to text-only warnings in reducing smoking behaviour. The results
showed that not only did graphic warnings not make daily smokers,
occasional smokers or non-smokers view smoking more negatively,
daily and occasional smokers actually viewed smoking more positively
after seeing the graphic warning.
A 2017 study into the effect of graphic anti-tobacco posters at
point-of-sale on adolescents’ likelihood of future smoking found
similar results, with an increase of susceptibility among teens
already at a high-risk of future smoking.
Experts have theorised that graphic warnings make smokers
feel that their freedoms are under threat, causing them to react
defensively and ignore the harsh truth. Research has also
suggested that repeat exposure to the same graphic message is
far more effective than short-term exposure to individual images.
In 2003, the UK government launched their ground-breaking FRANK
national anti-drug information service. Rather than just attempting
to drive home the ‘drugs are bad’ message, the website and
confidential phone and online chat services provide a platform for
teenagers and young people to ask questions about drugs.
Educating youth about smoking and e-cigarettes is no easy task.
But history has taught us that young people are smarter than
Reefer Madness and DARE gave them credit for. Public health
groups and anti-tobacco NGOs could learn a lot from the factual,
harm-reduction approach of vape advocates.
“Especially with teens, you’ve got to be credible,” Michael Slater, an
anti-drug campaign expert at Ohio State University, told Vox.
“They’ve got great BS thermometers.”
“With teens, you’ve
got to be credible.
They’ve got great BS
thermometers”
VM25 109