Running head: SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 1

Secondhand Smoke Bans

and Their Impact on Public Health

Secondhand Smoke Bans and Their Effect on Public Health

Walk into any hotel or casino and the first thing that hits is the pungent, instantly

recognizable presence of cigarette smoke, using its wispy tentacles to completely encompass its

unassuming victims. The smoke tendrils make their way from around the body of an innocent

casino-goer to inside the nostrils, snaking their way into the lungs, where they fill the cavity,

ready to incite a slew health problems. Many accept this as a way of life in today’s society.

People are too scared to approach the sources of the cigarette smoke with their opinions, for fear

of being socially inept or awkward, and instead resign to inhale the tainted air and keep their

silence. Society should not continue to stay quiet over a commodity that is proven to lead to

serious health problems and even death. This secondhand smoke is harmful to all of the

inhabitants of a public place, and there should be measures put in place to prevent secondhand

smoke from inhabiting those places as well. Smoking bans are a preventative measure that have

begun to be utilized in the modern world that should continue to be implemented as well as

advertised in order to gain public support for their implementation.

Discussion

Smoking bans are restrictions put into place at public facilities, places where many

people pass through and spend time in, that restrict and inhibit smoking within these facilities.

Smoking bans are a way to prevent people who smoke from infecting the public air with their

byproduct, and they are an escape from secondhand smoke for people who do not smoke.

Smoking used to be a commonly accepted practice. It used to be dubbed as the “cool” thing to

do, with many teenagers and young adults hopping in on the trend and beginning to smoke from

a young age. There were little studies done on it and everyone blindly believed in the safety of
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 3

smoking cigarettes. However, eventually studies began to be done on smoking cigarettes, and the

evidence was very much conclusive. Smoking is detrimental to a person’s health and well-being,

and the chemicals within cigarette smoke can cause a number of health complications. The most

well known of these complications is lung cancer. Smoking is the cause of about eighty to ninety

percent of all lung cancer deaths, with around one hundred and fifty thousand Americans being

expected to die from lung cancer each year. Lung cancer is not the only killer that is linked to

smoking. More deadly health complications include heart disease, strokes, aneurysms, and many

other types of cancers, (Azagba, 2012).

How Does Secondhand Smoke Compare? ​Smoking itself has negative consequences,

as can be seen through the health complications that follow a lifetime of smoking. How does

secondhand smoking compare to smoking? Are the negative results similar, or is there a tangible

difference between the effects of smoking and the effects of inhaling secondhand smoke?

Secondhand smoke must have some kind of effect, when exposed in large quantities, because it

is made up of the same chemicals and materials as the smoke smokers are inhaling that causes

them to have complications. Is that effect diluted because the stream of smoke is not fully

directed to the subject?

Wong (2004) states that secondhand smoke does indeed have an adverse effect. She

states secondhand smoke can lead to abnormal tissue repair and remodeling. Her research also

shows that secondhand smoke can delay the healing of wounds and can lead to excessive

scarring. This means that secondhand smoke is impacting people, and if it already has this much

of an effect on the outside of the human body, one can imagine what its effect inside of it is. Her
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 4

results show connections to cancers and fibrosis as well, which are similar results that regular

smoking has.

According to Simons (2012), secondhand smoke has a definite effect on the health of a

human being, as ​“children exposed to home second-hand smoke during pregnancy were more

likely to develop asthma and developed asthma sooner.” Asthma is a serious health condition

that plagues many people, especially children. Public places do not exclude pregnant women.

Many pregnant women spend a lot of their time in places known for the amount of smoke they

hold within them. Pregnant women might work in a casino, where they spend eight or more

hours of day inhaling something that is harmful for their about to be newborn child. Secondhand

smoke is not only putting adults at risk for health complications, but is also impacting beings that

do not even exist yet.

Siegel (2007) argues along a different line of thinking. Siegel says that although

secondhand smoke has been proven to have effects linked to cardiovascular disease and an

increase in heart attack risk, it must be in large quantities. He argues that “transient” smoke

exposure will not have much of an effect on the health of a bypasser in a public space. However,

a person cannot be assumed to be a bypasser. Public spaces, although many times not inhabited

by most people for hours upon hours, are always a home for someone. There are people who

work in the public space and people who do end up staying hours. Those people should not be

subject to the risk of such horrible consequences when they are just trying to enjoy their space.

