I wish to make a small (but significant IMHO) point: in Italy smoke is banned in ALL public places, i.e. restaurants, bars, pubs, discos, post offices, barber shops, trains etc.

Oddly enough before, during and after I've heard very little complaints about it from smokers. A vast portion of them were in fact quite happy to smoke outside (despite the fact that the ban started in January) and go home with clothes that stunk less. In fact I've heard complaints about it only from smokers in the UK (where I was living at the time) planning to visit Italy ;-)

Dev

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/d...05&sid=6752696

Another interesting article today on Swissinfo. Here's the first paragraph:

How about that folks? The public is starting to realise that tobacco is harmful. Well heck, I learnt that in school, which was, well, a long time ago.

Interesting article, you can read the rest yourself.

I'm not an anti-smoking zealot, but I have found it quite interesting observing the smoking culture here versus in Australia. It seems that things have been done "arse about" here, regulation (banning smoking) before education. I'm 38 and since I was a kid we were educated on the health risks of smoking, horrible autopsy pictures of cancers and black lungs and the like. Bombarded with anti-smoking advertising on TV, radio and school. Smokers are seen as losers. But not here. I was at a bar here in Zurich last week with a group of Swiss friends, and I was quite shocked when I counted off seven smokers in our group of nine. Honestly, in Australia none of my friends smoke, nobody in my family, I have to think hard to even name some smokers I know.

So, that leads me a great event in my Wallisellen office building. Smoking is banned as of today, not for health concerns though, the cleaning costs are too high. How is that for some Swiss rationalising! By default this building has caught up with 1985 Australia :-)

Good point Greg. Swiss public health and road safety advertising is very weak, ineffective and in many aspects non-existent. Graphic, "in-your-face" style campaigns are known to be the most effective, especially amongst kids, and I have never seen anything even closely confrontational here.

My father is a pathologist, and as a kid I remember him chastising smokers no-end. Nowadays he just tells them "keep smoking - your keeping me and my colleagues employed".

Yes, I have lived in Australia for six years and did not know a single smoker. It is only now that I live here that I realized how amazing this is.

At risk of getting off topic, how is drink driving regarded in Switzerland?

That is something Australia still has a problem with, but they are trying to tackle it with similar advertising, displaying drunk drivers as losers to, who risk everything including the lives of family, friends, strangers etc. as well as themselves.

I know the limit here is still pretty medium (not low compared to some countries like Sweden). How strict do people in Switzerland stick to no drinking if you drive??

(I looked it up, the limit is 0.05 in Australia and 0.05 in Switzerland)

Yes, this is a little off-topic, but I'll answer this briefly here. After that you should use the search function and find the other threads where we have been discussing drink driving. From memory we discussed it quite a lot.

You need to remember that it appears that Australia has a problem with drink driving because you saw so much public education and police enforcement. This simply represents a commitment by the government to reduce the number of road deaths, a process that has been running (sucessfully) for many years and that has dramatically reduced the road toll in Australia. By the same token you could also assume that the lame advertising and almost non-existant alcohol checks here means that there is no drink driving problem in Switzerland. I know from my own observations that I've often seen drunk drivers driving home on Friday and Saturday nights, that I've never been checked in 10 years and that on a recent random control (hooray!) in Zurich one in forty drivers was over the limit. That's right - 1 in 40.

You should also remember that the 0.05 limit is a very recent thing, prior to that it was 0.08.

Anyway, to try and get back to smoking - by using the logic above you could also conclude that since we see plenty of cigarette advertising and not much in the way of public education or anti-smoking campaigns (compared to other countries such as Australia) that Switzerland doesn't have a smoking problem, and that people in this country aren't dying every day of smoking-related problems.

As a previous poster noted the lack of public education on this subject is alarming, but it is slowly getting better. To paraphrase a quote from earlier posts - Welcome to the 1980's folks...

Speaking of the 80's, many aussies of that generation might remember "the sponge" ad. A sponge, used to absorb the toxins of 10 years simulated smoking, is wringed out. It almosts fills a 1 litre beaker full of this horrible brown muck. Very effective.

But, if you have some smoker buddies here you wish to educate, you can download the more grizzly aussie ads here and send them on:

http://quitnow.info.au/smokescreen/smokescreen.htm

I doubt translation is necessary

Thought to share this with you as I just discovered it myself:
today (31/05) is World No Tobacco Day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_No_Tobacco_Day)!!! Did anybody know this?

Have a nice, smoke free day

Well... yes.

I got into a lift today, and someone else got in smoking a cigarette. I asked him if he was aware that one is not supposed to smoke in a lift. He said he knew (in a tone of voice like he didn't give a f...) and excused himself by saying that he was only going to be quick. As he left the lift I thanked him for leaving me with a lift full of his smoke to breathe as I rode the lift to the next floor.

As far as I'm concerned it's just a matter of poor manners. But things are changing slowly but surely. Even since we started this thread things have changed.

I doubt that public littering is going to change anytime soon unless police actually start fining people for littering (technically, people who throw butts in the street are breaking the law). To use your terminology - clean country my ass. I find it filthy.

Hi

I think I am going to be the only person on this whole thread to admit to smoking offences!! past smoking offences I mean

I have been a non smoker now for almost a year!! after 15 years of smoking, I am understandible VERY proud of myself as it is an extremely bad habit to kick and I had been trying to kick the habit unsucessfully for about 8 years, I am absoluteluy 100% in favour of banning smoking EVERYWHERE and was of this opinion when I was a smoker.

