Introduction
Presently, smoking cigarettes in public is one of the most contentious issues. There is no denying that many individuals continue to be ignorant of the prohibition on smoking in public spaces, including parks, train stations, and bus terminals. In America, the ban on smoking on beaches and public parks has grown in recent years. This is a contentious issue because all individuals, particularly smokers, do not support the prohibition of cigarette smoking in public places such as beaches and parks.
Opposition to Public Smoking
Most individuals who oppose tobacco use on public beaches are non-smokers. They condemn cigarette smoking in public spaces because they consider it a detrimental and hazardous practice they would rather not be exposed to. Conversely, critics argue that the prohibition of smoking in public spaces violates individual liberties. Numerous people are afflicted with respiratory difficulties due to the smoking behaviors of those in their vicinity; therefore, the local community should implement regulations prohibiting smoking in public spaces. The international prohibition of consuming tobacco in public spaces is necessary due to the health risks associated with this behavior. Local communities should, therefore, ban smoking in public parks and beaches.
Health Effects of Public Smoking
Active smokers are not the only ones whose health is negatively impacted by smoking; those in their proximity who smoke passively are also affected. Recent research has examined the impact of public smoking prohibitions on the level of secondary smoke exposure among non-smokers (Catalano & Gilleskie, 2021). An investigation into the effects of public smoking restrictions enacted in Germany from 2007 to 2008 scrutinized the self-reported health outcomes of individuals who smoked and those who abstained from smoking (Catalano & Gilleskie, 2021). A decline in the health of smokers was observed alongside advances in self-reported health among non-smokers when smoking restrictions were implemented (Catalano & Gilleskie, 2021). Numerous individuals are consequently in favor of banning smoking in public spaces.
The act of smoking is associated with a multitude of health-related issues, including respiratory difficulties, the development of lung cancer, and adverse effects on the reproductive system. The implementation of a ban on smoking in public areas will likely result in individuals adopting better lifestyles, thus contributing to the overall improvement of societal well-being. Throughout the years, smoking has emerged as a predominant factor contributing to mortality.
Secondhand Smoke and Its Consequences
Based on the World Health Organization (2023) findings, an estimated 1.3 million individuals who do not engage in smoking succumb to mortality annually due to their exposure to secondhand smoke. The observed mortality figures may exhibit variability over different years owing to fluctuations in smoking prevalence, changes in public health interventions, and breakthroughs in medical treatment. Tobacco is a prominent contributor to avoidable early mortality, being the only commercial item that exacts a fatality rate of half of its consumers when used in accordance with its intended purpose.
When people smoke in public places, they may be denying others an opportunity to breathe fresh air. People who do not smoke should not have to deal with the negative health effects of secondhand smoke. People who smoke in public places like parks, beaches, or restaurants expose others to toxic substances they exhale into the air. Long-term exposure to secondhand smoke is associated with a wide range of health issues.
Non-Smokers’ Rights and Public Spaces
Notably, non-smokers’ rights are being violated in more ways than just their health. According to Tompkins et al. (2020), when people smoke in public places, it may make such places smell unpleasant and make others feel uneasy. Public spaces might become less welcoming to non-smokers due to the lingering smell of tobacco. Cigarette butts and other trash are a nuisance in public places and detract from the cleanliness and safety of the area. Even though it might be expensive, local communities at all levels and non-profit groups should launch programs with the goal of eliminating butt litter from the environment.
Impact on Vulnerable Populations
Individuals who engage in smoking not only compromise their well-being but also negatively impact the health of others in their vicinity. Adolescents whose caregivers consistently engage in smoking in their presence have higher probabilities of developing respiratory disorders and infections. According to Torkashvand et al. (2020), the average daily consumption of cigarettes among 20% of individuals aged above 15 years is estimated to be 16. These factors have an effect on newborns whose respiratory systems have not fully developed.
Medical professionals and scientists have shown that the lung tissues of young children are more susceptible to developing ailments (Korsten et al., 2022). Children are consistently subjected to respiratory complications when they come into contact with tobacco smoke. Therefore, the closer proximity of a younger individual to a smoker results in a more pronounced effect as the dosage of exposure increases.
