Wales stubs out smoking in public places

[JPaul]

Again, what of people who must enter these "smokers only" areas. Staff, Tax Inspectors, Police Officers, Delivery Men, Firemen and whatever else you may wish to mention.

I love this utopia you have created where there are hermetically sealed rooms which only smokers need ever inhabit. No smoke will ever leave because the doors are perfect and there is an airlock twixt them and the other areas of the pub. No carcinogens would leave and destroy the lives of others who were simply going about their normal lives

Where we can have a new rule "smokers only need apply for jobs" if you don't smoke fuck off and stay on the dole. Or compromise and die of throat cancer, or emphysema.

Where possible I expose there mendacity ...

Go for it Zorro.

Lots of things are becoming obvious.

[lynx]

The only possible reason you've submitted is that affecting staff.

I've already covered most of the others.

Delivery persons would have to have a separate route and since the smoking area I defined is not allowed to be in an access path that's already covered.

Tax inspectors - that's a good one, what are they going to say, "I want to look at your books and I want to do it in that room so you have to ban smoking"? Get real.
Firemen - "Sorry, we had to let the place burn down, there was smoke in there".
Policemen - "These villains are getting even more devious - last week we even had one escape by dodging into a smokers area".

The emergency services have to deal with all sorts of situations which they may find unpleasant and even life threatening. It is part of life, we have to get on with it. Many of these relate to motor vehicles, I haven't heard you calling for cars to be banned. Next week perhaps.

I'm sure you've heard of smoke extraction systems, or air cleaners as they are more properly known, some of which are so effective that the air that leaves them is cleaner than so called "fresh" air, and in a very short space of time too. With a system of negative pressure the progression of air would be into the smoking affected area, there's no great technological leap required to achieve that. Certainly no need for the hermetically sealed rooms and airlocks you've dreamt up.

So you are left with the question of staff in a smoking area. Remember that all facilities have to be accessible in smoke free areas, which by definition means that all serving must be done in such an area. By and large that leaves such activities as cleaning and glass collection. It is hardly difficult to devise a scheme whereby this can be achieved without staff being exposed to smoke, particularly given the effectiveness of modern air cleaners; I exclude most members of parliament from those capable of formulating such a plan.

Long before the votes, governments were asked by the license trade to indicate how they might react to the introduction of smoke free areas and active air cleaning, and all refused to give any lead. The license trade would have been insane to invest in potentially soon-to-be-redundant equipment. These same governments then cited the lack of such investment as one of the reasons for not going down that route. Talk about two-faced.

Whoopee, you spotted a typo. Is that the line you propose to pursue next?

[lynx]

Where we can have a new rule "smokers only need apply for jobs" if you don't smoke fuck off and stay on the dole. Or compromise and die of throat cancer, or emphysema.

I've just found an article (not online so I can't link to it) that shows the hole in that argument - 34% of respondents to a query by the Scottish Licensed Trade Association reported that they have had to lay off staff, so now the choice is stay on the dole.

That's it, even for those who were willing to put up with the risks. Nice.

[Busyman™]

Well I'm switching my opinion now, somewhat.

I have to agree with lynx to a degree. If there are rooms designated for smoking then there shouldn't be a problem. It's almost an extension of what I was saying with the private club. However......

A smoking area would be a matter of logistics since clearly a room right next a non-smoking area is not good enough or even worse, I've seen smoking areas that were wide open right next to non-smoking areas.

That ain't good enough.

If the rooms were totally separate then it would be totally fucked up that some non-smoker demanded access knowing it's a smoking area.

Either way, as it stands now where I live, the restaurants with "bar" areas fail and so do pure bars. On principle, it could work but no one imo meets the requirement since a non-smoker would have legitimate gripe about smoke simply going out the so-called smoking area into their non-smoking area.

[JPaul]

As always the point is being missed. Smoking isn't a right, so why should any compromise be needed.