During the 8 years whilst trying to give up unsuccessfully I found the hardest part being in the pub, drinking and smoking go hand in had and whilst going all week without a cigarette and being very good I would get to the pub at the weekend and all my willpower would go up in a puff of smoke litterally!!, and I know most smokers will agree with this, I know for sure that if smoking had been banned in the UK a long time ago I would have given up smoking a long time ago, a lot of smokers who want to give up but struggle will agree with this.

What helped me give up smoking was my husband working in Ireland, I used to go and visit him every weekend, during the week i wouldn't be smoking as I was actively trying to give up and being in ireland at weekends and going out drinking and eating and not being able to smoke helped me kick the habit.

So on that note as an ex smoker (usually the worst kind of anti smokers ) I wholeheartedly agree on banning it because i would bet the majority of smokers want to kick the habit but lack enough willpower, banning smoking will help a lot of people give up which can only be a good thing??

Nicky

Swiss info is running a new story on the subject. This time the Hotel and Restaurant survey have made their own survey saying that the public don't want a ban. If you read the fine print the no part of their survey was only 1% higher than the yes part!

Read the article for the details.

http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/front/d...05&sid=6780090

Here's a choice quote I thought you would like. Anyone with any experience of eating out in Switzerland might be able to appreciate the irony in the following statement:

Interesting. Well apparently Switzerland is spoilt for choice with restaurants. Well you could have fooled me... Second point is that nobody is forced to go to this restaurant or this restaurant. Well of course. Except that when they all have the same policy then there isn't much choice at all. Of course, I exercise the choice to usually stay at home. If I exercise this choice is it a free market - or no market at all? When consumers stay home it's just another contributing factor to slow economic growth. I want to spend more money in this economy, but not like this.

Maybe restaurants should also provide rolling papers and bits of cardboard in their smoking 'sections'. I think left handed/Jazz cigarette smokers should also have the opportunity to light up after a pleasant meal. After all, surely it would increase sales of the dessert menu???

We don't go out eating because of smoking here. Simple.

You may get smoke in a UK restaurant, but it's mild compared the smog-laden eateries over here, and there is usually clear separation between smoking and non-smoking areas.

As I see it, non smoking here is having no ashtray at the table...

This amuses me somewhat:
http://www.eatsmokefree.ch/
If you take off Starbucks, the Nordsee in ZH HB etc, there aint many truly non smoking places in Zurich.

Some years ago, about 6, when I was living in Bern a local restaurant advertised no smoking. So as a rabid anti-smoking type I went expecting a treat away from the smokers.

Much to my surprise there were four non-smoking tables in the center of the restaurant surrounded by at least twenty tables for smokers. The manager could not understand my dismay when I told him that the smoke was not intellegent enough to know where the two areas were divided and probably would not respect the no smoking area. At the time this was considered non smoking. It has improved somewhat since. At least Zurich now has the web listing of restaurant that prohibit smoking. One small step.

Also when I lived in Neuchatel the smokers were legion. I would go to lunch at 11 and dinner as early as possible to avoid the smokers. The French actually smoke during their meal with puffs on their cigarettes between bites of food. I found this practice amusing but also somewhat disgusting.

Bern and Zurich have improved somewhat since 1999 but Neuchatel has not. I often see pre-teens smoking.

I've taken a more philosophical view of this problem by telling myself that these people will probably not live as long as us nonsmokers so there is some saving grace in that and probably a good reason to tolerate them, but never for lunch.

If we live longer, why aren't our health insurance cheaper...?

Or perhaps a better question is - if we choose not to smoke why isn't our health insurance cheaper than those who do?

Nah, keep it simple tax at source. Just tax the ciggies out of the affordability range of kids & teenies. Personally I'm just happy to profit from the health benefits and extra cash in my pocket from not being addicted to the stuff.

Yes, that is a better question.

Another thing, there was an article I saw in the last week or so saying that the standard health insurance includes Methadone treatment if you're an addict.

Why? Bollocks to them I say... but then I guess addicts won't have health insurance...

	Quote:
	Or perhaps a better question is - if we choose not to smoke why isn't our health insurance cheaper than those who do?

It is a dangerous question. One could then argue that insurances for people who have diabetes should rise when, as is the case some, type 2 diabetes is induced by lifestyle only. Is that what we want?

In the US, many doctors are starting to refuse to treat patients who are the cause of their own problems (e.g., obesity).

I feel society is heading that way, and it is dangerous. One day we may get genetic screening that is unavoidable, and insurance premiums will depend on the results.

I understand what you are saying, I'm not advocating that people are denied insurance based on genetics, but I do not think that it is unreasonable to be charged extra if you make a lifestyle choice that increases your risks (and therefore costs) to the health system. Why should someone who makes sensible choices about their health have to end up paying for someone who makes the opposite choices? I believe in people taking responsibility for their own actions, and this includes financial responsibility.

The idea of non-smokers and smokers paying different rates for health insurance is by no means a new thing, and is done in other countries already, just not here.

Just to re-iterate the point earlier - a lifestyle-related condition is very much different to a genetic pre-disposition, the line is very clear.

In Switzerland we have a situation where people of certain nationalities are charged extra for car insurance (almost every nationality except Swiss, but some more than others) because of the perceived risk that a driver might have purely as an accident of his birth. So why should smokers enjoy this subsidy when foreign car owners and non-smokers don't?