Smoking is bad for health! This message has been publicized and circulated for years, yet how many smokers have accepted the advice and kicked the habit.
Being a risk factor for heart disease, lung cancer, and many other ailments, smoking can not only harmful to the smokers themselves, but also to the people around them through second-hand smoke. According to World Health Organization (WHO), smoking kills about 4 million people each year, causing a quarter of deaths related to heart disease.
In recent years, many Western nations have begun varying types of smoking bans in public places like restaurants, pubs, cafes, etc to protect people from second-hand smoke. On June 30, 2008, WHO has also published a report indicated that “smoking bans are an effective way of preventing heart disease, getting cigarette users to quit, and protecting children from second-hand smoke.”
These policies have undoubtedly achieved their aim of protecting the health of non-smokers by decreasing exposure to second-hand smoke. In addition, they have many effects on the smoking behavior that compound the health benefits.
The scientists at the WHO's International Agency for Cancer Research, who are responsible for the report, reviewed more than 900 studies and government reports looking at the impact of smoking bans across the world. They also cited studies that suggest smoke-free workplaces have lead to a 10 to 20 percent decrease in hospital admissions for heart disease a year, after a smoking ban.
They believe that implementation of such policies can have a broader population effect of increasing smoke-free environments.
As indicated in a separate report released by Cancer Research UK on June 30, 2008, England's ban adopted a year ago has spurred more smokers to kick the habit, and it was predicted the restrictions would prevent 40,000 deaths over the next 10 years.
Being a risk factor for heart disease, lung cancer, and many other ailments, smoking can not only harmful to the smokers themselves, but also to the people around them through second-hand smoke. According to World Health Organization (WHO), smoking kills about 4 million people each year, causing a quarter of deaths related to heart disease.
In recent years, many Western nations have begun varying types of smoking bans in public places like restaurants, pubs, cafes, etc to protect people from second-hand smoke. On June 30, 2008, WHO has also published a report indicated that “smoking bans are an effective way of preventing heart disease, getting cigarette users to quit, and protecting children from second-hand smoke.”
These policies have undoubtedly achieved their aim of protecting the health of non-smokers by decreasing exposure to second-hand smoke. In addition, they have many effects on the smoking behavior that compound the health benefits.
The scientists at the WHO's International Agency for Cancer Research, who are responsible for the report, reviewed more than 900 studies and government reports looking at the impact of smoking bans across the world. They also cited studies that suggest smoke-free workplaces have lead to a 10 to 20 percent decrease in hospital admissions for heart disease a year, after a smoking ban.
They believe that implementation of such policies can have a broader population effect of increasing smoke-free environments.
As indicated in a separate report released by Cancer Research UK on June 30, 2008, England's ban adopted a year ago has spurred more smokers to kick the habit, and it was predicted the restrictions would prevent 40,000 deaths over the next 10 years.
An alternative to smoking bans
ReplyDeleteDear Editor, July 13/08
It is clear that separation of smokers from non-smokers combined
with air exchange technology is a complete solution to this largely
artificial problem. All it takes is regulating authorities setting the
standards for indoor air quality on passive smoke, and the technology
does the rest. Such air quality standards are common in industrial
and environmental contexts. But, to date, no country in the world has
set them for smoking areas. It seems clear that the reasons are not
scientific, nor are they economic or technical: they are political.
The anti smoking agencies do not want safe standards that would still allow
people to smoke...they simply want a ban that will push smokers
outdoors like outcasts.
Thomas Laprade
Thunder Bay, Ont.
Ph. 807 3457258