Campus

U looking into a smoke-free campus

Advertisement

BY Briana Bierschbach
PUBLISHED: 09/30/2008

It’s been exactly one year since smoking in bars, restaurants and other establishments became illegal in Minnesota, and some campuses across the state are taking this one step further and going entirely smoke free.

The University is now conducting a study on being smoke free and may join the ranks.

Boynton Health Service , in conjunction with the Office of Student Affairs, is developing a campus-wide smoking survey to administer to students, faculty and staff during the first week of October, Vice Provost for Student Affairs Jerry Rinehart said.

The survey’s purpose is to get a broad sampling of people’s attitudes toward smoking, Rinehart said.

“We would be reluctant to adopt a policy that no one would support,” he said.

Banning smoking on campus would require discussion, but Rinehart said there would financial benefit as well.

Tobacco-related illnesses account for 9 to 10 percent of the University's health benefits expenditures for faculty and staff, he said. This amounts to approximately $11 million annually.

“It’s not going to make or break the University, but it is certainly something we are looking at in this study,” he said.

Rinehart said he also feels a smoking ban could reduce the number of smokers on campus and may entice other universities to consider a ban.

Stephen Hecht, professor and chairman of the University’s Cancer Prevention Center , said smoke-free legislation in California and Massachusetts has resulted in smoking rates below 20 percent in those states.

Dave Golden, public health and marketing director at Boynton, said there is a surprisingly low number of students who smoke regularly on campus.

A recent Boynton survey found that 96 percent of University undergraduates don’t use tobacco on a daily basis; 80 percent report they never use tobacco products. This is the lowest rate since tobacco-use data was first collected in 1992.

“This generation of students is not like any other,” Golden said. “They’ve really got it figured out.”

But Golden said there are safety issues that could arise with such a policy.

“Is it realistic to have somebody that really wants to smoke to have to go off campus at night to have a cigarette?” he said. “There is a safety issue there.”

Rinehart also said a ban would bring questions regarding campus boundaries.

Margaret Johnson, English studies junior and smoker, said a campus smoking ban would be difficult to implement and control because campus is so large.

“You would probably still see students smoking on campus,” Johnson said. “But I think if smokers had designated smoking areas people would respect that.”

The University’s current policy prohibits smoking in all facilities and within 25 feet of building entrances.

Universities across the state are going smoke-free. Minnesota State University Moorhead went smoke-free in January , and the University of Minnesota, Crookston, campus will be smoke-free by January 2009.

The University of Minnesota, Duluth campus went smoke-free in September 2007 .

However, Dori Becker, a health educator at UMD Health Services, said she noticed students having a hard time adjusting.

“Last spring I still saw people smoking around campus,” she said. “You wouldn’t have even known there was a smoking policy in place.”

Becker said in retrospect, she wishes there would have been an educational campaign to prepare student smokers for a smoke-free campus.

Both Rinehart and Golden agreed that programs would need to be available to students if a smoking ban were to be put in place.

“We have very affective and powerful cessation programs through Boynton that help those who are addicted to nicotine,” Rinehart said. “The question is how much advanced warning should we give smokers so they can go through these programs.”

Rinehart said the smoke-free campus study should be completed by the first of the year, and there should be recommendations for the University by spring. There would also be a six-month waiting period between making a decision and putting a policy in place.

24 Comments

The Minnesota Daily wants to host a forum for discussion regarding issues and stories regarding the University of Minnesota and surrounding communities. However, the online comments should not be used to threaten or defame. This is a place for people to be heard, and want to contribute to discussion. Those who persist to use expletives, inappropriate, racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post.

To flag an inappropriate comment please login.

Finally

Clean air and clean streets. Smokers litter our streets more than any other group of people on this planet. Seriously, walk around campus and look at the groud, its disgusting.

Here we go, cant wait to her the cancer stick lovers whine like babies........

The Fairview hospital

The Fairview hospital campuses are smoke-free, and you see patients and staff light up not two feet from the front entrance. There is that 25 foot from building entrances rule at the U, and again, walk out any door and you walk through a smoke cloud. Does this not prove that smokers' will not respect the proposed designated smoking zones?

