The smoking ban in Germany is simply pathetic

Again Hazza, you are conflating political will with market will. My personal belief is that the majority are in favor of (or at least ambivalent about) a smoking ban, however a significant percentage did not make "non-smoking" enough of a deciding factor to make it a competative advantage.

I have a feeling even you might concede this. These two things feelings can co-exist without much problem:

"Where do you want to go tonight?" "Where ever, I'm up for anything" (or even: "I like place X")
"Should there be a smoking ban?" "Yes"

I think you'll also find that there are historical examples of businesses going out of business due to lost revenue from tightened government environmental, safety, and health regulations. Just as will happen here, it won't be all. Some adapt, some don't. Anytime you change the "rules of the game" it changes who the winners and losers are.

@Don_riina,

I thought it only right and proper to write that in the thread.

I used to think all the people saying they smoke because its fun, they like it, its cool, they can give up that 40 a day habit anytime were telling the truth.

It appears, they were not...

They were just addicted...

Yes TFL, there are "winners" and "losers" under the ban.

Winners are going to be places that generate a higher proportion of income from food sales, have a customer base of a higher-socio economic class,
tend to serve families more, generate a lower proportion of turnover from beer sales, have a higher customer turnover not nescessarily locally based.

Losers are going to be places that generally don't sell as much food, have poorer, local, regular beer drinking customers.

I think the experience of Ireland and the UK have proved this to be the case.
Go ahead and support smoking bans but there needs to be some honesty that there are consequences.

The smoking ban is not working in Glasgow anyway.

Last week, just after Celtic beat Rangers 2-1, a number of Celtic fans were outside a well known Celtic-friendly pub having a smoke. A car load of rangers eejits rolled up, windows down and peltered them with eggs.



There is potential for mayhem after sporting fixtures across europe!

Tango bigots shoot protein cos they see a few Bhoys having a puff!

On Sat 1 teletext there's a poll at the moment.


Translated:


Now it's a Sat 1 poll and you have ring in to get your vote counted, and I'm sure it's not 100% accurate. But it's the only poll I've seen anywhere neutral so far.

It's currently on page 184 if you want to see it for yourselves...

Hi.

I started a new job today, the people are nice there but the one problem I have is the smoking in the staff room. I'm quite allergic to cigarette smoke (Chronic Asthmatic) and I can't be in a room with someone who is smoking.

Today is only my first day so I didn't say anything. I did mention that I have asthma and can't smoke, but is there anything I can do to persuade them to smoke somewhere else... or will they just tell me to sit somewhere else in my coffee break?

Kate

1.26pm and already logged onto TT. That's the attitude.

I assume the "staff room" is the smoking room, in which case telling people they can't smoke in the smoking room is not likely to prove popular.

Not popular, but I believe now smoking is not allowed in the office. Do you piss on everyone's fire? Your call...

like everything, it takes time. There is no argument for smoking. No smoker in the world can conjur up any debate on something proven beyond any doubt that it's bad for you and second hand smoke is as bad.

I indulge on rare occasion, however, everyone get over it. the ban will only go further, not backwards. it is not a birth right and there are no benefits or purpose of smoking.

to my knowledge, non-smokers have a right in any workplace to have a smoke free environment. However with many private companies, the ban has not stretched that far, but it's coming. Smoking in the office is so 70's...

SquirrelKate -- you can at least ask where the non-smoking break room is.

There is no argument for lots of things, yet folks still do them because they like it. How do you convince someone that they shouldn't like something anymore? You can stop them from doing whatever the activity is that they like where it bothers other people, but you can't stop them completely if they like it and want to continue.

Kinda like sex... you can forbid sex in public places like restaurants and offices, but you can't stop folks from doing it in the privacy of their own homes


Actually, for some conditions smoking can be quite beneficial, like glaucoma or aids ... only then we're not talking about tobacco

of course you can completely stop them from doing things that annoy other people, and in some cases that are public health concerns. For example: smoking ban...errrr...uhhh...yeah. (but i do get your point...airports and jet emissions are worse for your lungs than some irritating smoker next to you.) Btw, public sex isnt the same as smoking, as public sex doesnt really hurt those around you, unless some poor slob isnt getting any.

im sure if hemp was less socially-stigmatized and legal, more people might actually refute any said ban. I like the way you are thinking!

Banning something never completely stops anything.. Drugs are banned in the US.. If I recall my College career I think I saw some drugs being done once

I am upset I left Germany before this took affect. The smoke everywhere in Germany was my number 2 most hated thing after the rainy weather, a smoke free Germany would be awesome...

for clarifications sake, the current "ban" is public bldgs, restaurants, etc. Im quite certain failure to comply within the boundaries of the regulation will have legal implications, such as "drug bans" do. To my knowledge drugs are somewhat banned in public bldgs, restaurants, etc. (for the exception of alcohol and caffeine, of course )

I read an interesting statistic at the weekend, apparently there were 1,384 fewer heart attacks in the nine months after the no smoking legislation was introduced in Britain than in the same period a year earlier, with some NHS Trusts reporting a decline of as much as 41 per cent in heart-attack related admissions since last July. This is presumably because it persuaded a large amount of smokers to give up. Source: The Observer Magazine

anyone have some sincere REAL advice on how to stop smoking? Im not sure if its physical, habitual or psychological addiction at this point.

