Jump to navigation
Is this an ad? I don't understand the concept!
why bother quiting if the ozone is pretty much jacked-up.
hi ivan thank you for your comment i should have put the explantaion below
thank you for smokin movie inspired me for this counter idea of stop smokin it is just a thread of an idea and wanted to see the reaction on this approach
The man who stops advertising to save money is like the man who stops the clock to save time
i must watch that movie. tx
pixelbomb got it ....
isn't it about smog?
yup indeed salamandos :) if i stop smokin would i be doing myself a favor??? what about my environment ???governements, organisation, mediacal center incite people to stop smokin
but every one of em has a car or uses a bus to get to work everyone uses electricity turn on computers have lithium batteries etc ...
environment can still be fixed, but once you get cancer, you might not really get out of it. If the cancer is serious, the death is painful.
And not just that, 80% of the puff goes to the non-smokers....you are giving them cancer too.
Harm done to environment is a long term disaster, smoking is very much a short term disaster.
So I'm not with your idea. It's a really bad argument.
I think you should rethink this idea so it won't seem like a politically motivated thought. Also, I'm not sure as to whether this is a Greenpeace or Global Warming awareness or anti-smoking ad. Anyways, why are we still talking anti-smoking ads? I thought everybody agreed we're all sick n tired of it?
I thought the subject headline was why you should quit advertising as a profession, then I saw the ad and I thought, hmmm, maybe you should quit advertising as a profession.
lolololololololol i am sure DD you can seperate between tests and ads ......but good comment
and Swat are you serious about your comment i mean is it true!!! that environment can be fixed i mean do you really have a proof ??wow and you dont have a proof that cancer can be fixed but still we did not invest on it ...hahahahahahahjah no you cant be serious to tell me that every wealthy son of a gun donate zillions for cancer and appear in shows and newspaper headlines magazine etc appearing as noble people and still no results..........but the ecological disaster can be fixed
if we all tried together, then we can fix the environment....such as plant more trees, shutdown leather factories, treat the wastes, control the population etc etc.
But then cancer still doesn't have 100% cure. While it's entirely one's own choice to smoke or not, but it's the non-smoker who inhale the fumes are at greater risks, coz they take that nicotine oxide 90% of the time, and directly to their lungs.
Smokers take only 10% of it, and that too only upto their throat.
As I said, ecological disaster, is still a distant disaster, but cancer is not...and if the cancer is severe, death can be painful.
And the ill-effects of smoking are known and proven.
after reading the comments, i think this a good thought. just needs more exploring and proper positioning, which i'm sure u'll do it. no wonder i call ourselves 'humans' - a failed species, we've f***ed ourselves from all sides n we're stuck irreversibly.