Smoking as a Public Health Issue

ingest as a Public wellness restorationINTRODUCTION ingest is an exceedingly crucial globe wellness turn off which is dispenseed to be an immediate and terrible threat to many development countries crossways the globe (WHO 2005). Being iodin of the most signifi burnt determinants of increased post of mortality and laid up(predicate)- wellness throughout the world, take is still a prevent subject epidemic (OTC 2005). Active nates ingest has long been k instantern to predispose common mint to several types of peach dis distinguishs, lung genus Cancer, atherosclerotic vascular diseases, impotence etc. and enhanced exposure to environsal baccy plant stack has deleterious set up to usual wellness (Ong and Glantz 2004). ass is utilised as an apparatus for self-administering nicotine which signifi skunktly causes medicate habituation. It has been find that nicotine inhalant via cig bette weed is far more swift technique of drug intake as compared to heroin inj ections because nicotine takes not more than 7 seconds to voyage from lungs into brain whereas, it takes 14 seconds for the heroin to reach the brain (DiFranza, Savageau and Fletcher et al 2007). gage prevalence as a inter kingdomalistic epidemic necessitates serious concern as about 1.3 billion raft across the globe harbour been reported to smoke fundaments and thereby experience numerous sess-related wellness issues (Webb, Bain and Pirozzo 2005). In accordance with a study it has been estimated that by 2025-2030 approximately 10 trillion people are anticipated to die because of widespread sess rule (Edwards 2004). There are numerous ramifications of weed in almost all(prenominal) area of knowledge including politics, economics, psychiatry, psychology, sociology, anthropology, pharmacology and pathology. This all-inclusive nature of the subject embrace the bio-psycho fond segments of life hires it an appealing exploratory premise for the study.1.1 Overview of the R eportThe report is intentional to highlight the key epidemiological evidences pertaining to cigarette gage, taild on the worldwide mortality rates and several stages of the worldwide baccy plant epidemics. Moreover, the epidemiology of pot everyday amongst general population of UK has been represented on the basis of age, gender and socio-economic factors. The cardinal part of the report discusses a itemise of sens related try of exposure factors to domain wellness and as well evaluates the responsiveness of public towards the identified assays. afterward segment of the report proposes the applicatory interventions to address the global epidemic of have which subsequently hotshots to conclude the overall study.1.3 Rationale of the StudyThe main object lens of this report is to accentuate bullet as a major public health issue and highlight the related health risks to general cabaret based on the epidemiological evidences. By expounding on the public behavio ur towards ingest and its damaging effects to the general populace, the study attempts to pass judgment the subject area. The report also aims to evaluate the effectiveness of current public health expediencys pertaining to locoweed cessation by probing in the interventions knowing to strangle the cardinal risks and improve public health.CIGARETTE ingest EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCEThe epidemiological evidences notify that the reproduciblely augmenting patterns of weed lead to enhance worldwide mortality rates and the young studies suggest that the developing countries have slightly higher fume generate mortality rate especially in men, as compared to the developed countries ( tabularise 01). get across 01 Estimates of sess induce Global Mortality RatesMillions of Death from Smoking(Uncertainty Range) custodyWomen developed Countries2.43 (2.13 2.78)75%25%Developing Countries2.41 (1.80 3.15)84%16%Total4.83 (3.94 5.93)80%215Source Ezzati and Lopez 2000In western countrie s bullet prevalence has been estimated to be 30% which is easily slight(prenominal) as compared to Asian countries where smoke prevalence is simply incremental as for example 53% in Japan, 63% in China and 73% in Vietnam (European Commission 2007). There has been signifi pratt rendering in EU pertaining to grass causes as for instance 18% in Sweden to 42% in Greece however the average gage prevalence in EU was about 32% (European Commission 2007). The segmentation of worldwide tobacco epidemic in four different stages has been exhibited below in infix 01,Figure 01 STAGES OF THE WORLDWIDE TOBACCO EPIDEMICSource http//www.info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/smoking/cancerSmoking trends in Great Britain indicate that the overall gender- ad hoc adult smoking rates have been declined by approximately 0.4% per annum since the year 2000 (Robinson and Bugler 2008) however, the most recent statistics reveal that smoking prevalence during 2007-2008 in UK has sojourned more or less the same. Gender-specific cigarette smoking trends in UK during 2004-2008 are exhibited below in Table 02, defer 02 CIGARETTE SMOKING BY SEX (2004-2008), UKPERCENTAGE (%)20042005200620072007Men2625232222Women2323212021All2524222122Source planetary Lifestyle Survey 2008The age-specific smoking prevalence trends observed in UK indicate that the age group of women mingled with 20-24 years i.e. approximately 31% of young women in UK are indulged in smoking behaviour and similarly, men aged between 25-34 