Smoke Free Regulations

If 90% of United States smokers could have another chance to redo it, they reported that they would not even have their first puff that initiated their tobacco addiction (Winickoff, Gottlieb, and Mello 2014). The Tobacco 21 bill is a fairly new legislation and already it has shown a decline in underage smokers as a result of its implementation. The results of the survey presented that the public opinion was largely accepting and supportive of the bill. The main argument against the bill is the harm that will come to retailers of tobacco products. Correspondingly, the argument is proven inaccurate and in favor of the bill. The past has shown the improved outcome of the country from the raise in the minimum alcohol age, and researchers regard

Tobacco use and the effects of second hand smoke have been an ongoing issue for many years. Looking at the attitude of the 1950’s and 1960’s when smoking was thought of as cool, suave, mature, etc., there has been a major turnaround in the way society looks at the use of tobacco. Now the issue is not just smoking and the damage to health that it causes, but now there is the additional awareness of what second hand smoke can do to individuals.

In October of 2015, Calvin Christian High School’s Advanced Placement (AP) Government class conducted a poll in Walker, Michigan to better understand the citizens’ political views. The government class’s twelve students collaborated over the course approximately two weeks to create an unbiased poll with concise demographic questions and current political issues. The twelve students broke down into groups of four to formulate questions. After researching current topics and forming the questions, the class carefully critiqued each question to prevent bias, incoherency, or redundancy. After going through the long list of questions, the class voted, and nine questions were selected, and thus transferred to the official poll. The last step in

In calculating the economic influence of smoke-free policies and laws, the Surgeon General considered their constructive effect in decreasing health care costs. Utilizing a simulation prototype, the Surgeon General concluded, if all U.S. workplaces implemented an all-inclusive smoke-free policy, it would result in 1.3 million smokers renouncing, 950 million less cigarette packs being smoked, 1,540 heart attacks and 360 strokes being prevented, and $49 million passive medical cost savings being attained within the first year.” The costs saved would increase over time. (American for nonsmoker’s rights,

Introduction: Hi everyone, recently when I walk outside our company and could not help but notice the amount of cigarettes scattered all over our front lawn, a smoke smell that seems to never disappear and there always seems to be people taking smoke breaks polluting up the air. The reason I called for this meeting is to discuss why we should ban smoking on company property and most importantly the benefits that this smoking ban could bring to our company.

Raising taxes on tobacco products and implementing smoking cessation legislations can minimize the prevalence of smoking up to 30 percent to 80 percent over a 50-year period (Ekpu & Brown 2015).In 2009, NBC news stated that Kansas, one of the states, considering banning smoking at enclosed areas showed that if they banned smoking in restaurants, the state was going to save 20 million dollars in healthcare costs (Associated Health, 2009). West Virginia state implemented smoke-free laws and had an increase of almost 1 percent in restaurant employment (“Smoke Free Laws do not Harm Business,” 2017). Restaurant workers were more comfortable coming in to work knowing they would be breathing in fresh air. Although in Tennessee, percentage of adults who smoked in 2011 increased from 23 percent to 24.3 percent in 2015 (Fletcher, 2016). This increment was not that significant considering the fact that it was over a period of just 4 years. The annual health care cost in Tennessee directly to smoking increased from $2.16 billion in 2004 to $2.67 billion in 2017(“The Toll of Tobacco in Tennessee”, n.d.).

It was in 1964 that the Surgeon General of the United States first published a report on the ill-effects of smoking cigarettes, and within a year the first law requiring health warnings on cigarette packages was in effect. From that point, the government has slowly, but continually, imposed more and more restrictions on the use of tobacco products. Throughout the 1960s, 70's, 80's, and 90's, the both individual jurisdictions within the State of California, as well as the entire state, continued to impose tougher and tougher restrictions on smoking cigarettes until 1994, when California became the first state in the union to pass a law which completely prohibited smoking in most enclosed workplaces. ("Secondhand Smoke Exposure") This law, which took effect in 1998, restricted smoking in all enclosed places of employment including offices, factories, bars and restaurants. But by the early 21st century, the current restrictions were not enough for California's lawmakers and a push was started to ban smoking in all public places. Since the passage of these restrictions in the 1990's, there has been a great deal of change in the state with advocates of the smoking ban pointing to the increased health benefits for the citizens of the state, while opponents focus on the economic damaged in the business community caused by the restrictions. It is therefore necessary to examine the State of California and its ban on smoking and how it has

