Smoke Free Restaurant and Bar! Would you go more or less?
I would go much more
I would go more
I would go much less
I would go less
I would go just as usual
0voters
Hi everyone
I was wondering if your guys would support Smoke Free Regulation recently causing a big debate in the Legislative Yuan in Taiwan. The law, called Tobacco Hazards Control Act if passed, will ban smoking in all indoor public and workplaces, including all restaurants, clubs and bars etc. It has a grace period of a year and half. Chances of not passing in this terms is quite significant.
The local leading anti-tobacco organizaiton- John Tung Foundation, is pressing hard to go total smoke free, which will make Taiwan, one of a few smoke free pioneering countries/regions. The tobacco industry also presses hard. They mobilizes hospitality business and other businesses to against this act in the congress.
Ireland, New York City, California(more than 20 states have similar ban on smoking and Provinces in Canada as well), Scandinavian countires, Italy and several other european coutntries are either already going smoke free or having their laws debated.
It is partially due to an international treaty call Framework Convention on Tobacco Control(FCTC), the first and first Public Health related has ever signed, ratified in such short period of time.
The question is, will you go to a smoke free bar? Do you support Taiwan to go Smoke Free? and If the ban comes into force, will you go less or more?
Personally I support this regulation and will go more if bars are smoke free. I think bar workers should not be victims of second hand smoke which has proved to be Calss A carcinogen. I work as an consultant at the John Tung Foundation, so I am biased but I really would like to hear your opinions. If more people concern this topic, a poll might be a good idea.[/b]
We passed a ban here in Sweden that took effect last year. Many people had their doubts but after a year I think it’s safe to say that most people like it. I go to clubs quite often and I must say that it’s a bliss compared to back in the days. Ok, I don’t smoke but most smokers that I know like the ban as well. And this is in a country where it’s really cold outside.
I think I’ll have a hard time adjusting when coming to Taiwan. I went to Germany for New Year’s and even though I had fun I could have done without the smoking.
I think it should be up to managers of restaurants, Pubs, Bars if they want to implement a general smoking ban and guests to decide where they want to go. However I do think that within a few years, indeed even in Taiwan, I am sure there will be a general ban on smoking just as it happens worldwide in commercial flights.
Bars went ‘smoke-free’ in California in 1999. It caused a lot of complaints
from the smokers, a substantial amount of clientle, and the bar owners.
This new law also was part of a massive tax increase on tobbacco products.
I do not smoke cigarrettes but I was a 2 - 3 a day cigar smoker.
This bit me right in the ass…hard!
I agree with the smoke-free environment but I think it can be accomplished
with ventilation and creativity on the bar owners part.
Also, I personally like to set outside on patios and patronize.
Plus, I think it can be decided by the patrons. If they want to patronize a smoke-free place they can vote with their feet. If they want to go to a smoking bar, again, its their choice.
During my bar days, I would regularly take my clothes off on my patio and hang them up to air out. It was dark and in my back-yard so the neighbors didn’t complain.
But smokey clothes and hair is not a good thing.
Bottom line - The patrons should be allowed to decide which they prefer.
Customers have a lot more power than they realize.
A Lao-ban of a bar I’ve liked to go on Roosevelt road told me that he would by all means go total smoke free in his bar since he has personally suffered from second hand smoke so badly (when he is on vacation, his respiratory symptoms just go away). But his didn’t because he is afraid of losing business. He told me that the current amendment to go smoke free is great because every bar would compete under all other aspects except smoking policy.
One of the delirious trick big tobacco industry plays all over the world is to wage smoke free debate, a war between smokers and non-smoker. But what really matter, is the health of workers who work in bar and restaurant. It is not really about creating a bliss for nonsmokers or smokers, (as EddieG said even a lot smokers enjoy smoke free bars). A recent research found that after implementing smoke free policy, smokers tend to “naturally” smoke less and even quit smoking since apart from Nicotine is highly addictive substance, it is also a social and psychological behavior that a changed environment can result in good health outcome.
There was a big lawsuit in the US where fly attendants sued airlines which didn’t ban smoking long after second hand smoke had been proven to be carcinogen. They won the case but for many fly attendants who had worked in an enclosed space like commercial airlines, and suffered from tobacco induced diseases and deaths, the justice was too late. We don’t want this to be happening to bar and restaurant workers.
This is why if it is up to bar owners to decide whether to go smoke free or not, in fear of losing business, nothing will really change. I am sorry to say but I am afraid that most bar Lao-ban will put profit over health of workers in Taiwan. I mean, can anyone one tells me that if there is actually a smoke free bar in Taiwan? I can’t find one …It is just the current situation.
