Australia to become first country to enforce first plain-pack cigarettes

I don't smoke ... but am curious as to how smokers in Australia will know what they are smoking if all smokes will be sold in identical, plain packages. Guess the brand name will appear somewhere, but the article doesn't make this clear.

Leading cause of death around the world. It does not discriminate and makes sick and kills.

Old age is the leading cause of death around the world.

Will be interesting to see if this works.

ashamed to be Australian about this...

As a non-smoker, I hate the smell of cigarette smoke BUT this regulation is extreme overstepping. Ridiculous!

Good on you Australia. Smoking and smokers should be regulated like heroin and its users. This is a solid step to get smoking levels down and decrease healthcare costs in the country. All taxpayers pay for the slow suicide of smokers. Amazing that 25% of them do not think smoking causes cancer, that will change when they get lung cancer. Denial is just amazing in the addiction world. NYC has banned smoking from all public places now. That also is a huge step for public safety. In Japan kids eyes continue to be burned out by smokers walking while holding cigarettes in public. Horrible thing to consider. But of course most smokers do not care about that at all, only getting their fix.

My mother, at the tender age of 54, passed away painfully with much suffering from COPD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_obstructive_pulmonary_disease). RIP mother, you left us far too young. Let this be a warning to you please, you not need to smoke. Save money, save your life.

AKBFan, you have no clue do you? It's heart disease .. D'UH.

Good on you Australia. Smoking and smokers should be regulated like heroin and its users.

Right, because they're even remotely on the same level. That's honestly offensive to both smokers AND people with heroin problems.

The new legislation comes into force as a study conducted for the Cancer Council of Victoria found that one-in-four smokers believe the effects of tobacco on health are exaggerated.

1 in 4 smokers are correct.

YuriOtaniNov. 30, 2012 - 03:59PM JST Leading cause of death around the world. It does not discriminate and makes sick and kills.

10 seconds on google would disprove this. In low-income countries it's lower-respiratory tract infections (can't blame 'flu, bronchitis or pnemonia on cigarettes no matter how hard you try). In middle and high income countries its heart disease (again fast food is more of a factor here than cigarette use). Worldwide it's heart disease.

Thank you for proving 1 in 4 smokers are right.

illsayit, why on earth would you be ashamed to be Australian about cigarette companies being required to package their drugs in plain packaging? surely one could only applaud the Australian government for pursuing this issue. Far too many people are attracted to smoking because of the ‘cool’ factor and the glossy advertising surrounding cigarettes. Time to put it into perspective.

Just make cigs illegal and imprison 15% of the Aussie population. No worries mate!

Illsayit-nothing to be ashamed of. Good on our government for doing this. If it stops people taking up the dirty habit then it will have served its purpose. Don't forget this I'd on addition to the hefty govt taxes on cigarettes.

I wonder if the Japanese govt health ministry will ever do something about the smoking rates here.. Oops JT (tobacco) are making the govt squillions...

Hypocrisy (definition):

A government profiting hugely (via taxes) from a substance they declare a health risk, yet refuse to ban outright because it brings them so much money.

Wow, counterfeiting will become damn easy now.

Good luck Australia: tax loss, massive counter mafia spending and totally uncontrolled cigarettes consumed. Big challenge in front of you.

Expecting that everyone will adhere to the fashioned "healthy life" is a big dream for some people and the worst nightmare for the others.

Let the people make their own lifestyle choice!

I applaud my country for being proactive leaders in the fight against big tobacco. I hope this latest strategy works better than previous efforts though. When they first brought in super high taxes to dissuade starters and encourage quitters it backfired somewhat. Although there's been a drop in smokers in the middle to high income brackets the numbers of lower income smokers haven't altered much. Those that can least afford it have been known to sacrifice family necessities in order to keep their dirty habit. Not only has this had an adverse socioeconomic affect it has also contributed to increases in crime. Businesses have been targeted by burglars for their cigarettes (I know, I've been a victim) which are then sold on the black market. So as much as I support the stance of the Australian government I remain cynical as to whether they'll be truly successful, at least not in the short term.

I like this, and I am a smoker. The product kills, and the tobacco industry used to get its own way in far too many ways.

The bigger issue is the change of the government in Australia. Looks like a lot of Californians showed up and started voting. First, they came for the guns. Now, it's the cigarettes. Sooner or later, it will be YOU. Not a fan of cigarettes: One of my worst air sickness moments happened on a trip from Tachikawa to Itazuke due to an aircraft filled with cigarette smoke.

