Smoking Bans

Boston Braces For Anti-Smoking Tooth Fairy Fetish Porn in Convenience Stores

|

Remember those anti-soda ads depicting fat over ice that cropped up in Big Apple subway cars last year? Massachusetts has taken up the baton and is considering gross you out for your own good campaign of their own, but in this case the state is mandating that stores place anti-smoking ads everywhere that cigarettes are sold.

Images of ominously darkened lungs, damaged brains, and diseased teeth could start appearing before the end of the year in more than 9,000 convenience stores, pharmacies, and gas stations, if a proposal by the state Department of Public Health is approved as expected. Other posters would direct smokers to where they can get help to stamp out their habit.

Retailers who refuse to display the signs within 2 feet of tobacco displays and cash registers could face fines of $100 to $300.

tooth fairy porn?

And where'd they get the idea? New York, of course:

The signs are modeled on a nothing-left-to-the-imagination campaign in New York City, where signs showing the health effects of smoking began sprouting in 11,500 shops last December. Massachusetts health authorities provided copies of the New York City posters as an illustration of what their campaign will look like.

Who's paying for the campaign and the printing costs? Everyone!

The campaign is being underwritten by $316,000 in federal stimulus money from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which will allow the state to provide the materials to retailers without charge. Because the posters will be produced by outside vendors, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Public Health said, it conforms to the intent of the stimulus law, providing jobs in a sour economy.

Enjoy a childrens' gallery—one targeted at adults—of blackened lungs, ruined teeth, and brain scans in anti-smoking ads here.

Via Sometimes Right.

Advertisement

NEXT: Britain's Streets Are Crawling with MP-Stabbing Samurais in Track Suits

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Somebody ought to make a similar series of posters and ads portraying the ill effects of too much government and display them anywhere that has anything to do with government.

    1. Brought to you by your local SWAT team…

      1. That is what my followers do to the Infidels.

    2. Shit – warning! The photo linked above will be disturbing to animal lovers.

  2. damaged brains

    That’s a favorite.

    Smoking increases the counts and activity of cells that dispose of already damaged cells. Because some of those cells wouldn’t have been disposed of by a nonsmoker’s lesser amount of disposal cells, they’re “healthy cells.” So if you smoke, you’re brain-damaged. QED.

  3. And where’d they get the idea? New York, of course.

    Or maybe Australia.
    http://www.drmartinrussell.com…..tralia.jpg

  4. Its a good thing the First Amendment says that “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, except for commercial speech” otherwise this would be pretty clearly unconstitutional.

    1. Right, because the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is “clearly” embraced within the term “Congress.”

      1. Right, because government agencies other then Congress can create new laws.

        1. There are 50 state legislatures other than Congress that can, and do, create new laws. And many, many state agencies that create regulations that have the force of law, under authority delegated to them by those state legislatures. The Massachusetts Department of Health is one of them. (Just so I’m clear, the Massachusetts Department of Health does not derive any of its authority from Congress. So if you’re going to talk about what is and is not unconstitutional under the first amendment, this MDOH regulation does not “clearly” fall within the scope of the first amendment. We only apply the first amendment to action by state governments because the 14th amendment’s due process clause has been held to “incorporate” the freedom of speech and press that are protected by the first amendment against congressional infringment. That may be a desirable result, but let’s not kid ourselves into saying that it “clearly” follows from the text of the constitution.)

          1. Greetings friend fellow Saint!

            Seamus,
            I have just been made aware that you are a resident of the state of which I have been appointed the Secretary of Health and Human Services. I would like to inform you that Mormonism has been proven by rigorous scientific means to have a healthy life style benefit ratio of twenty percent more than any other theological or atheological persuasion. Good to know, don’t you agree?

            Not being bound by the US Constitution, our state legislature has allowed me to write up a new set of regulations to promote the health of our residents by the most efficient and maximizing means at our disposal.

            Welcome, New Member to the Later Day Saints of Jesus Christ!*

            I have no doubt you are as thrilled with this decision we have made on your behalf as we are to have so rewarded you with it.

            *Questions concerning acquiring ownership of your own planet should still be referred to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mack.

  5. The campaign is being underwritten by $316,000 in federal stimulus money from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which will allow the state to provide the materials to retailers without charge. Because the posters will be produced by outside vendors, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Public Health said, it conforms to the intent of the stimulus law, providing jobs in a sour economy. [bold added]

    A blast from the past –

    To Jolt Economy, Obama and Congress Eye Billions in Infrastructure Spending

    The president-elect has vowed to create 2.5 million jobs in two years. His pledge has advisers, congressional leaders, and economists armed with sophisticated computer models wrestling with how to make investments with an immediate payoff in terms of new “made in America” jobs.

