Can you substantiate the claim that it is habit inducing with any significant study?...
Did you actually read that article? Nowhere in it does it discuss the question I raised. It talks about how some people are genetically more prone to smoking and lung cancer than others. Interesting but a totally different point.
Are we seriously questioning whether or not cigarettes are habit inducing/addictive? The fact that it is so hard to quit smoking should be evidence enough.
The question is whether ads on racing cars are just raising brand awareness or are actually habit inducing. I have read several studies about it and it is a question that is very difficult to answer. Because it is a bit of chicken and egg question: If you are consciously aware of the branding, you probably already have an interest/incline in cigarettes.
I really must thank you for enlightening me. I run a multidisciplinary thoracic cancer conference. Every two weeks, we go over the about 15 new patients with lung cancer. In general, one or two will die before we can present them. Usually 3 to 4 have widespread metastatic disease at the time of presentation (not much can be done for them). But there are usually 2 or so with stage 1 disease (potentially curable, five year survival of 60% or so). I now spend as much time as I can going into elementary schools to educated childern on tobacco products, because I know that is where I will do the most good. I have always wondered how it is that the people who work in the tobacco industry are able to live with themselves. Your comments have helped me to understand. I see now that you are not a completely uncaring monster (though the "all these people need to get sick to keep all these other people employed" idea sorta teeters on sociopathic). You are however misguided. There are a lot of health myths. Let me dispell a few: Cell phones do not cause brain tumors. Deodorant does not cause breast cancer. Microwaving plastic containers does not release carcinogens. And you cannot get HIV from a toilet seat. Here is another fact: 40,000 non-smokers die per year in the US from disease related to second hand smoke. You are right that it is you choice to smoke. What you are ignoring is that nicotine is addicting. Most people start smoking before they are 18 years old, and once started it is very difficult to stop. But you go on ignoring all of this, as I wouldn't want you to miss any sleep. Except that some of my pulmonology buddies run a sleep lab, and you know how physician reimbursment has been cut these days...
Notice that they are saying "related to" not "caused by". Second hand smoke is dangerous, but it doesn't kill THAT many people.
+1, It has always been my opinion that it sways people who have already decided to smoke, not to sway people to begin smoking.
Banning advertising of a legal product or service is just more PC hypocrisy. If something is so bad, why not ban the product, not just the advertising? Because governments are addicted to the tax revenue, that's why. After all, the easiest way to generate revenue is to raise the tobacco tax. Who could possibly object to that? The height the silliness is in the UK, where the John Player Special advertising on an historic photo of a Lotus F1 car was airbrushed out on the cover of a recent issue of MotorSport. So much for history...into the memory hole to appease the PC masters. Not to be outdone, the hyper-PC movie industry, in a fit of smug self regulation, decided that any movie with smoking in it would be rated R. Gosh, I thought "filmmakers" were all about creativity, not self repression. I think I'll fire up a nice A. Fuente Don Carlos Doble Robusto. Any objections? Jack
Good post. Just like when they re-mastered the movie ET and replaced all the guns with walkie-talkies.
because it's a bad influence? over here, the main sponsor for most sports was Dunhill, years ago. then the government got tough on them, and there's no more tobacco related sponsors in sports here. personally, i don't care who sponsors the car. not being bias or anything, but like i said, it's just advertising, brand awareness. no where on the Ferrari cars thats stating that smoking is cool or something. i'm not a smoker, because i choose not to. that don't mean that i like it when Marlboro decals won't be appearing on the car.
If we ban everything that is a bad influence, well then motorsports should be banned altogether: As the environmentalists in Europe never tire of stating that motorsports teaches all the wrong values (adoring cars, engines instead of thinking about the environment, pollutants and hugging trees). It is a slippery slope once you get on that path of moral highground. As I said, I'm not a smoker and I couldn't care less about Philip Morris etc, but I really don't like it when the government or some other authority institutes thought control to "protect its citizens for their own benefit".
This image typifies tobacco sponsorship in F1. How much of an impression would an image like this have had on generations of young people before me ( probably alot of the posters here )? Hell i think i would have taken up smoking if i saw a hero sitting on the holy grail of Formula 1 cars. You couldn't pay for advertising like that. Image Unavailable, Please Login
BubblesQuah, you're missing the point.. GrndLkNatv comes from a tobacco family, nothing you say will change his mind. I've given up trying to convince him otherwise. ~shahedc .
In these tobacco-ad-free countries, can smokers where Marlboro T-shirts with the logo on them? ~shahedc .
In this country it was part of a legal settlement... I wore a Full Tobacco jacket into Indy pits to get some autographs and the Ferrari team covered them really quickly!
oh ok.. then Marlboro could be paying their employees to wear Marlboro T-shirts all over the place or Marlboro "fans" can wear them as well as some sort of protest
Actually that wouldn't work as it would be considered advertising. It is difficult to get F1 stuff with Marlboro logos in the US, they try to prevent that. I couldn't care less about Marlboro and Philip Morris, but yes, I do wear my Marlboro logos as some kind of protest. I think this political correctness has gone too far. Particularly as long as e.g. hard liquor is allowed to advertise everywhere. BTW: My avatar shows a pic of my racing helmet.
