Doctors call for smoking ban inside cars

The smoking ban was first enforced in 2007 and since then, it has been credited with substantially reducing smoking levels in Britain. Nevertheless, many doctors are adamant that the law needs to go even further.

In a new report, The Royal College of Physicians – an organisation that counts over 20,000 medical professionals among its members – is campaigning for the smoking ban to be extended. They would like to see cigarettes outlawed inside cars, on beaches, in parks, and outside of all buildings.

The main thrust of their argument is that children’s health should be made a priority – and that as things stand, children are being hugely affected by second-hand smoke from their parents, when they take them to school, drive them to the shops, or go on holidays in their cars.

Second hand or passive smoking costs the NHS £23 million every single year. It causes 300,000 extra visits to the doctor, for various conditions ranging from chest infections to asthma, and kills 600 people every year. What is more, the latest scientific evidence suggests that ‘third hand smoke’ could also be a big threat to the nation’s well-being. Third hand smoke essentially means nicotine stains that are left on surfaces after a smoker has left the room. This can include carpets, furniture and upholstery. Research shows that these stains can linger on for days after cigarettes have been stubbed out, presenting a particular danger to children, who may touch the marks before putting their hands near to their fingers.

The anti-smoking group Forest has argued against the ban, which they say is an outrageous attempt to further limit the personal freedoms of smokers. They argue that smoking is a personal choice, and that restricting the areas in which people can legally smoke is a direct attack on the liberty of the adult population. On the other hand, Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, said that “radical action” is needed, and that if above all else, we should be thinking about children’s health. If adults’ freedoms need to be restricted to do this, he says that this is simply a sacrifice that will have to be made.

Baja K | 2010-03-28 00:17:39

1) The further along this Smoking in Cars with Children thing goes, the closer we get to the next "logical" step...bans on smoking in homes or any buildings where there are children. 2) It is perverse hypocrisy that officials feign this "concern" for children even though most or all of those very officials have condoned for years or decades the proliferation of pesticides and chlorine and other industrial substances (in foods, beverages, containers, household products, pesticides, synthetic fabrics, etc.) that are PARTICULARLY harmful to children and to fetuses and pregnant mothers. These officials, uniformly, permit child-damaging (and adult-damaging) non-tobacco cigarette contaminants galore and do not even have the human decency to warn or tell anyone, let alone calling for bans on those adulterants. Their "nice" "no smoking" positions are obnoxious attempts to paint themselves as "concerned about health". They are liars who are complicit in perhaps the most extensive mass public poisoning in industrial history...the contamination of so-called "tobacco products" with more pesticide residues than exist in any other product, and with dioxin-creating chlorine, with radiation from certain fertilizers, with burn accelerants, with addiction-enhancing substances, AND with child-attracting sweets and flavors. These officials are not protecting anyone from smoke; they are protecting the industries responsible for the almost century-old atrocity. To ban tobacco for the effects of things that are not tobacco is a gross injustice...and an insult to science and medicine. 3) Evidence seems not to exist that any child has been harmed by smoke in a car. No victims have come forward. 4) These laws give police Yet Another Pretense to pull over drivers, especially those they don't like for racial reasons, or having the "wrong" bumper stickers, to check papers and harass. A cop, "in good faith", could even pull over someone with a lollipop sticking out of their mouth. 5) It is important to mention, in the Smoking In Cars topic, that it is dangerous and reckless for officials to force anyone to go "cold turkey" when driving. No reputable doctor would recommend that...although some doctors fail to even address the issue when supporting such smoke bans. Tobacco withdrawal symptoms include irritability, inattention, diminished alertness, and even sudden sleepiness. Withdrawal symptoms, while driving, is worse than driving with a cell phone which, at least doesn't prompt Road Rage and Sleep. Search the terms "tobacco withdrawal" or "nicotine withdrawal" etc for plenty on this. Irony---the "quit smoking" sites provide evidence galore against DWQ...Driving While Quitting. 6) Further, when an "illegal" smoker spots a cop, the person may panic and attempt to ditch the cigarette, maybe tossing it onto the roadside (fire danger), or trying to open the ashtray or find an empty bottle. This is dangerous distraction. When one ordinarily extinguishes a smoke, it is done, like lighting a cigarette, at a properly safe moment...at a red light, for instance, or on a clear stretch of road, or in stalled traffic, etc. BUT...the cop panic thing can happen any time...while passing, while turning corners or going around curves. These "well meaning", and also medically unjustified, laws are threats to everyone on or near a road.