Prohibiting smoking in public spaces protects both the smoker’s and the general public’s lives. Research has demonstrated that secondhand smoke is lethal. Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), respiratory infections, and asthma attacks are all outcomes of secondhand smoke exposure in children (Braun et al., 2020). In addition, both adult smokers and non-smokers develop heart and lung cancer from secondhand smoke.
At least 250 toxic chemicals are present in secondhand smoke, with over 50 of them having the potential to induce cancer (Omare et al., 2021). These studies demonstrate that secondhand smoke is exceedingly hazardous to the health of both smokers and non-smokers, potentially leading to cancer. This means that by simply being in the vicinity of smokers, non-smokers are succumbing to diseases transmitted through secondhand smoke. This infringes on the right of non-smokers to lead a healthy lifestyle, as they are exposed to offensive gases simply by being in public areas where smoking is prevalent. As a result, without their consent, the health of non-smokers who are in public parks and beaches is being endangered.
Environmental Consequences of Public Smoking
The act of smoking in public spaces such as beaches and parks has the potential to contribute to environmental pollution. Cigarette filters are often observed as the most prevalent form of litter throughout several global locations, including roadways, sidewalks, parks, and other public spaces. According to Castaldi et al. (2020), it has been estimated that around 4.5 out of the total 6 trillion cigarettes used globally every year are disposed of in the environment.
In addition to considerations of aesthetics, the act of discarding cigarette waste presents a significant environmental and public health hazard attributable to the presence of plastic components as well as poisonous and carcinogenic constituents. The plastic constituents of the filter, such as cellulose acetate, have the capacity to undergo fragmentation into smaller fragments over time. However, their persistence in the environment is attributed to their protracted disintegration rate. Cigarette remnants include chemicals and hazardous constituents, including nicotine, benzene, heavy metals, and volatile organic compounds, which have the potential to seep into the surrounding environment, polluting soils and aquatic ecosystems.
The presence of filters scattered throughout beaches poses a significant threat to marine ecosystems. According to Castaldi et al. (2020), it is possible for these entities to reach the ocean, hence causing the discharge and buildup of pollutants, resulting in significant damage to marine creatures. The literature extensively documents the adverse effects of filters on marine species, including the ingestion and entanglement of smoking particles by seabirds, mammals, turtles, and fishes (Castaldi et al., 2020). The intake of microplastics, which are produced by filters, leads to the transfer of pollutants into the bodies of animals. This transfer not only affects the health of these animals but also poses potential risks to people since microplastics have been detected in marine animals that humans consume.
Fire Hazards Linked to Public Smoking
In addition, the danger of fire hazards is increased when people smoke in regions that are dry and have grass, such as parks and beaches. Cigarettes are the most common cause of ignite in fires involving other smoking materials. Grass and vegetation that has dried up are very combustible; all it takes is a little spark from anything like a cigarette to start a fire, and this is particularly true when the weather is hot and dry. These kinds of fires may spread rapidly and are often hard to put out, presenting a threat to both humans and the wildlife that lives in the area and the property they own.
The incorrect disposal of cigarette butts is one of the key factors that contributes to the fire risk associated with smoking. It is estimated that 38 percent of all littered garbage is made up of butts and that 52 million butts have been recovered in 27 years of beach clean-ups (Isabella, 2023). Although the statistics differ, studies have indicated that 75 percent of smokers throw their butts on the ground (Isabella, 2023). Many smokers have the habit of flipping their cigarette butts carelessly onto the ground; hence, in places with dry grass and plants, the spark from these lighted butts may easily set fire to the dry vegetation.
Cigarette Prohibition as a Step to Ecological Health
Advocates of cigarette prohibition assert that the implementation of such bans is imperative in safeguarding the well-being of the general populace and the ecological surroundings. Conversely, opponents assert that these bans infringe upon individual rights. They contend that individuals who engage in smoking deserve certain privileges that should not be violated (Mokhtar, 2021). The argument posits that local communities’ intervention in matters pertaining to individual health is unwarranted and asserts that tobacco-related regulations impede smokers’ personal liberties. There exists a perspective among some individuals that the implementation of regulations on tobacco products hinders their ability to exercise informed decision-making. Critics contend that the implementation of a smoking prohibition in public areas surpasses the limits of governmental interference.
