If you're a smoker, do yo subscribe to the belief that second-hand smoke causes no damage when inhaled by non-smokers? While some smokers I know defend the position that there are no ill effects from second-hand smoke, I just don't buy it.

Apparently, many researchers agree with me, as a recent round of research has added to the body of evidence that second-hand smoke is indeed dangerous, even in small amounts.

This new research showed that second-hard smoke can "can harm the function of the arteries in children," among other things. Adding to that, the inhalation of second-hand smoke was found to be "harmful to the cardiovascular system of healthy schoolchildren." What about adults who breathe in second-hand smoke? I would venture to guess the disadvantages are pretty much the same.

Source

With smoking bans going into place all over Europe now -- mirroring the efforts of us old Yanks -- attendance in some Scottish pubs has actually risen since the public smoking bans has taken place in that country. Is that a surprise?

Perhaps patrons stayed away from smoky bars and pubs for fear of smelling and feeling like a wet, limp cigarette at home and at work. I know when I've gone out to places that allowed smoking, I come home smelling disgusting. I have to wash all those clothes and take a shower just to get rid of the stench.

Maybe pubs and other places of entertainment in Scotland and in other European countries will see improved attendance when banning smoking is put into full effect -- if it ever is.

Source

After all the bans on smoking in public places here in the U.S., the European Union has urged nations within that bloc to do the same -- and many countries are following along to the better health of their own citizens.

Smoking in public places may seem like a "right" to many, but when that smoke crosses some invisible barrier and affects other patrons, that is where the line must be drawn.

Ireland, Italy and Sweden have already banned smoking in public places -- which European country is next?

Source