    The result is shaping up to be a massive infusion for public works projects, reminiscent of efforts following the Great Depression. And it has triggered a lobbying spree as potential recipients extol the advantages of specific projects, whether it be a new Tappan Zee Bridge in New York, a refurbished Interstate 70 to zip motorists across Missouri, or improved port and rail facilities in the San Francisco Bay area.

    Instead we get anti-smoking posters, doubtlessly produced by some politically connected printing firm. Whoop-de-fucking-doo.

  6. Whether somebody smokes is everyone’s business*!

    *Thanks to Obamacare.

  7. Smokers ignore well-documented health risks every time they light up. Their self-created addictions will not be cured or thwarted by horrifying package graphics. They just don’t care, at least not until it’s time to sue Big (“Moneybags”) Tobacco for their own lack of willpower. But we knew that.

    1. I have no intentions of suing Big Tobacco, and I only quit two weeks ago. But you go ahead and fuck off with your hyper-judgmental anti-self, when it comes to legal adults partaking in — whoa, get this — a legal product!

      1. Your angry frustration is misdirected. I don’t care if people smoke and I don’t think it’s any of the government’s business if they do. I’m merely pointing out the futility of this latest scare campaign. Addicted adults and kids aren’t going to let that stop them. But they shouldn’t blame somebody else (and lots of them do) if and when their addiction shortens their lives in some horrible way. Congrats on quitting. Do you want a cookie?

        1. Of course s/he’s angry. S/he JUST FUCKING QUIT SMOKING. I would tread lightly for the next few weeks.

          1. Good point. And if Fluffy is a she, maybe the cookie offer wasn’t such a good idea. Goes right to the thighs.

            1. Or Steff.
              Apologies to Fluffy, who may or may not be somebody’s cat.

              1. Fluffy is a man, unless I’m grossly mistaken. Steff, I believe, mentioned a husband. Combined with that handle, I’d say she’s is probably a female.

                1. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
                  But I did date a psycho girl in college named Steph, so…nah, it couldn’t be her…it’s just that…no. She wasn’t a smoker…

                  I’m locking my door anyway.

  8. Oh, a fetish held by the tooth fairy. You got my hopes up for a second.

  9. The campaign is being underwritten by $316,000 in federal stimulus money from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which will allow the state to provide the materials to retailers without charge.

    SEE?

    Nothing the government does is nonessential.

  10. posters and ads portraying the ill effects of too much government

    A small businessman sitting morosely at a desk buried in government tax and regulatory forms, with the muzzle of a double barreled shotgun in his mouth.

    1. I would consider such posters and ads to be the kind of free speech that needs to be redistributed.

  11. America is so cluttered by media nothing stands out, except for the gross and despicable. The idea of beauty has been lost, so there is no reason to pay attention to any of this, as it is ultimately garbage. Tune it out.

  12. Has smoking or soda consumption actually decreased in NYC since starting these campaigns?I know legislators dont need evidence to back up their reasoning behind huge money-suck programs but I was still wondering if there are any stats out there.

  13. I eagerly await the mandated posters depicting esophageal varices, blood shot eyes, scarred livers and abnormally large and round abdomens next to the beer coolers. And next to the Twinkies they will have pictures of blind people who have undergone diabetes-related leg amputations. Pretty soon you won’t be able to walk around the fucking store because of all the posters in your damn way.

    1. That’s a pretty good idea. And then, in order to make it possible to clear out all those posters, the government will simplify things by just banning those products outright. Works for me.

    2. And a poster of Ray McKigney next to the girlie mags.

      1. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Man, talk about an obscure Seinfeld reference.

    3. My first thought was “pictures of mangled corpses trapped in cars wrapped around telephone poles” taped on every windshield at every car dealership. Same idea, I guess.

    4. Chancres aweigh at the condom rack.

      You can have your diseased lungs and livers, nothing can compare to VD posters.

  14. Reason itself is contributing to this Passive Prohibition campaign by proposing to imprison Reasonoids on Celebrity Cruises, where
    ” smoking will be prohibited in cabins and on balconies. Also, smoking is not permitted in any dining venue, casino, theater, hallway, elevator or corridor..: Cigar and pipe smoking is allowed only in specially designated sections of the open decks.

