Mark Spice wrote:


Whilst I am willing to believe your figures about the cost to the NHS
(I've read them in far more places than this) the fact remains that
there are costs that are not bourne from the NHS's budget. This will
include the costs of any non-medical equipment used in the home (eg
beds and daily living aids) and care and support packages (eg respite
for any carers, home helps and the like) these will both be paid for
by Social Services. On top of this there is the cost from the
benefits system (incapacity benefit and disability living allowance
for the patient and carer's allowance) which comes from DWP budget.
Whether this combined is more or less than the tax revenue generated
I do not know.
Of course to completely analyse the figures we would need to also
include the reduced cost of pensions for smokers as an additional pay
back along with the tax generated.

As someone who has worked as a toxicologist (albeit not directly in
the field of smoking) the evidence of the harm of passive smoking is
not as clear cut as it is for direct harm to the actual smoker. That
being said there does seem to be a strong correlation with harm even
if this is not strong enough, at this moment, to prove direct
causation. Much seems to depend on how define the harm caused - for
example an asthma attack may be precipitated by exposure to tobacco
smoke but it is unlikely that the underlying asthma condition was
actually caused by the smoke. I have read any of the scientific
journals for a few years now so I could be out of date but if there
are links to reputable, peer-reviewed journals feel free to share.

As a non-smoker it appears to me that many smokers do not realise how
unpleasant their second-hand smoke is even on a purely irritating
basis (ie just the smell and general irritation of being in a smoky
atmosphere rather than any major toxicological effects it may cause)
but, that being said, I am not personally a great fan of the total
ban. Personally I would have been happy for there to continue to be
smoking rooms in pubs and the like as long as these were physicaly
separate to the non-smoking areas and with decent ventilation.

Thank you for a reasoned & intelligent post Mark.

I agree that smoke can be unpleasant to non smokers, I would also agree that
there should be legally enforceable non smoking areas - equally there should
be smoking areas.

Dennis appears to be arguing that I am deliberately ignoring the cost to
social services. I'm not, I simply don't have the information, only the NHS
figures. As the proponent of the argument Dennis should be able to put a
figure on this, but he can't, so typically he avoids the issue & behaves
like a cross schoolboy.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk