How Long Until Smoke Free Pubs In Thailand?

[Sunderland]

Just come back to England from a week in bonny Scotland and delighted to report that the complete ban on smoking in all pubs in Scotland is not having a negative impact on the trade. Spent time in Edinburgh, Inverness and Oban. Busy, lively pubs in all three and smokers standing outside the pubs taking things in their stride just as they had to do when forced to go outside for a smoke when smoking was banned in work places years ago.

If Scotland can successfully make the transition to smoke free pubs then I am sure Thailand can.

[Sunderland]

Oops. I meant ... how long until smoke free pubs in Thailand! Too many whiskies in Scotland!!

[PeaceBlondie]

When I first visited Ireland in late 2003, the no-smoking rule for pubs was about to go into effect. All the smokers thought it was the end of Ireland, the worst thing to happen in 80 years. Two years later, they've all taken it in stride.

You can take the drinker out of the pub long enough to smoke, but you can't keep him out of the pub.

[Tippaporn]

It'll be awhile. Thank Buddha.

[alexth]

It'll be awhile. Thank Buddha.

Yeah, Thank Buddha!!! They're closing at 1 am, no alcohol for sale after 12 o'clock (at least oficially), no smoking would be the top of it...what would be next? No girls, no acohol, no smoke...breathing only maybe

[game4shame]

The smoking ban has, surprisingly, went without a hitch in Scotland so far, although I can't see a smoking ban being enforced in Thailand in a hurry.

The ban in Scotland was on smoking in enclosed public spaces.

In Thailand, few of the bars i've been to have been totally enclosed. Either the bar is open to the elements or open at the front or there's at least some form of ventilation.

In Scotland in Ireland it's usually so cold that all the doors and windows are closed so passive smoking was unavoidable for non-smokers.

Edited April 15, 2006 by game4shame

[Mighty Mouse]

Bring it on...the sooner the better.

Enclosed restaurants should all be smoke free. There is nothing worse than trying to find your pork chop through a thick fog of tobacco smoke.

Hotel lifts are also a must for smoke free, but you still get the arrogant smoker who believes it his/her right to fill the small space with vile smelling smoke.

Camel cigarette smokers are the worst.

Discos and go-go bars should be next on the list for clean air.

..........and what is ever done about those b**stards who light up in the movie theatre ??

[cdnvic]

I imagine the locals will follow it as strictly as they do the rules of the road.

cv

[markuk]

Sooner the better i think.

[monochaser]

It'll be awhile. Thank Buddha.

Yeah, Thank Buddha!!! They're closing at 1 am, no alcohol for sale after 12 o'clock (at least oficially), no smoking would be the top of it...what would be next? No girls, no acohol, no smoke...breathing only maybe

and after all that, no farangs and/or tourist cept for the holdovers from the byegone era. It would not be the end of the world, trust me on that

[Ulysses G.]

I object to smoking in most public places that don't have excellent ventilation, but it seems to me that bars are different. This seems to be protecting the rights of the very few against those of the many.

For one thing, don't most drinkers smoke?

Edited April 16, 2006 by Ulysses G.

[John K]

What I may suggest is tell the management that you will return after the smoke issue has been resolved. Until then they have lost a customer. That suggestion will eventually flow from wallet to brain. Remember the power of money in Thailand.

[Morden]

What I may suggest is tell the management that you will return after the smoke issue has been resolved. Until then they have lost a customer. That suggestion will eventually flow from wallet to brain. Remember the power of money in Thailand.

The reply would be something like

Even if the suggestion was taken seriously, the 'power of money' would indicate that, smokers and their guests being in the majority, things would remain unchanged. We've never had a problem with smokey restaurants but that might be because we use good restaurants and, rurally, healthy outdoor restaurants and avoid the dingy girly boozers.

[Maigo6]

The sooner the better, enclosed Bars lose a lot of trade cos of a smokey atmosphere, smokers can go outside to smoke, then all people could enjoy the bar, I for one will not go into smokey Bars....

