- Smoking ban
Smoking bans are public policies, including criminal laws and occupational safety and health regulations, which prohibit tobacco smoking in workplaces and/or other public spaces. Legislation may also define smoking as more generally being the carrying or possessing of any lit tobacco product.
The rationale for smoke-free laws is based on the fact that smoking is optional and breathing is not. Therefore, smoking bans exist to protect breathing people from the effects of second-hand smoke, which include an increased risk of heart disease, cancer, emphysema, and other diseases. Laws implementing bans on indoor smoking have been introduced by many countries in various forms over the years, with some legislators citing scientific evidence that shows tobacco smoking is harmful to the smokers themselves and to those inhaling second-hand smoke.
In addition, such laws may lower health care costs in the short term (but may actually increase them in the long term, since smokers who die sooner no longer use health care), improve work productivity, and lower the overall cost of labor in a community, thus making a community more attractive for employers. In Indiana, the state's economic development agency wrote into its 2006 plan for acceleration of economic growth an encouragement to cities and towns to adopt local smoke-free workplace laws as a means of promoting job growth in communities.
Additional rationales for smoking restrictions include reduced risk of fire in areas with explosive hazards; cleanliness in places where food, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, or precision instruments and machinery are produced; decreased legal liability; potentially reduced energy use via decreased ventilation needs; reduced quantities of litter; healthier environments; and giving smokers incentive to quit.
The World Health Organization considers smoke-free laws to have an influence to reduce demand for tobacco by creating an environment where smoking becomes increasingly more difficult and to help shift social norms away from the acceptance of smoking in everyday life. Along with tax measures, cessation measures, and education, smoking ban policy is currently viewed as an important element in lowering smoking rates and promoting public health. When correctly and strictly implemented it is seen as one important policy agenda goal to change human behavior away from unhealthy behavior and towards a healthy lifestyle.
Medical and scientific basis for bans
Research has generated evidence that secondhand smoke causes the same problems as direct smoking, including lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, and lung ailments such as emphysema, bronchitis, and asthma. Specifically, meta-analyses show that lifelong non-smokers with partners who smoke in the home have a 20–30% greater risk of lung cancer than non-smokers who live with non-smokers. Non-smokers exposed to cigarette smoke in the workplace have an increased lung cancer risk of 16–19%.
A study issued in 2002 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization concluded that non-smokers are exposed to the same carcinogens on account of tobacco smoke as active smokers. Sidestream smoke contains 69 known carcinogens, particularly benzopyrene and other polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and radioactive decay products, such as polonium 210. Several well-established carcinogens have been shown by the tobacco companies' own research to be present at higher concentrations in secondhand smoke than in mainstream smoke.
Scientific organizations confirming the effects of secondhand smoke include the U.S. National Cancer Institute, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the Surgeon General of the United States, and the World Health Organization.
Bans on smoking in bars and restaurants can substantially improve the air quality in such establishments. For example, one study listed on the website of the CDC states that New York's statewide law to eliminate smoking in enclosed workplaces and public places substantially reduced RSP (respirable suspended particles) levels in western New York hospitality venues. RSP levels were reduced in every venue that permitted smoking before the law was implemented, including venues in which only second-hand smoke from an adjacent room was observed at baseline. The CDC concluded that their results were similar to other studies which also showed substantially improved indoor air quality after smoking bans.
Research has also shown that improved air quality translates to decreased toxin exposure among employees. For example, among employees of the Norwegian establishments that enacted smoking bans, tests showed improved (decreased) levels of nicotine in the urine of both smoking and non-smoking workers (as compared with measurements prior to the ban).
Public Health Law Research
In 2009, Public Health Law Research published an evidence brief summarizing the research assessing the effect of a specific law or policy on public health. They stated that "There is strong evidence supporting smoking bans and restrictions as effective public health interventions aimed at decreasing exposure to secondhand smoke."
One of the world's earliest smoking bans was a 1575 Mexican ecclesiastical council ban that forbade the use of tobacco in any church in Mexico and Spanish colonies in the Caribbean, The Ottoman sultan Murad IV prohibited smoking in his empire in 1633. The Pope also banned smoking in the Church, Pope Urban VII in 1590 and Urban VIII in 1624. Pope Urban VII in particular threatened to excommunicate anyone who "took tobacco in the porchway of or inside a church, whether it be by chewing it, smoking it with a pipe or sniffing it in powdered form through the nose". The earliest citywide European smoking bans were enacted shortly thereafter. Such bans were enacted in Bavaria, Kursachsen, and certain parts of Austria in the late 17th century. Smoking was banned in Berlin in 1723, in Königsberg in 1742, and in Stettin in 1744. These bans were repealed in the revolutions of 1848. The first building in the world to have a smoke-free policy was the Old Government Building in Wellington, New Zealand in 1876. This was over concerns about the threat of fire, as it is the second largest wooden building in the world.
The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital, and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under orders from Adolf Hitler. Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.
In the latter part of the 20th century, as research on the risks of second-hand tobacco smoke became public, the tobacco industry launched "courtesy awareness" campaigns. Fearing reduced sales, the industry created a media and legislative program that focused on "accommodation". Tolerance and courtesy were encouraged as a way to ease heightened tensions between smokers and those around them, while avoiding smoking bans. In the USA, states were encouraged to pass laws providing separate smoking sections.
In 1975, the US state of Minnesota enacted the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act, making it the first state to ban smoking in most public spaces. At first, restaurants were required to have No Smoking sections, and bars were exempt from the Act. As of 1 October 2007, Minnesota enacted a ban on smoking in all restaurants and bars statewide, called the Freedom to Breathe Act of 2007.
On April 3, 1987, the City of Beverly Hills, California, initiated an ordance to ban smoking in most restaurants, in retail stores and at public meetings. It exempted restaurants in hotels - City Council members reasoned that hotel restaurants catered to large numbers of visitors from abroad, where smoking is more acceptable than in the United States.
In America, the success of the ban enacted by the state of California in 1998 encouraged other states such as New York to implement bans. California's smoking ban included a controversial ban of smoking in bars, extending the statewide workplace smoking ban enacted in 1994. As of April 2009 there were 37 states with some form of smoking ban. Some areas in California began making entire cities smoke-free, which would include every place except residential homes. More than 20 cities in California enacted park and beach smoking bans.