There should not need to be a majority of people affected for people to consider a smoking ban a

necessity.
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 5

Public Opinion on Secondhand Smoke. ​Secondhand smoke has its detriments, but does

the public have a strong concern about it? Many people complain about inhaling smoke, but is it

just a passing annoyance or do they consider it a serious issue within their lives? Rosen (2013)

found that health policy advisors actually underestimate public desire for smoke free air. This

means that the public wants policies that will ban smoking in public places more than the people

who make the decisions about bans being implemented believe. Connolly (2012) states that this

positive public opinion is a necessity when implementing a ban that impacts the public on such a

wide scale. Connolly states that public smoking bans have the potential to be effective, but there

is one thing that can potentially hold it back from being a successful implementation. This

crucial factor is public opinion. The public must support the ban of public smoking in order for

the ban to be effective. It makes sense; if the public does not support a ban, there is a low

likelihood that it will be followed and a low likelihood that it will be allowed to stay in place

without people making a scene. Connolly says that the organizations that want to implement this

ban need to stay on top of public opinion in order to better approach the public. This will allow

the public to be more receptive to any sort of drastic changes that are being implemented. Burns

(2013) conducted a university study with professors and college students that had to do with a

smoking ban. The results of the study allowed the researchers to make the conclusion that the

public has to be involved in the implementation of the ban. They used and advised using

mediums that spread more knowledge about the topic to the target audience. For example, these

mediums can include posters and presentations about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke

on health. According to Owusu-Dabo (2011), in Ghana, the limited advertising of smoking, and

the prevalent education about the harms of smoking, is part of why Ghana has such a low
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 6

smoking rate. According to a study evaluated by Mourik (2018),​“support among Dutch smokers

for a PoS cigarette display ban increased between 2010 and 2015, and increased faster among

highly educated smokers than among moderately educated smokers”.​ ​ Another study by

Owusu-Dabo (2011) showed that in Ghana, the limited advertising of smoking, and the prevalent

education about the harms of smoking, is part of why Ghana has such a low smoking rate. These

mediums allow the public to be more informed about the situation, and they also increase the

likelihood that the general public will support the movement towards implementing smoking

bans in public spaces. The majority of the public is already sided in favor of smoking bans, but

these mediums can be used to even further solidify public support for a ban that should be put in

place for the good of public health.

Examples of Implementation and Their Results. ​When evaluating whether smoking bans are

effective or not, it is important to evaluate tested and tried scenarios. There have been many

experiments that test out smoking bans or simulate the environment, in order to gain some

insight into whether it is actually a feasible solution in the modern world​.​ ​Naiman (2011) was

able to get conclusive and decisive results. His study concluded that the “implementation of a

full smoking ban was associated with the largest decreases in secondhand smoke exposure while

partial bans and changes in existing bans had inconsistent effects.” Not only does this result

confirm that smoking bans can be extremely effective, it also confirms that it has to be a full

smoking ban. Partial ones do not have as much of an effect on secondhand smoke exposure,

making it not worth the effort of implementation. However, studies have also shown that some

groups of people have particular needs that others may not. For example, older people might

have a dependent need for smoking. Many started smoking in their teenage years and have
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 7

become so dependent on smoking that they might physically have to smoke wherever they are,

whether it is in private or in public. This complicates the smoking ban, they cannot satisfy this

requirement of theirs if it is banned. In their case, not smoking can actually cause complications

because they are so addicted to smoking cigarettes. Another group that might have trouble with

the smoking ban is people in bars that smoke cigarettes. A study done by Hilton (2008) suggests

that people in bars that smoke do not support the smoking ban because they believe it is a breach

on their personal security. They say that in order to smoke while a smoking ban is implemented

in a bar, they have to go outside to smoke where it is allowed. This can cause complications for

the smoker because they ordered drinks in the bar. To smoke outside, they are forced to leave

their drink unattended, out in public for any one passing by to tamper with. Many smokers in

bars are wary of the ban because they fear it might make it easier for someone to slip something

into their drink, and for them to get drugged or harmed in the process. In order to implement a

full time smoking ban, these issues will need to be addressed. Each person has a different need,

but society’s focus should be on promoting healthy behaviors, rather than catering to dependent,

addictive ones. A smoking ban is not as simple as putting up a small sign that says “no

smoking.” There has to be many people involved in making it work. If everyone participates in

making a smoking ban feasible, it can become a reality, and although it is extra work, in the long

run it will save people health complications and lead to an overall happier and cleaner lifestyle.
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 8

Conclusions and Future Study

Smoking bans should be implemented in public facilities in order to prevent public health

problems stemming from secondhand smoke. Smoking bans have been proven effective in

preventing these health effects, smoking bans are supported by the public, and they have worked

in various trials and experiments.