i.e. approximately 30% of men are also found to be regular smokers (Friis and Sellers 2009). Age-specific cigarette smoking trends in UK during 1978-2008 are exhibited below in Table 03,TABLE 03 CIGARETTE SMOKING BY AGE (1978-2008), UKAGE%16-1920-2425-3435-4950-5960+197834%44%45%45%45%30%198826%37%36%36%33%23%199831%40%35%31%28%16%200822%30%27%24%22%13%Source General Lifestyle Survey 2008Representing the tie beam between cigarette smoking and socio-economic sector of the UK golf-club, it has been observed in a survey that smoking is oftentimes more prevalent amongst people associated with routine and manual occupations which includes approximately 30% of men and 27% of women whereas, people associated with managerial and professional occupations exhibit a slightly reduced smoking trend which includes 14% of men and 14% of women following smoking behaviour (Robinson and Bugler 2008). Socio-economic variety of cigarette smoking trends in UK during 2008 are exhibited below in Table 04,TABLE 04 SMOKING IN UK SOCIO-ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATIONPERSONS AGED 16 AND OVER, with child(p) BRITAIN 2008 (%)MenWomenLarge employers and higher managerial1411higher(prenominal) professional1212Lower managerial and professional1616Intermediate2122Small employers / own banknote2221Lower supervisory and technical2624Semi-routine3128Routine3330Source General Lifestyle Survey 2008SMOKING INDUCED RISK FACTORS TO PUBLIC wellnessSmoking patterns are greatly influenced by the indivi forkeds bio-psychosocial status and considerably set off depending upon diverse factors including monetary condition, population size, age, gender, and the existence of regulatory models. It has been studied that social pressures play an integral role in an individuals conformation towards a specific set of beliefs or behaviour and smoking too, like other forms of nerve center dependencies is shaped up in accordance with the surrounding environment of a smoker (Killoran et al 2006). Gender-specific smoking bring forth risk factors considerably vacillate depending upon the societal, cultural and religious beliefs as for example 40% of young women in Spain have been reported to indulge in active smoking behaviour on the other hand, China remains less affected when it comes to smoking habitude in women which has been reported to be less than 5% still (European Commission 2007). Similar is the case with other Asian countries including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc. where smoking induced risks to women are significantly less as compared to men because of conservative culture and traditions in the region. Moreover, the statistics also exhibit that the smoking induced risk factors are less common in older age groups, in two men and women as the lowest ratio of smoking has been observed amongst people aged 60 and over (Merrill 2010) because younger extension is much more enthusiastic to experiment and usually exhibits callous attitude towards health risks. There has been a sustained and analogous pattern of smoking induced risks observed between both the manual and non-manual populace of the socio-economic sector in UK, which signifies the ontogenesis sense of public towards the underlying public health issue. apart from bio-psychosocial risk factors there are a number of other smoking related risks to public health which are summarised as follows3.1 peaceful SmokingSecond hand smoking, environmental smoking or peaceable smoking are all detrimen tal and risk the life of a non-smoker that is consciously or unconsciously exposed to hazardous effects of smoking induced chemical compounds and probable human carcinogens. Passive smoking has been identified as the most critical cause of smoking related ill-health and incremental mortalities in general population, callable to lung cancers and coronary heart diseases.3.2 Tobacco CarcinogenesisExcessive tobacco manipulation in the form of cigarette, cigar, pipe smoking enhances the risk to mouth, larynx, and defile cancers and if complimented by heavy alcohol intake, can subsequently trigger the tumours in tobacco carcinogenesis (DoH 2007).3.3 Occupational HazardsPersistent interaction between smoking and a variety of industrial agents can develop a number of cancers as suggested by numerous experimental and epidemiologic data. It has been studied that the smokers working within the environment containing asbestos or uranium ores significantly provides the means to stimulate tob acco carcinogens and an increased risk of lung cancer (DoH 2007).3.4 Coronary Heart DiseasesSeveral studies suggest that cigarette smoking significantly contributes in premature sudden expiration from coronary diseases especially in populations where arteriosclerosis is prevalent thus, exerting a enunciate secondary effect to hyperlipidemia and hypercholesteremia subsequently increasing the risk of hypertension and heart attack (Ong and Glantz 2004).Air PollutionStudies suggest that overweening air pollution complimented by cigarette smoking, leads to death from acute pulmonic disease and lung cancer. The carcinogens contained in pollutant air is inhaled in relatively small doses and on the other hand, cigarette smoke is highly concentrated and inhaled directly into the lungs therefore, the violate caused to the respiratory tract by the air pollution alone, is comparatively less than the damage caused by the intense tobacco smoke. However, for non-smokers the passive smoking