The inclusion of cigarettes in the movie "She's Not That Into You" has the American Medical Society Foundation up in arms. A spokeswoman tells the NY Times: “There is absolutely zero artistic justification for this.” One part of the plot of the movie is a character lying about quitting smoking, but that argument isn't working on the medical group. They point to readily identifiable packs of "American Spirit" in the flick, although that tobacco company itself complains about the images (Oh sure! Free publicity in a hit movie? And they complain?) I'm an ex-smoker, but not a rabid ex-smoker. Trying to scrub a century of cigarette smoking from film is a bit heavy handed to me. Are movie characters supposed to hold prop boxes with the large-font black and white word "Cancer Sticks" on the side? Pipes too? Fat foods? Let movies portray what they will, with yet another disclaimer to give parents another symbol or abbreviation to consider.
Research has recently demonstrated (er, suggested) that smokers actually cost less to insurance and government, when it comes to health care.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
It's rather simple.
Non-smokers live longer and thus have increased health issues.
Smokers die earlier.
Seems to me that the government instead ought to be encouraging smoking!
Tobacco has an illustrious history of spurring private enterprise, farming income, tax revenue, etc.
Oh yes, I'm a non-smoking (save for the rarely occasional cigar) health care professional.
Yet, I'm neither under no misconception of smoking's health care dangers and risks.
On top of that, t hose non-smokers who do live longer create the largest percentage of their health care costs in those final years and months, no? Remember when some Governor suggested doing away with old people to save Medicaid? (-:
ReplyDelete