Tags: Joint Honours Degree DissertationSmall Business EssayCover Letter For Sales ResumeAngela Martin ThesisCourse In Social WorkSample Statistics Research Paper6th Grade 5 Paragraph EssayRules For Argumentative EssayMckinsey Problem Solving Test SampleWhere To Put Thesis Statement In Research Paper
Additionally, students who smoke will likely spend less time on campus and avail themselves less frequently of campus dining options – leading to a reduction in university revenues and a less vigorous student presence on campus.
Methods: Prevalence estimates and behavioural changes were examined among a random sample of bar workers before and 1 year after the smoke-free legislation; comparisons made with a general population sub-sample.
Changes in risk knowledge related to SHS exposure were based on general population data.
In a sense, the outdoor bans seem like a logical extension of 30 years of efforts to reduce tobacco use, given the harmful effects of smoking.
The majority of the most elite schools, especially Ivy Leaguers like Harvard and Princeton, have yet to jump on the bandwagon, however.
Some 10 years ago, Ozarks Technical Community College became the first higher education establishment to ban smoking even outdoors.
Since then, several hundred more universities and community colleges, especially in the South and Midwest, have followed suit.Call me old fashioned, but I think I actually prefer the image of a university with pipe-wielding, pontificating professors and arts students smoking and arguing politics by the campus fountain.In any case, the proportion of the campus community and population in general that smokes has been steadily declining since the 1970s, without these draconian "smoke-free campus" bans.Instead of respecting our students and offering them a safe, liberal environment on campus, our university administrators feel cowed by the new political correctness of the latest temperance movement.How distressing that the groups pushing these policies, from the “true believers” to Anheuser-Busch funded organizations like the Bacchus Network (which would divert universities’ attention from alcohol to tobacco) or pharmaceutical company groups (who often get universities to buy their smoking cessation products and distribute them for free or at a subsidized price), couldn’t care less about the fallout.If just half of these 4000 students who smoke have access to a car and use it to leave campus just once more a week for lunch or a break (as a result of the ban), this equals two thousand extra car trips a week around the university.Unlike tobacco outdoors, vehicle exhaust does pose a significant health risk to others, and the extra traffic (some 60,000 extra car trips an academic year as a conservative estimate) will increase the university’s carbon footprint accordingly.Faculty in particular may find it frustrating to work so hard for student retention and morale only to see their efforts hampered in this regard. The implication that tobacco smoke poses a significant health risk to others outdoors is disingenuous.A university’s first mission centers around truthful discourse, and we should be teaching our students to differentiate between significant risks (such as smoking) and totally insignificant risks (such as secon hand smoke outdoors).I can’t help but think that this is because they have more common sense than the rest of us: it’s only a matter of time before this “smoke-free campus” movement gets a student assaulted, raped or killed. I shouldn’t think so, given that the sequence of events is perfectly foreseeable, and quite likely, in the aggregate.Here's why: Some 20 percent of university students smoke.