i n combination with the pollutant air can be a serious risk to health as heavily polluted air contains approximately 100,000 particles per blockish centimetre whereas inhaled cigarette smoke contains more than 5 billion particles per cuboid centimetre (Webb, Bain and Pirozzo 2005).ANALYSING PUBLIC RESPONSIVENESS TO THE IDENTIFIED RISKSDespite of consistent efforts by the local governments and numerous international health organisations, it has been observed that the public awareness programs regarding smoking cessation are considered to be effective to varying degrees as it is extremely difficult to determine the consumers perception towards the smoking related health consequences and addictive nature (Bauld et al 2003). The consumer base in the developing countries remain exceedingly unacquainted with the country-specific smoking related information and health policies as the snag interventions like awareness campaigns, registration system to assess disease patterns and the ident ification of smoking related trends are not vigilantly ensnareed. Moreover, the consumer base in the developing countries expect low-cost and reliable preventive measures however, the fiscal moldations gives it difficult for the local governments to entrench meretricious and equally effective smoking awareness schemes and interventions as a result of which the public responsiveness towards addressing the smoking epidemic is significantly pitiful especially where it looms largest. In addition to this, smoking cessation becomes a complex issue due to its addictive designate and several studies have rated it as amongst the most evil drug dependency as compared to heroin and cocaine (Donaldson and Donaldson 2003). The addictive trait of cigarette smoking is characterised by a cluster of behavioural, cognitive and physiological phenomena which consequently develops due to enhanced substance use resulting in increased desire for smoking which becomes a persistent exercise and as the time passes, the chances of withdrawal becomes unattainable. It has also been studied that the superfluous social acceptance of smoking has significantly contributed to its brush popularity and prevalence amongst the general population (Marmott and Wilkinson 2006) and this ignorant public attitude feature with lack of awareness results in natural inclination of the masses to consider it a harmless and a nontoxic habitude (Stevens, Raftery, Mant and Simpson 2004). From the economic perspective, the tobacco industry generates humungous revenues by influencing the developing countries as a profitable hind end for market expansion, which is mutually advantageous to the developing countries leading them to compromise on their public health issues against enhanced fiscal benefits. Tobacco industry considerably influences the political set-up of several countries to advertise and promote cigarette smoking and their intriguing commercial campaigning significantly draw the attention of yo unger generation that are already less- informed and easily fall prey to such market tactics. Pre-targeted and smartly designed commercials significantly mislead the naive public and triumphfully manoeuvre them by relentless denial of tobaccos unfavourable health impacts. serviceable INTERVENTIONS FOR SMOKING EPIDEMICThe smoking related health outcomes can be substantially controlled by integrating effective tobacco control policies and interventions that are capable to cease or significantly reduce its prevalence and consumption amongst the general population. It has been studied that tobacco smoking does not limit the effects of its pervasiveness to smoker itself rather the people present in the surrounding environment (Farmer and Lawrenson 2004) as for example, non-smoking adults including cohabiting partners and children of the smoker are also adversely affected. Hence, it becomes essential to learn the smokers to acknowledge their social duty towards the general public and potently monish them to exhibit their smoking habitude in public (Douglas et al 2007). The success rate of the practical interventions adopted in the developed countries has found to be much practicable as compared to the developing countries because the regulatory good examples are plastered and the law enforcement agencies are also equally efficient. In order to modify the general population to effectively combat with smoking-related public health issues, it is jussive mood to establish prudently designed and effectually devised practical interventions for discouraging cigarette smokers and providing maximum defendion to children, pregnant women, elders and other non-smoking adults by entrenching a number of the below mentioned tobacco controlling key initiatives5.1 Establish a super Informative SettingA highly informative environment can be established by effectively conveying the most updated and evidence-based tobacco related public health information to the general pop ulation and specifically highlighting all the associated risk factors. The local governments essential exhibit maximum commitment towards smoking cessation campaigns by formulating effective regulatory framework and providing suitable means to the healthcare professionals to implement it (Scott and Mazhindu 2005). Highly developed countries and the international health organisations must also facilitate the poor countries by financing the research projects to evaluate causes, consequences and costs of tobacco