NO KIDDING

I absolutely HATE walking past smokers and having to breathe their air. We don't go around farting in their face, (although we maybe should start, it might get a point across...) why should I have to smell their cigarettes? GET IT OFF CAMPUS!

sounds like a personal

sounds like a personal problem.

get over it.

While we're at it, why don't

While we're at it, why don't we give citations for people who wear too much cologne/perfume and give headaches to those sitting next to them.

perfume and cologne dont

perfume and cologne dont affect the health of everyone who is breathing it in!

Fragrances certainly can

Fragrances certainly can affect the health of some. See Wikipedia.

It's usually the anti-smokers

It's usually the anti-smokers whining, not the smokers...as you can see above.

Smoking is

the calling card of a feeble mind.

Calling card of a feeble

Calling card of a feeble mind? Catchy, but it's more along the lines of 'addiction to nicotine'. Why harass the few smokers left who've yet to quit? You might get farther with honey as opposed to vinegar.

Whatever happened to Democracy?

A non-smoker myself, I feel this to be a blatant violation of human rights. Students pay a devastatingly large amount of money to be here (tuition, fees, etc) and have every right to smoke outdoors on their campus. It is a smoker's responsibility, and that of every individual, to be respectful of others. Respectful behavior, however, cannot be enforced by law.

The U.S. Supreme Court has

The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that SMOKING IS NOT A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT. Non-smokers pay the same tuition/room & board that smokers do and there are many more non-smokers than there are smokers. Second-hand smoke (SHS) is a class A carcinogen (same as asbestos) and according to the current surgeon general report, no amount of SHS is safe even for brief periods of time. Why should non-smokers have to endure SHS which is responsible for over 60,000 deaths each year in the U.S.?

Respect is not the issue here. The health and well-being of students is much more important.

a ban on smoking, yeah right

Lets go a step further and ban alchohol! Oh yeah, thats right, we do and people binge themselves weekly. OOOOO OOOO you cant stand a little smoke? Get over it, you probably eat things that are 50 times worse. We stress so much at school, let the people who need a smoke break have one.

Thank You for Not Smoking

A smoke-free campus is one of the best ideas I've heard in a long time. Now, I know there'll be MANY unhappy smokers, but there are a lot of things better kept off campus. Even if we just began by eliminating smoking near UDS sights and popular stops like Coffman, we non-smokers would be ecstatic.
Don't get me wrong, I know it's fairly common to smoke. It's also fairly common to drink under 21, pig out on McDonald's, and go tanning, but that doesn't make it any better for you. Not to sound like a broken record, but I implore ANYONE to show me one benefit of smoking. Plus, as immeasurably grateful as I am for the Clean Indoor Air Act, breathing in secondhand smoke outside is also not ideal. As frustrating as it to be craving a cigarette, it's just as frustrating to crave fresh air.
For those of you who smoke? I know you have your cravings, which wouldn't stop overnight. How about a 'smoking section', like in airports? Even without that, whether you're near Fairview and the Superblock, West Bank, or in the Mall near Dinkytown, you're just a couple minutes away from your freedom. And when you think about, maybe that few minutes' worth of exercise wouldn't be a bad precursor to smoking.
Plus, what's the worst that could happen? All I can forsee is a few more packs of Nicotine gum.

I agree. There really isn't

I agree. There really isn't any benefit to smoking. Cigarettes make you smell bad, are expensive, will eventually kill you, etc. On the whole, it's a bad idea to smoke, and if you already do, quitting would do wonders for your health/wallet/etc.

There is also a (I'm not terribly familiar with the research) risk associated with being stuck in secondhand smoke for long periods of time. If you live with someone who smokes indoors, you're at risk. Before smoking was banned in bars, I'd imagine that bartenders were at some sort of increased risk as well.

Catching a whiff of someone's cigarette while walking down the street hasn't been shown to be harmful. It might be unpleasant if you don't like the smell of cigarettes, but I'd imagine that brief and infrequent exposure to cigarette smoke isn't a factor in the development of cancer, heart disease, etc.

We all encounter things in public that we don't agree with or find to be unpleasant. You might disagree with them, but as long as they're not harming you, I don't see how it makes any sense to ban certain activities if they aren't harming anyone who doesn't want to be harmed. If you really want to help these people quit, buy them some patches. Don't harass them.

