Today's most viewed
Call for tougher smoking warnings
A EURO MP is calling for tougher warnings on cigarette packets in a bid to encourage more people to stub it out.
Radcliffe-based MEP Gary Titley claims the current warnings encouraging people to quit are not being updated fast enough.
He is now calling for the Government and the European Commission to highlight the link between smoking and blindness.
Mr Titley said: "There is evidence that if these warnings are not kept fresh, they lose their effectiveness.
"Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker but, for the first time ever, a link has been found to passive smoking. Passive smokers almost double their risk of sight loss."
The MEP has already written to Health Secretary Alan Johnson about the work of the Eyes and Tobacco Study Group, based at the Royal Bolton Hospital and led by consultant ophthalmic surgeon, Simon Kelly.
1:18pm Thursday 8th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: chas, suffolk on 1:19pm Thu 8 May 08
The EXACT causes of both dry and wet AMD are not completely understood. However, genetics, diet, cigarette smoking, bright sunlight, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension are considered to be POSSIBLE risk factors for AMD.
So where is the PROOF?
The EXACT causes of both dry and wet AMD are not completely understood. However, genetics, diet, cigarette smoking, bright sunlight, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension are considered to be POSSIBLE risk factors for AMD.
So where is the PROOF?
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 1:26pm Thu 8 May 08
Perhaps too may Labour MEPs and MPs are smoking and cannot see what they are doing to this country.
Perhaps too may Labour MEPs and MPs are smoking and cannot see what they are doing to this country.
Posted by: player #1, Half the world away on 2:38pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote]Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker[/quote]
He actually says it is the risk that is greater chas, so what you say is actually backing up their claim. the only difference is that this report gives figures as to how that risk factor rises for smokers.
What might have been a useful comparative tool would have been statistics around the risk factors of other things, like you stated, hypertension, sunlight etc.
Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker
He actually says it is the risk that is greater chas, so what you say is actually backing up their claim. the only difference is that this report gives figures as to how that risk factor rises for smokers.
What might have been a useful comparative tool would have been statistics around the risk factors of other things, like you stated, hypertension, sunlight etc.
Posted by: apple on 4:16pm Thu 8 May 08
Will the mep not realise that the nanny state attitude is one of the reasons the voting public are turning against his party. All this rubbish on passive smoking when there is no conclusive evidence to date. I and anyone could do research and come to thre conclusion however, proof is required and i would ask the MEP to provide it before making statements to put him in the public eye. Easy targets next you can have a go at drinkers and blame the drink and not the individuals who cause problems and they would do so drink or not. Then it will be green issues as if Britain would make a difference to europe let alone the world another way of milking the tax payers. It all boils down to the nanny state gone mad with it MPS and MEPS.
Will the mep not realise that the nanny state attitude is one of the reasons the voting public are turning against his party. All this rubbish on passive smoking when there is no conclusive evidence to date. I and anyone could do research and come to thre conclusion however, proof is required and i would ask the MEP to provide it before making statements to put him in the public eye. Easy targets next you can have a go at drinkers and blame the drink and not the individuals who cause problems and they would do so drink or not. Then it will be green issues as if Britain would make a difference to europe let alone the world another way of milking the tax payers. It all boils down to the nanny state gone mad with it MPS and MEPS.
Posted by: VM User, Bolton on 6:31pm Thu 8 May 08
I wonder how many he'd had to dumb his brains before thinking that one up??
No doubt this idiot will say NOTHING about the problems with alcohol so prices can be put sky high (Which actually needs doing)
I wonder how many he'd had to dumb his brains before thinking that one up??
No doubt this idiot will say NOTHING about the problems with alcohol so prices can be put sky high (Which actually needs doing)
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 6:39pm Thu 8 May 08
VM User
Drinking can affect our eyesight. Too much and we cannot see clearly and hence the saying blind drunk.
VM User
Drinking can affect our eyesight. Too much and we cannot see clearly and hence the saying blind drunk.
Posted by: Le Roi on 7:24pm Thu 8 May 08
Give it up then.
Posted by: RagReader, Horwich on 8:12pm Thu 8 May 08
Good to see Chas has finally joined the anti-smoking lobby.
Good to see Chas has finally joined the anti-smoking lobby.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 8:38pm Thu 8 May 08
Ragreader
I am at present watching Sherlock Holmes and cannot see how you come to that conclusion.