Since December 1993, in Peru, it is illegal to smoke in any public closed places and any public transportation vehicles. (according to Law 25357 issued on Nov 27, 1991 and its reglamentation issued on Nov 25, 1993 by decree D.S.983-93-PCM). There is also legislation regulation publicity, and it is also illegal (Law 26957 May 21, 1998) to sell tobacco to minors, and even directly advertising tobacco within 500m of schools (Law 26849 Jul 9, 1997).
On 3 December 2003, New Zealand passed legislation to progressively implement a smoking ban in schools, school grounds, and workplaces by December 2004.  On 29 March 2004, the Republic of Ireland implemented a ban on smoking in the workplace. In Norway similar legislation was put into force on 1 June the same year. The whole of the United Kingdom became subject to a ban on smoking in enclosed public places in 2007, when England became the final region to have the legislation come into effect. The age limit for buying tobacco was also raised from 16 to 18 on 1 October 2007. On July 15, 2007, Chandigarh became the first city in India to become 'smoke-free', however, the ban on smoking was implemented in rest of the country in mid 2009.
Smoking was banned in public indoor venues in Victoria, Australia on 1 July 2007. Nepal announced a ban on smoking in public places, as well as by those under age 16 in June 2010. On 31 May 2011 Venezuela introduced a ban on smoking in enclosed public and commercial spaces.
Smoking was first banned in schools, hospitals, trains, buses and train stations in Turkey in 1996. In 2008, a more comprehensive ban was started. Smoking is forbidden in all public indoor venues in Turkey.
Smoking has been banned at a French beach - the Plage Lumière in La Ciotat, France, became the first beach in Europe to ban smoking, from August 2011, in an effort to encourage more tourists to visit the beach.
In one part of the world, tobacco advertising and sponsorship of sporting events is prohibited. The ban on tobacco advertising and sponsorship in the European Union in 2005 has prompted Formula One Management to look for venues that permit display of the livery of tobacco sponsors, and has led to some of the races on the calendar being canceled in favor of tobacco-friendly markets. As of 2008, only one Formula One team, Scuderia Ferrari, receives sponsorship from a tobacco company. Marlboro branding appears on its cars in two races; Monaco and China, as neither bans tobacco advertising. Despite the EU ban from 2005, advertising bill boards for tobacco is still in use in Germany as of 2011.
MotoGP team Ducati Marlboro receives sponsorship from a Marlboro branding which appears at races in Qatar and China. On 1 July 2009 Ireland banned the advertising and display of tobacco products in all retail outlets. This means that shops will have to store cigarettes in closed containers out of sight of customers.
Public support for smoking bans
A 2007 Gallup poll found that 54% of Americans favored a complete ban inside of restaurants, 34% favored a ban in all hotel rooms, and 29% favored a ban inside of bars.
Another Gallup poll, of over 26,500 Europeans, conducted in December 2008, found that "a majority of EU citizens support smoke-free public places, such as offices, restaurants and bars." The poll further found that "support for workplace smoking restrictions is slightly higher than support for such restrictions in restaurants (84% vs. 79%). Two-thirds support smoke-free bars, pubs and clubs." The support is highest in countries which have implemented strict smoking bans: "Citizens in Italy are the most prone to accept smoking restrictions in bars, pubs and clubs (93% – 87% “totally in favor”). Sweden and Ireland join Italy at the higher end of the scale with approximately eight out of 10 respondents supporting smoke-free bars, pubs and clubs (70% in both countries is totally in favor)."
Effects of bans
Enforcement of a ban can cause resentment among smokers, with potentially serious consequences. In July 2009, a Turkish restaurant owner was murdered by a customer after attempting to enforce the recently implemented smoking ban.
Effects on health
Several studies have documented health and economic benefits related to smoking bans. In the first 18 months after Pueblo, Colorado enacted a 2003 smoking ban, hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped by 27% while admissions in neighbouring towns without smoking bans showed no change. The decline in heart attacks was attributed to the smoking ban, which reduced exposure to secondhand smoke. A similar study in Helena, Montana found a 40% reduction in heart attacks following the imposition of a smoking ban.
Researchers at the University of Dundee found significant improvements in bar workers' lung function and inflammatory markers attributed to a smoking ban; the benefits were particularly pronounced for bar workers with asthma. The Bar Workers' Health and Environment Tobacco Smoke Exposure (BHETSE) study found the percentage of all workers reporting respiratory symptoms, such as wheezing, shortness of breath, cough and phlegm production, fell from 69% to 57%. A group of researchers from Turin, Italy found that a smoking ban had significantly reduced heart attacks in the city, and attributed most of the reduction to decreased secondhand-smoke exposure. A comprehensive smoking ban in New York was found to have prevented 3,813 hospital admissions for heart attacks in 2004, and to have saved $56 million in health-care costs for the year.
Effects on tobacco use
Smoking bans are generally acknowledged to reduce rates of smoking; workplace bans reduce smoking rates among workers, and bans in public places reduce general smoking rates through a combination of stigmatization and reduction in the social cues for smoking. However, reports in the popular press after smoking bans have been enacted often present conflicting evidence for the bans' effectiveness.
One report stated that cigarette sales in Ireland and Scotland increased after a smoking ban. In contrast, another report states that in Ireland, cigarette sales fell by 16% in the six months after the ban's introduction. In the UK, cigarette sales fell by 11% during July 2007, the first month of the smoking ban in England, compared with July 2006.
A 1992 document from Phillip Morris summarized the tobacco industry's concern about the effects of a ban: "Total prohibition of smoking in the workplace strongly effects [sic] tobacco industry volume. Smokers facing these restrictions consume 11%–15% less than average and quit at a rate that is 84% higher than average."
In the United States, the CDC reported a leveling off of smoking rates in recent years despite a large number of ever more severe smoking bans and large tax increases. It has also been suggested that a "backstop" of hardcore smokers has been reached: those unmotivated and increasingly defiant in the face of further legislation.
Smoking bans may make it easier for smokers to quit. A survey suggests 22% of UK smokers may quit in response to a smoking ban in enclosed public places.