It stinks and even the most addicted smoker knows it bad for the health, so why should I pay for the privilage of endangering my health and having my clothes and hair stinking of Tobacco smoke..

So I choose not to go to Smokey Bars, and as for restaurants that still allow people to smoke, I find it unbelievable.

I had the same problem Friday Night in The Hub Pub in Roppongi, only one table that is non smoking in the whole pub, we left and went to Tony Romas instead, even then it is only segregated and you have to hold your breath when going to the restrooms cos you have to walk through the smokers section, and Japanese do enjoy a puff!!

I know these people are addicted and can't help the craving, but why the he.ll should I suffer when they can go outside and kill themselves with toxic smoke?

I see and hear these smokers coughing and wheezing in the mornings, do I want to be in the same sorry state ? NO!! I very much doubt they do either, but they have the opportunity to at least try to stop, and if they realise it's bad for ones Health, then smokers should go outside of enclosed Public areas to smoke and not inflict the same punishment they suffer on innocent bystanders.

Edited April 17, 2006 by Maigo6

[Dragonman]

There have been laws regarding smoking in Thailand since 1992, and the Public Health Ministry determined, prior to the 2002 Act banning smoking in 19 public places including air conditioned restaurants, that compliance was 4%. No recent survey has been carried out but compliance in restaurants likely to be not much higher. It has recently been announced that Thailand will ban smoking in bars, etc from next year. I shall not hold my breath

[Tippaporn]

The irony with tobacco is that governments make huge profits on it. At least the U.S. government does. For a country that's so health and safety conscious they won't illegalize tobacco even though they agree that it's bad for people's health. Not just bad but deadly. No matter how hypocritical the policy is in the end it's all about money.

People don't lobby their governments to ban tobacco, period. Why??

[Axel]

Very good point Tippaporn. Just imagine all those smokers stop over night, tax income for a lot of governments around the globe would drop dramatically.

At the same time the life expectancy for the new non-smokers goes up. They might live til 90 instead passing away with lung cancer at 70. Who pays for all this?

[Donz]

Smoke free pubs and clubs piss me off.

They done it here in aussie land and we can only smoke in certain rooms.

[Morden]

The sooner the better, enclosed Bars lose a lot of trade cos of a smokey atmosphere, smokers can go outside to smoke, then all people could enjoy the bar, I for one will not go into smokey Bars....

It stinks and even the most addicted smoker knows it bad for the health, so why should I pay for the privilage of endangering my health and having my clothes and hair stinking of Tobacco smoke..

So I choose not to go to Smokey Bars, and as for restaurants that still allow people to smoke, I find it unbelievable.

I had the same problem Friday Night in The Hub Pub in Roppongi, only one table that is non smoking in the whole pub, we left and went to Tony Romas instead, even then it is only segregated and you have to hold your breath when going to the restrooms cos you have to walk through the smokers section, and Japanese do enjoy a puff!!

I know these people are addicted and can't help the craving, but why the he.ll should I suffer when they can go outside and kill themselves with toxic smoke?

I see and hear these smokers coughing and wheezing in the mornings, do I want to be in the same sorry state ? NO!! I very much doubt they do either, but they have the opportunity to at least try to stop, and if they realise it's bad for ones Health, then smokers should go outside of enclosed Public areas to smoke and not inflict the same punishment they suffer on innocent bystanders.

Many substances pollute the atmosphere and damage our health in other ways. Too much salt in Thai food is one. Walking around in the open air in BKK can't be much better than sitting in a smokey restaurant.

I wonder how many non-smokers suffer from stress because they get wound up about other people smoking. It's much better for one's health simply to go without complaint or annoyance to a smoke-free restaurant and leave the smokers in peace. Does anyone get so upset about carbon monoxide, uneven sidwalks, badly maintained motor vehicles or excessive alcohol consumption? If you did, you would probably die of a heart attack before any smoker. Why pick on smokers? Live and let live.

