Plain Packs, Was it Legal?
Its been a couple of years now since the vote to move to plain packs has been adopted, in the UK, Australia, Norway, France, and a few other places. Canada is not planning regulatory action that would require plain or standardised packaging of tobacco products, nor is the US and many other places. But was it legal?
Extent of 'Plain Packs' throughout the world
- First of all, the governments of these countries ordered that the trademarks and registrations, and any IPs, colours and logos, of all the tobacco companies must be removed. This goes against most company trade laws, which state that companies can and should provide proof of authentic ownership of their products.
- Secondly, the legislation said that 'health warnings' will be placed on all packs - not the lies we see actually printed on the packs. A health warning is simply "This product could be damaging to your health" and is the same warning printed on paint pots and solvents. Claims that smoking makes your body disintegrate are simply not based on actual science, and if they were, it should quote the paper in which it is proven that smoking a few cigs will "make all your teeth fall out and you will go blind".
- The legislation said nothing about photos on the packs, and the lengths to which they are shown to the public, either in an informed choice kind of way, or as persecution. Below we can see how this started, in an informed kind of way, with innocent images and "Dont Let Your Kids Smell Your Smoke" slogans.
- The law says "The plain packaging of tobacco means that all tobacco products will be required to look the same." But they are not all the same. Each pack is different, and has different wording, and different images, and no two packs of the same product look the same. Of course brand identification is now a thing of the past, and people dont know if the product is cheaply made or expensively made, and so they dont know if they are buying diet cola or the real deal.
An actual Plain Pack
- Plain packaging could be extended to the food and beverage industry. Imagine if all products on the shelves came in the same green boxes, and were covered in horrible images and lies. Surely people would be concerned that tea and coffee can make your child hyper active and develop ADHD. What about the fact that Coconut can cause some people to get diarrhoea? Im sure the whole industry would love to give up their identities for the will of a few hundred politicians.
- The move to plain packaging was supported in the UK by 60,000 public supporters. So out of a population of several million people, and also several million smokers, 60,000 signatures isnt an overwhelming majority from the people to change national policy. In fact plain packaging is considered by some as a form of social engineering.
- Lastly, as pointed out in the main article on here about 'Plain Packs', there is little proof that this has changed the buying habits of smokers. If anything, it has made smokers less able to afford other things in life, like food, clothing and heating, as people would rather smoke.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer. They are meant to be taken as humerus satire and not to be taken as 'advice'.
Post Guest by on Jul 20, 2018 15:18:45 GMT
I'm a first-time visitor to the site. Very interesting. I know attitudes about smoking vary around the world, and many people find smoking attractive in the opposite sex. That said, to portray the health concerns as invalid or politically motivated is absurd. The author (Dan) apparently simply chooses to believe what he wants, which is that smoking anything less than a huge number of cigarettes per day is essentially harmless. And I guess he things smoking makes him look like Sean Connery.
Post by Dan on Jul 20, 2018 20:05:31 GMT
Hi john, yes Sean Connery lived to a ripe old age and smoked, same with Clint Eastwood. This is my forum and my views on pro-smoking. I think the responsibility of the matter lies with the individual as a pro-choice matter. My views are based on my own views, and no amount of arguing back and fourth would change that. Just as my personal stories and evidence wouldn't change your views on this matter.
Smoking is detrimental to health, but the long term health risks of smoking have long been known about. To say most or all people who smoke will go blind from smoking, or will get any of these conditions, is not proven, and after the many years of pleasure and satisfaction smoking has provided me with, in my case, (and my mum who is 71), I'm happy that I smoke.
I've never seen or known anyone in my whole life who had any of the long list of health ailments on the packs, and I think the way smoking has been demonised is one-sided and unfair, and spoils a smokers enjoyment of the tobacco plant. In response I made this forum, to represent an opposite view usually in a satirical way, and to promote smoking.
Post by Dan on Jul 20, 2018 22:02:35 GMT
Neil Oliver: Was WW1 propaganda the Birth of UK Government Spin? - BBC World War One
In this documentary, Neil Oliver traces the history of UK Government propaganda and spin techniques (seen today with tobacco); which were first used to engineer the British entry into WW1 - which killed 6 Million British soldiers.
Politicians today often try to persuade people to think or act in a certain way. We see the agenda is carried out using a number of techniques:
- Plant news stories
- Use cutting edge technology to convince people
- Intimidate the opposition
- Associate the enemy with evil
- Tap into the group mentality
- Use children to evoke powerful feelings
- Feature famous faces to provide authority