You know, it does sound kind of harsh when you read about it but when applied it's not. My country has done the same thing and the results are really positive. Cigarete consumption goes down 4.3% per year (since 2005), and between kids (13 to 17 y/o) it goes down 8% every year.

And the best part is, while it looked kind of scary at first, it only took like a few months for people to get used to it and even smokers agree with the project. It becomes a part of your daily life and you don't even realise is there.

Another country that feels that it's adult citizens are to stupid to make their own decisions. There's plenty of things I disapprove of but I don't go around making laws about it. Especially something as stupid as plain packaging. Not only will it likely do nothing but it opens up the market to smuggled tobacco. Worst thing that ever happened to me in Korea was buying a cigar I thought was a Davidoff and finding out it was a Chinese knock-off.

If you don't believe the dangers of smoking you're foolish, I understand the risk and elect to smoke anyway.

Frungy

Hypocrisy (definition): - A government profiting hugely (via taxes) from a substance they declare a health risk, yet refuse to ban outright because it brings them so much money.

Then they should ban alcohol, driving, travel, sex...

You pays yer money, you takes yer chances. I know what you're saying, though. The whole thing is rather ridiculous.

Frungy posted that a Google search shows that heart disease is the leading killer around the world, not smoking. Perhaps you should search further online. Did you not know that smoking is a leading risk factor for heart disease, as well so many diseases of the lung and bladder cancer? Obviously you are a smoker and take this article personally.

As someone working in the medical field with an MPH, I don't have a problem with governments grabbing money back from the tobacco industry. Especially if that money goes back to cover the growing health insurance costs that many nations now struggle with, thanks in part to so many chronic smokers and those who must live with them receiving costly treatments for the rest of their lives. If smoking is a "choice", it is a miserable one.

ChubakaDec. 01, 2012 - 08:27AM JST Frungy posted that a Google search shows that heart disease is the leading killer around the world, not smoking. Perhaps you should search further online. Did you not know that smoking is a leading risk factor for heart disease, as well so many diseases of the lung and bladder cancer?

Show me the research that proves that smoking is a "leading risk factor" for heart disease, and I'll post back pointing out at least 3 flawed assumptions with the research that invalidate the results. As far back as 2001 there have been court decisions pointing out that the research into smoking is heavily biased, to the point of being unscientific. These aren't lone scientists saying, "There's something fishy here", these are actual court decisions pointing out that the quality of research being done doesn't even meet the looser legal standard of "on balance of probabilities", never mind the higher scientific standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". Despite this these studies are still cited, and ever increasingly inaccurate research is being done.

Obviously you are a smoker and take this article personally.

Wrong again Sherlock. I'm an ex-smoker who now can't stand the smell of smoke. However, I do believe in truth, honesty and logic, and frankly the anti-smoking agenda is an injustice. You may be happy to conduct a witch-hunt, but I'm not going to stand by and watch it happen without at least saying, "Hey, hang on a second...". And in 30 years or so when they finally publish research showing that the risks of smoking were grossly exaggerated... well, it'll be too late for all the people who were persecuted, but at least I'll be able to sleep well.

As someone working in the medical field with an MPH,

You have an MPH and didn't know that cardiovascular disease is only the leading cause of death in medium to high income countries?? Where did you buy your degree? Of course smoking is highest in low-income countries like India... yet heart-disease isn't the leading cause of death. Do I need to draw a picture with regards to your previous comment about smoking being a leading cause of heart disease?

I don't have a problem with governments grabbing money back from the tobacco industry. Especially if that money goes back to cover the growing health insurance costs that many nations now struggle with, thanks in part to so many chronic smokers and those who must live with them receiving costly treatments for the rest of their lives. If smoking is a "choice", it is a miserable one.

Growing health insurance costs have very little to do with smoking. Try the pharmaceutical industry if you want to find the real culprits... you know, the industry that keeps getting tax breaks?

Frankly the fact that you have an MPH is very, very scary.

@ Frungy

A quote from a UK National Health Service website:

Because your veins and arteries become blocked and narrow you are at a greatly increased risk of heart attacks, strokes and aneurysms. Aneurysms are blockages which can burst or completely block up. This can lead to amputation or death. Smokers are more than twice as likely as non-smokers to die from heart disease.

Frankly, I'd trust the NHS over you any day.