I'm not supporting the smoking habit but smokers are easy and popular targets, aren't they? Like the older farang who are attacked here. They and smokers are unlikely to post to defend themselves so bigots and the chronically angry and judgemental can vent their spleen unhindered. Perhaps someone will soon start a thread decrying the sight on Thailand's streets of tall, old farang smoking a cigarette and accompanied by short, young Thai lady. The same person might even follow the example of previous would-be news hounds and publish images of people actually smoking! There's more that's wrong with this world than smoking.

[Prasert]

Why would anyone compare a pub in Scotland to a bar in Thailand regarding smoking?

I think the unwritten rule in Thailand is quite simple: don't smoke in closed places, which you will recognise immediately: air conditioning.

But the hunt-for-smokers is a worldwide hype. Walk around in the center of BKK during a week and you'll have the equivalent of 200 cigarettes going through your lungs.

[Donz]

I should charge non smokers for breathing in my smoke

[Mighty Mouse]

The irony with tobacco is that governments make huge profits on it. At least the U.S. government does.

Tobacco is one of the strongest cancer-causing agents. Tobacco use is associated with a number of different cancers, including lung cancer, as well as with chronic lung diseases and cardiovascular diseases.

* Tobacco use remains the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, causing more than 440,000 deaths each year and resulting in an annual cost of more than $75 billion in direct medical costs.

Source: US National Cancer Institute.

Governments may rake in $$$'s on one hand by pay it out with the other hand.

It's always the smokers that say to the world, "Leave us smokers alone, they're our lives not yours."

It's the non-smokers like me who says, "Smoke all you want, when and where you want, but if you can't contain your second hand smoke so that only you breathe it in, then take your filthy cigarettes somewhere else."

.........and in view of the $$$ statistics provided above, perhaps I should also add, "....and don't use my taxes to pay for your tobacco related medical costs."

[Prasert]

It's always the smokers that say to the world, "Leave us smokers alone, they're our lives not yours."

It's the non-smokers like me who says, "Smoke all you want, when and where you want, but if you can't contain your second hand smoke so that only you breathe it in, then take your filthy cigarettes somewhere else."

I totally agree with you!

And it is a lot easier to pick on a few smokers than on all drivers poluting the air you're breathing (e.g. in BKK). Or those burning rubbish in the open.

Every forum on the internet has a smoker versus non-smoker topic hidden somewhere in the archives. Every topic finally ends in a flame-war between these groups. The worst people: those who gave up smoking, those are the ones that turned into non-smoking crusaders.

It causes stress. Stress is bad for your heart. Heart diseases cost a lot of $$$ in medical care each year.

[Morden]

Tobacco is one of the strongest cancer-causing agents. Tobacco use is associated with a number of different cancers, including lung cancer, as well as with chronic lung diseases and cardiovascular diseases.

* Tobacco use remains the leading preventable cause of death in the United States, causing more than 440,000 deaths each year and resulting in an annual cost of more than $75 billion in direct medical costs.

Source: US National Cancer Institute.

Governments may rake in $$$'s on one hand by pay it out with the other hand.

It's always the smokers that say to the world, "Leave us smokers alone, they're our lives not yours."

It's the non-smokers like me who says, "Smoke all you want, when and where you want, but if you can't contain your second hand smoke so that only you breathe it in, then take your filthy cigarettes somewhere else."

.........and in view of the $$$ statistics provided above, perhaps I should also add, "....and don't use my taxes to pay for your tobacco related medical costs."

MM, I'm broadly in agreement with what you say but I do find it easier to walk away from a smoker if his smoke offends me than to expect him to walk away from me. It's best to avoid trouble than to expect it to avoid you.

I've highlighted in red a couple of your quotations from the US National Cancer Insitute. The reason is that the proof of those statements is not there. Maybe it's published elsewhere and maybe it's not. I've been very wary of such unsupported statements from official and pseudo-official sources ever since two liars appeared on my television to say that Saddam Hussein had WMD that could be deployed in 45 minutes. After all, what would happen to the very profitable cancer research industry if either a cure were found or it was discovered that smoking was not a major cause of cancer?

