Standard cigarette packs: one of the greatest gifts we can give the next generation

My mother and my grandmother both died of breast cancer. My maternal aunt and my niece both had it and survived. All non smokers and apart from my niece, non drinkers. Smoking may well be a factor but not the only one. For CRUK to focus so much on smoking as the only issue, comes across as more based on ideology rather than science.

After watching family members who did not smoke, die, from cancer I find it hard to believe in what this objective has in merit to Cancer Research, fundamentaly I subscribe in the belief that some day CR will find many cures for the different types of cancer that affect not only smokers but evryone, I am a smoker and enjoy it, I am in control of what I do and people died to give me that control. Stop trying to control what people do, thats not your remit nor the reason I subscribe to CR. What next? sell alcohol in unlabeled bottles etc??? Alcohol causes cancer along with a host of other products available in the OPEN market!!

Throw the the packets in the nearest skip. They cause heart attacks and cancer.

Throw every packet of cigarettes in the nearest skip and ban them. They cause heart attacks and cancer. People will live longer and save the NHS money.

What is all this garbage about? You either decide to sell people drugs that may kill them or you don`t. I say stop trading lives for profit, stop selling cigarettes in shops and make them available on the national health .

quick question has just come to mind do we have any figures on how many people have given up since you could not smoke in the work place I.E before and after the reason i ask is i haven’t heard of any Tabasco company’s going bust or lots of people losing there jobs because of this or do we not make any in this country there seems to be the same old company’s selling them and a few new ones

this is all smoke and mirrors if it was going to happen it would have happened by now and one thing that always puzzles me as we all know there is no nicotine in tobacco it is put there by cigaret company’s to my then addictive also we no that tobacco is very hard to keep alight and company’s put chemicals into them to make them burn at a set rate so if the government were realy intending to reduce the amount of people that smoke it would be very easy just ban them for adding nicotine and the other chemicals that are not present in tobacco and that would reduce the amount that smoke but you know and i no that this would never happen as there is firstly the tax the government get from the tobacco industry then there is all the jobs involved in that industry then we go on all the staff that are employed to look after them when they get ill then all the charity involved in all the medical problems that are linked to smoking i believe if there was no smoking half the people employed today would be out of a job why the government needs to do is make cigarettes more healthy cut all the chemical put into them that are realy not required but are put there for other reasons and make them as health as possible then you would see a reduction in the amount of people that smoke i remember when is started smoking you would use two or three matches per cigarette as they always whent out and they were not as smooth as they are today so bring them back like that and a lot would quit
1)no nicotine
2)no chemicals to keep them alight
3)no chemicals to make then smoother
4)no chemicals to reduce tar

Hello, I am 62 years old and was a big smoker for many years but I gave up about 32 years ago. About 18 months ago a friend asked if I could do some shifts in her shop and I was happy to do so. As I opened the shutter on the cigarettes I was amazed how I reacted. It took me back 32 years and I felt a tinge of excitement. If I could feel like that at my age I can fully understand how it could affect a child. The colours are enticing, they are not those colours by chance. The warnings on the packets are not noticeable until the cigarettes are purchased. This government is tied into the tobacco giants and can’t be trusted to introduce plain packaging which has been seen to work in Australia

This is very encouraging news and appears to have been well received by the general public. The public have seen the obvious benefit to society of effective progressive tobacco control. They are beginning to see through the myths, denials and scare tactics of the tobacco sponsored propaganda campaigns. As for staying out of politics, I say this. If research provides evidence that suggests removing tobacco marketing will reduce cancer rates for future generations. Campaign campaign and campaign again. And keep campaigning until the decision maker politicians listen and act. You owe it to the thousands of supporters, volunteer and fund raisers like me to act on the research we pay for. To suggest that cancer is not a political issue is bordering on idiotic. Well done Cancer Research UK. Be proud of the fact that you save,prolong and enhance peoples lives with your work. The vast majority of the public are right behind you.

Plain packaging will not make a scrap of difference to the quantity of cigs that are sold full stop ……..GET OUT of the politics CR it’s not your remit ,I have already stopped my standing order which was paid to you every month ….

I can only congratulate Cancer Research UK for their devotion in pursuing the fight against this dreadful disease.

.

Nearly 12 months into the Australian plain packs, guess what? No decrease in smoking and smuggling is up.

It really is a lazy argument “its for the children,” it’s cheap moral blackmail which will not protect them whatsoever, especially as smugglers do not ask for people’s ID before selling.

The smoking rate since the smoking ban, if you include vapers is identical, despite the £300 million a year of MY money being wasted on fake charities and “eye catching” initiatives.

Cigarette packets are for those who have decided to buy a pack and persuade what brand you buy.

I feel Cancer Research is damaging its reputation by being involved in politics and quite frankly junk science.