As for cigarette smoke, even further study should be conducted as to whether smoking

bans are effective in different places. A research experiment should be held to show whether the

effectiveness of a smoking ban is dependent on the type of place, the type of people that inhabit a

place, and the region of the United States that the ban is implemented in. There are so many

factors that go into an issue such as smoking bans, and it is important to evaluate as many as

possible to get the most enduring results.

The topic of discussion in society today is mostly regarding cigarette secondhand smoke

and its harmful effects on human health. However, this concept can be extended to other topics

within today’s society. Recently, cigarettes have not been as widely discussed in the news as a

new trend has been: vaping. Vaping is much more contained when it comes to letting off smoke.

Vape users inhale directly into their mouths and slowly let off the smoke. However, just because

the smoke is not as easily visible when someone vapes in comparison to smoking a cigarette, that

does not mean the smoke is not there, still lingering in the air. Are the effects of vaping on health
SECONDHAND SMOKE BANS 9

the same as the effects of smoking cigarettes on health? Will there be a movement to ban vaping

in public places due to the same logic as the implementation of a cigarette smoking ban? These

developments will likely occur as vaping grows even further in popularity, but the issue of

cigarette smoking in public places should be the priority as of now.

References

Azagba, S., Sharaf, M.F. The association between workplace smoking bans and self-perceived,

work-related stress among smoking workers. BMC Public Health 12, 123 (2012).

https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-123

Burns, S., Jancey, J., Bowser, N. et al. “Moving forward: a cross sectional baseline study of staff

and student attitudes towards a totally smoke free university campus”. BMC Public

Health 13, 738 (2013). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-738

Connolly, G.N. How society treats smoking. Isr J Health Policy Res 1, 29 (2012).

https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-4015-1-29

Hilton, S., Cameron, J., MacLean, A. et al. Observations from behind the bar: changing patrons'

behaviours in response to smoke-free legislation in Scotland. BMC Public Health 8, 238

(2008). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-238

Montini, T., Bero, L.A. Implementation of a workplace smoking ban in bars: The limits of local

discretion. BMC Public Health 8, 402 (2008). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-402

Naiman, A.B., Glazier, R.H. & Moineddin, R. Is there an impact of public smoking bans on

self-reported smoking status and exposure to secondhand smoke?. BMC Public Health

11, 146 (2011). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-146

Owusu-Dabo, E., Lewis, S., McNeill, A. et al. Support for smoke-free policy, and awareness of

tobacco health effects and use of smoking cessation therapy in a developing country.

BMC Public Health 11, 572 (2011). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-572

Park, H., Cho, S. & Lee, C. Second hand smoke exposure in workplace by job status and

occupations. Ann of Occup and Environ Med 31, 3 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-019-0282-z

Rajkumar, S., Huynh, C.K., Bauer, G.F. et al. Impact of a smoking ban in hospitality venues on

second hand smoke exposure: a comparison of exposure assessment methods. BMC

Public Health 13, 536 (2013). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-536

Rosen, L.J., Rier, D.A., Connolly, G. et al. Do health policy advisors know what the public

wants? An empirical comparison of how health policy advisors assess public preferences

regarding smoke-free air, and what the public actually prefers. Isr J Health Policy Res 2,

20 (2013). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/2045-4015-2-20

Tadesse, T., Zawdie, B. Non-compliance and associated factors against smoke-free legislation

among health care staffs in governmental hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: an

observational cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 19, 91 (2019).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6407-z

van Mourik, D.A., Candel, M.J.J.M., Nagelhout, G.E. et al. Support for a point-of-sale cigarette

display ban among smokers: findings from the international tobacco control (ITC)

Netherlands survey. BMC Public Health 18, 740 (2018).

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5666-4

Wong, L.S., Green, H.M., Feugate, J.E. et al. Effects of "second-hand" smoke on structure and

function of fibroblasts, cells that are critical for tissue repair and remodeling. BMC Cell

Biol 5, 13 (2004). ​https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2121-5-13

Wye, P., Gow, L.B., Constable, J. et al. Observation of the extent of smoking in a mental health

inpatient facility with a smoke-free policy. BMC Psychiatry 14, 94 (2014).

https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-14-94