Graphic Warning Labels - Are they effective?

By : Chris | Published : Friday November 11, 2011 | Posted in : Stop Smoking | Comments (5)

A few months back the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the United States revealed graphic images intended to be used for cigarette packs, in a bid to decrease the amount of new smokers as well as dissuade current smokers from continuing. The institute, under U.S. Congress’s direction, presented these warnings and placement changes to tobacco companies along with the ultimatum that these should appear in 2012 or else the manufacturers would face disciplinary charges.

As we recently reported, a U.S. judge has since intervened on behalf of the tobacco firms, agreeing with the argument that this was in violation of the First Amendment, and their freedom of speech rights, as they would be “engaging in anti-smoking advocacy”. This potential irony aside, the argument for sterner and more effective warnings is becoming an increasingly discussed subject. Is the use of graphic warnings an effective method of presenting the health dangers of smoking?

In the United Kingdom, cigarette packs already contain several different images depicting such things. Decayed teeth and throat cancer are among the more common ones, but the pack itself has a number of images attempting to convey the potential damage that can be done. Has this had any effect on smoking habits? For potential smokers, maybe. For current smokers, like myself, probably not.

The reason I believe, is because the dangers of smoking have, at least in the last decade, become more documented and more presented than ever. Smokers know, maybe not in as gruesomely as some of the images depict, that smoking causes serious bodily harm. The effect of the images is therefore decreased already.

The other aspect to this knowledge is a fair amount of rebellion towards something being constantly reinforced. Personally I feel a substantial amount of irritation that something which I enjoy, granted something unhealthy (no argument there), has a bitter aftertaste thanks to the images that assault my eyes every time I reach for a cigarette. I don’t, and I’m sure others don’t too, want to see throat cancer right before I do the activity that might give it to me. Following the logic of this, where we should display the worse case scenarios on the products we enjoy in order to avoid them, how come alcohol containers don’t have images of mangled cars or disrupted families? Alcohol has proven to contribute to those situations.

But I digress.

The other side of the coin is in relation to non-smokers who have the potential to start the habit. I agree that the images would present a lot more of a deterrent than a plain text warning. Those images intended for the U.S., if seen by a non-smoker, will probably have an effect – possibly even making the person avoid smoking all together if they have just bought their first pack. The addictive qualities of cigarettes yet to take hold really.

But the effectiveness overall? I honestly believe it will be very difficult to gauge and also think there is a lot more room to deliver educational material about the dangers of smoking. Or rather, a better medium. Current smokers are unlikely to respond given the frustration at finding them on the packs, potential smokers also might not heed them if they have actually already purchased one.

I really think that the dangers of smoking could be presented in different and unique ways; that inform and prevent, as well as assist in cutting the habit without having to shout it as loudly as it is currently being attempted to. Please feel free to give your suggestions and join the debate, my first idea would be having doctors issue more reading material or advising patients more sternly about their smoking.

Add Comment