Canada will be the first nation to start printing warnings directly onto individual cigarettes in a bid to deter young people from starting smoking and encourage others to quit.

The warnings, which will be in English and French, will include phrases like “Cigarettes cause cancer” and “Poison in every puff”.

The new regulations go into effect on Tuesday.

Starting next year, Canadians will begin to see the new warning labels.

By July 2024 manufacturers will have to ensure the warnings are on all king-size cigarettes sold, and by April 2025 all regular-size cigarettes and little cigars with tipping paper and tubes must include the warnings.

The phrases will appear by the filter, including warnings about harming children, damaging organs and causing impotence and leukaemia.

In May, Health Canada said the new regulations “will make it virtually impossible to avoid health warnings” on tobacco products.

A second set of six phrases is expected to be printed on cigarettes in 2026.

The move is part of Canada’s effort to reduce tobacco use to less than 5% by 2035 and follows a 75-day public consultation period that was launched last year.

Canada has required the printing of warning labels on cigarette packages since 1989 and in 2000 the country adopted pictorial warning requirements for tobacco product packages.

Health Canada said it plans to expand on warnings by printing additional warning labels inside the packages themselves, and introducing a new external warning messages.

Dr Robert Schwartz, of the University of Toronto, told BBC News it was good news that Canada was “moving forward with this innovation”.

“Health warnings on individual cigarettes will likely push some people who smoke to make a quit attempt and may prevent some young people from starting to smoke,” he said.

He also pointed to New Zealand, which has introduced very low nicotine cigarettes, as a leader in limiting the use of tobacco.

Mr Schwartz added: “These are the kinds of measures needed if we are serious about decreasing tobacco use.”

Tobacco use continues to kill 48,000 Canadians each year.

“Tobacco use continues to be one of Canada’s most significant public health problems, and is the country’s leading preventable cause of disease and premature death in Canada,” Public Services Minister Jean-Yves Duclos has previously said.

The Canadian Cancer Society, Canada’s Heart and Stroke Foundation and the Canadian Lung Association have all praised the warning labels, saying they hope the measures will deter people, especially young people, from taking up smoking in the first place.

Cigarette smoking is widely regarded as a risk factor for lung cancer, heart disease and stroke.

In Canada, the rate of smokers aged 15 years or older is around 10%, according to a national 2021 Tobacco and Nicotine survey but electronic cigarette use has been on the rise.

  • T-rex Teabag@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Could someone smart enlighten me on why cigarettes continue to be allowed to be sold if we know that it causes cancer and costs the healthcare system millions (billions?) each year? I know we can’t suddenly stop production overnight but can’t they gradually putting a stricter ban on it until it’s almost impossible to get? Is it smokers being too addicted? Is it tobacco lobby being too strong?

    • Tunahan Yılmaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      11 months ago

      Because people will still smoke even if you ban cigarettes. Legalizing cigarettes actually provides a way for governments to regulate production and enforce safety standards, while getting a cut of the profits by sales tax.

      • danieljoeblack@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        11 months ago

        Exactly, if you made them illegal you would open up a huge black market while making the products likely more dangerous. This would put further strain on our healthcare system, while decrease funding as the government would no longer be getting taxes on the sale of cigarettes.

    • kostel_thecreed@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      2 things (one of which you mentioned)

      • Lobbying
      • Makes money for the government (taxes)

      Lobbying in the tabacco industry is crazy strong, they have so much money that, much alike to the oil industry, they will keep selling their products no matter the risks.

      There’s also the fact that the government makes money off the sales and imports of tobacco products. The revenue is strong enough to counter the money spent on healthcare, etc.

  • Ertebolle@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    11 months ago

    Is this really necessary? Aren’t most smokers, y’know, aware of the dangers of smoking by now? At some point I wonder if the warnings will get annoying enough that people will start to actively defy them out of spite instead of just passively ignoring them.

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      “Health warnings on individual cigarettes will likely push some people who smoke to make a quit attempt and may prevent some young people from starting to smoke,” he said.

      The constant barrage of negativity and warnings may help keep kids from picking it up.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        11 months ago

        Kids aren’t picking it up though. They’re going to vapes. Which are probably just as bad.

        • Alto@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          As I understand it, vapes are in theory not as bad, however the significant increase nicotine consumption far offsets any of that.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Kind of depends on the vape, the chemicals in the cartridges and how hot they get.

