Example Of Smoke-Free Laws Article Review
Smoking has often been described as one of the leading causes of lung cancer. Smoking is also associated with several other health related problems. Throughout the years, many state and national governments have banned smoking in a variety of places. Early smoke-free policies and laws banned smoking in venues such as food preparation centers, theatres and so on. These laws were mainly intended to prevent food contamination or fire. However, recent smoke-free laws have been formulated not just for the mentioned purpose but for others as well.
The content of the article “The Impact of Tax and Smoke-Free Policy Changes” exhibits aspects related to smoke-free policy formulation, implementations and moderation.
This article, therefore, shows how policy formulations in relation to smoking happened. It also shows how they were implemented across several states as well as by the federal government. The article also shows how several smoke-free laws and policies have been modified over the years to fit with prevailing conditions.
In fact, smoke-free policies and laws have undergone various modifications and revolutions in the United States (Mathews et al., 2011). For instance, the California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report which was released in 1997 saw California ban smoking in those bars that did not have separate ventilated smoking areas (Chaloupka et al., 2011). The state of New York made news when it banned and outlawed smoking in restaurants as well as bars and virtually all workplaces. Another report by the Surgeon General titled “The Health Consequences of Tobacco Smoke” stimulated action by a lot of states and local communities which formulated comprehensive bans on smoking on virtually all private worksites and public spaces as well as in some outdoor spaces including public parks and attitudes.
Therefore, this article shows that policy formulation is usually prompted or stimulated by reports about a certain health issues caused by smoking. After the formulation, the community or region involved then goes forward to implement the policies strictly. Over time, these policies are modified or adjusted, for instance in regards to smoking, the areas, where smoking is banned, are increased (Nykiforuk et al., 2010).
The content of the article may have a huge impact on organizations, interest groups, health care professionals and even the general public. This is particularly through the section where the impact of smoke-free policies are discussed as well as the sections where the importance of relevant organizations is discussed. The article shows how various reports by health professionals, health organizations and interest groups have acted as catalysts for policies on smoking. This obviously motivates these organizations and individuals to conduct and publish even more studies that will show further show the negative health consequences and thus lead to the formulation of even more heath related policies.
In addition, the article shows how anti-smoking policies and smoke-free laws have impacted smoking on a general scale. The articles states that smoke-free laws and other smoking related policies have significantly reduced non-smoker’s exposure to cigarette smoke. In addition, smoke related policies have reduced smoking on a general scale. This has been through encouraging adult smokers to quit smoking and also by encouraging the youth to stop. With this kind of content, health professionals, interest groups and bodies are likely to be encouraged in their push for more smoke-free laws and policies (Chaloupka et al., 2011). The public will also see the huge benefit, that accrues from smoke free laws as depicted by the article and they, will encourage even more strict smoke-free laws.
There have been several social, political and economic forces that have impacted the concept found in the article. For example, there is both \economic and social aspects that promotes the formulation and implementation of smoke-free policies. Socially, it is for the welfare of the community especially the non-smokers face similar heath consequences as smokers. Economic wise, it is to reduce the huge costs incurred in terms of medical care for those whose health has been affected by smoking. Political wise, the article shows that it is political bodies such as state and local governments that are primarily involved in formulation and implementation of smoke-free laws and policies and ensuring that they are followed.
Critical thinking questions
What more can be done to ensure that people follow all smoke-free policies and laws?
What role does the public has to play in ensuring that smoking in public places is totally eliminated?
Chaloupka Frank J., Levy David., Huang Jidong. (2011). The Impact of Tax and Smoke-Free Air Policy Changes. RWJF Retrospective Series. Retrieved from http://rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?id=72056
Mathews, R., Schneider, N., & Peterson, E. D. (2011). Current Status of Smoke-Free Air Laws in the United States. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 57(14), E550.
Nykiforuk, C. I., Osler, G. E., & Viehbeck, S. (2010). The evolution of smoke-free spaces policy literature: a bibliometric analysis. Health policy, 97(1), 1-7.