When I saw Stan Glantz's recent post in which he argued that graphic warning labels will reduce smoking by 16%, I decided to write a commentary noting that the actual experience with graphic warning labels in other countries has not demonstrated any effect, much less a 16% effect. I just noticed, however, that Christopher Snowdon has written the post for me. His excellent commentary demonstrates that the graphic warning label intervention in the UK has not been associated with any significant decline in smoking prevalence.
I do agree with Stan that workplace smoking policies and anti-smoking media campaigns are effective and much needed interventions. However, I do not agree that the scientific evidence supports the conclusion that graphic warning labels will reduce smoking rates by 16%.