            Generally speaking though, inhaling chemical aerosols into your lungs is bad. Most of the “it’s better” research is brought to you by the vaping industry itself . “No, no, it’s totally harmless. Honest!”

            • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              Exactly. Inhaling anything other than oxygen is bad for your lungs. Vapes are definitely bad. They might not be bad in the same exact way cigarettes are, but that doesn’t make them any better.

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Even pure oxygen is generally not recommended- it’s you know… oxidizing….

                But like yeah. Sorry for being a pedant

                • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  Just don’t. Seriously, what’s the purpose of being like that?

            • can@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              I think a lot of it comes down to the subjective experience of ex smokers. It feels better. Not coughing black, no struggling to breathe jogging, etc.

              Could we find out later that they’re just as likely to cause an early death? Who knows, but it still feels better than the alternative.

          • Belgdore@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            The lack of any real controls on what goes into vape fluid is a concern. Also, breathing glycol into your lungs can’t be great for them. Studies seem to vary on that, but breathing anything but air isn’t good, just like drinking anything but water isn’t great (I’m big hypocrite on that one though) On the whole probably still not as bad as cigarettes.

            • Alto@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Oh I’m a big hypocrite in the smoking regard. I smoke weed fairly regularly, and will occasionally vape for the first bit of a T break.

              It’s all at best not great for you

          • Gigasser@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Nicotine by itself isn’t really that bad, as it isn’t much of a carcinogen. The sharp increase of nicotine in vapes is troubling though, as although it isn’t much of a carcinogen, it does increase risk of heart disease and can lead to hardening of the heart in the long run.

          • Einar@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            Not as bad is still bad.

            Like saying “instead of drinking a glass of poison, I just drink half of a glass. Its better for my health.”

              • Einar@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                You didn’t. I didn’t say you did.

                I just built on your comment.

                I apologise for the misunderstanding.

            • can@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Mixing drinks with half shots is technically better for your health than full shots.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            usually by way of vaping. teens only really start with cigarettes or other tobacco if their parents smoke, these days. And for the record, you can get addicted to nicotine off 2nd hand smoke if your around it enough.

            Vaping is the “cool” thing to do now.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      They have ONE idea to stop people smoking and by god they’re gonna use it

    • aski3252@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s similar to commercials and ads. Everyone thinks they are not affected by such things, but pretty much everyone is affected by them on a subconscious level. Why would companies such as coca cola spend millions of dollars on advertisements? After all, virtually everyone already knows what coca cola is.

  • OminousHum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    11 months ago

    I bet it would be a lot more effective if they just printed a penis down the length of every cigarette.

  • Twisting0347@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    “Poison in every Puff”

    Don’t threaten me with a good time!

    Joking aside, I’m fairly ambivalent about this as a smoker. I hope it helps people avoid smoking but not sure how effective these warnings are.

    • janus2@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      11 months ago

      Former smoker. The specific medical warnings are good imo. “Poison in every puff” is a little too goofy and my inner teenager reaction is just “hell yeah” hahaha. Which is funny, but also counterproductive.

      • Spendrill@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        Long time ago my brand was Death cigarettes. The pack had a skull on it and a portion of the price of packet went to cancer research. I knew that smoking was bad idea but it was an excellent drug delivery system.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Though if it just means it costs the cigarette companies a bit more to produce each cigarette and makes it harder for them to divert inventory for one market to another if their predictions turn out not so good, that’s still a win.

        Though, now I’m suddenly wondering why cigarette company profits aren’t taxed at like 90%.

    • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I quit smoking almost a decade ago. But I feel like if I was still smoking this would only make me want to smoke more. Watching the warnings slowly burn away would be relaxing.

      • doppelgangmember@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        They fked up

        They should’ve printed anatomical lungs on the cigarette that showed them getting darker with soot as the cig burns

        More ominous and a picture is worth a 1000 words. And some ppl dont/cant read tbf

  • solidsnake2085@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    11 months ago

    My friend from Canada comes to visit and is a smoker. She brings packs with her and the entire pack is covered in warnings and pictures. I asked her if it bothers her and and she said, “I don’t even notice them anymore.” I highly doubt putting a warning on each cigarette is going to do anything.

    • Polar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      People who have lung cancer continue to smoke in the hospital. Alcoholics continue to drink, even after massive accidents.

      People addicted to things don’t care.

    • Adeptfuckup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Agreed, it’s a very stupid idea. They should print ‘Known by the state of California to cause cancer’ just to drive home how incredibly stupid this idea is.

    • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Maybe “they” will. Worked on me though. Took sometime but after years of the warnings it finally sunk into me how dumb smoking was and I quit. Some people are not reachable but the anti smoking campaign is working because we’ve seen huge reduction in smokers since its started

      • Melkath@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        At the start of the cigarette propaganda machine, asbestos filters were added to cigarettes to make them safer.

        I want to say that it isn’t being done on purpose, but there is no way I believe that inhaling ink isnt a larger carcinogenic risk than the tobacco alone.

        Creating a red herring problem to baselessly add pathos to your power trip.

      • JenIsBringingTheDrugs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        “The phrases will appear by the filter, including warnings about harming children, damaging […]”

        Looks like it might be on the filter part though the wording is kinda ambiguous

    • strawberrysocial@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      They are actually considering adding warning labels to booze in Canada like they have on cigarette packages. I’m unsure if they’ll go full gory photos of damaged organs and dying people but they are thinking of putting a label of some sort on it.

      • ANGRY_MAPLE@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean, if the concern is public health, I don’t see why not. To be honest, I’m actually kind of suprised that they haven’t yet. Cannabis, too.

        It might be a bit of a pain for companies to re-fit their labelling machines with the new labels, but after the hypothetical switch there would probably be nearly no difference in terms of manufacturing. Waiting for the labels to arrive would probably take the longest.

        Source: I’ve worked in food manufacturing

  • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    Denis Leary: It doesn’t matter how big the warnings on the cigarettes are; you could have a black pack, with a skull and crossbones on the front, called TUMORS, and smokers would be around the block going, “I can’t wait to get my hands on these f***ing things! I bet ya get a tumor as soon as you light up!”

    Funny enough tale is he actually quit a while ago, but there are a handful of folks that legitimatly don’t give a damn how may warnings of what type you put on there. It seems a lot more practical to just continue to raise the tax on them to fund the health system detriments they pose.

  • Grass@geddit.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    When I ran the tobacco lockup in a grocery store old, nearly dead people would specifically request boxes or cartons with the less disturbing images on them.

  • Legendsofanus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    What about e-cigs and vape? They’re the new hip and most young people are catering to that now some even rationalizing that they do it because it doesn’t have nicotine and is therefore not dangerous.

  • khaleesa@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I actually think this could be a good idea as a deterrent. It’s easy enough to ignore the images and words on the box, but to have to see it every time you pull out and puff on a cigarette might be more effective.

    • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      I dunno, lighting the cigarette and watch the words slowly burn away might have the opposite effect on me personally.

      • khaleesa@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yes, I imagine if you’re (not you specifically) edgy or depressed the words wouldn’t much of a deterrent at all. Might even be “cool.” But in that case I figure you’d likely be smoking already and not making the best life decisions in general.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        They are on the filter.

        Younger me wouldn’t have even thought of this and maybe would have just assumed it was fine if I did, but I’d also wonder about the safety of inhaling burnt ink fumes. If you smoked the message itself, maybe that would be part of the poison in every puff.

        • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          11 months ago

          Having it on the filter makes a lot more sense. I didn’t realize it from the picture since it was not a brown filter.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            They got rid of those a couple years back. Other than this new messaging, there can’t be anything printed on the smokes other than a serial or batch number.

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Makes perfect sense. The warnings on every pack have stopped being effective so start printing lessor warnings on the part that’s immediately thrown away.

    • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      Honestly why not skip the middle man and pass legislation to get them to stamp the warning directly in my lungs

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      What resources? The cost to print those messages is so small and shouldered by the manufacturer. The government doesn’t care it’s going to cost another half cent per cigarette wrapper and the majority of legally purchased cigarette cost is tax at this point.

      I more curious if they will have to be printed on the big bags of smokes people get from the resi.

      • Grant_M@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Exactly. The cigarette companies are printing on the individual cancer sticks anyway.

    • Mereo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      You need the know context. Canada’s has universal healthcare and it costs taxpayers too much money to treat cigarette related illnesses.

      • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It won’t fix it, so why bother? Lets put labels on heroin and see how that fixes that problem.

          • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Because “knowledge” isn’t the problem. You’re addressing the wrong issue and wasting your resources on the wrong problem.

          • TIEPilot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            And I’ll shovel shit against the tide… I bet we get to the same place. Drunks gonna drunk, druggies are gonna drug, smokers will smoke. YOU CAN’T FIX THESE PEOPLE WITH A LITTLE AD ON A CIGARETTE. Don’t waste your time.