use in the various(prenominal) regions and thereby, devise a preventive strategy accordingly.5.2 Media CampaigningMedia is the most shaping tool to speedily communicate with the masses therefore, it is imperative to utilise both print and electronic media for positive campaigning and specifically rope-in the e-media to target todays mesh savvy, younger generation. In the wide-ranging interest of public health, it is the social responsibility of media world to all told proh ibit the enticing cigarette advertisements and instead make noble use of the media by broadcasting regular public service messages to discourage the prevailing smoking behaviours.5.3 Stringent Policies to Reduce Tobacco manipulationSubstantial increase in tobacco prices can significantly reduce its consumption especially amongst younger generation or those that are inefficient to afford. Governments must also concentrate on formulating such policies that can completely forbid the promotional campaigns and considerably re relentless the sales through vending machines (DoH 2007). Since smoking is one of the most prevailing global epidemics therefore strict rules and regulations shall be imposed to discourage smoking in public places as for example bus stops, restaurants, educational institutions, offices, hospitals and cinemas etc. This would not only limit its consumption but will also signify the governments seriousness towards addressing the underlying public health issues. More over, the tobacco industry shall be consistently introduced to consistent and rigorous tax networks so that the target of promoting controlled use of cigarette smoking can be achieved (DoH 2007). On the other hand, governments can attain dual benefits by expanding the tax network for the tobacco industry thus cut down its consumption amongst general populace and can generate more taxed revenue.5.4 discourage Nicotine DependencyRegular smokers become heavily reliant upon nicotine intake and therefore, search for certain other alternatives as a substitute to cigarettes including chewable tobacco, tablets, patches and inhalers, if their approachability to cigarette smoking has been disrupted. The governments while designing smoking related preventive strategies must acknowledge that nicotine is highly addictive and therefore, it is wise to introduce less-harmful and inexpensive alternatives to regular cigarettes and subsequently educate them to overcome their nicotine dependency by adopting practical interventions through professional medical assistance (Prabhat, Chaloupka, Corrao and Binu 2006). Moreover, the developed countries and international health organisations can also donates such inexpensive nicotine alternatives to poor and deprived countries in order to promote smoking cessation and bouncing living across the globe.5.5 Support GroupsNicotine dependency significantly damages the internal health of people which restricts them to participate in healthy sports activities. Governments can help the local bodies to establish tobacco control support groups in their respective neighbourhoods and to organise healthy activities and events to promote constructive attitude amongst general population. A strategically designed tobacco control program also facilitates in mobilising the civil society to effectively contribute both their money and time to engage nicotine bloodsucking people in healthy activities (Prabhat, Chaloupka, Corrao and Binu 2006) and ther eby, motivating them to overcome their cigarette smoking habitude. Formation of such support groups provide easy and consistent recover of tobacco-specific valuable information to the smokers and also enhance their awareness to the associated risk factors. closureSmoking has been established as a consistently prevailing global epidemic and that is so, because the related effects of smoking are not circumscribe to the smoker himself, but also extend to others through a paradigm of risk factors including passive smoking and air pollution etc. which makes it a substantial risk to public health. Provided the fact, it is not only essential to discourage smoking behaviour in smokers but also educate the non-smokers to protect themselves from the associated health risks. Apart from individual preventive measures, there is a growing need for integrating practical interventions to ensure reduced exposure to tobacco smoke especially in public places by providing separate smoking and non-sm oking areas or installing ventilation or completely banning smoking through industry led voluntary agreements or by introducing loaded statutory requirements. To conclude, cigarette smoking is radically injurious to public health and honest efforts are required at both individual and communal level to enhance public awareness towards the associated risks and particularly support the smokers to retract their smoking habit.Smoking as a Public wellness IssueSmoking as a Public Health IssueIt is now a matter of common public acceptance that smoking causes ill health. This education can be backed up by large amounts of authoritative literature (Dobson et al 1999) (Smoking Kills 1998) (Choosing Health 2001)The subject of this essay however, is whether or not it is a Public Health issue. We will argue strongly that it is and produce evidence to support this stance.The Wanless Report (2002 ) defines Public Health as The science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promotin g health through organised