We don't want hundreds of poisons in enclosed public places. So ban it, sorted. Nothing complicated there, simple 100% effective solution.

Tax inspectors - that's a good one, what are they going to say, "I want to look at your books and I want to do it in that room so you have to ban smoking"? Get real.
Firemen - "Sorry, we had to let the place burn down, there was smoke in there".
Policemen - "These villains are getting even more devious - last week we even had one escape by dodging into a smokers area".

A VAT inspector is entitled to inspect all of a set of premises at any reasonable time. "People smoke there" is not an aceeptable reason to prevent that.

Why should firemen have to inhale other people's poisons. Yes if there's a reason they have to go into dangerous areas they do it, after balancing the risks, that's a given. However why should they have to do it because other people chose to inhale noxious fumes.

Policemen, see above. The fact that people have a dangerous job already does not make them fair game for the self imposed lunacy of others.

The emergency services have to deal with all sorts of situations which they may find unpleasant and even life threatening. It is part of life, we have to get on with it. Many of these relate to motor vehicles, I haven't heard you calling for cars to be banned. Next week perhaps.

As previously discussed cars have a reason. However there are risks so we compromise. Remember, that was the analogy you didn't understand.

Whoopee, you spotted a typo. Is that the line you propose to pursue next?

It wasn't the typo, it was the fact that you posted "Where possible I expose there mendacity ...". Who the fuck do you think you are.

[Night0wl]

Ban it everywhere. Then just maybe I could quit

[JPaul]

That's a bit harsh, people should be able to smoke if they chose to. So long as it's only themselves they are slowly killing.

[bigboab]

Ban it everywhere. Then just maybe I could quit

I agree. There are over THIRTY thousand deaths from tobacco caused lung cancer per year in the UK.

There are TWO deaths from using Marijuana per year in the UK.

It is legal to smoke tobacco in the UK.

It is illegal to smoke Marijuana in the UK.

It all seems logical to me.

[JPaul]

http://www.ash.org.uk/html/factsheets/html/fact02.html

Illness caused by smoking

Smoking harms nearly every organ of the body, causing many diseases, and reduces quality of life and life expectancy. It has been estimated that, in England, 364,000 patients are admitted to NHS hospitals each year due to diseases caused by smoking. This translates into 7,000 hospital admissions per week, or 1,000 day. [1] For every death caused by smoking, approximately 20 smokers are suffering from a smoking related disease. [2] In 1997/98, cigarette smoking caused an estimated 480,000 patients to consult their GP for heart disease, 20,000 for stroke and nearly 600,000 for COPD. 1



Half of all teenagers who are currently smoking will die from diseases caused by tobacco if they continue to smoke. One quarter will die after 70 years of age and one quarter before, with those dying before 70 losing on average 21 years of life. [3] It is estimated that between 1950 and 2000 six million Britons, 60 million people worldwide, died from tobacco-related diseases. [4]



Non-lethal illness

Smokers face a higher risk than non-smokers for a wide variety of illnesses, many of which may be fatal (see “Deaths caused by smoking” below). However, many medical conditions associated with smoking, while they may not be fatal, may cause years of debilitating illness or other problems. These include: [5]



Increased risk for smokers

Acute necrotizing ulcerative gingivitis (gum disease)


Muscle injuries

Angina (20 x risk)


Neck pain

Back pain


Nystagmus (abnormal eye movements)

Buerger’s Disease (severe circulatory disease)


Ocular Histoplasmosis (fungal eye infection)

Duodenal ulcer


Osteoporosis (in both sexes)

Cataract (2 x risk)


Osteoarthritis

Cataract, posterior subcapsular (3 x risk)


Penis (Erectile dysfunction)

Colon Polyps


Peripheral vascular disease

Crohn’s Disease (chronic inflamed bowel)


Pneumonia

Depression


Psoriasis (2 x risk)

Diabetes (Type 2, non-insulin dependent)


