Those responsible for the work, including 603 adults, asked that the list of banned words of packets of snuff not only include adjectives such as' light ',' soft 'and' low tar. " They suggested that other elements related to design, for example, should be eliminated to prevent consumers mistakenly believe that a brand is less harmful than another.
The research studied the perceptions of 312 smokers and 291 nonsmokers and nine pairs were used replica fake cigarette packs, which were incorporated words and designs commonly used by international labels. Each pair differed only on one aspect of design, or the word 'silver' vs. 'full-flavor' or 'soft' vs. 'regular'. In addition, the color against the dark blue and white against the gray.
Thus, experts asked each participant to tell which of each pair of packets believed it had a milder taste, which had more tar and choose what if they were trying to reduce risks to their health.
80% of the respondents believed that the package with the word 'soft' would be less harmful than the message 'regular', and 73% thought, meanwhile, that the message 'silver' was referring to snuff less harmful than the packages that included 'ful-flavor'. In addition, almost 80% said the light blue had a lower risk to health than the dark.
Professor of Health at the University of Waterloo in Ontario (Canada), David Hammond, said that "an important function of marketing of snuff has been reassuring consumers about product hazards," adding that "a central feature of the strategy has been to promote the perception that some cigarettes are less harmful than others, so instead some smokers to quit switch brands.
"The truth is that all cigarettes are equally harmful, regardless of the type of filter, the color of the package or words that appear on cigarette packets," according to this expert expert
Related:
Popcorn antioxidants
Chitosan lighten diet
Reduce uric acid and cholesterol
Sexual dysfunction in women