A Lao-ban of a bar I’ve liked to go on Roosevelt road told me that he would by all means go total smoke free in his bar since he has personally suffered from second hand smoke so badly (when he is on vacation, his respiratory symptoms just go away). But his didn’t because he is afraid of losing business. He told me that the current amendment to go smoke free is great because every bar would compete under all other aspects except smoking policy.
One of the delirious trick big tobacco industry plays all over the world is to wage smoke free debate, a war between smokers and non-smoker. But what really matter, is the health of workers who work in bar and restaurant. It is not really about creating a bliss for nonsmokers or smokers, (as EddieG said even a lot smokers enjoy smoke free bars). A recent research found that after implementing smoke free policy, smokers tend to “naturally” smoke less and even quit smoking since apart from Nicotine is highly addictive substance, it is also a social and psychological behavior that a changed environment can result in good health outcome.
There was a big lawsuit in the US where fly attendants sued airlines which didn’t ban smoking long after second hand smoke had been proven to be carcinogen. They won the case but for many fly attendants who had worked in an enclosed space like commercial airlines, and suffered from tobacco induced diseases and deaths, the justice was too late. We don’t want this to be happening to bar and restaurant workers.
This is why if it is up to bar owners to decide whether to go smoke free or not, in fear of losing business, nothing will really change. I am sorry to say but I am afraid that most bar Lao-ban will put profit over health of workers in Taiwan. I mean, can anyone one tells me that if there is actually a smoke free bar in Taiwan? I can’t find one …It is just the current situation.
You are exactly right, this is a health issue. I have argued that point at lenght in another thread. It is a health risk for bar workers that should not be tolerated. Unless bar owners are willing to let employees walk around with respirators, there is no question smoking should be banned.
In addition, letting customers decide doesn’t work. There is no choice. I have voted with my feet for over a decade and not a single bar has gone smole free. In fact the experience in many places that have banned smoking is that business improves after a while with the return of people like me.
Furthermore, why should a health issue be up to a bar owner to decide? Can the taverncaptain decide he is not going to freeze meat because 9 times out of 10 there will be no problem, and hey, even if there are problems, let the public decide whether they want to return to a bar that gives them food poisoning? Exaggerated point to be sure, and no disrespect meant by it, but with health matters, appeals to freedom of choice are just so much special pleading.
To answer your original question: yes, I would go to bars much more frequently than now if they were smoke free.
Mucha Man, there are some bars that that do offer smoke free sections or even smoke free floors. Interesting you mention the staff. The bars, restaurants I am involved with, about 95% of the employees are heavy smokers! This is an issue, that should be up to bar managers. If there is a market for it and really patrons would reward it then the one that has the courage to start it, would then in theory have a competitive edge.
As for smokers working in bars, their health is still being affected by being in a smoky environment, and this is over and above the damage they are doing to themselves. In addition, many practises are still proscribed even with the consent of both parties. I know many people who do not cook their hamburger meat thoroughly, and eat raw eggs. But as both these practises are dangerous they are rightly prohibited in restaurants in most countries.
Besides, there is still the 5% who do not smoke.
But you are correct that some places have smoke free floors. JB’s for one, and I do go there in part because of it. (Actually I go for the food and beer, but without a smoke-free atmosphere I would not go at all.)
I know that I will go to bars/restaurants much less if there is a total ban on smoking. My homecountry have that total smoking ban, and while I frequented pubs/bars every second night or so before the ban, I am down to maybe once a week now, during my visits there. During summertime, with temperatures over +10C it is no problem as long as there is a patio, but during winter at -10-20C or so, it is a real hassle to enjoy a beer and a cigarett outdoors.
No, I will be staying at home with my beer and cig, rather than being expelled to the side-walk when I want to smoke.
I dunno - is it really for the manager to decide if he exposes the 5% of the staff and his (non-smoking) customers to a health hazard?
Anyhow, this whole thing is not going to work here due to lack of enforcement - they will make some examples, show it on TV and after that it will be “business as usual”. Says the pessimist in me.
I hate Hip Hop Music and it is a proven fact that it could cause hearing problems! But it is up to me if I want to join my friends that love Hip Hop Music to join them to go to places that expose customers and employees to such noise, nobody ever forced me!
I wouldn’t be happier or less happy when this law is in effect. It’s long due, I think. As a smoker, it’s up to me to be responsible. I choose to pollute the air and get cancer, not non-smokers. Of course, because there’s no law preventing me from lighting up indoors right now, I can. But I will happily obey once the law is passed.