There are other major causes of cancer. My point earlier was that we don't hear such vehement complaints about those as we do about smoking.

The point that you make about the use of taxpayers' money is aimed only at smokers and yet the resources of Western hospitals are increasingly crushed by the obese and by those damaged by alcohol. But take the argument further and consider the drain on taxes resulting from the increasing number of old people, road users, mountaineers and so on.

As I said, I broadly agree with you but we need to keep a sense of proportion. If we ban everything that offends us we shall live in a very controlled society. Perhaps one day the law might ban something that you like to do that annoys your neighbour. And don't be angry - it causes stress, which causes heart disease and that could cost the taxpayer some money!

[Maigo6]

I don't care if you want to pollute your lungs and cough and wheeze like a 90 year old, as long as you don't blow that poison in my direction, if I Threw water over your cancer stick you would agree that it is ny right, cos I choose not to want to breathe it in?

You are endangering peoples health, not just your own, but a Child in a restaurant has to suffer cos you are too selfish to go to somewhere in the open and smoke?

Smoking is an addiction, I understand that, and I'm sure that a very large percentage of Smokers would love to give up but can't, they can't help not being strong enough to stop smoking, so these people should smoke in designated areas , away from non smokers who have the right NOT to breath in second hand smoke from an addict.

And if you yourself would like to stop smoking, then you know why you want to stop smoking, cos it's no good for you, that's why, so why make other people suffer cos you are too weak to say NO yourselves?

Anyway, to all smokers, you will never be denied your right to smoke, Governments of the world make too much money from they tax they put on your addiction.

97% of all Drug Related Deaths are down to Alcohol and Tobacco, and our caring Goverments allow this carnage to continue in the name of the almighty Dollar.

[Phil Conners]

The sooner the better!!

[Rinrada]

Had to visit someone the other night in casualty (minor accident)at our local Hospital...Chase Farm North London and had to fight my way in through the pathethic groups of addicts puffing away at the main entrance area.

At least they were all huddled about and freezing their billhooks off on the outside of the building.

What we need is a squad of those splendid chaps from "Krungthreps finest" to sort them out but then again looking at some of them (the smellies) they probably aint gonna survive to see the end of the month.

Very nice wee graveyard just at the back of the joint....

[britmaveric]

Smoking ban in Asia? I'd like to see that happen, but I'm realistic, won't anytime soon.

[Mighty Mouse]

....I do find it easier to walk away from a smoker if his smoke offends me than to expect him to walk away from me. It's best to avoid trouble than to expect it to avoid you.

I think the opposite.

I go to a restaurant to enjoy a meal. I'll sit at my table, eat quietly and not disturb other diners.

I go to a bar to have a few drinks with my mates. I don't disturb other drinkers.

If that's good enough for me, why can't smokers give me the same amount of consideration?

If the restaurant or bar is enclosed, is it such a burdon for a smoker to walk outside for a cigarette?

The smoker would take about three minutes to smoke a cigarette outside, but it takes at least ten minutes for his smoke to dissipate if he smokes inside.

Multiply one smoker by four or five smokers and you have a very unpleasant, unwelcome and unhealthy smoke screen.

Statistics indicate that smokers are a dying breed. (literally ) So if non-smokers are now the majority, non-smokers should stand up for their rights and expect clean breathing air wherever they go.

Rather than meekly walking away, non-smokers should become more vocal towards the intrusive smoking habits of smokers.

Whilst in some regards I feel sorry for those who are hooked on the cravings, it was their choice to experiment with tobacco in the first place and I don't see why I should pay a price for their indulgences.

[Donz]

I always walk away if there is children around, even if i was there first.

But if im sitting on a seat and an adult comes next to me i wont walk away, I would assume he doesnt mind.

But I dont smoke next to people who are not smoking