The Dangers Of Smoking - Essay Example

? The following analysis will discuss the many negative health impacts that smoking engenders. As such, a discussion of these negative impacts and a further delineation of these topics will seek to provide a more nuanced understanding of overall risk that smoking necessarily imposes upon the life of the smoker as well as those who are impacted by the second hand smoke of the primary smoker. Therefore, it will be the express intent of this author to focus upon the risk of cancer, breathing diseases, up to and including emphysema, and heart disease that smoking has been known to trigger. Moreover, the analysis will also consider the secondary health affects that smoking can visit upon the individual exposed to “secondhand” smoke or passive smoking. Through such an analysis, the far reaching and broad health impacts that smoking portends can readily be noted. Whereas many individuals are of the opinion that smoking is a dangerous process that threatens the overall health and well-being of the individual, the fact of the matter is that the overall scope of danger that smoking represents is much greater than most individuals realized. Accordingly, as a means of categorizing this danger and promoting a level of understanding with respect to the full range of damaging impact that smoking can have upon the individual, this brief analysis will consider and discuss the litany of negative health impacts that smoking engenders. As such, it is the hope of this author that such an analysis will further help to congeal a level of understanding within the reader that smoking is a harmful practice that is not only restricted to impacting the individuals overall chances of lung cancer. It is the view of this author that smoking is an extraordinarily damaging process that few individuals grasp the full scope of. However, as our positions have changed with respect to smoking and fewer and fewer individuals consider themselves as “smokers” within the United States, there still is a long way to go with reference to promoting the general health of the population. The purpose of this brief piece will be to consider the issue of banning smoking in publicly shared places (whether indoor or outdoor). Similarly, the appeal which this particular piece will make is one that I based on a logical framework of understanding the known risks which smoking provides to both the smoker and to those that inhale the second-hand smoke. Firstly, it must be understood that smoking accounts for nearly ? million deaths each and every year within the United States. This is a figure that is larger than the overall number of people that succumb to HIV/AIDS, illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle death, suicide, or murders combined. As such, the overall scope of the damage that smoking can have upon an individual is profound and affects their life in a number of different ways. Most obviously, high rates of lung cancer can almost entirely be attributed to smoking. Current estimates place this number from 80-90% of all lung cancer cases; depending upon what demographic and gender is measured. Regardless of the actual number, the statistics that have been provided show that smoking is invariably attributed to high rates of lung cancer and death. Yet, this statistic oftentimes confuses individuals who assume that lung cancer is the only means through which smoking can adversely impact upon the overall health of an individual. However, smoking also increases the chances of developed coronary heart disease by up to several times the normal rate. Moreover, a vast percentage of all deaths that are the result of chronic obstructive lung disease are normally caused by cancer. Yet, of all of the health impacts that can be felt, it is the health impact of cardiovascular disease that is the most overlooked. Due to the impact that nicotine has as well as the artery hardening properties of prolonged exposure to first or second hand cigarette smoke, the narrowing of blood vessels helps to put smokers at high risk for any type of blockage or obstruction that might appear in their blood. Naturally, this drastically impacts upon the overall risk of death and disease from aneurysm, stroke, and of course heart attacks. As each of these increases with risk as an individual ages, the compound effect of smoking and the risk of these diseases acts as a catalyst for many complex health issues that otherwise might not be evidenced within an individual’s life. Not surprisingly, smoking has a drastic impact upon increasing rates of a great litany of different respiratory diseases. As has been discussed, whereas lung cancer is common, bronchitis, chronic airway obstruction, and emphysema are also well known side effects of smoking. Further, beyond merely lung cancer, smoking is known to drastically increase the overall risk of all types of cancer. For instance, bladder cancer, myeloid leukemia, cervical cancer, kidney cancer, esophageal cancer, oral cancer, pancreatic cancer, cancer of the pharynx, and stomach cancer have all been proven to have a direct linkage with regards to the impacts that smoking can have on health. Whereas many studies were not previously engaged with regards to the less common impacts of cigarette smoke, cancers