketing due diligence before they spend millions of dollars fighting against this. The reason why they would spend that kind of money is a result of their research showing that these ads are indeed effective.
umbdude 6 months ago
@umbdude they r suing because of the new customers of smoking cz if they put the pictures the people who r not familiar with smoking or try it before they will be horrified by the images so they may not use the product. But the smokers which r addicted to smoking they wont stop buying no matter what
AbDiNhO70 6 months ago
nicotine is as addictive or more so than cocaine. not in the least because it is legal. the male news presenter on here is wrong. tobacco companies know that their products kill. If they want to really help, they will make nicotine free cigarettes.
blackinkonpaper 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Financial Enemy of Greece, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, & America - Jew
1. Goldman Sachs CEO, Lyold Blankfein is Jew
2. IMF Deputy CEO, John Lisky is Jew
3. Ex IMF CEO, Dominic Strauss is Jew
4. World Bank CEO, Robert Zoellick is Jew
5. Ex World Bank CEO, James Woolfesen is Jew
6. Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke is Jew
7. Ex Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan is Jew
8. Obama Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner is Jew
9. George Bush Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson is Jew
Stevie68000 6 months ago
I don't know why these idiots don't just move to electronic cigarettes.
xyzoneon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
2:54 she looks so pissed at you, cenk.... lol
pharaoh9000 6 months ago
Comment removed
pharaoh9000 6 months ago
@Invaishir Yes, you do, especially considering the evidence and science is against you.
MrBored999 6 months ago
@MrBored999 God, you're so stupid.
Invaishir 6 months ago
@Invaishir You can accept whatever you are told like a mindless drone all you want, but I won't accept you, a fvcking idiot, calling me stupid. I'll repeat myself. The cancer society uses the same EPA study, that was declared a violation of law for deviating from the scientific procedure and cherry picking their data, to confirm their unsubstantiated beliefs on second hand smoke. The WHO did a survey and concluded ETS is statistically unlikely to cause lung cancer in either children or adults.
MrBored999 6 months ago