Ragreader
I am at present watching Sherlock Holmes and cannot see how you come to that conclusion.
Posted by: gm, lancs on 11:33pm Thu 8 May 08
most cigarette packets say smoking can kill, how much tougher of a warning does gary titley want.
most cigarette packets say smoking can kill, how much tougher of a warning does gary titley want.
Posted by: RagReader, Horwich on 12:26am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]chas[/bold] wrote:
Ragreader I am at present watching Sherlock Holmes and cannot see how you come to that conclusion.[/quote] Player #1 pointed it out.
Elementary.
chas wrote:
Ragreader I am at present watching Sherlock Holmes and cannot see how you come to that conclusion.
Player #1 pointed it out.
Elementary.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 8:30am Fri 9 May 08
Ragreader
My comment was a quote from a AMD site. Again I say, where is the proof?
Ragreader
My comment was a quote from a AMD site. Again I say, where is the proof?
Posted by: player #1, Half the world away on 10:04am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]chas[/bold] wrote:
Ragreader My comment was a quote from a AMD site. Again I say, where is the proof?[/quote] the quote you used chas, actually backed up the article, in that you both said that smoking is a risk factor to blindness. The difference, as i pointed out earlier, is that the article gives the statistics of the risk factor, while your quote does not give the statistics for the other risk factors.
the proof is not definative, and no one has said it is, but it is the risk factors, the studies that you quote confirm this, that guide the legislation.
[quote]
most cigarette packets say smoking can kill, how much tougher of a warning does gary titley want.[/quote]
i think the idea is to refresh the messages, the design, wording etc, so that the message does not lose its impact upon smokers.
chas wrote:
Ragreader My comment was a quote from a AMD site. Again I say, where is the proof?
the quote you used chas, actually backed up the article, in that you both said that smoking is a risk factor to blindness. The difference, as i pointed out earlier, is that the article gives the statistics of the risk factor, while your quote does not give the statistics for the other risk factors.
the proof is not definative, and no one has said it is, but it is the risk factors, the studies that you quote confirm this, that guide the legislation.
most cigarette packets say smoking can kill, how much tougher of a warning does gary titley want.
i think the idea is to refresh the messages, the design, wording etc, so that the message does not lose its impact upon smokers.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 10:23am Fri 9 May 08
Player
Genes and diet were mentioned first because they are the biggest factors.
Those warnings have failed. The number of smokers had been decreasing for decades, until ASH and the Government got involved.
Player
Genes and diet were mentioned first because they are the biggest factors.
Those warnings have failed. The number of smokers had been decreasing for decades, until ASH and the Government got involved.
Posted by: player #1, Half the world away on 10:44am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]chas[/bold] wrote:
Player Genes and diet were mentioned first because they are the biggest factors. Those warnings have failed. The number of smokers had been decreasing for decades, until ASH and the Government got involved.[/quote] so what are the figures for obesity and genetic theories? is it four times higher, more? the fact that you say it doesn't make it true chas. i don;t doubt that other things have attached risk factors for all sorts of issues, but without researched figures as to what the health risk is then we can't count them credible.
chas wrote:
Player Genes and diet were mentioned first because they are the biggest factors. Those warnings have failed. The number of smokers had been decreasing for decades, until ASH and the Government got involved.
so what are the figures for obesity and genetic theories? is it four times higher, more? the fact that you say it doesn't make it true chas. i don;t doubt that other things have attached risk factors for all sorts of issues, but without researched figures as to what the health risk is then we can't count them credible.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 11:55am Fri 9 May 08
Player
As you say we need PROOF.
Notice the wording in the story
[quote]"Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker[/quote]
'Upto'. This is always used when they have no idea.
Player
As you say we need PROOF.
Notice the wording in the story
"Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker
'Upto'. This is always used when they have no idea.
Posted by: player #1, Half the world away on 2:34pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]chas[/bold] wrote:
Player As you say we need PROOF. Notice the wording in the story [quote]"Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker[/quote] 'Upto'. This is always used when they have no idea.[/quote] actually, no its used when the figure is fluctuating. upto would mean there were instances at the higher rate, and some instances at lower rates too.
