iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Cigarette Displays To Be Banned In England

RAPHAEL G. SATTER   03/ 9/11 01:34 PM ET   AP

Cigarette Displays Banned

LONDON — The cigarette packs piled into prominent displays behind store counters and supermarket checkouts in England can't be missed. They occupy prime retail real estate, helping to keep addicts hooked and quitters tempted.

But the government announced a ban on them Wednesday, a move that will keep cigarettes hidden away and make it just a tad more difficult for smokers to find their fix.

"We cannot ignore the targeting of young people through these displays," England's chief medical officer Sally Davies said in a statement, adding the can't-miss-it advertising encourages teens "to start smoking at an age when they are less able to make an informed choice."

England is following the lead of countries such as Iceland, Ireland and Canada, all of which have already forced cigarettes under the counter. Finland is also planning to introduce a ban on over-the-counter advertising in 2012, and a similar ban went into force in Norway at the beginning of last year.

That last ban even applies to imitation tobacco products such as chocolate cigarettes and licorice smoking pipes.

Cigarette packs in the U.K. already carry gruesome images of cancer-ridden lungs, corpses and tumors. Authorities are still mulling proposals to impose generic packaging on all tobacco products – a move that would force cigarette makers to use plain, logo-free packs, aside from health warnings. Australia is already working toward a generic packaging system. If it followed suit, England would be the first nation in Europe to do so.

Meanwhile, the English display ban drew predictable responses from both sides of the tobacco wars, with health groups cheering and retailers grumbling.

The Association of Convenience Stores said the new regulations would impose 40 million pounds ($65 million) in costs as owners dismantled displays and refit counters, while the National Federation of Retail Newsagents described it as a "betrayal of our nation of shopkeepers."

Both groups argued that there was no evidence to show such a ban would help improve public health.

Doctors disagreed. The British Medical Association said it was "very pleased" with the announcement, citing research which it said showed that a display ban would play "a key role in discouraging children from smoking and ... also help smokers quit."

The association's only complaint was about the deadline – which forces larger stores to take down their displays by April of 2012 and gives smaller stores an extra three years to comply with the ban.

In north London, most shopkeepers interviewed said they believed the new rules would be counterproductive.

Mohammad Mahmoodi, the Afghan-born manager of Capital Food convenience store in Camden, said that by shutting down displays the government would be "opening a window to a dodgy business."

"There'll be more of a chance for counterfeits" and contraband cigarettes if tobacco is kept under the counter, he warned.

England's ban doesn't apply to other regions in the U.K. such as Scotland, where the implementation of a similar law has been held up by litigation.

___

Louise Nordstrom in Stockholm, Matti Huuhtanen in Helsinki, and Shawn Pogatchnik in Dublin contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTH

LONDON — The cigarette packs piled into prominent displays behind store counters and supermarket checkouts in England can't be missed. They occupy prime retail real estate, helping to keep addic...
LONDON — The cigarette packs piled into prominent displays behind store counters and supermarket checkouts in England can't be missed. They occupy prime retail real estate, helping to keep addic...
Filed by Meghan Neal  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 64
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
11:05 PM on 03/14/2011
This is ridiculous. Whats next-making tobacco illegal altogether?
08:50 AM on 03/15/2011
I wish they would.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
11:25 AM on 03/15/2011
Why-because you believe the government should be making personal decisions for people?
Sandmanj
Tread gently. Mother nature is pregnant.
11:27 PM on 03/15/2011
My 6 year old has more wisdom than you do. Since I went in for surgery last Wednesday to have half of my left lung removed to protect my body from the cancerous lobe that had grown there, my son says that people should not be allowed to sell cigarettes. He doesn't blame me for being a smoker - he's actually forgiving, saying he understands that quitting smoking is one of the hardest things to do in the world.

I hope you and everyone like I was never gets hooked on it. The tobacco companies now add hundreds of carcinogens to their products, with nicotine levels designed to overcome any rational brain activity attempting to kick the habit.

It's not a question of free choice or government interfering with your free choice. It's a question of government doing its job - protecting its citizens from inherently dangerous products and practices by industries whose sole interest is profit and who have never demonstrated any social responsibility whatsoever.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vivian Alicia Evans
12:34 AM on 03/16/2011
exactly. Fanned and faved for pointing out this out. Sometimes common sense is easier for 6 year olds to understand than us adults. Praying you have a speedy recovery.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
02:31 AM on 03/16/2011
Oh whatever. You alone are responsible for your bad decisions. I am sorry that you became ill because of your addiction. And tobacco companies absolutely should not be allowed to add hazardous chemicals to tobacco or anything else they sell. Tobacco alone is hazardous enough.

