Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

USF should continue to allow smoking

Published: Monday, August 23, 2010

Updated: Monday, August 23, 2010 00:08

In July, the University of Florida initiated a campus-wide ban on all tobacco products after students and staff voted in favor of the measure, joining nearly 400 other U.S. colleges that have already done so.

A total ban of on-campus tobacco use is unreasonable and represents an unwillingness to act fairly and cooperatively with the estimated 1 in 5 adults who smoke.

"Contrary to popular belief, we're not trying to punish people," UF spokesman Steve Orlando said to the Gainesville Sun. "We're just trying to help people live healthier lifestyles."

It is true that cigarette smoking is unhealthy. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), it can cause cancer in the lungs, kidneys, bladder, larynx, cervix and esophagus, as well as contribute to heart disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, bronchitis, emphysema, infertility, preterm delivery and stillbirth.

Despite the negative health effects and overwhelming tidal wave of information arguing against cigarette use, people still smoke. While many try to quit but are too addicted to nicotine, there are countless others who choose to smoke despite knowing the risks, a practice that is well-entrenched in contemporary society.

The negative effects of fattening foods, soft drinks and physical inactivity are widely known to contribute to obesity and the plethora of health issues that affect the 34 percent of Americans who are obese.

But rightly, people are still allowed to enjoy their limited time alive by indulging in bad habits like smoking, drinking and overeating.

Smoking cigarettes, though, contributes to second-hand smoke, while other self-destructive lifestyle habits do not adversely affect those nearby.

Because of this, there should be limitations on the effect that smokers may have on non-smokers. However, intolerance should not lead to the total elimination of smokers' rights.

Cigarette smoke pales in comparison to the thousands of cars, trucks and other automobiles that constantly pump carbon monoxide and other hazardous chemicals in peoples' faces as they speed away from crosswalks.

USF Health already bans smoking within a 100-foot radius of all 19 of its buildings, and there are many on campus who want a UF-like prohibition and are working tirelessly to bring the same to USF.

Students, faculty and staff should not have to go an entire day without having a cigarette break, even in the most remote areas, because the possibility exists that a non-smoker will wander by them.

Institutions like USF that promote intellectual freedom risk becoming hypocrites when trying to quell personal liberties such as smoking on campus.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

5 comments

Anonymous
Wed Aug 25 2010 19:41
By the way, the fact the others drink or overeat do not affect another individual directly, not as much as someone's second hand smoke in one's face.
Anonymous
Wed Aug 25 2010 19:39
I think designated smoking areas are the best route. It'd be fair to all parties involved. Banning smoking completely would not work, but the current policy (or "policy") is that people can smoke anywhere they want. It's very annoying to have to smell it when going into a building or walking down a sidewalk. How about SG get to work on something like this (to the extent possible, because it's likely coming down to a university admin decision)?
Anonymous
Tue Aug 24 2010 14:17
I don't think it is very fair that the 4 out of 5 peple who don't smoke and care about their health have to hold our breath just to walk in a building because so many people feel that the best place to smoke is right next to the doors!!
I hate cigarettes and the smoke makes it hard for me to breath even just by walking through it. In my opinion majority rules and this should just be voted on so that something can be done about it. Even if it is just designated smoking areas which I will GLADLY avoid at all costs.
Anonymous
Mon Aug 23 2010 15:02
What about alcohol ???? Our parking lots are littered with empty beer cases and empty beer cans and bottles and its ilegal for the mostly 21 and under crowd who abuse it the most.
Anonymous
Mon Aug 23 2010 05:58
overwhelming tidal wave of information.............Lets just say it was all created propaganda none of it worth the paper the witch doctors wrote it on.........second hand smoke is an insignificant health threat to anyone. As is diesel smoke or car pollution on the 2.5 pm scale.........heres oshas take


All this is in a small sealed room 9x20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes

"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes

"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes

For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time

The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

So,OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA







log out