With the many discomforts to

With the many discomforts to smoking, it would be hard to think of the benefits of smoking, but believe me, most people know that its harmful and could quit. The benefits of smoking are the same as drinking coffee. It's a stimulant, and as a drug it keeps you going, and makes the people who smoke it happy.

Information frrom the American Lung Assoc. of Minnesota

Anyone interested in quitting should take a look at the American Lung Association of Minnesota website. There is a free Lung Helpline and lots of good info there.

Lungmn.org

Bob Moffitt
Communications Director
American Lung Association of Minnesota

Bad Things

You are right, we do eat things that hurt our bodies more than second hand smoke, and we participate in things that are much worse for our bodies as well. The difference there is that we CHOOSE to do those things. Now when I'm walking down the street and Johnny Jackass blows his smoke right in my face, I did not choose to have that happen. As Lauryn Hill sang "Killing me Softly" with your nasty ass habit. We should start farting in their faces, but that still wouldnt slowly kill them, so i guess we need to think of something else to do every time Selfish Shirley and her Cigarette blow into our clean air.

Human rights my ass, the human right that we all have is the right to clean air, i think that trumps the right to smoke outside anyday.

The real danger concerning

The real danger concerning second hand smoke is when people are forced to breathe it in enclosed, poorly ventilated areas, and not outside like you say.

What are the basics of

What are the basics of freedom that we are granted? Life, liberty and the persuit of happiness...
Secondhand smoke attacks my right to life. I choose not to smoke, so why am I suddenly 'supposed' to be okay with secondhand smoke, so long as it's outside.
Smokers, stop rebelling, learn a real coping mechanism for your stresses, and have some respect.
And while I'm on my soapdbox, stop littering. I hate seeing a pile of butts ten feet from a trash can. For pete's sake, you kill me with your secondhand smoke, and you kill the planet with your trash. Stop being so self-centered.

Did anybody ever think that

Did anybody ever think that this may potentially lead to problems with profiling. For instance, guy in business suit walks by smoking, police don't bother him. Guy with a mop-head, sagging jeans and a t-shirt walk by smoking, he may get bothered. With as many problems as the local police departments have been having with harassing and getting on seemingly 'innocent' individuals cases, it could be very likley that this may open the door for police to impede on something they shouldn't be messing with. Also, don't give me that "smokers deserve it bec. they're breaking the law if they smoke on campus," because that is looking past the point, which is that this "right to 'fresh-air" in a city may be threatening greater rights.

Just think about it.

A campus-wide ban on mayonaisse...

Why are we wasting our time with this nonsense when there are real issues at hand? I'm proposing a campus-wide ban on mayonnaise. I'm sick of those no-good mayo users taking up my valuable resources. Let's do what we should have done years ago and feed them all to the leeches.

On the advice of a poster on

On the advice of a poster on another board, I thought I'd look to see if there were other active discussions on a smoking ban and found this one which is a little old, but seems to still have some worthwhile activity.

Heather wrote, "Second-hand smoke (SHS) is a class A carcinogen (same as asbestos) and according to the current surgeon general report, no amount of SHS is safe even for brief periods of time. "

It's also like sunshine! No safe level of exposure has ever been found, sunscreens provide only partial protection, and innocent workers are forced every day to serve the whims of greedy sunshine addicts who insist on al fresco dining under its carcinogenic rays.

Patio dining is a barbarous custom. While we DO know that roughly 60,000 people a year die from carcinogenic ultraviolet irradiation the numbers of young teens trying to raise money for school who die from the skin cancers created by on the job exposure is unknown but could run into the thousands as cumulative effects take hold.

We won't even get into alcohol fumes here, but if you want to read about the dangers of passive drinking just go to the BMJ at:

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/330/7495/812#103642

and read "Secondaryu Smoke, Alcohol, and Deaths"

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

smoking

You would be surprised to find out how many of the students lied about their smoking habits. Many of them even smoke cigars. They answered no because that is the desirable answer, but the truth remains to be actually tested within campus. Just infiltrate a few undercover students and ask them to count the actual smoking students.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <b> <i> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
Are you human?
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.