But you should not go around blaming other people for your bad decisions.

Some people choose to smoke because they enjoy it. Some can manage to smoke just a little. And some dont care about their health. its a free country and everyone should be allowed to lead their lives as they wish, without the government forcing personal decisions on people. The only victim is the smoker. Nobody else is harmed by a smokers habit, so the government has no business banning it.

Besides, a ban would not work, because smokers will simply grow it themselves, or buy on the black market. We have seen the policy disasters resulting from the ridiculous drug war. Do you really want to expand the drug war to include tobacco? Alcohol, too? Logical consistency would urge banning alcohol also. Banning alcohol didnt work too well when it was tried in the 1920s.

I dont consider myself a smoker, but I do vaporize occasionally. I dont want the government to take away my freedom of choice just because some OTHER people are lacked the ability to make reasonable decisions for themselves.
07:27 PM on 03/14/2011
Lol I didn't know about this! Some of my friends are going to be really p*ssed off lol
photo
Iatros78
Science is the consensus of expert opinion
03:44 PM on 03/12/2011
There is currently a petition drive in the US to eliminate the sale of tobacco products from chain pharmacies (http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-pharmacies-to-stop-selling-tobacco-products#?opt_new=t)
01:21 PM on 03/11/2011
I quit smoking a few weeks ago cold turkey, and while I have successfully made exercise my alternate, I still find it difficult to go into my local quickmart what with being faced by a wall of my former addiction...so I've stopped going into that store all together... :/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Julepandme
03:46 PM on 03/14/2011
I completely understand. I just recently quit myself (and then fell off the wagon - back on now). I feel as long as I'm not around cigarettes at all I do ok but I know myself and know that just seeing them is a trigger. (and yes, I'm well aware that I'm an addict and I got myself into this mess in the first place, but some of us turn almost any activity into "addictive" activity and thankfully I can throw myself into something like exercise and become obsessed with that rather than smoking). I don't think any illicit substances should be banned because I don't think banning prevents use, but perhaps cigarettes should only be sold at certain places and out of sight of the general public, from under the counter, say. I'd be all for legalizing marijuana and selling it the same way, through a clinic or something similar.
photo
Iatros78
Science is the consensus of expert opinion
08:59 PM on 03/10/2011
The display of tobacco products should also be eliminated in the United States. Any store containing a pharmacy should not be permitted to sell tobacco products. All tobacco products should come in plain packaging. Big Tobacco relies upon such displays to attract "replacement smokers" (children), get people who have stopped smoking to start again, and to create the perception that the use of tobacco is normal and therefore not dangerous.

"More deaths are caused each year by tobacco use than by all deaths from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, suicides, and murders combined." - US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
11:11 PM on 03/14/2011
This is a free country. Tobacco should remain legal.

Banning marijuana and other drugs hasnt worked, and "just ban it" wont work for tobacco either.

At some point, people must take responsibility for their own health choices. Its not the proper role of government to make these kinds of choices for people.
08:53 AM on 03/15/2011
Sure, and while we're at it let's make meth, crack, rape, and theft legal. After all, people need to take responsibility for their own choices. Its not the proper role of government to make these kinds of choices for people.
06:48 PM on 03/10/2011
The anti-smokers commit flagrant scientific fraud by ignoring more than 50 studies which show that human papillomaviruses cause at least 1/4 of non-small cell lung cancers. Smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus for socioeconomic reasons. And the anti-smokers' studies are all based on lifestyle questionnaires, so they're cynically DESIGNED to blame tobacco for all those extra lung cancers that are really caused by HPV. And they commit the same type of fraud with every disease they blame on tobacco.

http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.htm
http://www.smokershistory.com/SGHDlies.html

And, all their so-called "independent" reports were ring-led by the same guy, Jonathan M. Samet, including the Surgeon General Reports, the EPA report, the IARC report, and the ASHRAE report, and he's now the chairman of the FDA Committee on Tobacco. He and his politically privileged clique exclude all the REAL scientists from their echo chamber. That's how they make their reports "unanimous!"

