• Research Paper on:
    USA Today Article Review

    Number of Pages: 5

     

    Summary of the research paper:

    5 pages in length. The USA Today article from April 16, 2007 entitled "Study: Smoking Ban Benefits Pub Workers" illustrates long-awaited results stemming from Ireland's smoking ban in public pubs. Originally published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, the abbreviated version in USA Today points to the beneficial outcome of a ban that has been in effect the past three years. Mixed methodology (both qualitative and quantitative) uncovered the bottom line: Irish pub workers "are healthier and exposed to far fewer cancer-causing substances" (Associated Press, 2007). Bibliography lists 2 sources.

    Name of Research Paper File: LM1_TLCUSAToday.rtf

    Buy This Research Paper »

     

    Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
    and Critical Care Medicine, the abbreviated version in USA Today points to the beneficial outcome of a ban that has been in effect the past three years. Mixed methodology  (both qualitative and quantitative) uncovered the bottom line: Irish pub workers "are healthier and exposed to far fewer cancer-causing substances" (Associated Press, 2007). Seventy-three employed in forty-two pubs were studied  both prior to and after the ban that was implemented in March 2004, marking Ireland as a precedent-setting country to lead the way with a national smoking ban. The  studys results clearly correlate with the significant exposure reduction pub workers have experienced; before the ban was put into practice, they were forced to breathe secondhand smoke a full forty  hours a week - now it is but a mere twenty-five minutes. This ninety-nine percent decrease equates to eighty and eighty-three percent lower airborne carcinogens and inside air pollution,  respectively. The ongoing external presence of vehicle emissions continued to present a major "threat to respiratory health" (Associated Press, 2007), however. The importance of this study clearly illustrates how  hazardous secondhand smoke is to those in its direct path. When nonsmoking sections first became popular in public venues as a means by which to separate smokers from nonsmokers,  the idea had merit; however, the execution of it severely lacked effectiveness. Nonsmoking sections have done little to appease the nonsmoking public and allow them to enjoy a meal  or a night on the town without being overwhelmed by the stifling impact of secondhand smoke, particular when there is no tangible barrier between the two sections. All in  all, the nonsmoking section was created to mollify complainants rather than address the problem. As such, nonsmokers have long being stripped of their right to enjoy public venues without 

    Back to Research Paper Results