Analysis of Tobacco Control Policies and Public Health Report

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of tobacco control policies and their impact on public health. The report is divided into two parts, Part A introduces the health hazards of tobacco, the effects of second-hand smoke, and the public's attitude towards smoke-free environments. The report reviews the public support for tobacco control and the need for smoke-free outdoor settings. Part B explores the role of government interventions, such as smoking bans, increased tobacco taxes, and plain packaging, in reducing tobacco consumption and improving public health. It highlights the importance of awareness campaigns and rehabilitation facilities. The report concludes that efficient evidence-based strategies are crucial for improving public health, emphasizing the need for government interventions and community support to reduce tobacco-related illnesses and promote a healthier society.

Introduction to Public Health

Table of Content.
PART - A.....................................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................1
LOG- 1.........................................................................................................................................1
LOG-2..........................................................................................................................................2
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................4
PART-B.......................................................................................................................................4
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................4
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................4
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

PART - A
INTRODUCTION
Tobacco is symbolising as the epidemic which is one of the major public health in the
England. It has been that surpass smoker reduce their lifeline of almost around 10 years. It has
been found there were 20% of death across the UK. Smokers are at high risk of progression of
the heat disease, chances of stoke and the lung cancer. Its effect is also seen the insulin
production and conveyance which might lead to the development of the insulin resistance in the
smokers. This report will typify about the reason why the tobacco is need to be banned in public
places as It is associated with the strong health hazard for both smokers and non-smokers in the
equal manner (Hammond & et. al., (2022)).
MAIN BODY
Here, it stands for the argument and the analysis of the Public support for tobacco control
policy extensions in Western Australia and a brief on public view on the smoke-free outdoor
surroundings. When the smoker smoke at public places it flumes get interact with other
individuals including the adults or children which can affect the health of them. It also pollutes
the air which can cause the nausea, discomfort or the irritation in the individuals. This control of
smoking in public place might control their desire to consume the tobacco and it will accelerate
the improve health of individuals which will reduce the healthcare burden (Joossens, Feliu &
Fernandez, (2020)).
LOG- 1
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ATITUDE TOWARDS THE SMOKE-FREE OUTDOORS
Reference
A brief review of public attitudes toward smoke-free outdoor places, (2009) [Online] Available
through < file:///C:/Users/user/AppData/Local/Temp/Rar$DIa8604.22690/A%20brief
%20review%20of%20public%20attitudes%20toward%20smoke%20free%20outdoor
%20places.pdf>
Purpose
As per the view of the George (2009), the reflect on the awareness about the developing
the smoke free public outdoor areas are mooted.
Reliability of the log
1

It has been found that there was modulation in the policies or the procedures by the
government as to design smoke free in door area which means separate other smoking is created
in indoors to avoid the enlargement spread of fumes to the non-smokers.
Interpretation from the log
In various country it has been seen that the outdoor limitation of the smoking has also
been implemented in the bus stops, stadium platforms, university campus, building entry ways
and many more public oriented places. It has also been seen the hospitality domain associated
also has to implement limitation in the smokers and its area. When the limitation passes in the
California for the indoor smoking it has been found that there were increase risk to second hand
smoking by the non-smokers whose rate has risen from 32% in 1999 to about 44% by 2005.
Support on appropriate control on the smoking outdoor settings is need to be done where the
SHS level or the fire hazards should not be accelerated as an impact of laying the limitations.
In extent overview
From the studies it has been found that the implementation of the smoke-free policies is
to be design by the government authorities in primarily the large parks or crowded stadium. It is
done with the aim to safeguard the children health and as to improve the public health
conditions. In this review the author purpose is to symbolise the effect of smoke-free outdoors in
different parts and the measure that the policy makers need to be taken before implement the
policies to improve the public health condition. It provides evidence on the public opinions for
the cause which is the implementation are need to be implemented while analysing it associated
outcomes or the care in the widespread population diversity. It has been seen that these outdoor
smoking accelerates the risk of inhalation of the emitted smoke by the non-smokers or the
children. This intake of tobacco matter from the contaminated environment encompasses the
encumbrance on the child well-being. The main aim to form these policies are to safeguard the
young generation as it has been found that these inhaled fumes deprives the children existence by
nearly 10 years. Smoke free policies will reduce the destructive health outcomes in kids, reduce
the chance of asthma in patients and also cut down the hospital ingress for lower respiratory tract
infections
LOG-2
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ON TOBACCO CONTROL POLICY
2

Reference
Public support for tobacco control policy extensions in Western Australia, (2012) [Online]
Available through <
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221880836_Public_support_for_tobacco_contr
ol_policy_extensions_in_Western_Australia_A_cross-sectional_study>
Purpose
As per the view of the Michael (2012), various role of tobacco control policies is carried
out which includes nicotine replacement therapy for smokers, limitation on the promotion of the
consumption of tobacco and liberation of its sale.
Reliability of the log
It also includes its packaging should include a proper description of the products that are
used in the manufacturing of the product and the hazards associated when consumed by the
individuals. It also covers the indication of associated harms between smokers and non-smokers
when consuming nicotine on the regular basis. It also includes its packaging should include a
proper description of the products that are used in the manufacturing of the product and the
hazards associated when consumed by the individuals. It also covers the indication of associated
harms between smokers and non-smokers when consuming nicotine on the regular basis.
Interpretation from the log
Different ways of bringing control are provided which are banning the consumption of
tobacco in public areas or altering the advanced packaging of the cigarettes into the plain basic
packing. These evidence-based report will support the formation of policies as it will intend the
magnitude till which the alteration are done while keeping community values and behaviour
changes among the policy makers when providing them the evidence report. It is done by
creating awareness among the people about the hazards of consuming tobacco to their own and
their family members. From the evidence, it has been found that women are more supportive of
the policies.
In extent overview
Here the author has reviewed the role of awareness among individuals to modulate their
thought processes. When the idea of plain packaging was imposed there was a reduction in
consumption as individuals recognized it as dull or ugly and they don’t felt the feeling to
purchase it. It has been carry through as individuals don't find it attractive to consume. It has
been found that the government has imposed the strict regulations for the imposing of limitation
3

of smoking in the indoor or workplaces and are further planning to impose it on outdoor to
module the protect of well-being of individuals. There is need to generate the more community
support for the implementation of the agreement. It is seen that women were not ready for the
plain packaging but its reason were not provided in the report. The role of the media is also to
aware the community about the benefits of quitting smoking and accepting the policies.
CONCLUSION
From the above report efficient evidence-based report for the implementation of the
smoke-free outdoor setting is concluded through it. Here, they reflect on the incognizance of
developing the smoke-free public outdoors to improve healthcare conditions. The negative
impact of the banning of indoor smoking is carry through where second-hand smoking was
found to be accelerated and was the reason of illness. Other study provides various role of
replacement therapy or plain packaging in reducing the consumption of the tobacco in
individuals.
PART-B
INTRODUCTION
Government intervention is the action that is taken by the ruling dominance in the nation to
implement the changes to control public health. These interventions are set with the objective to
benefit the socioeconomic grounds of well-being. These implementations are done to enable the
rigorous consequences on the individuals. This report provides logical evidence on different
government interventions implemented to ban public smoking (Kingsle & et. al., (2022)).
MAIN BODY
Banning of the public smoking by the government result into a reduction of cases of heart
attack or other emphysema patients. As it will limit the risk of second-hand smoke to non-
smokers or youngsters which modify the change of hazardous infection in them. It has been
found by above report that banning of indoor smoking has increased the chance of second-hand
smoke or the associated health hazard. So to control it different government interventions are
need to be provided to limit the indoor-outdoor smoking as it reduces the lifeline of children or t
youngsters by 10 years (Chun, (2020)).
Intervention that government might has consider are dual the magnitude of the tax on the
tobacco package. From the evidence it has been found that increased in taxes have reduce the
4

amount of tobacco purchasing and consumption as all of them can’t afford the accelerated
magnitude. As it has been found that young individuals attract towards the tobacco for
generating catchy attraction in their group and also to fit the peers they face with increasing
burden of employment or education. Another engagement includes prohibit tobacco endorsement
as it will reduce the harm which it causes to the society. These advertisements or the publicity
normalize the nicotine consumption which attract more youth towards it as they feel it makes
them popular. Advertisement must include the risk associated with the consumption of the
nicotine as it will make population aware about its associated noxious effects. This can be done
majorly by making population aware about its noxious effects as this action might acknowledge
the individuals to either quit the usage of the tobacco or else cut down its overload day by day.
Its overdose consumption has life-threatening effect on the health conditions of the own
individuals as well as the one who are directly or indirectly connected to them. When imposed
by the policies by the government it is there duty to ensure that proper implementation of
policies is passageway by every individual. When not locomote they will be admonished for the
illegal action they have performed. It is done by monitoring the tobacco control initiative which
includes different training or the awareness session organise through campaigns to aware the
people about its harmful effect.
The government can also impose the plain packaging of the tobacco which might remove
individual interest for the consumption of the packet because of its desiccated packaging. These
dried-out packaging plan, the government can carry through as to module the smokers rate in the
nation. This action might also work as the aid to improve the public health as these
implementations by the government will vantage the quality living of the population. Quality of
living must be provided by the government by providing the better rehabilitation facilities to the
one who are trying to stop the nicotine consumption (Pisinger, Katsaounou & Belo Ravara,
(2021)).
CONCLUSION
From the above report it has been concluded the role of government intervention in
carrying out the alterations required to improve the public health. This report mooted upon
various intervention that government can implement including the banning the indoor or outdoor
smoking, implementing the plain packaging. Through the evidence it has been seen that
implementation of these plan packaging for couple of instance reduce the individual wish to
5

overdose the consumption. Government is also flourishing towards the better health care
facilities for the rehabilitation therapy.
6

REFERENCES
Books and Journals:
Chun, J. (2020). Public health threat of tobacco and substance use in Asia: An introduction to the
theme issue. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 52(1), 1-4.
Hammond, D., Reid, J. L., Rynard, V. L., O'connor, R. J., Goniewicz, M. L., Piper, M. E., &
Bansal-Travers, M. (2022). Indicators of dependence and efforts to quit vaping and
smoking among youth in Canada, England and the USA. Tobacco control, 31(e1), e25-
e34.
Joossens, L., Feliu, A., & Fernandez, E. (2020). The tobacco control scale 2019 in Europe.
Brussels, Belgium: Association of European Cancer Leagues.
Kingsley, M., McGinnes, H., Song, G., Doane, J., & Henley, P. (2022). Impact of Massachusetts’
Statewide Sales Restriction on Flavored and Menthol Tobacco Products on Tobacco
Sales in Massachusetts and Surrounding States, June 2020. American Journal of Public
Health, 112(8), 1147-1150.
Pisinger, C., Katsaounou, P., & Belo Ravara, S. (2021). E-cigarettes, heated tobacco and other
novel nicotine-containing products: A help to smokers or a public health
threat. Supporting Tobacco Cessation, 2021th ed.; Ravara, SB, Dagli, E., Katsaounou,
P., Lewis, KE, Pisinger, C., Eds, 33-55.
7