Thanks for not killing us anymore

At a restaurant recently I asked a friend: isn't it hard to believe that just a few years ago there would have been people smoking at the tables all around us?  It's a mark of how much things have changed that the idea seemed so surprising, and that breathable, non-lethal air in restaurants has become something we basically take for granted around here.

Two new studies have verified the health benefits of smoking bans:

Overall, American, Canadian, and European cities that have implemented smoking bans had an average of 17 percent fewer heart attacks in the first year, compared with communities who had not taken such measures.

Then, each year after implementing smoking bans (at least for the first three years, the longest period studied), smoke-free communities have an average 26 percent decline in heart attacks, compared with those areas that still allow smokers to light up in public places.

(This echoes a study I mentioned a few months ago that showed a 41% drop in heart attack hospitalizations over three years thanks to a smoking ban in Pueblo, Colorado.)

And the benefits also extend to non-smokers inhaling the smoke from the other end of the cigarette:

Nonsmokers have a 25 percent to 30 percent higher risk of heart attack if they inhale smoke at home or at work, and smoke has been shown to affect heart health within minutes, says [Dr. David] Meyers.

"We can measure chemical changes within 20 minutes," he says. "The changes that occur primarily involve the clotting system. Basically, exposure to smoke makes your blood sticky and real clot-y and that's what causes heart attacks."

This is why I support smoking bans: because I'm happy with my blood's standard viscosity, I'm opposed to olfactory abuse in all its forms, and being alive is one of my favorite pastimes.  So to those people who've gotten hooked on the products of some of the most evil corporations on the planet, I say, sincerely: thanks for not killing us anymore.  I'm sure it's a pain to go smoke outside in the cold and I can imagine that the looks from non-smokers get on your nerves, but I thank you from the bottom of my heart for not causing my blood to clot excessively and, you know, terminate my existence.

The larger point here (and one that gives me hope) is that behaviors that are destructive to other people are continually becoming less acceptable.  As the movement against smoking gained traction in the U.S. I noticed a direct effect throughout my extended family, nearly all of whom used to be smokers and nearly all of whom no longer are—and I have no doubt that the lower acceptance and higher social costs of smoking contributed to that change.  Even before smoking bans were adopted where they lived, the growing sense that it was no longer acceptable to inflict cigarette smoke on innocent bystanders led many of them to change their smoking habits.

There's been a similar slow and steady growth in the notion that we need to take responsibility for the environmental consequences of everything we do.  The environment has become a central consideration in almost every public activity in a way that seemed unimaginable 20 or 30 years ago; witness the ubiquity of recycling, the rise of green architecture, and the changes in the way large events are handled (in terms of waste management, energy efficiency, environmental impact, and so on), to name just a few of the more visible effects.  The idea that it's immoral to harm the environment or to waste the planet's resources is becoming more widespread every day.

So I'd say the movement against smoking has contributed in a small but important way to the growing acceptance of a core principle of the left: that we need to take responsibility for the way our actions affect other people.  I've mentioned two of the signs of this pattern of change, but they're only the tip of the iceberg; in looking back at the past few decades I see a greater regard for human rights, an increased belief in the need for universal accountability, the steady growth of boundary-defying solidarity movements, and many other positive trends that can be traced to this same principle.

Against the best efforts of its worst members, civilization is slowly becoming civilized.  That's a major change for the better, and it's the one thing that makes me the most hopeful for the future.

Comments

[NomadUK]

and it's the one thing that makes me the most hopeful for the future

I would change that to 'at all hopeful', and it's a pretty damned tenuous thread from which to be swinging, but I suppose it's better than nothing.

[Tony]

Smoking, believe it or not, actually used to be allowed in hospitals!

My mom was in the hospital when I was very young in the early 1970's...I remember thinking to myself then how could they allow people to smoke...no so much for the health reasons, which I barely understood at the time if at all, but because of the smell...I hated the smell more than anything else. Still do.-Tony

[John Caruso]

I wouldn't say they're tenuous at all. In fact if it weren't for global warming, I'd be annoyingly optimistic on the basis of just these types of things.

Speaking of hospitals and smoking, my mom had life-threatening pneumonia years ago, and the woman sharing her hospital room actually died while she was there—and that still wasn't enough to convince my mom to quit smoking. It wasn't until years later that she managed it. That's one powerful (and powerfully stinky) drug.

[KDelphi]

As an es-smoker, I am waiting for society to take responsibility for the health care of all. THEN, when it costs them money , they will ban it. They should. It helped me quit and I appreciate it.

[NomadUK]

I am waiting for society to take responsibility for the health care of all. THEN, when it costs them money , they will ban it.

You're going to be waiting a long time, mate. The NHS treats everyone here, and the fucking mouth-breathers are still whinging about the new smoking ban in pubs.

[SteveB]

Thanks, I needed this. The decline in political influence of the tobacco industry gives me hope that, some day, the insurance industry will no longer have a stranglehold on our Congress.

If there's a pattern here, it seems to be that progressives, lefties, granola-eaters, or whatever you want to call them, are quite good at persuading their fellow citizens (probably all that earnestness and persistence). But obviously, if it's an issue where some powerful interest is making a ton of money from the status quo, persuading your fellow citizens isn't enough. And that's where progressives fall down, I think. They don't seem to have an idea what to do with all those people they've persuaded in order to overcome the powerful interest that's blocking the way.

Last week, I was at a meeting for a small local group that's advocating for single-payer. They had organized a rally for the "Mad as Hell" doctors tour, and were planning an educational event for the next week to follow up. The plan for the educational event was to lay our 10 myths about single-payer, and then have someone explain why each one was a myth. I pointed out that, already, about 60% of Americans support single-payer, and among the people who attend health-care educational events in Madison, Wisconsin, that percentage probably approaches 100%. "Sure, but we need to give people these arguments so they can persuade others," was the response. And when the people we've persuaded have persuaded others, too, what then? It's like there's no step after the persuasion step, except more persuasion. But I'm sure that once we've persuaded 100% of Americans that single-payer is the way to go, we'll get single payer. Maybe.

[KDelphi]

NomadUK--ues, but even mouth breathers in the uK (or worldwide) dont seem to eat, breathe, sleep and live only for MONEY. But, my Eurailpass didnt go there, so I didnt get to see the uK. Wish I had. At least , that is the way it seemed to be in the rest of Europe. (I know that the uK is not Europe...lol)

I know that people dont like to hear this, but, I dont really give a rat's ass wht the 'Merkin people "want"--they obviously have no idea what is best for themselves (just kidding--sortve).... but, its true our primitivistic society is so domionated by corporatism that, that it is very difficult, without extensive research, to find out what the hell you are doing at any one moment--like now.

I mean, the "poll" that "shows" that "people"

"dont want govt run health care" (I'm NOT doing Glenen Beck 'quotes in the air" right now, btw), is sponsored by somone that has a vested interest (stock) in Big Pharma or (in)Humuna.