Skin wrinkling (2 x risk)

Hearing loss


Stomach ulcer

Influenza


Rheumatoid arthritis (for heavy smokers) [6]

Impotence (2 x risk)


Tendon injuries

Optic Neuropathy (loss of vision, 16 x risk)


Tobacco Amblyopia (loss of vision)

Ligament injuries


Tooth loss

Macular degeneration (eyes, 2 x risk)


Tuberculosis

Function impaired in smokers

Ejaculation (volume reduced)


Sperm count reduced

Fertility (30% lower in women)


Sperm motility impaired

Immune System (impaired)


Sperm less able to penetrate the ovum

Menopause (onset 1.74 years early on average)


Sperm shape abnormalities increased

Symptoms worse in smokers

Asthma


Graves’ disease (over-active thyroid gland)

Chronic rhinitis (chronic inflammation of the nose)


Multiple Sclerosis

Diabetic retinopathy (eyes)


Optic Neuritis (eyes)

Disease more severe or persistent in smokers

Common cold


Pneumonia

Crohn’s Disease (chronic inflamed bowel)


Tuberculosis

Influenza






Deaths caused by smoking

One in two long-term smokers will die prematurely as a result of smoking – half of these in middle age. The most recent estimates show that around 114,000 people in the UK are killed by smoking every year, accounting for one fifth of all UK deaths. [7] Most die from one of the three main diseases associated with cigarette smoking: lung cancer, chronic obstructive lung disease (bronchitis and emphysema) and coronary heart disease. The table below shows the percentage and numbers of deaths attributable to smoking, based on the latest available detailed breakdown (2002 data).



Estimated percentages and numbers of deaths attributable to smoking in the UK by cause

(based on 2002 mortality data) 1, [8]




* Studies have shown that smoking appears to have a protective effect against the onset of some diseases such as endometrial cancer. However, the positive effect is so small in comparison with the overwhelming toll of death and disease caused by smoking that there is no direct public health benefit.



Deaths caused by smoking are five times higher than the 22,833 deaths arising from: traffic accidents (3,439); poisoning and overdose (881); alcoholic liver disease (5,121); other accidental deaths (8,579); murder and manslaughter (513); suicide (4,066); and HIV infection (234) in the UK during 2002. 8 World-wide, almost 5 million die prematurely each year as a result of smoking. Based on current trends, this will rise to 10 million within 20 years. [9] For further information on smoking deaths in the UK and worldwide see: www.deathsfromsmoking.net





References

[1] Nicotine Addiction in Britain. A report of the Tobacco Advisory Group of the Royal College of Physicians. RCP, 2000 (for percentage of smoking-related deaths). Mortality statistics 2002., Office for National Statistics, 2002; General Register Office for Scotland, 2002; Registrar General Northern Ireland, Annual Report, Statistics & Research Agency, 2002.

[2] Cigarette smoking-attributable morbidity – United States, 2000. MMWR Weekly Report, 5 Sep. 2003

[3] Peto R. Mortality in relation to smoking: 40 years’ observations on male British doctors. BMJ 1994; 309: 901-911

[4] Peto R et al. Mortality from smoking in developed countries, 1950-2000. Oxford Medical Publications, 1994.

[5] Cigarettes: what the warning label doesn’t tell you. American Council on Science & Health, 1997.

[6] Hutchinson, D et al. Annals of Rheumatic Diseases, 2001; 60: 223-7

[7] Peto, R. et al Mortality from smoking in developed countries 1950-2000 (2nd edition) Oxford University Press, Oxford. View report

[8] Mortality statistics 2002., Office for National Statistics, 2002; General Register Office for Scotland, 2002; Registrar General Northern Ireland, Annual Report, Statistics & Research Agency, 2002.

[9] The World Health Report 2003. World Health Organization, 2003.