Restaurant smoking bans may help stop young people from becoming habitual smokers. A study of Massachusetts youths, found that those in towns with bans were 35 percent less likely to be habitual smokers.
Effects on businesses
Many studies have been published in the health industry literature on the economic effect of smoke-free policies. The majority of these government and academic studies have found that there is no negative economic impact associated with bans and many findings that there may be a positive effect on local businesses. A 2003 review of 97 such studies of the economic effects of a smoking ban on the hospitality industry found that the "best-designed" studies concluded that smoking bans did not harm businesses.
Studies funded by the bar and restaurant associations often find that smoking legislation has a negative effect on restaurant and bar profits. Such associations have also criticized studies which found that such legislation had no impact.
The following are some examples: the Dallas Restaurant Association funded a study that showed a $11.8 million decline in alcohol sales ranging from 9 to 50% in Denton, Texas. A 2004 study by Ridgewood Economic Associates LTD funded by the Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association found a loss of 2000 jobs, $28.5 million dollar loss in wages, and a loss of $37 million in New York State product. A 2004 study for the National Restaurant Association of the United States conducted by Deloitte and Touche found a significant negative impact. The restaurant Association of Maryland found sales tax receipts for establishments falling 11% in their study. Carroll and Associates found bars sales decreased by 18.7% to 24.3% in a number of Ontario markets following a bar smoking ban. The Buckeye Liquor Permit Holders Association reported that liquor sales were down over $67 million dollars while sales for home consumption increased and asked for the bar smoking ban to be amended in Ohio.
A government survey in Sydney found that the proportion of the population attending pubs and clubs rose after the introduction of a ban on smoking in enclosed places. However, a ClubsNSW report in August 2008 blamed the smoking ban for New South Wales clubs suffering their worst fall in income ever, amounting to a decline of $385 million. Income for clubs was down 11% in New South Wales. Sydney CBD club income fell 21.7% and western Sydney clubs lost 15.5%..
Smoking bans were introduced in German hotels, restaurants, and bars in 2008 and early 2009. The restaurant industry has claimed that many businesses in the states which introduced a smoking ban in late 2007 (Lower Saxony, Baden-Württemberg, and Hessen) witnessed lowered profits. The German Hotel and Restaurant Association (DEHOGA) claimed that the ban deterred people from going out for a drink or meal, stating that 15% of establishments that adopted a smoking ban in 2007 saw turnover fall by around 50%. Smoking is not permitted in any public transit or in or around railway stations except for the locations expressly indicated for smoking.
In the Republic of Ireland, the main opposition was from publicans. Ireland was the world's first country to introduce a full workplace smoking ban. The Irish workplace ban was introduced with the intention of protecting workers from passive smoking ("second-hand smoke") and to discourage smoking in a nation with a high percentage of smokers. Many pubs introduced "outdoor" arrangements (generally heated areas with shelters). It was speculated by opponents that the ban would increase the amount of drinking and smoking in the home, but recent studies showed this was not the case.
Ireland's Office of Tobacco Control website indicates that "an evaluation of the official hospitality sector data shows there has been no adverse economic effect from the introduction of this measure (the March 2004 national ban on smoking in bars, restaurants, etc). It has been claimed that the ban was a significant contributing factor to the closure of hundreds of small rural pubs, with almost 440 fewer licenses renewed in 2006 than in 2005.
Isle of Man
The ban came into effect in the Isle of Man on 30 March 2008.
The ban came into effect in Scotland on 26 March 2006, in Wales on 2 April 2007, in Northern Ireland on 30 April 2007 and in England on 1 July 2007. Six months after the ban's implementation in Wales, the Licensed Victuallers Association (LVA), which represents pub operators across Wales, claimed pubs had lost up to 20% of their trade. The LVA says some businesses were on the brink of closure, others had already closed down, and there was little optimism trade would eventually return to pre-ban levels.
The British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA), which represents some pubs and breweries across the UK claimed that beer sales were at their lowest level since the 1930s, ascribing a fall in sales of 7% during 2007 to the smoking ban.
According to a survey conducted by pub and bar trade magazine The Publican, the anticipated increase in sales of food following the smoking ban has not occurred. The trade magazine's survey of 303 pubs in the United Kingdom found the average customer spent £14.86 on food and drink at dinner in 2007, virtually identical to 2006.
A survey conducted by BII (formerly British Institute of Innkeeping) and the Federation of Licensed Victuallers' Associations (FLVA) concluded that sales had decreased by 7.3% in the 5 months since the smoking ban's introduction on 1 July 2007. Of the 2,708 responses to the survey, 58% of licensees said they had seen smokers visiting less regularly, while 73% had seen their smoking customers spending less time at the pub.
In the USA, smokers and hospitality businesses initially argued that businesses would suffer from smoking bans. However, a 2006 review by the U.S. Surgeon General found that smoking bans were unlikely to harm businesses in practice, and that many restaurants and bars might see increased business.
In 2003, New York City amended its anti-smoking law to include all restaurants and bars, including those in private clubs, making it, along with the California ban, one of the toughest in the United States. The city's Department of Health found in a 2004 study that air pollution levels had decreased sixfold in bars and restaurants after the ban went into effect, and that New Yorkers had reported less second-hand smoke in the workplace. The study also found the city's restaurants and bars prospered despite the smoking ban, with increases in jobs, liquor licenses, and business tax payments. The President of the New York nightlife association remarked that the study was not wholly representative, as by not differentiating between restaurants and nightclubs, the ban may have caused businesses like nightclubs and bars to suffer instead. A 2006 study by the New York State Department of Health found similar results: "(...) the CIAA has not had any significant negative financial effect on restaurants and bars in either the short or the long term."
Effects on musical instruments
Bellows-driven instruments – such as the accordion, concertina, melodeon and Uilleann (or Irish) bagpipes – reportedly need less frequent cleaning and maintenance as a result of the Irish smoking ban.
Effects of prison smoking bans
Prisons have increasingly been banning tobacco smoking. In the United States, some states with smoke-free prison policies only ban indoor smoking whereas others ban smoking on the entire prison grounds. In July 2004 the Federal Bureau of Prisons adopted a smoke-free policy for its facilities. A 1993 Supreme Court ruling acknowledged that a prisoner's exposure to second-hand smoke could be regarded as cruel and unusual punishment (which would be in violation of the Eighth Amendment). A 1997 ruling in Massachusetts established that prison smoking bans do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Many officials view prison smoking bans as a means of reducing health-care costs.