    1. Russell, have you considered that, perhaps, it’s the Celebrity Cruises policy and not, say, that of Reason?

      1. It’s also a private company. They can make any kind of rules they want.

  15. OK, I understand that smoking is bad for the lungs – but the brain? Where does that come from? What evidence is there of this? I welcome any comments from professionals in the health care field who actually know what they are talking about.

    1. I’m not a health professional, but I’ve read that smoking increases placque build-up or atherosclerosis in all blood vessels including those of the brain. Besides restricting blood and oxygen flow to the brain cells the placque also increases the likelyhood of strokes.

      1. So is this due to the nicotine or some other factor? Just asking. What if I just chew nicotine gum all day for years on end? For the record, I am a non-smoker.

        1. It’s all the chemical shit in the smoke. Nick gum, and similar nicotine products such as e-cigs and snus are said to be much safer. But have no fear, our leaders are working tirelessly to ensure that the only legally available nick fix is the smokey, cancer-causing one.

        2. So is this due to the nicotine or some other factor?

          Nicotine by itself is a vaso-constrictor, but the placque is caused by other stuff in the smoke with the carbon monoxide being a major agravant. Apparently it makes stuff floating around in your blood “sticky” or stickier, so that it coats the walls of the vessels. Of course, there is also the fact that carbon monoxide deprives the body and brain of oxygen – which is not good either.

          1. Tobacco by itself is relatively harmless, with the exception that you are regularly breathing in smoke.

            The stuff that actually hurts you in cigarettes is not the tobacco, its all of the chemicals and preservatives that go into them during the manufacturing process, some of which are quite toxic.

  16. Orwell had it all wrong. The vision of the future isn’t a boot stamping on a human face, forever; it’s Mary Poppins in a surgical mask stomping on a human face, forever.

    1. I would look SOOO cute in a Mary Poppins outfit!

      1. No, Michelle. You couldn’t look cute even if you were Alison Brie. Sorry.

        1. Wow. That girl almost defines “cute”.

    2. But is she wearing boots?

    3. Nicotine keeps me from strangling people who probably deserve it.

  17. But… legalization…

  18. I have a distinct feeling that smoking in a cabin on a cruise might just be a bit of a fire hazard.

  19. I live in NYC and I can attest that these posters have absolutely zero effect on smoking. The diseased gums and blackened lungs don’t stand a chance among the cacophony of that other state-sponsored poster: the lottery crap that plasters most bodegas’ walls.

  20. Oh wow, no way dude that is too cool!

    Lou
    http://www.total-anonymity.se.tc

  21. Whoa, technically nothing in particular ever actually “causes” tooth decay.

    That statement should read “promotes tooth decay” like it always has, so I still get that image of a anthropomorphic tooth stain getting a new stripe on his uniform

    1. Actually the consumption of sucrose causes tooth decay, just as smoking causes lung cancer, and in fact it is the only substance that can initiate the formation of carious lesions. The term “promotes tooth decay” is however the more accurate description when discussing the effects of smoking as there is no evidence demonstrating a causal link between the initiation of the caries process and smoking.

  22. I wrote an op-ed about this:
    http://www.boston.com/bostongl…..paign=8315

  23. I’d love it if a merchant bought one of those digital picture frames, put it right next to the anti-smoking posters and then started streaming photos from FreeSmokingPorn.org NSFW!!!

    Or if he was a pussy I guess he could show pics of cool smokers from Hollywood.

  24. Dear Katherine,

    Shove your indiotic pro-smoking right-wing ideology up your scrawny ass, you stupid cunt.

    Regards,

    Max

    1. Please explain your hostility. Debate is fine, I have no problem with rational debate or mere disagreement. But this hostility you show is absurd. This is not the first time I have seen this hostile nature from you.

      Please explain it.

      1. Pirs,

        Edward (aka Max, Lefiti, Concerned Observer, and other aliases) was a John Edwards supporter who started trolling Hit n’ Run back when Ron Paul was starting to make a splash, just before John Edwards was revealed to be a scumbag to the idiots that hadn’t actually looked at his history as a trial lawyer.

        At first, Edward was drunk with glee; I suspect he thought Edwards was a shoo-in for the presidency, and all the little girls would get unicorns and all the little boys would get puppies and the land would flow with milk & honey.

        As Ron Paul increased in popularity, Edward started panicking. John Edwards then imploded, and with it Edwards dreams for paradise on Earth. I believe those dark days before the newsletter scandal took the wind out of Ron Paul’s sails were too much for poor Edward; he snapped; and what we see now is the deranged shell of a man who was driven beyond endurance by a world that mocked all that was good and right.

