Elsevier

The Lancet Oncology

Volume 9, Issue 7, July 2008, Pages 614-615
The Lancet Oncology

News
Effectiveness of smoke-free policies

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70167-0Get rights and content

References (15)

  • IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Volume 83. Tobacco smoke and involuntary smoking

    (2004)
  • The health consequences of involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke: a report of the Surgeon General

    (2006)
  • WHO framework convention on tobacco control (WHO FCTC)

  • IARC. IARC handbooks of cancer prevention: tobacco control. Volume 13. Evaluating the effectiveness of smoke-free...
  • SJ Haw et al.

    Changes in exposure of adult non-smokers to secondhand smoke after implementation of smoke-free legislation in Scotland: national cross sectional survey

    BMJ

    (2007)
  • WK Al-Delaimy et al.

    The California tobacco control program: can we maintain the progress? Results from the California Tobacco Survey, 1990–2005

    (2008)
  • W Evans et al.

    Do workplace smoking bans reduce smoking?

    Am Econ Rev

    (1999)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (41)

  • Patterns, prevalence and determinants of environmental tobacco smoke exposure among adults in Bangladesh

    2018, Addictive Behaviors Reports
    Citation Excerpt :

    Making policies for 100% smoke-free environment is the most effective way to protect the public, including children, women, and people at their homes, workplaces, and public places from exposure to ETS. There is sufficient evidence that implementation of smoke free policies substantially decreases ETS exposure (Oberg et al., 2011; Pierce & Leon, 2008). Studies of the effects of the smoke-free policies consistently show that these policies decrease exposure to ETS by 80–90% in high exposure settings, and they can lead to overall decreases in exposure of up to 40% (Haw & Gruer, 2007).

  • Social norms and its correlates as a pathway to smoking among young Latino adults

    2015, Social Science and Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    Further, aside from the population reached, smoking social norms remain important to study even under today's more regulated climate. As an example, while the causal role of any single policy change in decreasing smoking prevalence has not been conclusively demonstrated, it is clear that the combined effect of the public's awareness of the dangers of smoking, removal of cigarette advertising from television and billboards, state tobacco control funding, smoking bans in public places and increased sales taxation of cigarettes all played crucial roles in changing norms regarding the acceptability of smoking and ultimately smoking behaviors (Tauras et al., Feb 2005; Pierce and Leon, Jul 2008; Albers et al., Dec 2004), despite the fact that these initiatives were initially met with great resistance by the general public (Gutman, 2011; Walsh, 1981). Our study showed consistent associations between smoking norms specific to Latino populations and current smoking status, suggesting the need for future research to replicate these findings and corroborate whether this association systematically differs according to nativity status, length of residence in the US, and language spoken.

  • Private space second-hand smoke exposure and the mental health of non-smokers: A cross-sectional analysis of Canadian adults

    2013, Addictive Behaviors
    Citation Excerpt :

    The U.S. National Institutes of Health defines SHS as the smoke emitted from the burning end of a cigarette, cigar, or pipe, along with a smoker's exhaled smoke (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004; United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1992), and has been shown to have a detrimental effect on everyone exposed (California Environmental Protection Agency, & Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 1997; Charney, Heninger, & Breier, 1984; Dome, Lazary, Kalapos, & Rihmer, 2010; Law et al., 2003; Matt et al., 2004; United States Department of Health and Human Services, 2006). Recognition of the negative effects of SHS exposure has resulted in the development of policies aimed at reducing exposure (Asbridge, 2004; United States Department of Health and Human Services, 1986), typically through restrictions on smoking in public spaces (Hopkins et al., 2001; Pierce, León, & IARC Working Group, & IARC Secretariat, 2008). Nonetheless, many people are still exposed to SHS in the home, vehicle, and other private and public locations (Leatherdale & Ahmed, 2009).

  • Population-based survey of secondhand smoke exposure in China

    2010, Biomedical and Environmental Sciences
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text