четверг, 7 марта 2019 г.

Impact of Government Restriction on Tobacco Smoking Essay

mental institution Tobacco fastball is known to be a major health problem among many since the product is known to postulate up to 60 carcinogens among them nicotine and carbon monoxide (Owing, 2005). Currently the fume prevalence in the European domain is estimated to be ab push through 28.6% with the male having a higher percentage of 40% as compared to the female who rank at 18.2%. Health experts have continuously pinpointed hummer as one the killer uniforms contributing to high cases of mortality and many health hazards CITATION WHO07 l 1033 (WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2007). In that regard many pre steadncy have put measures to curb the habit. In this presentation we shall focus on the smoking classs and limitations put by pre boldnessntial terms indoors the utmost 1974-1999 divided in 1974-1984 and 1985-1999.1974-1984Tobacco smoking in Britain has been on the scorn in the past 50 long time. It is believed that in the period fount 1974 the country e xperient the highest decline in smoking. This is compared to 1940s when prevalence was a high as 82%.Prevalence of smoking in the broad Britain for the period 1974-2012% 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 1998 2002 2006 2010 2012Men 51 45 38 35 31 28 28 30 27 23 21 22Women 41 37 33 31 29 26 26 26 25 21 20 19All 45 40 35 33 30 27 27 28 26 22 20 20Note Retrieved from ash.org.uk smoking statistics with information originating the Opinions and Lifestyle Survey, 2012.Based on the above statistics it is evident that the period 1974-1984 experienced a s petty(a)er decline in tobacco smoking as compared to the subsequent period.The fact that this period was the first to experience such spacious decline implies there must have been a superior general transmit in domain attitude towards the habit. In this case the government vie the role as a regulatory body to curb a common habit that had become a vice. To control smoking habit among the people the British government used price increa se to livelihood tobacco prices high. This was done through the introduction of taxes. Due to addiction feeling of nicotine contained in tobacco the decline in the do of skunkrs was non really large even the though the habit is concentrated among the low income earners (Ewles, 2005). condescension the low smoking prevalence in the period 1974-1984 as compared to earlier years, rights of non- pottyrs were not do itd. The government focused more of reducing smoking range rather than reducing the effects enforce by tobacco smoke on third parties. Smoking in public was not regulate as smoking zones did not exist and not much enquiry had been done of how the smoke can affect non-smokers without their consent. Individuals were free to smoke in public as no law enforced by the government was in place to control them. It is not just smokers who did not recognize that non-smokers have their rights but also non-smokers were not aware that they had rights to a smoke free environmen t.Generally the number of women smoking had also declined compared to earlier years. The elan continued to later years. Even though there was a decline still the number was high based on the statistics that by 1974, 4 in every 10 women were smokers. This figure dropped and by 1984 it was 3 out of 10. In this period of time smoking among women wasnt looked from the negative side but it came to be a concern when it was done in gestation period. patronage lack of much research rough the effect of smoking in meaning(a) women in this period, there was general belief in the public that it was not ideal for a with child(predicate) cleaning lady to smoke. A pregnant woman smoking was seen as irresponsible and not caring about the child she was carrying. The concern here was about the wellness of the child whom the woman was carrying since he/she was being exposed to the dangers of tobacco. However, such public concern did not affect the trend because smoking among pregnant women was com mon with women from low var.ly class.The question whether decline in smoking was to the advantage or a disadvantage of all is an turn up of concern. While tobacco fabrication was a big contributor to the tax revenue of the nation and created jobs, the same industry was linked to health and socio-economic challenges. In the period discussed many of the affected parties were the low class citizens who could former(a)wise used their funds in the right port rather than smoking. It problem worsened if they got health complications as this rendered them uneconomical. The efforts put by the government in this period to curb tobacco smoking were of bully value because they focused on building the future nation rather than gaining tax revenues at the expense of the future.1985-1999 In this period of time the trend in tobacco smoking were in decline until 1994 when they remained constant. In general what this statistics imply is that the smoking prevalence in Britain may have begu n to be constant at a rate of one smoker in every for souls among the