Can the most perfect cigarette packaging label pro

  • Detail

Can improving cigarette packaging labels protect consumers' right to know

it is reported that in order to regulate the production and packaging of Chinese tobacco, the state tobacco monopoly administration has recently issued two documents, the new version of the "national standard" and the "packaging logo". Among them, the carbon monoxide content index must be marked on the cigarette package, and cigarettes without carbon monoxide content index are not allowed to be sold. At the same time, the document also stipulates that the terms "health care", "low hazard", "ultra light taste", "top grade" and other terms cannot be used. In this regard, the tobacco monopoly departments in many provinces have begun to actively plan this work with the speed adjustment range of 0.001mm/min ~ 1000mm/min

considering the interests of consumers, the introduction of this regulation is an embodiment of safeguarding consumers' right to know. No matter whether it can achieve substantive effect in actual operation, no matter how big the effect is, at least in form, it is a progress. The cigarette industry is not only a highly monopolized industry, but also directly related to the health of consumers. Therefore, when consumers buy and smoke cigarettes, it is very important for them to have a comprehensive understanding of the characteristics of goods, especially the harm. Cigarette producers cannot only attract consumers' desire to buy through majestic advertisements and attractive sponsorship activities. They must also fulfill their obligation to inform consumers through various channels, especially through clear and clear labels on product packages - what harm this product will bring to consumers, rather than simply saying "smoking is harmful to health". Can consumers know the harm of cigarettes through this sentence? Can you know what kind of harm there is? In fact, the slogan "smoking is harmful to health" has long lost its warning significance, but only exists as a form, or under the pressure of laws and regulations; Consumers have long turned a blind eye to this, numb

Western developed countries with a relatively high degree of legalization are relatively adequate in protecting consumers' right to know, and consumers have a strong awareness of striving for the right to know. On October 4, 2002, the jury of the Los Angeles High Court, with an absolute majority of 11 votes to 1, asked the famous tobacconist Philip Morris Company (the manufacturer of Marlboro cigarettes) to pay a huge compensation of US $28billion to a woman who suffered from lung cancer due to long-term smoking. This amount has set a record for individual compensation cases in American history. Affected by this incident, Philip's stock fell nearly 8% that day, and the shares of other tobacco companies also fell one after another, causing the Wall Street stock market to fall nearly 200 points. The reason for the lawsuit, which shocked the world, is very simple: because the tobacconist Philip Morris Company did not mark the harm of smoking on the cigarette packaging, it misled consumers, so that long-term smoking cigarettes caused lung cancer. We don't consider whether there is a "no smoking campaign" factor. Just from the perspective of consumers' right to know, we can't help but admire the strong legal awareness of American citizens and the complete protection of consumers by laws and judicial institutions

China's tobacco industry has experienced a long way in protecting consumers' right to know. Of course, I am also a master. Since January 1st, 1987, China National Tobacco Corporation has decided to implement the national standard for cigarette production, and manufacturers must mark the tar content grade on the cigarette label. At the same time, for the first time, the tar content is taken as the assessment index, and it is clear that the products with excessive tar content are formulated as unqualified batches, thus promoting the coke reduction of cigarettes and the protection of consumers' right to know

it has gone a long way from marking "smoking is harmful to health" on cigarette packaging to marking tar content, and then to the current national decision to mark carbon monoxide content on cigarette product packaging. However, even so, we can't help but say that it is a progress - it is a progress in the form of price and within reasonable limits

however, protecting consumers' right to know is definitely not as simple as labeling some hazard warning information on cigarette packaging. For a long time, our society has paid too little attention to the cigarette industry. Consumers seem to know nothing about other brands of cigarettes except for their own tastes. Of course, this is related to the high monopoly and lack of competition of the tobacco industry itself. However, there is a serious lack of research on this by scientists and sociologists. The media lacks the necessary publicity on the characteristics, hazards and the status of the industry of cigarettes. The government lacks the guidance of consumer awareness, and even the provisions of laws and regulations are poor. The attention of legal workers can even be ignored, Isn't all this worth our serious reflection

in addition, if tobacconists mark cigarette packages, will they be able to fully guarantee consumers' right to know? Now it seems that the answer should be No. Some experts believe that tobacconists packaging low tar cigarettes into so-called "low tar" and "light type" are actually gradually changing concepts, making smokers mistakenly believe that low tar cigarettes are low-risk cigarettes, or even safe cigarettes, so as to lose vigilance and smoke more cigarettes. " This can be confirmed in the lawsuit of Philip Morris in 2002. Philip Morris once claimed in the advertisement that his "light" cigarettes with low tar content are harmless to the health of consumers. Many consumers heggs said they believed it. However, in a report submitted to the U.S. Department of justice in 2002, Philip Morris finally admitted that cigarettes marked with "low tar" are actually as harmful to health as other cigarettes. Moreover, people who smoke "low tar" cigarettes will smoke more cigarettes and become addicted more easily because they reduce their psychological burden

although the Framework Convention on tobacco control has begun to take legal effect in various countries, it is difficult to predict the extent to which it can guarantee consumers' right to know. However, one thing is certain that the protection of consumers' right to know requires the efforts of the whole society, and consumers are no exception

source: Tobacco

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI