SecretLeeds - History, culture and architecture in Leeds

sundowner · Post by **sundowner** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:13 pm

I have just bought a small tin of Hamlet miniatures cigars on the front of the tin is a health warning.I know this is the law but on the back of the tin is a photograph of someones mouth with a full set of rotten teeth.What im getting at is why would you do this if the law states you have to put a warning on the tin why would you put this on the back.Put it this way if you were a sports car sales man you would not say this car will do 120 mph but the speed limit is 70 mph then show them a book of photographs of mangled sports cars with bodies all over the road and still expect to sell the cars.So back to the question why?

raveydavey · Post by **raveydavey** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:23 pm

Because that is the law now as well.The nanny state thinks you might not notice, or choose to ignore, the huge warning on the front. So they force the manufacturer to put an unsavoury photo on there as well to really ram the point home that smoking is bad for you*.* - smoking is bad for you, but not bad enough to have it banned completely given the much needed tax revenue it raises.....

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:30 pm

I've stopped smoking for 7 weeks Tomorrow, I know just how dam hard it is.. i would guess they put such shocking images on tobacco products because....They know if they want to stop people smoking, there going to have to frighten them to death (and still it doesn't work)Nicotene is the most highly addictive drug known to man, It puts Heroin and Cocaine in the shade. It delivers a buzz to the brain in seven seconds flat. I've even known people to be hospitalised with smoking illnesses, they've been warned to give up smoking or die within months, believe it or not they can't stop the smoking and choose the coffin to the quit!

Brandy · Post by **Brandy** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:32 pm

I think its a global visual deterrent lol Here phill congrats on Kicking the cancer sticks mate!I stopped on the 2nd of june 2007 and i have saved a small fortune and have never felt better.

Phill_dvsn · Post by **Phill_dvsn** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:36 pm

The top 20 most addictive drugs chart here lol http://www.blurtit.com/q3150977.htmlAmy Whinehouse just has to be pictured here lol

sundowner · Post by **sundowner** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 10:43 pm

raveydavey wrote: Because that is the law now as well.The nanny state thinks you might not notice, or choose to ignore, the huge warning on the front. So they force the manufacturer to put an unsavoury photo on there as well to really ram the point home that smoking is bad for you*.* - smoking is bad for you, but not bad enough to have it banned completely given the much needed tax revenue it raises..... Thanks for that raveydavey i just could not work out why they would do that. When you think of all the exhaust fumes we breath in day by day what does that do to our health. But then look at the revenue made on fuel i know they cant ban cars but they could put money into finding other forms of transport to lessen the pollution.

drapesy · Post by **drapesy** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 11:21 pm

Brandy wrote: I think its a global visual deterrent lol Here phill congrats on Kicking the cancer sticks mate!I stopped on the 2nd of june 2007 and i have saved a small fortune and have never felt better. I stopped 29th Feb 1988 - just take it a day at a time

dogduke · Post by **dogduke** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 11:31 pm

It must be knocking on for 20 years since I stopped.Had a week off work and woke up each morning with something different wrong with me.Had about 2-3 days in bed,no ciggies and decided not to have anymore.Didn't I do well ? - well actually I don't think so.I seriously could not afford to smoke like I used to- about 30 a day yet I am no better off in monetery terms,you just spend it on something else.The real danger is my weight.Giving upsmoking rekindles your taste and sense of smell.From being around 12 stone as a smoker I am know 16 stone as a non smoker,WHICH was at most at risk from ??

Post by **chameleon** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 11:47 pm

[quotenick="Phill_dvsnI've stopped smoking for 7 weeks Tomorrow, I know just how dam hard it is..Well done Phill - don't give in - patches are good anf it's another risk point down the scale for you in terms of my present predicament.keep it up and think of all the dosh you're not giving the Revenue - you'll be amazed at the way your pocket swells

Uno Hoo · Post by **Uno Hoo** » Sat 12 Dec, 2009 11:49 pm

sundowner wrote: Put it this way if you were a sports car sales man you would not say this car will do 120 mph but the speed limit is 70 mph then show them a book of photographs of mangled sports cars with bodies all over the road and still expect to sell the cars.So back to the question why? Why do car manufacturers continue to offer machinery capable of very high speed when the legal limit is 70 mph?BTW, congrats to Phill D & Brandy in their efforts to kick the weed. May the gods smile upon you!