http://www.smokershistory.com/SGlies.html

For the government to commit fraud to deprive us of our liberties is automatically a violation of our Constitutional rights to the equal protection of the laws, just as much as if it purposely threw innocent people in prison. And for the government to spread lies about phony smoking dangers is terrorism, no different from calling in phony bomb threats.
Sandmanj
Tread gently. Mother nature is pregnant.
11:33 PM on 03/15/2011
Remarkable how hysterical posts are the ones most commonly to rail against something they call "fraud".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
roc-o-rama
Readers are plentiful; thinkers are rare.
03:16 AM on 03/10/2011
They did that here in CA in Super markets, but you still see the clerks running back and forth to the cig case for a pack for the customer. Whom ever thinks these ideas work at persuading those who smoke to quit is beyond comprehension. It's not a matter of out of site out of mind now, it's an addiction.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vivian Alicia Evans
01:29 AM on 03/10/2011
In Canada, these displays have been banned for years now.
12:19 PM on 03/10/2011
I was just going to post the same thing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Vivian Alicia Evans
06:31 PM on 03/10/2011
Great minds think alike. I've fanned you along time ago ontariogirl.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whyus
San Francisco native
11:01 PM on 03/09/2011
That's amazing England used to be a smoker's paradise.
08:01 PM on 03/09/2011
Why dither around? Why not do the right thing and ban cigarettes altogether.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ddanimal
11:07 PM on 03/14/2011
Because this is a FREE COUNTRY, or at least it ought to be.
08:56 AM on 03/15/2011
Ha ha. Poor smokers...
07:44 PM on 03/15/2011
Freedom requires responsibility and accountability. If people are foolish enough to choose to harm themselves (and oftern their families) smoking, fine, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

Problem is that I've yet to go anywhere where cigarette smoking doesn't harm others. My city streets, roads and parks are littered with filthy cigarette butts, I'm constantly breathing in the second-hand smoke of smokers lurking in doorways or shuffling ahead of me on sidewalks, and my outrageously high taxes go towards the care of those who have ruined their health by smoking.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
lisakaz2
Da ministero dell'interno di Snark.
03:58 PM on 03/09/2011
Don't know if it'll help since many smokers are hopelessly addicted. Last time I was there it seemed that the British were huuuuge smokers, which makes any tactic worth trying, I suppose. I doubt this will have a great effect, though.
07:45 PM on 03/15/2011
Never click on links of posters. Never know what harm may come to your computer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Demarcus Jackson
Southern Psychology Professor
03:38 PM on 03/09/2011
Good step, albeit one that arguably does not completely address this complex issue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tulka2
Solidarity. Courage. Humor.
06:15 PM on 03/09/2011
Collin Wilson called nicotine the "white worm".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TWeissMA
http://www.disabilitymessage.com
12:42 PM on 03/09/2011
Removing the displays doesn't get rid of either nicotine or addiction. Until mainstream tobacco products such as cigarettes and cigars are made illegal and removed from everyday markets, nothing will change. Cigarette manufacturers must be put out of business. Let the patches, lozenges, and whatever those quit smoking pills are called prevail.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1kant2
01:06 PM on 03/09/2011
I respectfully disagree, to a point. I think advertising should be curtailed. But US advertising is in part a reflection of the gluttonous overindulgence we approach many things, not just tobacco. It is just a symptom of a bigger problem (food, alcohol, credit cards etc.). We just have no sense of moderation.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Demarcus Jackson
Southern Psychology Professor
03:37 PM on 03/09/2011
I also respectfully somewhat disagree. I think getting rid of this displays is a good step in the right direction, although I admit it is an arguably small step.
06:17 PM on 03/09/2011
I respectfully disagree. I think that people should be free to put cigarettes in their store however they like. If you don't approve of how they organize their products, then you should peacefully boycott their business and tell others to do the same. A LAW on the other hand uses violence as the means to an end. Store owners that do not comply with the law will have men with guns come on their property and force compliance by threatening/using violence or slavery in a prison.

Again, I just don't think that violence is a justifiable means to reach our intended goal of decreasing the use of tobacco. Just my 2 cents.
12:15 PM on 03/09/2011
They estimate it to cost $65 million dollars to move cigarette packets from a shelf to under the counter?

Wow! I have GOT to move to England. They must pay their stockers a fortune! I could work for a few months and retire! I wonder if 7-11 has an online application.....
02:31 PM on 03/09/2011
I think the figure comes from the costs involved in removing the existing fixtures and fittings, many of which are sponsored by tobacco firms, and their subsequent replacements.

I've also heard that dedicated tobacconists will be required to have frosted glass and discrete fascias much like 'adult' retailers are in some places.
02:42 PM on 03/09/2011
I like the idea of the more discrete store fronts. Not to hide the activity, but because most dedicated smoke-shops I have seen are shabby and very run-down looking. They always seem to be put in old abandoned gas stations, and such. They just look horrible.

But, of course, that is just here in New Mexico.

I visited a cigar shop in Florida that was very nice. Very upscale and swanky.

I wonder if it really would have an effect...
I know I tend not to feel hungry/snacky ever sense I stopped watching TV. Those commercials fueled my desire to snack. Since I cut the cable cord, I just dont think about it.