Prison officials and guards are often concerned based on previous events in other prisons concerning riots, fostering a cigarette black market within the prison, and other problems resulting from a total prison smoking ban. Prisons have experienced riots when placing smoking bans into effect resulting in prisoners setting fires, destroying prison property, persons being assaulted, injured, and stabbed. One prison in Canada had some guards reporting breathing difficulties from the fumes of prisoners smoking artificial cigarettes made from nicotine patches lit by creating sparks from inserting metal objects into electrical outlets. For example in 2008, the Orsainville Detention Centre near Quebec City, withdrew its smoking ban following a riot. But the feared increase in tension and violence expected in association with smoking bans has generally not been seen.
The introduction of smoking bans produced protests and predictions of widespread non-compliance, and media stories regarding the rise of clandestine smokeasies, including in New York City, Northern Ireland, Germany, Illinois, the United Kingdom, Utah, and Washington, D.C.
In reality, however, high levels of compliance with bans (in excess of 90 per cent) have been reported in most jurisdictions including New York, Ireland, Italy and Scotland. Poor compliance was reported in Kolkata.
Criticism of bans
Smoking bans have been criticised on a number of grounds.
Government interference with personal lifestyle or property rights
Critics of smoking bans, including musician Joe Jackson, and essayist and political critic Christopher Hitchens, have claimed that bans are misguided efforts of retrograde Puritans. Typically, this argument is based on John Stuart Mill's harm principle, interpreting smoking bans as ban on tobacco consumption instead of ban on harming other people.
Such arguments, which usually refer to the notion of personal liberty, have themselves been criticized by Nobel Prize winning economist Amartya Sen who defended smoking bans on several grounds. Among other things, Sen argued that while a person may be free to acquire the habit of smoking, they thereby restrict their own freedom in the future given that the habit of smoking is hard to break. Sen also pointed out the heavy costs that smoking inevitably imposes on every society which grants smokers unrestricted access to public services (Which, Sen noted, every society that is not "monstrously unforgiving" would do). Thus, arguments, which invoke the notion of personal liberty against smoking bans, are incomplete and inadequate, according to Sen.
Some critics of smoking bans emphasize the property rights of business owners, drawing a distinction between public places (such as government buildings) and privately-owned establishments (such as bars and restaurants). Citing economic efficiency, some economists suggest that the basic institutions of private property rights and contractual freedom are capable of resolving conflicts between the preferences of smokers and those who seek a smoke-free environment, without government intrusion.
Legality of bans
Businesses affected by smoking bans have filed lawsuits claiming that bans are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal. In the United States, some cite unequal protection under the law while others cite loss of business without compensation, as well as other types of challenges. Some localities where hospitality businesses filed lawsuits against the State or local government include, Nevada, Montana, Iowa, Colorado, Kentucky, New York, South Carolina, and Hawaii. Such lawsuits have generally been unsuccessful.
Bans may move smoking elsewhere
Bans on smoking in offices and other enclosed public places often result in smokers going outside to smoke, frequently congregating outside doorways. Many jurisdictions that have banned smoking in enclosed public places have extended the ban to cover areas within a fixed distance of entrances to buildings.
The former British Cabinet Member John Reid claimed that bans on smoking in public places may lead to more smoking at home. However, both the House of Commons Health committee and the Royal College of Physicians disagreed, with the former finding no evidence to support Reid's claim after studying Ireland, and the latter finding that smoke-free households increased from 22% to 37% between 1996 and 2003.
Connection to DUI fatalities
In May 2008, research published by Adams and Cotti in the Journal of Public Economics examined statistics of drunken-driving fatalities and accidents in areas where smoking bans in bars have been implemented and found that fatal drunken-driving accidents increased by about 13 percent, or about 2.5 such accidents per year for a typical county of 680,000. They speculate this could be caused by smokers driving farther away to jurisdictions without bans or where enforcement is lax. No evidence is presented for jurisdictions where smoking bans and enforcement are consistent.
Effects of funding on research literature
As in other areas of research, the effect of funding on research literature has been discussed with respect to smoking bans. Most commonly, studies which found few or no positive and/or negative effects of smoking bans and which were funded by tobacco companies have been delegitimized because they were seen as biased in favor of their funders.
Professor of Economics at the California State Polytechnic University-San Luis Obispo, Michael L. Marlow, defended "tobacco-sponsored" studies arguing that all studies merited "scrutiny and a degree of skepticism," irrespective of their funding. He wished for the basic assumption that every author were "fair minded and trustworthy, and deserves being heard out" and for less attention to research funding when evaluating the results of a study. Marlow suggests that studies funded by tobacco companies are viewed and dismissed as "deceitful," i.e. as being driven by (conscious) bad intention.
Alternatives to bans
Incentives for voluntarily smoke-free establishments
During the debates over the Washington, DC, smoking ban, city council member Carol Schwartz proposed legislation that would have enacted either a substantial tax credit for businesses that chose to ban smoking or a quadrupling of the annual business license fee for bars, restaurants and clubs that wished to allow smoking. Additionally, locations allowing smoking would have been required to install specified high-performance ventilation systems.
Critics of bans suggest ventilation is a means of reducing the harmful effects of passive smoking. A study conducted by the School of Technology of the University of Glamorgan in Wales, United Kingdom, published in the Building Services Journal found that "ventilation is effective in controlling the level of contamination", though "ventilation can only dilute or partially displace contaminants and occupational exposure limits are based on the 'as low as reasonably practicable' principle".
Many hospitality organizations claim that ventilation systems can bring venues into compliance with smoke-free restaurant ordinances. A study published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers and funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation found one establishment with lower air quality in the non-smoking section, due to improperly installed ventilation systems. They also determined that even properly functioning systems "are not substitutes for smoking bans in controlling environmental smoke exposure."
The tobacco industry has focused on proposing ventilation as an alternative to smoking bans, though this approach has not been widely adopted in the U.S. because "in the end, it is simpler, cheaper, and healthier to end smoking." The Italian smoking ban permits dedicated smoking rooms with automatic doors and smoke extractors. Nevertheless, few Italian establishments are creating smoking rooms due to the additional cost.
