Campus-Wide Smoking Bans Have Powerful Effects

Research shows some campus-wide smoking bans have powerful positive effects, even when they’re not enforced.

Researchers from IU’s School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation compared IU, which enacted its ban in 2008, with Purdue, a campus with no ban.

Associate Professor Dong-Chul Seo says fewer people now smoke at IU, while the number of smokers at Purdue increased slightly over the same period.

“When we started the study in fall 2007, the smoking rates at IU were 16.5 percent, that was reduced to 12.8 percent in fall 2009, that was a big change, whereas the smoking rates for Purdue was 9.5 percent in 2007, and it actually increased to 10.2 percent in 2009. So, there was a significant decline while at Purdue, there was a slight increase,” Seo said.

According to the study, the numbers declined at IU even though the smoking ban is not enforced. Seo says IU relies on peer pressure to encourage smokers not to light up.

“As long as you are aware of the policy, and you have reasonable common sense, it would not be that comfortable if you violate the policy. So, that kind of a factor might have contributed to the decline of smoking rates within the past two years.”

IU’s smoking ban prohibits smoking on all the university campuses and in university owned vehicles.

  • Annie Thomassen

    Take a quick survey
    and get good information on quitting smoking and not gaining weight!   Google; quit smoking and lose weight.
    Lots of good information on how to avoid the pitfalls after you quit, like
    bloating, weight gain, constipation, etc.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IUXDHQFVNYHUXZDAU7GZAMOUJQ j_jonik

    It is tragic that colleges and universities…centers of
    learning…centers of science and medicine…accept the claims of the anti-smoking
    campaign. 

     

    Are there no microscopes or other technologies on campus that
    can analyze a typical cigarette to see if it even contains tobacco (the
    ostensible target of outrage and legislation), or if it’s only tobacco, or if
    it contains industrial contaminants that are already known to cause what some
    call “smoking-related illnesses”?  (When one says “smoking related”, one is blaming the victims…the uninformed, insufficiently-warned, unprotected persons smoking what they believe and are told is just tobacco.)

     

    Are there no researchers who might look up law Case
    History to find that the commonly-used EPA material about harms of
    “ETS” (environmental tobacco smoke) was thrown out of Federal Court
    (by anti smoking judge Osteen) as fraudulent? …AND that the EPA has not yet
    challenged the substance of his determination?

     

     Are there no
    political education students or professors who can find that the pushers of
    such smoke bans are invariably economically-linked to the parts of the
    cigarette industry that most want to scapegoat smokers and the public domain
    tobacco plant for the harms caused by non-tobacco cigarette adulterants?

    (This refers to many pesticides, dioxin-creating chlorine,
    paper, ag biz, pharmaceuticals that contribute pesticides and additives,
    suppliers of cellulose for fake tobacco, suppliers of radioactive phosphate
    tobacco fertilizers, suppliers of burn accelerants, AND their insurers and
    investors.)

     

    Are there no students of History who might glance back at
    the origins of Reefer Madness…the war on that other smokable plant,
    cannabis…and how that was promoted by pretty much the same pesticide,
    chlorine, industrial cartel that now pushes what might be called “Tobacco
    Madness” or “Reefer Madness II”?

     

    Banning Industrial Contamination of Smoking Products is a
    legitimate and urgent direction…but banning use of Mother Nature’s tobacco
    plant, which by itself hasn’t yet been studied for justifying public-interest-level prohibitions, is quite something else.

    Search up “Fauxbacco” for ample references to get the homework started.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_IUXDHQFVNYHUXZDAU7GZAMOUJQ j_jonik

    Funny…in that tobacco has been used for about 10 thousand years for, among other pharmaceutical reasons, for Appetite Suppression….just like other public-domain natural plants (khat, coca, betel nuts, etc.) in other parts of the world.
     (Industrial contamination of tobacco is relatively recent…going back to just the early 1900s…at the dawn of the pesticide and chlorine era….at the dawn of Cancer Going Off The Charts era.)

     Funny again that those natural plants are also banned, while corporate diet pills and other versions, with barely any, if any, testing, are approved and okey doke. (Who funds YOUR public officials?)

     Funny (not) also that the Obesity Epidemic comes along just as the big tobacco crackdown gets rolling.
     Funny (not) that virtually all the health problems that the corporate media are concerned with are about Individual Behavior and natural causes.  None, except scarce few that get out of the bag, are about Corporate-Caused Health Harms.

     And it’s sure not funny that as the USA is going down the economic tubes, and so many more are facing hunger, tobacco….which would relieve hunger symptoms…is being prohibited at every turn.

What is RSS? RSS makes it possible to subscribe to a website's updates instead of visiting it by delivering new posts to your RSS reader automatically. Choose to receive some or all of the updates from Indiana Public Media News:

Support For Indiana Public Media Comes From

Search News

Stay Connected

RSS e-mail itunes Facebook Twitter Flickr YouTube

Follow us on Twitter

What is RSS? RSS makes it possible to subscribe to a website's updates instead of visiting it by delivering new posts to your RSS reader automatically. Choose to receive some or all of the updates from Indiana Public Media News:

Recent Health Stories

Recent Videos

Find Us on Facebook