Can we just make this mandatory?

The fact is that even at informing the public of danger we can question the effectiveness. Many do- and studies support the idea. In fact some advocacy groups accuse the purveyors of potentially dangerous products of using these warnings as a tool for sales.

The principal is that of over saturation and hyperbole. With over saturation- you put out a message so much people stop hearing it, stop being shocked. It just becomes part of life. In some places (like California) laws require carcinogen warnings be placed where ANY potential carcinogen is. That means when you park your car in a garage, go to the car dealer, even in the fruit isles at grocery stores- you’ll see warnings that substances in the area are known to cause cancer, birth defects or reproductive harm.

To people who see them every day they blend into the background. They only strike visitors from areas without them as conspicuous.

Likewise- if buying an apple can kill you then many people just say “what the hell. Might as well just live and not worry about it.” Which leads us to hyperbole and inflation.

Everyone knows texting and driving is dangerous- drinking and driving. It’s common sense but it’s also law/public awareness. Most people do or have done one or the other. Why? The commercials say: “just one beer is enough...” well... Jim’s buddy Clark has drank 4 beers and drove fine every weekend since they were 16. Jim does it... no one dies. Suddenly it isn’t a meaningful warning- it’s just people being “overreactive” or law makers/companies “covering their butts.” Despite the data and reasons for personal protective equipment and safety protocol in labor- both paid employees and DIY folks routinely intentionally ignore it. “That’s just for idiots so they don’t get sued...” and so on.

When analyzed- the DARE anti drug campaign in the United States was seen to have 2 primary failings. Firstly- the message that “you don’t have to do drugs to be cool” and the image of “cool kids” using drugs- led many kids to actually believe the opposite- and NOT doing drugs was often seen as “uncool.” Outside perhaps the most conservative high school- saying something like “winners don’t do drugs..” or “drugs aren’t cool..” would generally be met with laughter.

The second huge failure was that the warnings of the dangers were so severe even when possible- that most people couldn’t relate. Yes- you CAN die the first time you huff paint or become a criminal through/in concert to recreational drugs- but that isn’t the norm. When kids look around and see people they know- possibly admire and respect doing these things and NOT dying or becoming criminals- the message becomes lost and it’s “santa syndrome,” they feel lied to and so the institution they see as responsible loses credibility.

It’s like the US government saying “we aren’t sending our troops for any financial or special interest reasons. This is purely for good!” Even if that’s true and they mean it- are most people going to nod and say “ok. That sounds like what I know...” they will likely not.

So the effectiveness of these messages even at spreading awareness to a problem is questionable at best- but even where awareness exists logical fallacy in humans tends to make us think things don’t apply to us. Texting and driving, drunk driving, speeding, people are aware of the dangers but assume they apply to others who aren’t as “capable” as them. Likewise- people play the lottery and engage in all manner of statistical insanity based on the thought that they are somehow immune to the odds and will be the “exception to the rule.” So in the end- even IF it raises awareness which is questionable at best- in terms of effectiveness to combating the problem awareness is a foundation point but alone is meaningless.