by T J Neale

Created on: January 15, 2008

In our liberal societies we normally only curtail individual liberty if there is a good reason to do so. The case for banning smoking in public areas rests on the damage to the health of non-smoking members of the public. This is a controversial subject, not least because of tobacco industry sponsored advocacy groups attacking the evidence for the health costs of passive smoking.

PASSIVE SMOKING

Passive smoking is the act of breathing in second-hand smoke.

Tobacco smoke contains over 4000 chemicals in the form of particles and gases. These include tar, nicotine, benzene, carbon monoxide, ammonia, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide. It has been estimated that tobacco smoke contains as many as 60 substances which cause - or are suspected of causing - cancer.

The Environmental Protection Agency in the USA has classified environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) as a class A carcinogen - ranking it alongside asbestos and arsenic.

According to Cancer Research UK, passive smokers are 20 to 30 percent more likely to develop lung cancer than people not exposed to smoke, with several hundred deaths occurring as a direct result in the UK each year.

Children whose parents smoke in the home are more likely to be admitted to hospital for bronchitis and pneumonia in the first year of life. One study found that in households where both parents smoke, young children have a 72% increased risk of respiratory illnesses. It is estimated that more than 17,000 children under the age of five are admitted to hospital in the UK every year because of the effects of passive smoking.

THE DENIERS

The tobacco industry denies the link between ETS and ill health. Pro-tobacco advocates often claim there is no hard evidence linking the two.

However, Jean King, director of tobacco control at Cancer Research UK in an interview with the BBC in 2006 said, "There is an international consensus among doctors, nurses and medical research experts that second hand smoke kills innocent people. Only people who work for or receive money from the tobacco industry deny this link."

Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association holds similar views. She said the tobacco industry's refusal to accept the dangers associated with passive smoking would result in "the sabotage of the health of people exposed to passive smoking all over the world."

The tobacco industry's track record on health issues relating to their products is highly dubious.

GET YOUR SMOKE OUT OF MY LUNGS

There is overwhelming evidence that passive smoking damages health. Experts contend that the dangers of passive smoking are well documents and cite existing evidence from more than 50 studies.

Do smokers have the right to endanger other people with their reckless behavior? The answer to that is clearly no.

Smoking should be banned from public area.

Learn more about this author, T J Neale.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.