Citation

Wilson, N., Thomson, G., Edwards, R., Weerasekera, D., Laugesen, M. (2008). Most New Zealand smokers support having fire-safe cigarettes: National survey data. New Zealand Medical Journal, 121(1286), 134-135.

Abstract

A recent New Zealand study on cigarette fires and burns among New Zealand smokers,1 has highlighted again yet another adverse consequence of nicotine addiction. The obvious long-term solution to this problem is to lower smoking prevalence by advancing comprehensive tobacco control measures (as previously advocated by injury researchers in New Zealand2). However, a more direct and supplementary option is for governments to mandate for fire safe (or “reduced ignition propensity”) cigarettes as per Canada and various US states (including New York and California).3,4

Citation

Thomson, G., Wilson, N., Weerasekera, D., Edwards, R. (2008). Ninety-six percent of New Zealand smokers support smokefree cars containing preschool children. New Zealand Medical Journal, 121(1285), 139-140.

Abstract

New Zealand and international research shows that smoking in cars, even with the windows down, produces dangerous levels of pollutants.1,2 These levels are far higher than World Health Organization air quality guidelines for particulates in ambient air.3 While at least 10 Australian and North American jurisdictions (including California) have banned smoking in cars carrying children,4–13 New Zealand officials have been reported as hesitant about considering such a move.14 Perceived questions about public support appear to have contributed to lack of progress on this issue in New Zealand.14 In a number of areas of Australia and North America, support from smokers (85% or over) and non smokers (90% or over) has been reported for banning smoking in cars with children inside.15–18 In a 1997 Wellington area survey, 94% agreed that cars with children in them should be smokefree (86% of smokers).15 In a 2004 New Zealand wide survey, 76% disagreed that it is “okay” to smoke around non smokers inside cars even when there are windows down.16

Citation

Wilson, N., Jalali, R., Nathe, J., Maher, A., Edwards, R., Wilson, N. (2007). National smokefree law in New Zealand improves air quality inside bars, pubs and restaurants. BioMed Central Public Health, 7, 85.

Abstract

Background: We aimed to: (i) assess compliance with a new smokefree law in a range of hospitality settings; and (ii) to assess the impact of the new law by measuring air quality and making comparisons with air quality in outdoor smoking areas and with international data from hospitality settings.

Methods: We included 34 pubs, restaurants and bars, 10 transportation settings, nine other indoor settings, six outdoor smoking areas of bars and restaurants, and six other outdoor settings. These were selected using a mix of random, convenience and purposeful sampling. The number of lit cigarettes among occupants at defined time points in each venue was observed and a portable real-time aerosol monitor was used to measure fine particulate levels (PM2.5).

Results: No smoking was observed during the data collection periods among over 3785 people present in the indoor venues, nor in any of the transportation settings. The levels of fine particulates were relatively low inside the bars, pubs and restaurants in the urban and rural settings (mean 30-minute level = 16 μg/m3 for 34 venues; range of mean levels for each category: 13 μg/m3 to 22 μg/m3). The results for other smokefree indoor settings (shops, offices etc) and for smokefree transportation settings (eg, buses, trains, etc) were even lower. However, some “outdoor” smoking areas attached to bars/restaurants had high levels of fine particulates, especially those that were partly enclosed (eg, up to a 30-minute mean value of 182 μg/m3 and a peak of maximum value of 284 μg/m3). The latter are far above WHO guideline levels for 24 hour exposure (ie, 25μg/m3).

Conclusion: There was very high compliance with the new national smokefree law and this was also reflected by the relatively good indoor air quality in hospitality settings (compared to the “outdoor” smoking areas and the comparable settings in countries that permit indoor smoking). Nevertheless, adopting enhanced regulations (as used in various US and Canadian jurisdictions) may be needed to address hazardous air quality in relatively enclosed “outdoor” smoking areas.