Counterarguments
Some opponents argue that banning smoking in public spaces can have a negative economic impact on businesses near these areas, such as restaurants, bars, and convenience stores. Business owners often raise concerns that they will be economically harmed by the bans. Bars probably suffer more harm from bans than restaurants because bars provide a more social atmosphere where customers enjoy mingling with one another. Bar owners find it more expensive, and many customers would find it unappealing to segregate smokers from non-smokers, as would more normally occur in restaurants where such mingling is less important.
Opponents maintain that revenues will decrease because smokers will visit smoke-free venues less frequently or for shorter periods and that costs will increase since businesses will need to establish and maintain smoking and nonsmoking sections. In addition, they believe that implementing and enforcing smoking policies will make the employees, especially those with an addiction, less productive as they take longer or more frequent breaks for smoking.
The smoking ban issue elicits genuine arguments from proponents and opponents alike. However, the health and environmental advantages and the possibility of deterring children from smoking surpass the concerns over freedoms and economic implications. The prohibition of smoking in a majority of public places is justifiable given its detrimental impact on both personal well-being and the health of those in nearby areas. It is essential to emphasize that the mortality rates associated with heart and lung ailments, as well as cancer, would persistently rise in the absence of mending the prevailing smoking conditions.
Conclusion
Local communities need to implement a prohibition on smoking in public spaces in order to foster a more health-conscious way of life for all individuals. This measure safeguards every person from many illnesses and health hazards, including but not limited to cancer and other life-threatening ailments. In addition, implementing the ban would effectively eradicate the negative precedent established by those engaging in public smoking. The local community will instill in children and teens a perspective that tobacco is detrimental. Implementing the ban is expected to serve as a deterrent for those who do not already smoke, mitigating the likelihood of people adopting cigarette use and subsequently developing an addiction.
References
Braun, M., Klingelhöfer, D., Oremek, G. M., Quarcoo, D., & Groneberg, D. A. (2020). Influence of secondhand smoke and prenatal tobacco smoke exposure on biomarkers, genetics and physiological processes in children—an overview in research insights of the last few years. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(9), 3212. Web.
Castaldi, G., Cecere, G., & Mariangela Zoli. (2020). “Smoke on the beach”: On the use of economic vs behavioral policies to reduce environmental pollution by cigarette littering. Economia Politica, 38(3), 1025–1048. Web.
Catalano, M. A., & Gilleskie, D. B. (2021). Impacts of local public smoking bans on smoking behaviors and tobacco smoke exposure. Health Economics, 30(8), 1719–1744. Web.
Tompkins, C. N. E., Burnley, A., McNeill, A., & Hitchman, S. C. (2020). Factors that influence smokers’ and ex-smokers’ use of IQOS: A qualitative study of IQOS users and ex-users in the UK. Tobacco Control, 30(1), 16–23. Web.
Isabella, J. (2023). How to Stop Cigarette Butt Litter | Hakai Magazine. Web.
Korsten, K., Adriaenssens, N., Coenen, S., Butler, C. C., Pirçon, J. Y., Verheij, T. J., Bont, L., & Wildenbeest, J. G. (2022). Contact with young children increases the risk of respiratory infection in older adults in europe—the RESCEU study. The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 226(Supplement_1), S79-S86. Web.
Mokhtar, K. A. (2021). The death knell of environmental tobacco smoke at public spaces: Constitutionality of smoking restrictions and smoke-free zone laws in Malaysia. UUM Journal of Legal Studies, 12(2), 89-114. Web.
Omare, M. O., Kibet, J. K., Cherutoi, J. K., & Fredrick Orori Kengara. (2021). A review of tobacco abuse and its epidemiological consequences. Journal of Public Health, 30(6), 1485–1500. Web.
Torkashvand, J., Farzadkia, M., Sobhi, H. R., & Esrafili, A. (2020). Littered cigarette butt as a well-known hazardous waste: A comprehensive systematic review. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 383. Web.
World Health Organization. (2023). WHO report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2023: Protect people from tobacco smoke.
Loading...