efforts and informed choices of society, organisations public and private, communities and individualsOn that basis we would suggest that the argument is already make since there is little doubt that smoking both active and passive will shorten life and cause disease.The evidence to support this statement comes from papers such as that by Prescott ( et al. 1998) who carried out a large study looking into the effects of primary smoking and the risk of myocardial ischaemia in the general population. The results of the study were absolutely unequivocal with a finding of an increased risk of myocardial infarction in women of 2.24 and in men of 1.43. the reasons for the sex difference are several including genetic factors (Bennett 2004) and hormonal factors (Chapman 1999)To take a step further back, we have to define HealthAn authoritative definition of Health comes from the WHO who currently tell us that health is a state of complete physical, mental and s ocial well universe and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. ( WHO 1992). A difficultness with this definition is that today many people confuse the attainment of ecstasy with the attainment of health (Kemm 2001). Ironically, in the context of this essay, Freud also offered us an mirror image on the definition of Health when he observed that most people equated well-being with happiness rather than health (Freud 1975) and he amplified this by observing that he had been advised by his doctors to give up cigars in order to improve his health. He commented that he was far more healthy but much less happy (Saracci 1997).Although Freuds comment was clearly flippant, it does personify a deeper truth, that part of the problem with smoking is the pleasure that some people derive from it. One can always advance the argument that in a free society one should always have liberty of choice to damage yourself if you wish. (Hegel 1971)That is clearly the case, but in adopting th at view you must also accept two further consequences of that position. One is that society is expect to pick up the bill when you are ill (via the NHS) and that by smoking, you whitethorn not only damage yourself but you may well damage others through the medium of passive smoking. (Kuhse vocalist 2001)It is these latter points which actually make the issue one of Public Health. The Public (in general terms) are expect to fund the necessary treatment when you become ill. This is not an isolated disaster as over 200,000 patients are diagnosed annually with some form of smoking related malignancy and over 120,000 will die from the disease. This is quite main(a) of those that develop other complications of smoke-related illness. (NHS Cancer Plan 2000). If you add to this number, the carers and the other economic costs to the community, the argument that it is not a Public Health issue clearly fails.We have raised the issue of passive smoking as one of the criteria for suggesting t hat smoking is an issue of public health. The evidence for this is rapidly accumulating. We can point to the cleverly designed study by He (et al.2004) whichwas able to point to the statistical differences in illness rates between those industrial workers who had a constantly smoky atmosphere to breathe and those who were able to lift it. There is little doubt that choosing to smoke where others will inhale the smoke is a demonstrably anti social behaviour.As if to underline our view, we can point to the fact that the Government takes a similar view as it has produced a series of Government whiten Papers (Choosing Health 2004) ( twist on the Best 2003) and regulations (Saving lives 1999) which are all aimed at improving the health of the nation by reducing its collective exposure to cigarette smokeReferencesBennett Gottleib 2004Passive smoking more risky for women with a missing gene.BMJ 2004 Vol 26 320-322Building on the best 2003Department of HealthHMSO. 09/12/2003Chapman S 199 9Smoking and Women beauty before age? BMJ, Mar 1999 318 818.Choosing Health 2004Government White Paper consultation on improving peoples health28.6.04 BMJ, Dec 2004 319 1522.Dobson et al, 1999National Centre for Social Research,RCP, 1999Freud S. 1975Letter to Lou Andreas-Salome, 1930 whitethorn 8. Cited in Sigmund Freud house catalogue.Vienna Lcker and Wgenstein, 1975 49.He, T H Lam, L S Li, L S Li, R Y Du, G L Jia, J Y Huang, and J S Zheng2004Passive smoking at work as a risk factor for coronary heart disease in Chinese women who have never take in BMJ, Feb 2004 308 380 384.Hegel GW. 1971Philosophy of Mind Being Part Three of the Encyclopaedia of the philosophical Sciences (1830). Wallace W, trans.Oxford Clarendon Press 1971.Kemm 2001The pursuit of happinessCancer Nurs. 200023(1)2031Kuhse Singer 2001A companion to bioethicsISBN 063123019X Pub Date 05 July 2001NHS Cancer plan 2000A plan for investment, a plan for reformDepartment of Health. HMSO. 27/09/2000Prescott, sexual moral ity Hippie, Peter Schooner, Hans Ole Hein, and Jrgen Vestbo 1998Smoking and risk of myocardial infarction in women and men longitudinal population study BMJ, Apr 1998 316 1043 1047Saracci R 1997 The world health organisation needs to reconsider its definition of health BMJ, May 1997 314 1409.Smoking Kills1998A White PaperHMSO December 1998Wanless reportHMSO 2002World Health Organisation. 1996Ethics and health, and quality in health carereport by the director general.Geneva WHO, 1996. (Document No. EB 97/16.)PDG 20.8.05Word count 1,192