More plain pack propaganda

Another study concludes that plain packaging will stop people smoking.

According to 'new' research:

Cigarette branding encourages teenagers to start smoking but non-smokers would be discouraged from even trying them and current smokers would quit if cigarettes came from ‘plain packs’.

But wait, these are not the conclusions of a report based on hard evidence but the subjective opinions of 15-16 year olds who participated in the study.

At the launch of the research, which was jointly commissioned by the Irish Heart Foundation and Irish Cancer Society, attendees were told that the children who took part in the focus groups believed that cigarettes currently on sale in Ireland, communicate ‘fun’, ‘style’ and make the smoker ‘look and feel better’ about themselves. The findings show that although finances and price prevent teenagers from purchasing premium brands of cigarettes, appealing packaging has the power to generate buzz, provide the incentive to purchase and can communicate perceived benefits of smoking one brand over another.

When shown the new standardised packaging proposed by Government, these were rejected by the teenagers who all said they would not smoke when the new packs are introduced because they are at odds with the image they want to portray. Asked who would smoke these cigarettes, one teen said: “I’d say an old person who smokes loads; they are too far gone and wouldn’t care if they are seen with the packs anyway”.

How the cigarettes they smoke are branded, is just as important to teenagers as the branding of other items they purchase, according to the research. Teens reported that branding helps to build identity and status and all of them want to be proud of brands they can show off to their peers. They said that appealing cigarette packaging encourages them to choose one brand over another while branding that they class as ‘unattractive’ is instantly rejected.

Needless to say the Irish press has lapped up the research which was launched by health minister James Reilly yesterday with the words:

"It is not acceptable that a product that kills 5,200 Irish people every year is packaged in a slim, pink container that strongly resembles perfume or lipstick. Given all we know about the dangers of smoking, we cannot allow deceptive marketing gimmicks to be used to lure our children into a deadly addiction that will ultimately kill half of those who become addicted. Standardised packaging is the next logical step in combatting this public health epidemic."

Oddly enough, the only time I've ever seen a "slim, pink container that strongly resembles perfume or lipstick" is when it's been in the hands of a tobacco control campaigner.

I accept they exist but I've never seen one in any normal situation (in a shop, for example).

Anyway, my colleague John Mallon had this to say :

“This research is no basis for legislation. The opinions are subjective and the results are hypothetical because what children say and how they behave in practise are two totally different things.

“Most children start smoking because of peer pressure or the influence of family members. There is no credible evidence that plain packaging will have any long term impact on youth smoking rates.”

To the best of my knowledge only The Journal.ie published his comments. See Tobacco industry ‘needs to recruit 50 new smokers a day’ to replace deceased and quitters.

PS. Here's another reaction – posted in the comments section:

I’m aware that many graduates are given huge salaries to work in the tobacco industry. I would assume that this tempts them into working for the companies. I propose introducing a cap on pay for workers in the tobacco industry so that they will have to put up with poor wages/salaries.

I can't possibly comment because I don't work for the tobacco industry (nor am I on a huge salary) but there may be a few people, including one or two readers of this blog, choking on their cornflakes this morning!

Comments

[stui]

Well 50 new smokers a day to replace quitters and deceased. That kills all arguments about the millions who die every year. My basic math says 50 a day is 18,250 a year!

[Pat Nurse]

I would say it's the other way around. How many parasites work for the Tobacco Control Industry and graduate from their bigoted Universities like Bath or Stirling to then go work a wealthy bullies?

How much is Debs on a year? How much is Linda on? I'll bet they don't work for peanuts. Hypocrites the lot of them. It is tobacco control that needs new smokers to become new quitters and ensure their gravy train keeps on rolling - hence the only time tobacco is mentioned, promoted, talked about, or put into the faces of young people in when Tobacco Control is looking to recruit via the tobacco industry.

[Junican]

Their activities are neither research nor a study. They no more than a cobbled together opinion poll, and a bad one at that. The objective was simply to provide an excuse for a publicity blitz.
I cannot help bit think that, eventually, this reliance upon junk will come back to haunt them.