[JPaul]

http://www.ash.org.uk/html/factsheets/html/fact08.html

Introduction

Breathing other people's smoke is called passive, involuntary or secondhand smoking. The non-smoker breathes "sidestream" smoke from the burning tip of the cigarette and "mainstream" smoke that has been inhaled and then exhaled by the smoker. Secondhand smoke (SHS) is a major source of indoor air pollution.



What's in the smoke?

Tobacco smoke contains over 4000 chemicals in the form of particles and gases. [1] Many potentially toxic gases are present in higher concentrations in sidestream smoke than in mainstream smoke and nearly 85% of the smoke in a room results from sidestream smoke. [2] The particulate phase includes tar (itself composed of many chemicals), nicotine, benzene and benzo(a)pyrene. The gas phase includes carbon monoxide, ammonia, dimethylnitrosamine, formaldehyde, hydrogen cyanide and acrolein. Some of these have marked irritant properties and some 60 are known or suspected carcinogens (cancer causing substances). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the USA has classified environmental tobacco smoke as a class A (known human) carcinogen along with asbestos, arsenic, benzene and radon gas. 1



How does this affect the passive smoker?

Some of the immediate effects of passive smoking include eye irritation, headache, cough, sore throat, dizziness and nausea. Adults with asthma can experience a significant decline in lung function when exposed, while new cases of asthma may be induced in children whose parents smoke. Short term exposure to tobacco smoke also has a measurable effect on the heart in non-smokers. Just 30 minutes exposure is enough to reduce coronary blood flow. [3]



In the longer term, passive smokers suffer an increased risk of a range of smoking-related diseases. Non-smokers who are exposed to passive smoking in the home, have a 25 per cent increased risk of heart disease and lung cancer. [4] A major review by the Government-appointed Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCOTH) concluded that passive smoking is a cause of lung cancer and ischaemic heart disease in adult non-smokers, and a cause of respiratory disease, cot death, middle ear disease and asthmatic attacks in children. [5] A more recent review of the evidence by SCOTH found that the conclusions of its initial report still stand i.e. that there is a “causal effect of exposure to secondhand smoke on the risks of lung cancer, ischaemic heart disease and a strong link to adverse effects in children”. [6] A review of the risks of cancer from exposure to secondhand smoke by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) noted that “the evidence is sufficient to conclude that involuntary smoking is a cause of lung cancer in never smokers”. [7] A study published in the British Medical Journal suggests that previous studies of the effects of passive smoking on the risk of heart disease may have been under-estimated. The researchers found that blood cotinine levels among non-smokers were associated with a 50-60% increased risk of heart disease. [8]



Deaths from secondhand smoke

Whilst the relative health risks from passive smoking are small in comparison with those from active smoking, because the diseases are common, the overall health impact is large. Professor Konrad Jamrozik, formerly of Imperial College London, has estimated that domestic exposure to secondhand smoke in the UK causes around 2,700 deaths in people aged 20-64 and a further 8,000 deaths a year among people aged 65 years or older. Exposure to secondhand smoke at work is estimated to cause the death of more than two employed persons per working day across the UK as a whole (617 deaths a year), including 54 deaths a year in the hospitality industry. This equates to about one-fifth of all deaths from secondhand smoke in the general population and up to half of such deaths among employees in the hospitality trades. [9]



Risk to young children

Almost half of all children in the UK are exposed to tobacco smoke at home. [10] Passive smoking increases the risk of lower respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis, pneumonia and bronchiolitis in children. One study found that in households where both parents smoke, young children have a 72 per cent increased risk of respiratory illnesses. [11] Passive smoking causes a reduction in lung function and increased severity in the symptoms of asthma in children, and is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children. [12] [13] Passive smoking is also associated with middle ear infection in children as well as possible cardiovascular impairment and behavioural problems. [14]