A landmark report from the U.S. Surgeon General found that even the use of elaborate ventilation systems and smoking rooms fail to provide protection from the health hazards of secondhand smoke, since there is "no safe level of second hand smoke".
A number of states in the United States have "preemption clauses" within state law which block local communities from passing smoking ban ordinances more strict than the state laws on the books. The rationale is to prevent local communities from passing smoking bans that are viewed as excessive by that state's legislature. Other states have "anti-preemption clauses" that allow local communities to pass smoking ban ordinances that their legislature found unacceptable.
In Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, three restaurants received short-term exemptions from a local ban on smoking in restaurants when they managed to demonstrate financial suffering because of the ordinance.
- Blue law#Islamic countries
- Indoor air quality
- List of smoking bans in the United States
- List of smoking bans (worldwide)
- List of smoke-free colleges and universities
- Tobacco control
- Tobacco fatwa
- Action on Smoking and Health
- Airspace Action on Smoking and Health
- Anti-Cigarette League of America
- FOREST (A UK pro-tobacco group)
- Douglas Eads Foster, Los Angeles, California, City Council member, 1927–29, proposed smoking ban near schools
- Evan Lewis, Los Angeles City Council member, 1925–41, opposed smoking in balconies of theaters
- ^ "36-601.01 - Smoke-free Arizona act". Arizona Revised Statutes Title 36 - Public Health and Safety. Arizona State Legislature. http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/36/00601-01.htm. Retrieved 18 Jun. 2009.
- ^ "Smokefree legislation consultation response, The Institute of Public Health in Ireland". Archived from the original on 8 Oct. 2007. http://web.archive.org/web/20071008192053/http://www.publichealth.ie/index.asp?locID=396. Retrieved 5 Sep. 2006.
- ^ "New health bill will ban smoking in majority of workplaces". http://www.direct.gov.uk/Nl1/Newsroom/NewsroomArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=10027079&chk=5r8ic9. Retrieved 5 Sep. 2006. (UK Health Secretary: The smoking ban "is a huge step forward for public health and will help reduce deaths from cancer, heart disease and other smoking related diseases") See also WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control; First international treaty on public health, adopted by 192 countries and signed by 168. See in particular Article 8 Protection from exposure to tobacco smoke.
- ^ Barendregt JJ, Bonneux L, van der Maas PJ (October 1997). "The health care costs of smoking". N Engl J Med 337 (15): 1052–7. doi:10.1056/NEJM199710093371506. PMID 9321534. http://content.nejm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=short&pmid=9321534&promo=ONFLNS19.
- ^ "New health bill will ban smoking in majority of workplaces". 28 October 2005. http://www.direct.gov.uk/Nl1/Newsroom/NewsroomArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=10027079&chk=5r8ic9. Retrieved 5 Sep. 2006.
- ^ "WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control". World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/fctc/en/. Retrieved 17 Jun. 2009.
- ^ Boyle P, Autier P, Bartelink H, et al. (July 2003). "European Code Against Cancer and scientific justification: third version (2003)". Ann Oncol 19 (7): 973–1005. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdg305. PMID 12853336. http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/content/14/7/973.long. Retrieved 18 Jun. 2009.
- ^ Sasco AJ, Secretan MB, Straif K. (2004). "Tobacco smoking and cancer: a brief review of recent epidemiological evidence". Lung Cancer 45 (Suppl 2): S3–9. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2004.07.998. PMID 15552776.
- ^ Jerry Markon, Renae Merle (13 April 2004). "Disparity in Protecting Food Service Staff from Secondhand Smoke Shows Need for Comprehensive Smoke-Free Policies, Say Groups" (Press release). http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-20996825_ITM.
- ^ Glossary: Sidestream smoke
- ^ "Involuntary smoking". http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol83/02-involuntary.html. Retrieved 15 Jul. 2006.
- ^ E. S. Ferri and E. J. Baratta: Polonium 210 in Tobacco, Cigarette Smoke, and Selected Human Organs, in: Public Health Reports, Vol. 81, No. 2, February 1966, pp. 121–127.
- ^ Schick S, Glantz S. (2005). "Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke". Tob Control. 14 (6): 396–404. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.011288. PMC 1748121. PMID 16319363. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1748121.
- ^ Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: A monograph from the U.S. National Cancer Institute. Retrieved 6 August 2007.
- ^ Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet, from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed 6 August 2007.[dead link]
- ^ Environmental Tobacco Smoke. From the 11th Report on Carcinogens of the National Institutes of Health. Retrieved 6 August 2007.
- ^ The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Dated 27 June 2006. Retrieved 6 August 2007.
- ^ Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking: A monograph of the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization. Retrieved 6 August 2007.
- ^ "Indoor Air Quality in Hospitality Venues Before and After Implementation of a Clean Indoor Air Law --- Western New York, 2003". Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 12 November 2004. pp. 1038–1041. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5344a3.htm.
- ^ "Study Finds That New Jersey Bars and Restaurants Have Nine Times More Air Pollution than Those in Smoke-Free New York". http://www.umdnj.edu/about/news_events/releases/04/r041214_bars.htm.
- ^ Nina Athey-Pollard (16 March 2006). "Smoking ban leads to healthier bar staff". Chemical Science (RSC Publishing). http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/ChemScience/Volume/2006/04/smoking_ban.asp
- ^ Ellingsen DG, Fladseth G, Daae HL, et al. (March 2006). "Airborne exposure and biological monitoring of bar and restaurant workers before and after the introduction of a smoking ban". J Environ Monit 8 (3): 362–8. doi:10.1039/b600050a. PMID 16528420.
- ^ Workplace Smoking Bans and Restrictions, Public Health Law Research 2009
- ^ a b “The ashtray of history”, the Atlantic Magazine, available at: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/01/the-ashtray-of-history/5532/
- ^ Lader, Malcolm Harold; Henningfield, Jack E.; Martin Jarvis (1985). Nicotine, an old-fashioned addiction. London: Burke Publishing. pp. 96–8.
- ^ Lader, Malcolm Harold; Henningfield, Jack E.; Martin Jarvis (1985). Nicotine, an old-fashioned addiction. London: Burke Publishing. pp. 96–8. ISBN 0-222-01216-1.