As in - "chas has up to 3 brain cells working at any one time." doesn't mean all 3 work in sync, maybe only one or 2 are working. you get me now chas? you still haven't given any risk factor stats for the other factors you mentioned. (I don't mind if you use "up to" when delivering them)
chas wrote:
Player As you say we need PROOF. Notice the wording in the story "Not only is a smoker's risk of developing age-related macular degeneration up to four times as high as a non-smoker
'Upto'. This is always used when they have no idea.
actually, no its used when the figure is fluctuating. upto would mean there were instances at the higher rate, and some instances at lower rates too.
As in - "chas has up to 3 brain cells working at any one time." doesn't mean all 3 work in sync, maybe only one or 2 are working. you get me now chas? you still haven't given any risk factor stats for the other factors you mentioned. (I don't mind if you use "up to" when delivering them)
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 2:56pm Fri 9 May 08
Player
You must learn to read. I said that what I quoted was from a AMD site, so ask them for the the risk factors.
I guess that your marks for reading at school, if you ever went to school, was maybe upto one out of 0ne hundred.
Player
You must learn to read. I said that what I quoted was from a AMD site, so ask them for the the risk factors.
I guess that your marks for reading at school, if you ever went to school, was maybe upto one out of 0ne hundred.
Posted by: player #1, Half the world away on 3:03pm Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]chas[/bold] wrote:
Player You must learn to read. I said that what I quoted was from a AMD site, so ask them for the the risk factors. I guess that your marks for reading at school, if you ever went to school, was maybe upto one out of 0ne hundred.[/quote] but the concept of quoting, chas, is that you are responsible for it, its validity and its appropriateness. i would say that any figures that are with the quote are surely going to be relevant to this article, so i would have thought you would have copied them in.
Ah... but to do that, and take ownership of your own opinions and statements would leave you open to being wrong, and we couldn't have that now could we.
Seriously, i think you are right, there are lots of other risk factors to a lot of the issues that smoking is blamed for. but quoting AMD without the stats is a pretty basic error, even for someone like me who can't read, and it doesn't promote your point of view at all, it just makes you look like a cretin. even the BN offered limited stats in their report, you offered nothing but C&P without stats, without direct source info and with a great amount of bias, generalisation and stereotyping.
please research if you must, but do it properly, don't just click the "i'm Feeling Lucky" button on google!
chas wrote:
Player You must learn to read. I said that what I quoted was from a AMD site, so ask them for the the risk factors. I guess that your marks for reading at school, if you ever went to school, was maybe upto one out of 0ne hundred.
but the concept of quoting, chas, is that you are responsible for it, its validity and its appropriateness. i would say that any figures that are with the quote are surely going to be relevant to this article, so i would have thought you would have copied them in.
Ah... but to do that, and take ownership of your own opinions and statements would leave you open to being wrong, and we couldn't have that now could we.
Seriously, i think you are right, there are lots of other risk factors to a lot of the issues that smoking is blamed for. but quoting AMD without the stats is a pretty basic error, even for someone like me who can't read, and it doesn't promote your point of view at all, it just makes you look like a cretin. even the BN offered limited stats in their report, you offered nothing but C&P without stats, without direct source info and with a great amount of bias, generalisation and stereotyping.
please research if you must, but do it properly, don't just click the "i'm Feeling Lucky" button on google!
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 3:32pm Fri 9 May 08
Player
Try researching the meaning of 'upto'. Upto 100% of posters would agree that you are an idiot.
Player
Try researching the meaning of 'upto'. Upto 100% of posters would agree that you are an idiot.
Posted by: derby0543, bury on 5:07pm Fri 9 May 08
Tut Tut Chas not often anyone gets under your skin now, Lord Andrew has decamped for pastures new.
Tut Tut Chas not often anyone gets under your skin now, Lord Andrew has decamped for pastures new.
Posted by: chas, suffolk on 5:20pm Fri 9 May 08
He couldn't have been put out to stud?
He couldn't have been put out to stud?
Posted by: Phil Button, Basingstoke on 11:01pm Mon 12 May 08
As usual,this is just a load of junk science presented in a hysterical way by biased media. It is no basis for any decision making process other that the anti-smoking lobby stinks. It is dishonest and amoral.
As usual,this is just a load of junk science presented in a hysterical way by biased media. It is no basis for any decision making process other that the anti-smoking lobby stinks. It is dishonest and amoral.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