Infants of parents who smoke are more likely to be admitted to hospital for bronchitis and pneumonia in the first year of life. More than 17,000 children under the age of five are admitted to hospital every year because of the effects of passive smoking. [15] Passive smoking during childhood predisposes children to developing chronic obstructive airway disease and cancer as adults. 15 Exposure to tobacco smoke may also impair olfactory function in children. A Canadian study found that passive smoking reduced children’s ability to detect a wide variety of odours compared with children raised in non-smoking households. [16] Passive smoking may also affect children’s mental development. A US study found deficits in reading and reasoning skills among children even at low levels of smoke exposure. [17]

For further information regarding the health risks of exposure to secondhand smoke for adults and children see the ‘Going smoke-free’ report by the Royal College of Physicians. [18]



Exposure to passive smoking during pregnancy is an independent risk factor for low birth weight.13 One study has also shown that babies exposed to their mother’s tobacco smoke before they are born grow up with reduced lung function [19] Parental smoking is also a risk factor for sudden infant death syndrome (cot death).





What protection is there for non-smokers?

A bill to ban smoking in public places and workplaces is currently being considered by Parliament. It is expected to come into effect by mid 2007. Scotland is covered by separate legislation which comes into effect from 26 March 2006. For further information see Factsheet no 14 in this series: Smoking in workplaces and public places.





Reports and surveys

Public opinion surveys have shown widespread support for smoking restrictions in public places whilst support for comprehensive legislation has increased dramatically over the past 2 years. A YouGov poll commissioned by ASH and Cancer Research UK in December 2005 found that 71% of respondents across the UK said they would support a law to make all workplaces smoke-free. [20]







References

[1] Respiratory health effects of passive smoking. EPA/600/6-90/006F United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. [View document]

[2] Fielding, JE and Phenow, KJ. New England J. of Medicine 1988; 319: 1452-60.

[3] Otsuka, R. Acute effects of passive smoking on the coronary circulation in healthy young adults. JAMA 2001; 286: 436-441 [View abstract]

[4] Law MR et al. Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and ischaemic heart disease: an evaluation of the evidence. BMJ 1997; 315: 973-80. [View abstract] Hackshaw AK et al. The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke. BMJ 1997; 315: 980-88. [View abstract]

[5] Report of the Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health. Department of Health, 1998. [View document]

[6] Secondhand smoke: Review of evidence since 1998. Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCOTH). Department of Health, 2004. [View document]

[7] Tobacco smoke and involuntary smoking. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol 83. Lyon, France, 2004. View summary

[8] Whincup, P et al. Passive smoking and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: prospective study with cotinine measurement. BMJ Online First June 2004 [View abstract]

[9] Jamrozik,K Estimate of deaths among adults in the United Kingdom attributable to passive smoking. BMJ 2005, published online 1 March 2005 View abstract

[10] Jarvis MJ et al. Children’s exposure to passive smoking in England since the 1980s: cotinine evidence from population surveys. BMJ 2000; 321: 343-345 View abstract

[11] Strachan, DP and Cook, DG. Parental smoking and lower respiratory illness in infancy and early childhood. Thorax 1997; 52: 905-914.

[12] Respiratory health effects of passive smoking. EPA/600/6-90/006F United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1992.

[13] Health effects of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Report of the California EPA. NCI, 1999. [View document]

[14] International Consultation on ETS and Child Health. WHO/NCD/TFI/99.10, World Health Organization, 1999. [View document]

[15] Smoking and the Young. Royal College of Physicians, 1992.

[16] Nageris,B Effects of passive smoking on odour identification in children. J Otolaryngol. 2001; 30 (5): 263-5 [View abstract]

[17] Yolton, K et al. Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and cognitive ability among US children. Abstracts Online. May 2002 View abstract

[18] Going smoke-free. The medical case for clean air in the home, at work and in public places. A report on passive smoking by the Tobacco Advisory Group of the Royal College of Physicians. RCP, London, 2005

[19] Gilliland FD et al. Thorax 2000; 55: 271-276 [View abstract]

[20] YouGov. http://www.ash.org.uk/html/press/051230.html