        It has been pathetic watching him; his threats to sue Urkobold, his posturing that he was independently wealthy and jetted around the world investing in profitable ventures, his constant name changes etc.

        While others hate him, I can only pity him. I look at poor Edward’s gibberish, and think how hellish it must be to exist with such a broken psyche.

        He had a model for how the world worked and it was wrong; and he can do nothing but howl at the madness of it all.

        1. There is one small problem with your analysis: Ron Paul never “made a splash” anywhere.

        2. Thank you for the background.

        3. Juanita|12.23.08 @ 3:00PM|#
          How dare you say I am a combo of other posters! You libertarian drug fiends are really messed up. I am a real person with real feelings, trying to protect this world from crazies like you!

      2. I can’t imagine why you find my comment absurdly hostile. It’s hostile, yes, but why absurd? I detest your right-wing libertarian cult. Why shouldn’t I be hostile? You losertarian true believers aren’t exactly all sweetness and light, you know.

        1. Max,

          Please, if you have an actual issue you would like to debate on state your position and we can debate it. So far, all I are are ad hominems.

          I welcome debate.

          1. How does the oil spill fit into your market-worshiping worldview, Pirs? A result of too much regulation? Kiss my ass, you fucking moron.

            1. “How does the oil spill fit into your market-worshiping worldview, Pirs?”

              In economics there is something known as the tragedy of the commons. If something is owned “in common” or there is no clear owner there is less of an incentive for any single person to take responsibility for it. This is the case with the oceans, the seas and public beaches. Now, in this particular case British Petroleum will clearly come out the loser ? as they deserve to. I will not defend British Petroleum in this case at all. But I would like to point out that the very fact that it is news is evidence that it is exceedingly rare.

              In a free society harm done to a non-consenting party would require compensation for damages. There would be no “caps” on said damages. Whatever the true damage is the party responsible would be required to pay proper restitution. In this case that would be enormous. They would need to pay not only for cleanup of beaches but also the fisherman for lost potential catches. IN a free society an accident like this one would be even more costly for British Petroleum.

              Does this answer your question?

              1. It tells me you have the catechism down, asshole.

                1. In other words you have no way to dispute my statement?

          2. By engaging the troll, you are no better than he.

            1. If you notice, I am not insulting him. On my end, I am merely engaging in a debate. If he wishes to use insults and ad hominems this reflects upon him, not upon me.

              1. No idiot, it reflects on you. If by now you don’t understand my unwillingness to take your pat answers seriously, you’re even stupider than the pay answers suggest.

                1. If you are unwilling to engage in a serious debate of the issues why do you keep coming here?

    2. Wow, it seems that Max is a complete jackass.

    3. Max|5.15.10 @ 10:47AM|#
      “Dear Katherine,
      Shove your indiotic pro-smoking right-wing ideology up your scrawny ass, you stupid cunt.
      Regards,
      Max”

      Poor Max. Pro-smoking? WIH does that mean? Max doesn’t know; max is a sewer-sucking brain-dead.
      But those who (unlike max) have several brain cells functioning still see smoking as a moral issue. Strangely, none that I’ve seen condemn rock-climbing and it’s pretty certain that statistically, rock-climbers have life expectancies lower than smokers. But when they die, they ‘died doing something they loved’! Well, I guess *that* means something.
      Motorcyclists? Let’s not start. Vegans? Either hypocrites or dead, and *they* don’t get any pleasure, outside of self-righteous preaching to those who’ll outlive them.

  25. Really ? What compelled The Free Minds in question to give their custom Celebrity ‘s ship of fools when more civilized cruise lines and vessels are available for charter?

    1. I challenge you to find one cruise line that allows passengers to smoke in their cabins. As I pointed out in an earlier post, it is probably a violation of various fire codes to smoke in sleeping quarters. Why the fuck are you making a mountain out of a fucking mole hill?

  26. Massachusetts has taken up the baton…

    Relay races are “teh ghey”.

    Also, if i can ignore retarded commercials on TV every 5mins, what effect will those displays actually have on my chain-smoking?

    1. Relay races are “teh ghey”.

      No kidding. All those guys in short shorts grabbing each other’s batons? Totally ghey.

  27. esmoke4you’s electronic cigarettes, e cigarettes , electric cigs or electronic cigarettes is the best alternate than electronic cigarette from the market.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.