hazardous chemicals that regular cigarettes do. It is unfair that electronic cigarettes are not always included in laws pertaining to the use of nicotine based products in public places. Bystanders should not have to face problems that a change in legislation could fix. The authors of this article went on to describe a study that was conducted to show how often users smoked cigarettes, how many cigarettes they averagely smoked at once, and where users received second hand smoke. Many of the places that users smoked and were around other smokers, were public areas. Second hand smoke will drastically decrease if clean air laws included electronic cigarettes under the same category as traditional smoking. After the results of the study were

In certain places, the government regulations against smoking could be very beneficial. For example, in hospitals or any healthcare

Jay Whitehead, publisher of a magazine for human resources managers, says, “There is discrimination at many companies—and maybe even most companies—against people who smoke.” Even if applicants aren’t asked whether they smoke, it “doesn't mean that hiring managers turn off their sense of smell.” Paul Sherer, a smoker who was fired less than a week after taking a new job, says, “Not hiring smokers affects millions of people and puts them in the same category as women able to bear children, that is, people who contribute to higher health-care costs. It's unfair.” Law professor Don Garner believes that not hiring smokers is “an overreaction on the part of employers whose interest is cutting costs. If someone has the ability to do the job, he should get it. What you do in your home is your own business. … Not hiring smokers is ‘respiratory apartheid.’”

When the medical associate researches the health ethnics of smoking they should have research tobacco is legal substance, people have a choice. The banning of smoking in public place only forces the people to smoke in the privacy of their homes even more. This will affect most eating and drinking establishments financially. The government will stand by these laws for banning smoking but do they stand by the taxes that are made for the selling of

This report provides a study and analysis on the smoke and tobacco-free policy that the University of Alaska Anchorage adopted in 2015 in line with the state program. Specifically, this study aims to discuss:

The P.E.R.I.E. process is illustrated in this case by the steps taken to address the issue of smoking rates in adults, being impacted by the rise in adolescent smoking behaviors. The first step of this process is the Problem. In this case, the text indicates, the problem is the growth rate of smoking teens in the 80’s and 90’s (Riegelman & Kirkwood, 2015). This in turn, led to an increase in adult smokers. This would raise rates again, after previously lowering them by approximately 50% (Riegelman & Kirkwood, 2015). The next step is Etiology. In this step we correlate smoking with cancer and the rise of adult smoking rates with the growth of adolescent smoking rates. This in turn, correlates adolescent cigarette smoking, to the rises in cancer (morbidity), and deaths from cancer (mortality). The case study also states, “…it was also found that nearly 90% of those who smoked started before the age of 18…” (Riegelman & Kirkwood, 2015). It was determined through behavior modification (preventing adolescent smoking), the rate of adult smokers would reduce. Thus, recommendations were introduced. The case study reveals, adolescents were targeted in cigarettes advertisements and marketing (Riegelman & Kirkwood, 2015). Cigarette availability was also an issue. Implementations of sales and advertisement campaign policies, were altered in reference to miners. The text reveals, once evaluated, strategies to reduce adolescent smoking

The United States is by far the richest and most powerful country in the world. We citizens take for granted luxuries that people of other countries can only dream. Yet in our society there are serious social issues that for reasons unknown are not being addressed. One of the most important issues that typical politicians are afraid to address is that of what to do with the nation’s illegal drug problems. Although we hear terms like "The War on Drugs" and "Drug Treatment", a fresh approach to this issue is overdue. The country should take a new look at drug legalization as a solution to a problem that has been long out of control.

In November 2015, my world was changed because my daughter was born. As a new mom, I had a hard time getting through baby blues due to sleep deprivation, breast engorgement, worrying about insufficient breastmilk and being a good mom. I felt isolated and lack of social support since I was the first one being a mom among my friends, as a racial minority in the U.S. and an international student. At the one-month checkup, I did a survey from the pediatrician about postpartum depression, and I got 7 points out of 10. I decided to go out and looked for new mom groups and talked to them; I realized that I was not alone. The experience inspired me to find solutions to benefit new moms and this community and to explore the role of technology in personal