Just Do It - wouldnt be asking if Nike's motto were simply that easy.

I can't help you there I'm afraid. I gave up more than 25 years ago and can't remember how I did it! You could however get some tips from this thread, it may help.

Also by reducing exposure to secondhand smoke for nonsmokers. This reduction has been observed everywhere a smoking ban has been brought in.

Public smoking ban slashes heart attacks 15:30 01 April 2003 NewScientist.com
A six-month ban on smoking in all public places slashed the number of heart attacks in a US town by almost a half, a new study has revealed. The researchers attribute the dramatic drop to the "near elimination" of harmful effects of "second-hand" smoke - passive smoking. A smoke-free environment also encourages smokers to reduce smoking or quit altogether, the team adds. Statistician Stanton Glantz, at the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues studied diagnoses of heart attacks in the town of Helena, Montana, where the ban was imposed. "This striking finding suggests that protecting people from toxins in second-hand smoke not only makes life more pleasant, it immediately starts saving lives," Glantz says. The researchers claim the study is the first to show that smoke-free policies rapidly reduce heart attacks, as well as having long-term benefits.

"Reduced Admissions for Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated with a Public Smoking Ban: Matched Controlled Study."
Dong-Chul Seo, and Mohammad R. Torabi.
Journal of Drug EducationVolume 37, Number 3, 2007, 217 - 226.

Smoking ban brings big cut in heart attacks in Scotland, study finds
Non-smokers benefit most with 20% fall in first year
Children and bar staff's exposure also reduced
Sarah Hall The Guardian, Tuesday September 11, 2007
The number of people being taken to hospital with heart attacks in Scotland has fallen significantly since the smoking ban was introduced, the most detailed study into the impact of the measure has revealed.
Researchers found a 17% drop in the number of people admitted for heart attacks in the year since the ban came into force, compared with an average 3% reduction a year over the previous decade.

Heart Attacks Decreased After Public Smoking Ban In Italy
ScienceDaily (Feb. 12, 2008) — The number of acute coronary events such as heart attack in adults dropped significantly after a smoking ban in public places in Italy, researchers reported in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association.

Heart attacks tumble after Irish smoking ban
By Ben Hirschler Tuesday, Sep. 4, 2007; 4:26 PM
VIENNA (Reuters) - Ireland's rate of heart attacks fell by around a tenth in the year following the introduction of the world's first nationwide ban on workplace smoking, boosting the case for more similar bans, doctors said on Tuesday. Edmond Cronin and colleagues at Cork University Hospital said an analysis of people admitted with heart attacks to public hospitals in southwest Ireland showed an 11 percent fall in the year after the ban came into effect in March 2004.

Think of all the other problems we could solve with a ban on public drinking! Would save the health system even more money than a smoking ban. And the cost of Police services would also drop since the drunks would already be home. And then we can expand it with a ban on all junk food, and fatty foods, and sugary foods... no, better yet, let's ban sugar completely... and then... we can get on to banning the rest of the items already on the list.

I'm thinking more in terms of a ban on blowhards. How about we confine blowhards to a single, easily isolated location? Oh wait, we already have TT.

Great! Add it to the list.

People in my office still smoke at their desks and I know a dozen bars that ignore the smoking ban...

The only sad thing is they never asked US, the people, what we want. If there are really more nons than smokers - hey, democracy rules! Can you say "Volksabstimmung"?

Hopefully this isn't a repeat link, but I saw an article about a study in the Netherlands that concluded all the worrying doesn't save money. The smokers and the obese need treatment, but die off faster than the old, healthy-but-arthritic walkers: Being Healthy Saves Lives -- Not Money

Anyway, just another topic to have fun with!

One thing I have noticed about smoking - It leads either to the inability to read or at least to process the words into conscious thought. There are large signs at the entrance to the S-Bahn station Lohhof saying no smoking beyond this point but you can count on at least two or three smokers on the platform. Poor guys, falling victim to cerebral deterioration just because of an addiction ...

update: I havent smoked in over 3 weeks. Ive kicked the nasty habit!!! Now I have no more shame, as smokers are socially considered unsophisticated, unintelligent bums.

Before this whole 'non-smoking' kick started, we had 5 smokers on our floor at work (out of 26 people). Now, three of those 4 have quit smoking and one has just quit (her job). We're down to just one now. He says it's lonely out on the fire escape...ha, sucks for him.