- ^ Proctor, RN (Fall 1997). "The Nazi war on tobacco: ideology, evidence, and possible cancer consequences". Bull Hist Med 71 (3): 435–88. doi:10.1353/bhm.1997.0139. PMID 9302840.
- ^ 
- ^ Proctor RN (February 2001). "Commentary: Schairer and Schöniger's forgotten tobacco epidemiology and the Nazi quest for racial purity". Int J Epidemiol 30 (1): 31–4. doi:10.1093/ije/30.1.31. PMID 11171846. http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/30/1/31.
- ^ Proctor RN (December 1996). "The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45". BMJ 313 (7070): 1450–3. PMC 2352989. PMID 8973234. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/313/7070/1450.
- ^ Daragan K, Fisher S, Keane D, Lattanzio T, Laufer D, Pontarelli J, Trach B, Walls T (30 Jun. 1994). "Preemption/Accommodation presentation" (PDF). Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. University of California at San Francisco. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=pmn67d00&fmt=pdf&ref=results. Retrieved 23 Nov. 2006.
- ^ "Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act - Freedom to Breathe". Minnesota Department of Health. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/indoorair/mciaa/ftb/index.html.
- ^ Martiga Lohn (13 May 2007). "Minnesota lawmakers approve smoking ban". Associated Press. Boston Globe. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/05/13/minnesota_lawmakers_approve_smoking_ban/.
- ^ Judith Cummings (4 April 1987). "BEVERLY HILLS SMOKING BAN CLEARS AIR BUT ASH TRAYS STAY". New York Times. New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/04/us/beverly-hills-smoking-ban-clears-air-but-ash-trays-stay.html.
- ^ David E. Garth (29 January 2001). "Letter to Nebraska Senators from San Luis Obispo Chamber of Commerce in favor of Smokefree Legislation". Tobacco.org. http://www.tobacco.org/News/010129garth.html. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2007.
- ^ "How many Smokefree Laws?" (PDF). American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. 6 October 2006. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/mediaordlist.pdf. Retrieved 23 Nov. 2006.
- ^ Ministry of Health (15 September 2005). "Smokefree Law in New Zealand". moh.govt.nz. http://www.moh.govt.nz/smokefreelaw. Retrieved 24 March 2011.
- ^ AFP: Nepal to ban smoking in public places
- ^ Venezuelanalysis.com, 30 May 2011, Smoking Banned in Public and Commercial Closed Spaces in Venezuela
- ^ Desk, Lifestyle (27 August 2011). "Smoking Ban Announced at Plage Lumière, Provence, France". The Global Herald. http://theglobalherald.com/smoking-ban-announced-at-plage-lumiere-provence-france/24054/. Retrieved 29 August 2011.
- ^ More Smokers Feeling Harassed by Smoking Bans
- ^ The Gallup Organization (March 2009). "Survey on Tobacco - Analytical Report". European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_determinants/life_style/Tobacco/Documents/eb_253_en.pdf. Retrieved 24 May 2009.
- ^ Hurriyet, 30 July 2009, also reported by Reuters: "Smoking-ban murder", 31 July 2009, http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSTRE56U4BO20090731
- ^ Bartecchi C, Alsever RN, Nevin-Woods C, et al. (October 2006). "Reduction in the incidence of acute myocardial infarction associated with a citywide smoking ordinance". Circulation 114 (14): 1490–6. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.615245. PMID 17000911. http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/114/14/1490.
- ^ Sargent RP, Shepard RM, Glantz SA (April 2004). "Reduced incidence of admissions for myocardial infarction associated with public smoking ban: before and after study". BMJ 328 (7446): 977–80. doi:10.1136/bmj.38055.715683.55. PMC 404491. PMID 15066887. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=404491. Lay summary.
- ^ Menzies D, Nair A, Williamson PA, et al. (October 2006). "Respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function, and markers of inflammation among bar workers before and after a legislative ban on smoking in public places". JAMA 296 (14): 1742–8. doi:10.1001/jama.296.14.1742. PMID 17032987. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/296/14/1742. Retrieved 4 Jan. 2010. Lay summary.
- ^ Ban sees bar staff 'breathe easy'
- ^ Barone-Adesi F, Vizzini L, Merletti F, Richiardi L (October 2006). "Short-term effects of Italian smoking regulation on rates of hospital admission for acute myocardial infarction". Eur. Heart J. 27 (20): 2468–72. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehl201. PMID 16940340. http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/27/20/2468.
- ^ Juster HR, Loomis BR, Hinman TM, et al. (November 2007). "Declines in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction in New York state after implementation of a comprehensive smoking ban". Am J Public Health 97 (11): 2035–9. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2006.099994. PMC 2040364. PMID 17901438. http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/97/11/2035.
- ^ Michelle Sims, Roy Maxwell, Linda Bauld, Anna Gilmore Short term impact of smoke-free legislation in England: retrospective analysis of hospital admissions for myocardial infarction BMJ 2010;340:c2161 doi:10.1136/bmj.c2161
- ^ NHS Heart attacks fall after smoking ban
- ^ Evans, et. al., Do Workplace Smoking Bans Reduce Smoking?, The American Economics Review, 1999, http://www.jstor.org/pss/117157
- ^ Do Smoking Bans Really Get People to Quit?, ABC World News, 8 Nov. 2005, http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/QuitToLive/story?id=1292456
- ^ Langlands, Eva (15 Oct. 2006). "Cigarette sales up 5% despite smoking ban". The Times (London). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article601421.ece. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2010.
- ^ Pagnamenta, Robin (21 Aug. 2007). "Cigarette sales drop 7% in a month". The Times (London). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article2295859.ece. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2010.
- ^ BBC Cigarette sales 'slump after ban' 2 October 2007
- ^ John Heironimus (21 Jan. 1992). "Impact of Workplace Restrictions on Consumption and Incidence" (PDF). http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/cgi/getdoc?tid=qhs55e00&fmt=pdf&ref=results. Retrieved 26 Dec. 2006.
- ^ Washington Post
- ^ (sv) SVD: Folkhälsoinstitutet: Snus ger cancer
- ^ BBC News A fifth of smokers 'plan to quit' 8 March 2006
- ^ Restaurant smoking bans stop teens getting the habit New Scientist Issue 2655, 10 May 2008, page 4
- ^ Siegel M, Albers AB, Cheng DM, Hamilton WL, Biener L (May 2008). "Local restaurant smoking regulations and the adolescent smoking initiation process: results of a multilevel contextual analysis among Massachusetts youth". Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 162 (5): 477–83. doi:10.1001/archpedi.162.5.477. PMC 2948204. PMID 18458195. http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/162/5/477.
- ^ Eriksen M, Chaloupka F (2007). "The economic impact of clean indoor air laws". CA Cancer J Clin 57 (6): 367–78. doi:10.3322/CA.57.6.367. PMID 17989131. http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/content/full/57/6/367.
- ^ Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, Glantz S (2003). "Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry". Tob Control 12 (1): 13–20. doi:10.1136/tc.12.1.13. PMC 1759095. PMID 12612356. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1759095.
- ^ "Economic impacts" Tavern League of Wisconsin(broken link)
- ^ "The Economic Impact of the New York State Smoking Ban on New York’s Bars" Tavern League of Wisconsin
- ^ "Evans Report Summary (Canada)" Tavern League of Wisconsin (broken link)
- ^ Home
- ^ "No smoke signals a boom for pubs, clubs". Sydney Morning Herald. 2 September 2007. http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/no-smoke-signals-a-boom-for-pubs-clubs/2007/09/01/1188067429767.html. Retrieved 1 Sep. 2007.
- ^ The Australian
- ^ Germany's Smoking Ban Spreads Through States, Deutsche Welle, 14 January 2007
- ^ "Does smoke-free Ireland have more smoking inside the home and less in pubs than the United Kingdom? Findings from the international tobacco control policy evaluation project". The European Journal of Public Health (London). 2008. http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/18/1/63. Retrieved 25 Apr. 2010.
- ^ Lister, David (27 Feb. 2007). "Rural pubs will suffer from smoking ban". The Times (London). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1443931.ece. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2010.
- ^ "Scottish Government". http://www.clearingtheairscotland.com/.
- ^ "Third of pubs 'not ready for ban'". BBC News. 2 Mar. 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6410215.stm. Retrieved 4 Jan. 2010.
- ^ "ic Wales (icwales.icnetwork.co.uk)". http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/news/wales-news/2007/10/12/smoking-ban-has-hit-trade-says-lva-91466-19938086/.
- ^ Pub beer sales slump to low point 20 November 2007, BBC News
- ^ Smoke Ban Fails To Boost Pub Meal Sales 26 November 2007, SKY News
- ^ Smoking ban 'costs pub takings' 17 December 2007, BBC News
- ^ "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General". http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke. Retrieved 27 Jun. 2006.
- ^ "Richard Roesler: Surgeon general: No safe level of secondhand smoke.". CNN. Archived from the original on 13 Jul. 2006. http://web.archive.org/web/20060713070715/http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/06/27/involuntary.smoking.ap/index.html. Retrieved 27 Jun. 2006.
- ^ Bars and Restaurants Thrive Amid Smoking Ban, Study Says 29 March 2003, The New York Times
- ^ Mark Engelen, Matthew Farrelly & Andrew Hyland: The Health and Economic Impact of New York's Clean Indoor Air Act. July 2006, p. 21
- ^ John F. Garvey, Paul McElwaine, Thomas S. Monaghan, and Walter T. McNicholas Confessions of an accordion cleaner – a marker of improved air quality since the Irish smoking ban BMJ 24 September 2007
- ^ Polito, John R.. "Prison Smoking Cessation, Tobacco Cessation and Nicotine Cessation". WhyQuit.com. http://whyquit.com/pr/092507.html. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ Young, Christie Getto (20 Apr. 2009). "100% SMOKEFREE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES" (PDF). American NonSmokers' Rights Foundation. http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/100smokefreeprisons.pdf. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ Zoroya, Gregg (21 Jul. 2004). "Smoking bans spread to prisons". USA TODAY. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-07-21-prison-smoking-usat_x.htm. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ "HELLING et al. v. McKINNEY". Supreme Court collection. Cornell University Law School. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/91-1958.ZS.html. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ a b Young, Christie Getto. "Prison smoking ban is not cruel and unusual punishment". Tobacco Control Resource Center, Inc., Northeastern University. http://www.tobaccocontrol.neu.edu/TCU/tcu02.1/Mass/prison_smoking_ban_is_not_cruel_.htm. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ Agar, John (31 Jan. 2009). "State's prison smoking ban to save health-care costs, end prisoner 'luxury'". Grand Rapids News (The Grand Rapids Press). http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/01/states_prison_smoking_ban_to_s.html. Retrieved 23 May 2009.
- ^ The Smokers Club, Inc. - Prison Ban Casualty
- ^ Prisoner riot reverses smoking ban | libcom.org
- ^ AFP: Dutch cafe owners rally against smoking ban
- ^ "Waiting to inhale", The New York Times, 4 January 2004 See also: "Lighting-up time: Big Apple meets Big Smoke," The Times, 1 April 2005. See also "Gangsters will be the real winners in smoking ban," Scottish Daily Record, 7 January 2005. "Smoked out?" The Buffalo News, 18 February 2004."N.Y. restaurants cutting trans fat from menus," The Washington Times, 6 December 2006. "The Guide to the Guides," The Observer (United Kingdom), 30 January 2005. "A year after New York smoking ban, debate still rages over effects," The Philadelphia Inquirer, 31 March 2004. "Late Night Cracks in City's Ban," New York Post, 4 March 2004. "On The Run," The New York Times, 8 June 2003.
- ^ "Beware of complacency as 'smoke-easies' appear", The Irish News, 12 June 2007
- ^ ""Warning over 'smoke-easy' lock-ins," The Scotsman, 29 August 2006". http://news.scotsman.com/ViewArticle.aspx?articleid=2806052.
- ^ Connolly, Kate (19 Jan. 2008). ""'Nazi' claim as Germans rebel over smoking ban," The Observer, 20 January 2008". The Guardian (London). http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2243763,00.html. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2010. ""German Don Quixotes Tilt against Smoking Ban", Der Spiegel, 11 January 2008". http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,527908,00.html.
