Secondhand Smoke in Geneva, 1996–2006: Changes in Exposure, Opinions, and Workplace Smoking Bans in the Absence of National Legislation
ABSTRACT Postal surveys were conducted in 1996 and 2006 to assess change in duration of exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS), frequency of smoking bans at the workplace, and opinions on smokefree measures in Geneva, Switzerland in the absence of national smoke-free legislation. A random sample of 742 participants in 1996 and 1487 in 2006 showed length of exposure to SHS decreased from 7 hours/week to 4 hours/week, with the largest decrease among 26-45 year olds. Workplace smoking bans increased from 33.4% to 66.3% (p < 0.001). Agreement that SHS is dangerous to health increased from 77.5% to 86.0% (p = 0.006). Agreement that all restaurant tables should be reserved to nonsmokers also increased, from 14.8% to 41.4% (p < 0.001). Opinions were more favorable to all smoke-free measures in 2006 than in 1996, except, "More information should be given on the health dangers of SHS," suggesting a level of saturation was reached for information on SHS.
Article: Secondhand smoke at work.[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure in the workplace remains common and has important acute and chronic health effects. The present study reviews the recent evidence linking workplace SHS exposure with poor health and the benefits of smoke-free workplace legislation. Workplace SHS exposure continues to occur in many parts of the United States and around the world. Occupational SHS exposure has been linked to serious chronic health effects including lung cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and poor general health. Smoke-free workplace laws rapidly reduce workplace SHS exposure and improve respiratory health including symptoms and lung function. Smoke-free workplace legislation is also expected to reduce the chronic health effects of passive smoking, including cardiopulmonary disease and lung cancer. Occupational exposure to SHS has serious negative health consequences and will shorten lifespan. Smoke-free workplace legislation should be universally adopted around the world.Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology 04/2010; 10(2):121-6. DOI:10.1097/ACI.0b013e32833649b3 · 3.66 Impact Factor
- Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift 01/2012; 142. DOI:10.4414/smw.2012.13678 · 1.88 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Article 8 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control mandates all signatory countries to "protect citizens from exposure to tobacco smoke in workplaces, public transport and indoor public places." Even though there has been great progress in the implementation of Article 8, still most of the world population remains exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS). In this article, we sought to summarize the research that supports Article 8, where do we stand, and current research gaps and future directions.Discussion: Secondhand smoke is an established cause of heart disease and several types of cancer. Additional research is needed to reach final conclusions for diseases where evidence is only suggestive of causality. The only solution to SHS exposure in public places is banning smoking indoors. Research on the gaming industry and nightclubs, particularly in developing countries, needs to be disseminated to support their inclusion in smoke-free laws. Aside from indoor bans, additional research is needed for outdoor and multiunit housing bans and in support of measures that protect children and other vulnerable populations. The impact of smoke-free laws on other health outcomes, besides heart disease and respiratory outcomes, is another area where further research is needed. Thirdhand smoke assessment and health effects are also likely to be a topic of further research. As new tobacco products emerge, evaluating SHS exposure and effects will be vital.Conclusions: Furthering research in support of Article 8 can contribute to reach the final goal of protecting everyone from SHS exposure.Nicotine & Tobacco Research 10/2012; DOI:10.1093/ntr/nts200 · 2.81 Impact Factor