adults. The trends here show that the number of women smokers was also getting impendent to that of their male counterparts of which stand at 28% as compares 29% in men by 1994. Smoking among the young too increased in this period especially among the teenagers. Despite the low prevalence percentage as compared to preceding periods, the worry was about the stability trend. The trend showed that unless action be taken the prevalence rate in Britain would have begun to rise over again CITATION Roy00 l 1033 ( Royal College of Physicians of London. Tobacco Advisory Group., 2000)Smoking during pregnancy was an issue of concern especially among the young and unemployed ones. This is because during this time much sense had been created about the negative effects of smoking especially in pregnant women. Smoking in pregnancy had been known to cause immature get and the children of mothers who smoked during pregnancy r isked neo-natal mortality or sudden infant expiration syndrome, of asthma or wheezing illness in the first years of life CITATION Roy00 l 1033 ( Royal College of Physicians of London. Tobacco Advisory Group., 2000). On the other hand there was public perception that smoking during pregnancy affected the normal growth of the child both physically and intellectually. With this kind of information within the public a pregnant woman smoking was seen as not caring of the wellness of her child. Although a large number of women continued to smoke during pregnancy, statistics by the Health Education Authority (HBE) in 1999 showed that 10% of women who were smoking before pregnancy stopped the habit.Much sentience was also created of how smoking is uniformly to affect people who are not smokers but come into contact with the smoke. It was well known that an individual smoking in public is likely to cause more harm to individual who inhale the smoke. In that regard the government came with rules meant to monish smoking in the public. This was based on acceptance even among the smokers that non-smokers had rights to a clean environment. It is in this period that the government adopted policies that limited places where an individual could smoke. This was aimed at disapprove further increase in the number of smokers who could be easily influenced and also meant to protect the rights of non-smokers.To curb smoking the British government put more efforts in price increase through the use of taxes. However, this did not been attend to work due to various reasons attached to smoking among them being the habit-forming nature of the product. It is well known that nicotine substance contained in tobacco is addictive and price increase could not prevent individuals from continuing to use the product. On the other hand the legality of tobacco made it is easier for smokers to get it from cheaper sources that revenue didnt affect.The government also turned to campaigns throug h the media that targeted the youth to discourage the habit among them being banning of cigarette adverts. However, such campaigns were known to have poor results in terms of outreach among the young people. The hurdle the government was approach here is that in this period the young were affected as compared to the later whereby focus was put more on the adult population.The actions by the government to put restrictions on smoking were of great importance to the society. Within this period of time most firms in the UK were manufacturing their products outside the country unlike in the 1974-1984 when tobacco products were produced locally. This meant that no jobs were created for the locals within the country unless in fields like sales, marketing and distribution. Looking into the retail sector cigarettes were sold as standby products since retailers had other products they majored in hence low returns from the tobacco products. On the side of the consumer it is known that in UK tobacco products are priced in a room that most of the cost is excise duty. This implied that expenditure on the products did not evoke the economy high as compared to other goods bought by the consumer (Ewles, 2005).Through the restrictions imposed the society benefited in terms of cost savings and a healthier population. This in turn benefitted both the government and citizens through saving on funds that could otherwise be used for health purposes. On the other hand the efforts to curb smoking were of great help to the future multiplication which could easily adopt to low smoking rates. Rules on public smoking also played an important role in societal eudaemonia as they gave non-smokers their rights of a clean and healthy environment.ReferencesOwing, J. H. (2005). Trends in smoking and health research. New York Nova Biomedical Books.Royal College of Physicians of London. (2000). Nicotine addiction in Britain A repute of the Tobacco Advisory Group of the Royal College of Phys icians. London The College.Ewles, L. (2005). Key topics in public health Essential briefings on prevention and health promotion. Edinburgh Elsevier Churchill Livingstone. witness document

Комментариев нет:

Отправка комментария