of almost each and every variety are increased as a result of cigarette smoking. Moreover, long-term impacts with regards to the central nervous system have been noted with regards to psychological and physiological tests that have been conducted. Due to the fact that nicotine ranks as one of the top three most addictive substances known to man, the difficulty in stopping smoking is something that oftentimes blurs the lines between medical treatment and psychological counseling for addiction. As such, the impacts and dangers of cigarette smoking not only extend to the increased risks of cancers, heart disease, lung function, and a litany of other factors, they also can have a heavy impact with respect to the overall mental health instability that an individual is able to portray. Yet, beyond the negative health impacts that have thus far been listed, there are a litany of other negative health affects that smoking can have upon an individual. For instance, one of the single largest causes of acquired infertility is the result of smoking. Moreover, cigarette smoking has definitively been linked to preterm deliveries, stillbirth, low birth weight, and SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome). The linkage to the dangers that smoking portends for newborn babies is of course related to secondhand smoke. However, recent scholarhip has noted that seond hand smoke alone is not the lone culprit; instead, it has been understood, as a result of medical research, that SIDs can be caused from smoking during pregnancy – a process that has been known to cause a great many other health concerns. The relative danger to the individual from smoking is only part of the concern. As has been noted, secondhand smoke and the threat of SIDs can be affected by smoking during pregnancy. However, smoking during pregnancy not only engenders the risk of SIDs; rather, it has definitively been linked to premature birth, poor health, and underweight full term children. In many ways, the risk of smoking to the infant is greater than it is to the mother. This is of course due ot the fact that the developmental stages of early life rely upon the relative health and nutritional inputs that the mother has. By much the same token, the dangers of smoking to infants is not contingent upon the inhalation of second hand smoke, or the process of smoking during pregnancy; instead, much harm to the child can also be affected as a result of smoking while breastfeeding. Research has indicated that the neural connections that the infant is able to make can be reduced due to the prevalence of nicotine within the breast milk. Moreover, the psychological health and development of the infant can also be placed at risk due to the fact that the child comes to be dependent upon the soothing and/or calming affects of nicotine rather than relying upon their own regulation of stress to integrate with the world. Such a dependence early in life can have a negative impact with regards to the predilection of the infant to addiction later in life. As if the previous information that has been thus far presented is not enough, it has also been noted that smoking is linked to a loss in bone density; representing a distinct risk of osteoporosis for post-menopausal women. Further, as a result of the process and manipulated body chemistry that smoking causes, the loss of bone density in tandem with aging creates a vastly increased risk of bone fractures with age. As such, smoking, if not primarily, can secondarily impact upon the risk of death as a result of the fact that broken bones, especially hips, take a great deal of strength and energy to heal from and are one of the primary causes of death in nursing homes around the nation. Yet, all of the information that has been discussed thus far has been concentric upon the ways in which first hand smoke impacts upon the health of the individual. However, the truth of the matter is that medical researchers have recently come to understand the fact that second-hand smoke is almost as damaging to the overall health of the individual exposed to it as is firsthand smoke. As such, many individuals have helped to enact laws that have banished smoking from workplaces, colleges and universities, airports, waiting lounges, restaurants, and a host of other venues. Although smoking is still permitted within certain restaurants and some bars(in designated sections) within the United States, the practice of smoking within a publicly shared space has become increasingly uncommon due to the efforts of those that sought to relegate smoking to areas in which it would have a considerably less negative effect on the general public. No single individuals have led the charge against banning smoking from public places; rather, the movement is made up of a grass roots movement of concerned citizens, community leaders, health professionals and other key shareholders (Macy, 2012). Naturally, rather than seeking to engage in other activities that are both positive to others and/or positive to one’s overall health and well-being, the individuals seek to utilize cigarettes as a means of creating a fabricated rite of passage demonstrate that they realize and understand little with regards to how such a rite of passage should be conducted and impacts upon