Second-hand smoke from the point of view of the WHO

Passive smoking.  Photo from

On the eve of World No Tobacco Day World Health Organization (WHO) considers it necessary to clarify the understanding of the harm caused by passive smoking.

Myth 1. Tobacco smoke is safe for the environment.

In fact. Tobacco smoke is equally dangerous for both the smoker and for the people around him. Paradoxically, — the smoke even less harmful to the smoker because his lungs he gets mostly filtered. Numerous references to the alleged scientific evidence harmless smoke prove to either appeal to a much outdated studies, or it appears that the sponsors of such works were the tobacco companies. Passive smoking leads to 200 thousand deaths per year on jobs (about 14% of all occupational diseases in the world). Particularly affected are professionals in the field of entertainment, passive smoking is the cause of 2.8% of lung cancer in these individuals.

Myth 2. The concept of "free choice" to help reconcile the smokers and non-smokers.

In fact. The concept provides for the voluntary withdrawal of a number of smokers from smoking in workplaces and public places. In response to this concession meant that the other part of the smokers can not give up the pleasure to smoke, and non-smokers are attributable to that tolerance. The concept is being actively promoted by the tobacco companies. But the practice of "free choice" in Finland, Ireland, New Zealand, Uruguay, California (USA) showed that voluntarily refuses to smoke only a tiny fraction of smokers, so that the danger of smoking is practically not reduced. That is why notwithstanding that the country moved to a total ban on smoking in public places and workplaces.

Myth 3. Modern ventilation systems effectively protect non-smokers from exposure to tobacco smoke.

In fact. Tobacco companies urge to buy expensive modern ventilation systems that are supposedly able to protect non-smokers from tobacco smoke. In practice, even the newest systems are not able to remove all of the components of cigarette smoke, so as to solve this problem will require a suction power, which will make it impossible to work in this area. Much of the smoke settles on clothing, furniture, office equipment — and absorbed in them.

Myth 4. The concept of "free zones of smoking" is not going to work.

In fact. An example of that practice at the "zone of smoke-free", shows that the system works. In Ireland, Norway and New Zealand produced results showing the improvement of the health of workers pubs, bars and restaurants, which used to be allowed smoke.

Myth 5. Banssmoking in restaurants, pubs and bars will lead to losses owners of these establishments.

In fact. Independent studies in countries where smoking in such establishments is prohibited suggest otherwise. Experience in Canada, Ireland, Italy, Norway, and the cities of El Paso andNY shows that the income of cafes and restaurants even grown. Studies in other countries show that partial or complete bans on smoking in public catering establishments income or have no effect or a positive effect.

Myth 6. The ban onsmoking violates the rights of smokers, deprived of their freedom of choice.

In fact. Laws areas smoke-free, protect human health by regulating the places where you can smoke, and in which — not. It should also be remembered that more than non-smokers and smokers among a considerable number of people wishing to get rid of this habit. The human right to clean air is higher in priority than the right of smokers to smoke in public places, exposing thereby endanger the health of others. This is to prevent danger to others and directed the laws of smoke-free zones.

Article provided by the site

Like this post? Please share to your friends: