The Shock and Awe CDC anti smoking campaign is back and it is intended to jolt, frighten and create revulsion against the deadly habit in smokers. CDC has released on Tuesday the latest “Tips from Former Smokers” ads and features the consequences of smoking- a man with a hole in his throat, a women who had a premature baby and persons who lost their teeth.

If people are still not convinced, there is more. A video featuring Terrie Hall, a North Carolina woman who had her larynx removed due to oral and throat cancer caused by excessive smoking. Her videos were watched 2 million times, the highest for any in the campaign, according to Tim McAfee, director of CDC’s office on smoking and health.

Ms Hall had requested that the CDC film her for the ad just before reaching a terminal phase of her life. Ms Hall, 53 did not want anyone to go through what she was going through.

The ads are hard hitting and disturbing but very effective. CDC director Tom Frieden said in a statement said “Smokers have told us these ads help them quit by showing what it’s like to live every day with disability and disfigurement from smoking,”.

Smoking has declined but still 18% of adults smoke and 1% use tobacco in some form or other. CDC reasons that the $50 million a year campaign which was launched in 2012 is still relevant and necessary. Come July 7 and these new ads will start rolling in theaters, magazines, and newspapers. All of the ads and background stories on the participants are at CDC’s website.

3 Responses

  1. Ray P. G.Yeates

    From Wikipedia: Harm reduction (or harm minimization) is a range of public health policies designed to reduce the harmful consequences associated with various, sometimes illegal, human behaviors. Harm reduction policies are used to manage behaviors such as recreational drug use and sexual activity in numerous settings that range from services through to geographical regions.

    Critics of harm reduction typically believe that tolerating risky or illegal behaviour sends a message to the community that such behaviour’s are acceptable and that some of the actions proposed by proponents of harm reduction do not reduce harm over the long term.

    We believe the 6,000,000 projected yearly deaths (approximately 16,000 per day) worldwide directly related to smoking, demand a fair and unbiased opportunity. For those less likely to quit have such an opportunity – as is freely given to other drug addictions or deviations – found within our social structure. A simple and focused upon implementation for harm reduction is well within our charter of rights and freedoms. We can no longer wait on critics and naysayers while individuals are suffering long painful deaths with no hope in sight while family members witness and endure hopelessly.

    Funding is pouring into ways and means to degrade the potential disease and life saving potential these devices offer. (PV’s – personal vaporizers) vs smoking cigarettes. We must, at minimum, perform studied research rather than dismiss such potential. The research performed and paid for thus far (mainly by smokers and vapers) has shown such potential.
    The benefits overwhelmingly demand closer scrutiny. Why anti-smoking/vaping advocates are spearheading the march against such technology is beyond reason. Not one single case of harm nor death from electronic cigarettes is recorded while millions will die from smoking a legal product –—which funds much of this biased and questionable stand against electronic cigarettes. That is no longer acceptable.

    We the people are the primary stakeholders here. We are not the tobacco industry nor do we represent them. We have been trying to break away from them and we have succeeded with innovative technology….that works. There is no smoking involved. It has been proven and declared by leading scientist and doctors and even Tobacco activist to be by multitudes safer than smoking tobacco cigarette. Where’s the problem? It’s seem to be within a stigmatized ideology of ” quit or die ” mentality now adopted by the WHO. This is NOT acceptable any longer.

    We have been unfairly treated by the same anti-smoke advocates who proclaimed to be fighting the tobacco industry while reaping the monetary gain from smokers via increased taxing of the only consumer product taxed at extreme levels beyond any other consumer product. We claim ” Foul Play” and “Unfair” discrimination. Enough is enough “WHO” We are now announcement our own statements regarding the last scandal exposed in which the WHO was involved. SNUS Remember? Remember it well because we do. You cannot expect to disregard the very people who pay you to protect their health to stand still while you now attempt to remove and restrict their own solution to harm reduction.

  2. John

    How did you survice cancer from cigarette smoke if you don’t smoke?

  3. Mark Laursen

    Why do we spend money on stopping smoking and help farmers who grow tobacco? Why don’t we just take the nicotine out of cigarette? Back in the 50’s they did this and people stop smoking in three weeks.

    I don’t smoke, I don’t want to smoke, work in a lab do inhalation studies. I rather sit in the middle of a chemical plant, than in some ones living room that smokes. I have survied cancer from cigarette smoke. I feel like some one is shooting at me every time I smell smoke. I would like to shoot back.

    Remember the Government makes billions of dollars in taxes on the sales of cigarettes. Get them hook, taxes them to death.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.