- ^ Eric Petersen, "Three Schaumburg businesses violate new smoking ban," The Arlington Heights Daily Herald, March 2007 See also: ""Smoking ban holds up, despite opposition", The Telegraph, 23 February 2008". http://www.thetelegraph.com/articles/ban_11408___article.html/smoking_bar.html.
- ^ ""Stand-off!", The Huddersfield Daily Examiner, 17 January 2008". http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2008/01/17/stand-off-86081-20360728/. "Defiant bar owner finds 'loophole' to flout smoking ban," The Daily Mail, 3 August 2007 ""My local smoke-easy", The New Statesman, 7 February 2008". http://www.newstatesman.com/200802070019. ""The Big Smoke-easy," The Publican, 21 February 2008". http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?storyCode=58732.
- ^ "Everyone Head for the Smoke-Easy", Utah Statesman, 12 December 2006
- ^ "Smoke-easies offer cover from puff police; Aficionados just want a place to light up, relax," The Washington Times, 20 November 2003
- ^ "tobaccofreecenter.org". http://tobaccofreecenter.org/files/pdfs/en/SF_laws_work_en.pdf.
- ^ "Record compliance with smoking ban - The Irish Times - Mon, 22 Jun 2009". http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0622/breaking34.htm.
- ^ "Times Higher Education - Italian smoking ban leads to drop in heart attacks". http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storyCode=205787§ioncode=26.
- ^ "Smoking ban up in smoke in Kolkata". http://www.indianexpress.com/news/smoking-ban-up-in-smoke-in-kolkata/427307/.
- ^ "The Official Website of Joe Jackson". http://www.joejackson.com/smoking.php. Retrieved 12 Apr. 2007.
- ^ The American Spectator : Smoking Room
- ^ Hoggart, Simon (18 May 2007). "Is the smoking ban a good idea?". The Guardian (London). http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/may/14/health.smoking. Retrieved 7 Apr. 2010.
- ^ a b c d Sen, Amartya (11 February 2007). "Unrestrained smoking is a libertarian half-way house". Financial Times.
- ^ "Valentin Petkantchin, "Should cigarettes be banned in public places?" (Montreal Economic Institute: April, 2005)" (PDF). http://www.iedm.org/uploaded/pdf/avril05_en.pdf. Retrieved 22 Jun. 2009.
- ^ Judge Rules Nevada Smoking Ban is Constitutional - Las Vegas Now |
- ^ Montana Gaming Group, effect of public smoking ban on Montana businesses | smoking ban in public areas | Helena Montana smoking ban | environmental tobacco smoke | economic da...[dead link]
- ^ Seven businesses sue over smoking ban[dead link]
- ^ Anti-smoking law challenged | The Honolulu Advertiser | Hawaii's Newspaper
- ^ Colorado AG Asks State Smoking Ban Lawsuit Be Dismissed [06/23/06-4]
- ^ Lawsuit Challenges Louisville's Smoking Ban - Louisville News Story - WLKY Louisville
- ^ smoking ban lawsuit loss - Google Search
- ^ Health board stands by smoking ban,: Lawsuit alleges group overstepped its authority | Article from Charleston Gazette | HighBeam Research
- ^ "Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights – Australia". http://www.no-smoke.org/learnmore.php?dp=d14%7Cd35%7Cp210.
- ^ a b Wintour, Patrick (17 Dec. 2005). "MPs to challenge ministers' veto on total smoking ban". The Guardian (London). http://www.guardian.co.uk/smoking/Story/0,,1669527,00.html. Retrieved 7 Oct. 2006.
- ^ "Smoking ban in public places also cuts smoking at home". http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7509/129-b. Retrieved 7 Oct. 2006.
- ^ Smiley, Colneth, Jr., "Puffers fuming over planned ban", Boston Herald, Sunday, 31 January 2010
- ^ Fermin, Marisela, "Not in Here You Don’t: Plans to Ban Smoking in Boston Public Housing", Spare Change News, Boston, 25 March 2010
- ^ "Drunk driving after the passage of smoking bans in bars". The Economist. 3 April 2008. http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10966152.
- ^ e.g. mentioned on p. 167 in  Econ Journal Watch, Volume 5, Number 2, pp. 163-168. . Retrieved 19 November 2009.
- ^ Marlow, Michael L. 2008. Honestly, Who Else Would Fund Such Research? Reflections of a Non-Smoking Scholar. Econ Journal Watch 5(2): 240- 268. 
- ^ "Press Advisory - Statement of Councilmember Carol Schwartz at the 14 June 2005 Smoke-Free Hearing". 14 Jun. 2005. Archived from the original on 2008-04-19. http://web.archive.org/web/20080419094903/http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/SCHWARTZ/smoke-free_workplaces_statement_june14_2005_rls.htm. Retrieved 31 Jul. 2008.
- ^ Cited at parliament.uk. "Dealing with the health effects of secondhand smoke". Accessed 26 August 2010.
- ^ "Can Displacement Ventilation Control Secondhand ETS?". http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?id=15600.
- ^ Drope J, Bialous SA, Glantz SA (2004). "Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America". Tobacco control. 13 Suppl 1 (90001): i41–7. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.004101. PMC 1766145. PMID 14985616. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1766145.
- ^ BBC News Italians fume over cigarette curb 10 January 2005
- ^ U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequesnces of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Coordinating Center for Health Promotion, National Center for Chronic Disease prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2006. Accessed 26 August 2010.
- ^ Banks, Gabrielle; Srikameswaran, Anita (23 December 2006). "Allegheny County smoking ban put on hold". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06357/748507-85.stm.
- ^ Hector's wants longer exemption See also: D.C. Grants First Exemption to Smoking Ban  The Gazette, Gaithersburg, MD,
- Canadian Council for Tobacco Control
- Clearing the Air Scotland Scottish Executive site established to provide information on Scotland's smoke-free legislation
- Hong Kong Tobacco Control Office
- Irish Government's Office of Tobacco Control
- State Tobacco Laws from the American Cancer Society
- Legacy Tobacco Documents Library from the University of California, San Francisco
- Philip Morris USA Document Archive
- Prevalence of smoking and information on smoking bans in an interactive world map
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.