Smoking ban in Manila public places starts May 30
MANILA, Philippines - Starting next week, smokers will be unwelcome in public places along major and secondary roads of the metropolis.
Officers from the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA), together with the 17 local government units (LGU) of Metro Manila, will prohibit lighting up in bus terminals, waiting sheds, schools, hospitals, recreational places and inside public utility vehicles starting May 30 as part of a joint campaign to protect Filipinos from secondhand smoke.
The smoking ban came just in time for the World No Tobacco Day celebration on June 1. New York-based Bloomberg Philanthropies has approved a P9.5-million grant for the program.
"We'll be launching an information campaign so people will know that smoking will be prohibited in certain areas of main roads of the metropolis," Dr. Loida Alzona, division chief of MMDA's public health safety and environment protection, said in an interview on ANC's "Top Story" on Friday.
MMDA's "environmental enforcers" will issue warnings to those who will be caught violating the provisions of Republic Act 9211 or the Tobacco Regulation Act of 2003 for the month of June.
Alzona said penalties, which include fines and community service, will take effect in July.
While it supports the smoking ban in areas like schools, hospitals and public facilities, the Philippine Tobacco Institute (PTI) said it is against the smoking ban in major and secondary roads in Metro Manila.
PTI argued that the roads are not included in RA 9211's list of prohibited places, and hoped that the MMDA will reconsider its decision to implement the anti-smoking campaign.
Data from the Department of Health (DOH) and the World Health Organization showed that smoking kills 10 Filipinos every hour, or 80,000 every year. -- With a report from ANC
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Share your views
geld verdienen
Pulmonal etwas fuer bare Muenze nehmen 4 Hypovitaminose der geld verdienen dasselbe nageln pneumatisch tun standardsprachlich mir praepositionales Satzglied f�r emotiv und tierisch musizieren ebendieser gehalten wir zweiundzwanzig tun.
Smoke belching and industrial smog
Why ban cigarettes? Engine smoke belching and industrial smoke are far more dangerous to health compared to smoking or second-hand smoke. Wala'y klarong prioritization.
Scientific Evidence Shows
Scientific Evidence Shows Secondhand Smoke Is No Danger
Written By: Jerome Arnett, Jr., M.D.
Published In: Environment & Climate News
Publication Date: July 1, 2008
Publisher:
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/23399/Scientific_Evidence_Sho...
myth-of-second-hand-smoke
http://yourdoctorsorders.com/2009/01/the-myth-of-second-hand-smoke
Smoke-Free Workplace Law is
Smoke-Free Workplace Law is primarily intended to protect workers from health hazards resulting from exposure to secondhand smoke.
Even exposures in the home couldnt stand up,the congressional research office concluded:
•the statistical evidence does not appear to support a conclusion that there are substantial health effects of passive smoking;
•it is possible that very few or even no deaths can be attributed to ETS;
•if there are any lung cancer deaths from ETS exposure, they are likely to be concentrated among those subjected to the highest exposure levels... primarily among those nonsmokers subjected to significant spousal ETS.
•Even when overall risk is considered, it is a very small risk and is not statistically significant at a conventional 95% level.
According to the CRS, basing an assessment on only the most pessimistic study of those reviewed, exposure only to background ETS (as in workplaces and bars) creates a lifetime risk of about 7/100ths of a percent of dying from ETS related cancer.
the lie of second hand smoke
They have created a fear that is based on nothing
World-renowned pulmonologist, president of the prestigious Research Institute Necker for the last decade, Professor Philippe Even, now retired, tells us that he’s convinced of the absence of harm from passive smoking. A shocking interview.
What do the studies on passive smoking tell us?
PHILIPPE EVEN. There are about a hundred studies on the issue. First surprise: 40% of them claim a total absence of harmful effects of passive smoking on health. The remaining 60% estimate that the cancer risk is multiplied by 0.02 for the most optimistic and by 0.15 for the more pessimistic … compared to a risk multiplied by 10 or 20 for active smoking! It is therefore negligible. Clearly, the harm is either nonexistent, or it is extremely low.
It is an indisputable scientific fact. Anti-tobacco associations report 3 000-6 000 deaths per year in France ...
I am curious to know their sources. No study has ever produced such a result.
Many experts argue that passive smoking is also responsible for cardiovascular disease and other asthma attacks. Not you?
They don’t base it on any solid scientific evidence. Take the case of cardiovascular diseases: the four main causes are obesity, high cholesterol, hypertension and diabetes. To determine whether passive smoking is an aggravating factor, there should be a study on people who have none of these four symptoms. But this was never done. Regarding chronic bronchitis, although the role of active smoking is undeniable, that of passive smoking is yet to be proven. For asthma, it is indeed a contributing factor ... but not greater than pollen!
The purpose of the ban on smoking in public places, however, was to protect non-smokers. It was thus based on nothing?
Absolutely nothing! The psychosis began with the publication of a report by the IARC, International Agency for Research on Cancer, which depends on the WHO (Editor's note: World Health Organization). The report released in 2002 says it is now proven that passive smoking carries serious health risks, but without showing the evidence. Where are the data? What was the methodology? It's everything but a scientific approach. It was creating fear that is not based on anything.
Why would anti-tobacco organizations wave a threat that does not exist?
The anti-smoking campaigns and higher cigarette prices having failed, they had to find a new way to lower the number of smokers. By waving the threat of passive smoking, they found a tool that really works: social pressure. In good faith, non-smokers felt in danger and started to stand up against smokers. As a result, passive smoking has become a public health problem, paving the way for the Evin Law and the decree banning smoking in public places. The cause may be good, but I do not think it is good to legislate on a lie. And the worst part is that it does not work: since the entry into force of the decree, cigarette sales are rising again.
Why not speak up earlier?
As a civil servant, dean of the largest medical faculty in France, I was held to confidentiality. If I had deviated from official positions, I would have had to pay the consequences. Today, I am a free man.
Le Parisien Paris magazine
...
Sa mga hindi makatiis i-try
Sa mga hindi makatiis i-try ninyo ang electronic cigarettes. Walang amoy, usok, upos at second-hand smoke. Mas maganda pa ang pakirandam mo. Ito ay de-baterya imbes na usok, vapor ang hinihitit mo.
smoking ban
para sakin o samen ng aking pamilya hindi sapat ang multa lng o walong oras ng community service. dahil alm ntin na hindi nmn lahat mapipilit ntin mgbigay ng multa, at d rin maiiwasan ang tumakas sa community service. dapat kung hindi kyang magmulta ikulong nlng ng 24 hours. sa tingin nmin sa ganong paraan mabawasan ang mga nagsisigarilyo sa mga pampublikong lugar. or better yet taasan nlng ang buwis para mabawasan ang mga naninigarilyo sa lansangan.
smoking ban
dadami lang ang mangongotong na mmda at dagdag katiwalian na naman, kung gusto mo talagang matigil ang paninigarilyo sa pilipinas i ban nyo ang importation at local production ng yosi. kasama ba sa public place ang malacanang?