Smoking Bans
The
current generation of smokers is finding life a lot more inconvenient than the generation before. From being able to smoke
in the workplace, restaurants and bars, they now find themselves unable to light up in many of these places. Limited outdoor bans have
even come into effect in some countries.
The wave of smoking bans really started in 2004, with the Irish ban on smoking in the workplace. After that, a succession of European, Asian and North American countries implemented bans. The evidence so far is that this is actually helping people to quit, and that can only be a good thing.
Below we list some of the countries that have smoking bans, plus a few of the arguments for and against regulations to stop smoking.
Countries with Smoking Bans
USA
Smoking bans in the US are decided by individual states, so a nationwide ban will be a long time coming. However, more than 50% of Americans
are now covered by some level of smoking ban. The highest profile is New York City, where almost all indoor areas are now smoke-free (the
only exception being cigar bars).
Australia
Australia
has taken its smoking ban to heart. Not only is smoking in the workplace banned, but many of its most beautiful beaches are now
smoke-free zones too.Its largest sports stadiums have also adopted the ban.
Japan
In
one of the stricter bans around the world, the city of Tokyo has curtailed smoking in certain streets in its city center. Given time, it is to be
expected that other major cities around Japan will follow suit.
UK
The
UK smoking ban became nationwide on July 1st, 2007. Certain outdoor areas, such as hospital car parks, are also included. Sports stadiums,
private members clubs, bus and railways stations have evaded the ban so far.
The other countries with smoking bans are too numerous to list here, but the information can be found on government health websites.
Arguments for a Ban
There is certainly evidence to suggest that a smoking ban can improve general health. When Colorado introduced its ban in 2003, the number of heart attacks quickly dropped by a quarter. Similarly, researchers in Dundee, Scotland found that non-smokers' lung function improved substantially as a result of passively inhaling less tobacco smoke.
This improved health comes from lower levels of tobacco use in the population. A Philip Morris study in 1992 found that smokers were 84% more likely to quit after a ban was implemented.
The benefits do not just accrue to smokers, but also to the victims of passive smoking. Additionally, reduced health care costs can mean tax savings for everyone.
Arguments against a Ban
Counter-intuitively, in some instances the number of smokers has actually risen after a ban. In Scotland and Ireland, the temptations of flirting in the outside smoking area proved too much for some pub-goers, who started smoking to try to kickstart their love life! This is the exception though, as a ban has reduced smoking in the majority of countries.
Often it is the owners of establishments like bars and restaurants who are the most resistant to smoking bans. Although anecdotally this might seem to be justified, in reality studies have shown that the bans have little effect on business. The loss of smokers' business is usually offset by non-smokers happy to stay longer in a smoke-free environment.
Another argument of the pro-smoking lobby is that a simple ban just pushes the smoking elsewhere. What this fails to acknowledge is that moving smoking outdoors still has benefits for passive smokers. An outdoor environment will never suffer from the same air pollution as a crowded, smoky bar might.