When it comes to smoking, I believe non-smokers have more right than smokers in a public restaurant/bar. Even if there is one non-smoker in the whole darn place, the law is the law.
As a smoker, I’m looking forward to this law being passed.
I still hope this argument will go beyond smoker’s health right vs nonsmoker’s smoking rights. As I said, it should not be portraying as a war between smoker and nosmoker. But it is really encouraging to hear a smoker supporting smoke free policy. 914, cheers
I voted that I would go less, only because the poll ties in bars and restaurants together, as a smoker I would not like to see a ban on smoking outright in bars, but agree that from a health point of view something should be done to protect staff and customers who do not smoke, (no matter the percentages).
I have to disagree with Tavern Captain on the point that it should be left up to the establishment to decide, Captains answer justifies this easily by simply discounting the minority, which would happen with all I suspect.
I would be happy to see a total ban in all restaurants or at least a mandatory enclosed area (there are many good air filtration systems available on the market) for smokers/non smokers.
As a smoker I generally sit in the non smoking area to eat, then move afterwards to the bar or outside if necessary to kill myself. I would probably go more to restaurants if there was total ban as there are some places, particularly the smaller establishments, where smokers show little or no regard for non smokers eating a meal, there is nothing worse than eating good food with someone sitting next to you blowing smoke in your face, smoker or non smoker!
Yeah, but neither myself nor my friends go to a restaurant / bar because they love the smoke there. [/quote]
Rascal, no one forced you to go into that bar either, you went in by your own free will, i believe that is the point that taverncaptain is trying to make.
I like frying scotsman, as a smoker, have no problems with restaurants being made non smoking, or specific areas that were well ventilated. I also hate smoke being blown across whilst trying to eat.
As far as pubs and bars go, then the choice should be down to the management, if the majority wish for smoke free then so be it, but if they vote to be smoking then the non smokers must also accept it, or move elsewhere to do their drinking, no one is being forced to drink in that bar.
Were it not for money, this would have been a moot point years ago. Smoking benefits no one and harms everyone. As the laws change, and much of public society reverts to natural healthy conditions (smoke-free), it will help people to see this even more. At that point, only the most stubborn few will resist. Realistically, from a societal change point of view, the only way to deal with that is wait a generation for them to die and be replaced by a generation that grew up naturally.
Other people smoking has ruined more of my dining experiences than I care to remember. I would definitely eat out more and in a greater variety of places if they were all naturally full of fresh air.
According to a recent authoritative position document approved by the Board of Directors of [color=violet]AMERICAN SOCIEYT OF HEATING, REFRIGERATING AND AIR-CONDITIONING ENGINEERS [/color]in 2005, which also co-chaired by Professor Jonathan Samet, head of Department of Epidemiology, John Hopkins University, and other prominent scholars from public health. , they have concluded as following (but not limited):
[b] [color=darkblue]At present, the only means of effectively eliminating health risk associated with indoor exposure is to ban smoking activity
No other engineering approaches, including current and advanced dilution ventilation or air cleaning technologies, have been demonstrated or should be relied upon to control health risks from ETS exposure in spaces where smoking occurs. Some engineering measures may reduce that exposure and the corresponding risk to some degree while also addressing to some extent the comfort issue of odor and some forms of irritation.
Although complete separation and isolation of smoking rooms can control Environmental Tobacco Smoke(ETS) exposure in non-smoking spaces in the same building, adverse health effects for the occupants of the smoking room cannot be controlled by ventilation.
Because of ASHRAE’s mission to act for the benefit of the publlic, it encourages elimination of smoking in the indoor environment as the optimal way to minimize, ETS exposure
[/color][/b] I think this is one of the most important documents in the history of tobacco control. It is, as far as I know, the first time a professional society from ventilation engineering expresses smoke free is the best solution for eliminating ETS in an indoor environment. The members of ASHRAE potentailly could have benefited from public believing in that ventilation system is a solution for ETS elimination. They choose to tell the truth. I think it is rather professional as well as respectable. I used this document to support our local legislation campaign because some people still believe in separation which is not really feasible cause most local restaurants and bars are small ones and have no room to really be “complete separated”. Besides, it does not normally have effective ventilation to prevent ETS from circulating to nonsmoking areas.
[/code][/i]
(when he is on vacation, his respiratory symptoms just go away). But his didn’t because he is afraid of losing business. He told me that the current amendment to go smoke free is great because every bar would compete under all other aspects except smoking policy.
