Smoking is being given a new look: one that is marked by images of cancer, corpses and diseased internal organs. As part of a new battle strategy in the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) war against tobacco, the plain and simple cigarette packs of the past will soon become more shocking and gruesome.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, passed in June last year, has since given the FDA more regulatory powers over tobacco, including marketing and labeling guidelines. The most visible change, however, is the FDA's new proposed labels. Those currently previewed feature images of cancerous lungs, a body in a coffin and covered corpses with identification tags hanging off a toe, all of which attempt to change the way smoking is looked at in the United States. Whether the images will have an impact on the number of smokers, however, is still up for debate.
"I don't think they're going to make much difference," Edith Balbach, a senior lecturer of community health, said. "I don't think they're going to hurt, but I think most smokers know there's a reasonable chance that smoking can kill you."
Senior Adrian Williamson agreed that more explicit labels aren't likely to make smokers quit. "I was in Edinburgh last semester, and there were very graphic images on cigarette boxes. They don't really bother me, except for the ones that show lung cancer. As a smoker, I would try to buy a different box or cover up the picture with tape," Williamson said.
Sophomore Ben Van Meter stated that the graphic labels on cigarette packs are trying to wage a battle that's already lost.
"It's kind of silly. I feel like it's wasting time to fight over it. … There are more substantive ways to promote non−smoking than putting stickers on cigarette cartons. If a person is buying a cigarette pack, it's already too late," Van Meter said, citing nicotine's extreme addictiveness.
Over the past decade, the number of Americans who smoke has decreased, but 20.6 percent of American adults still say they smoke, in addition to 19.5 percent of high school students, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
Still, Balbach is not certain how much of an effect the graphic warning labels will have on youth.
"Staring at a pack, they might think, ‘I'm so cool, I'm smoking something with lungs on the package,'" she said, adding that countries with lower knowledge of the dangers of smoking and lower literacy rates might be more likely to benefit from graphic warnings.
One such example is Uruguay, where warning labels are required by law to cover 80 percent of each cigarette package and each brand is allowed just one package design.
Williamson believes more graphic labels can spur gradual cultural change. "In general, I don't think smokers would be encouraged to stop smoking from images alone, but culturally, in the long run, I think it makes people more aware of the dangers of smoking," he said.
Balbach suspects that the future of smoking trends will vary depending on country and socioeconomic class.
"I think what's going to be really big is that the tobacco industry is going to be less active in upper−income countries and much more active in lower−income ones," Balbach said. "We're already starting to see aggressive action [by tobacco companies] in Africa. It's going to be a lot less visible to us here and a lot more visible in lower−income countries."
While the tobacco industry is trying to increase the number of smokers in other areas of the world, the percentage of adult smokers in the United States may simply be due to the enjoyment factor, Van Meter said.
"People are not smoking because they're misinformed, stupid or ignorant," Van Meter said. "They're smoking because they want to."
The biggest changes with regard to smoking habits, Balbach said, have come from legislation, not warnings.
"The things that make a real difference are clean indoor air laws," Balbach said. "If you can't smoke at work, that encourages people to quit. Increases in the excise tax, too, and that probably has an effect on youth starting. And the really aggressive media companies, the ones that really get out there and say the tobacco industry is manipulative." Romy Oltuski contributed reporting to this article.