their future health and decision-making process. Of all of the computing factors to use smoking which will herein be discussed, the rite of passage aspect is one of the most difficult to counter Low et al., 2007). This is due to the fact that it is born from within the community of young people that it affects; rather than being directly linked to the influences of another outside group of individuals, society, advertising, or even movies and films. Although the rite of passage argument is a powerful one, it also goes hand in glove with the understanding that exists within many elements of youth culture that smoking in an of itself is a type of rebellion to the norm and can be seen as punk or hip. Within such an understanding, the means by which smoking can be seen as something of a personality identifier can be readily noted. Since the beginning of earliest society, people have sought to differentiate themselves from other groups (Kalkhoran et al., 2013). Oftentimes, this is done by dressing in a different way, speaking in a different way, were generally behaving in a different way. As such, smoking provides a powerful means by which individuals within youthful society can seek to represent a level of differentiation and rebellion from the norm. Anyone who performs a level of psychological analysis upon youth culture can quickly come to the understanding that the level to which these individuals place and importance upon differentiating themselves from the others is necessarily much higher than is evidenced in any other group of people. Of all of the different aspects of youth smoking that will be discussed within this analysis, seeking to change the way in which culture and society tries to set itself apart from another is perhaps the most difficult of all. Within such an understanding, it is easy for the reader to realize why the definitive proof that exists within society with regards to the overall level of harm and health damages that smoking engage with the user are effectively useless in deterring individuals within the youth of the society from starting smoking. This is of course due to the fact that it is engaged in as a form of rebellion and separation from the remainder of society to my: as such, a traditional warning and health concern of the way in which it can ultimately chill is not heeded. The issue becomes further complicated by the fact that both civil liberties and the overall health of the population are two competing virtues that must be juxtaposed in order to seek a remedy. Medical research has greatly advanced within the past few years and has shown that second-hand smoke is nearly as damaging to an individual’s health as that of primary inhalation by the smoker himself/herself. As such, the “right” or “choice” of smoking takes on a broader meaning when weighed against the negative health side effects that are shared by society at large with relation to this destructive habit. The opinion of this author is that although it is within the rights of the individual to destroy their own health, it is entirely unfair to place such a burden on society at large when one factors in the known negative health effects that smoking provides. The opposing view on such measures to ban smoking in public places (both indoor and outdoor) hinges upon the fact that many smokers say that their civil liberties have been violated. This argument in and of itself breaks down due to the fact that the laws are not with regards to whether smokers can still smoke; rather, this argument breaks apart due to the fact that these “civil liberties” that smokers claim with respect to being able to light up in a public place also violate the civil rights and liberties of non-smokers (McEwen & Grothier, 2013). By means of the fact that the general public is introduced to the negative health effects of the second-hand smoke and resulting carcinogens, the logic behind implementing a ban on smoking in public is manifestly clear. Due to the fact that around 20% of the US adult population is smokers, one can quickly see that the number of individuals affected by second hand smoke can easily extend into the tens of millions. Due to this fact alone, one is easy able to infer that the negative health effects are compounded when one begins to consider the issue of second hand smoke on the general population. Regardless of one’s particular position on the practice of smoking, the fact remains that the issue itself must be weighed from the perspective of society as a whole and not the individual as a function of his/her rights to damage their own health (Small, 2012). Although this author is firmly against the implementation of further rules and regulations that provide a greater degree of government autonomy over key aspects of individual rights and individual freedoms, it is also a firmly held belief that those who engage in destructive practices should not be allowed to let those practices impact on anyone besides themselves (Ghiringhelli, 2012). In order to directly express what the true costs of second-hand smoke really are one might consider the case of Sally Brisbane. Sally worked as a special education teacher; continually struggling to get by on the meager salary she was provided by the state. Finally, as a means of supplementing this, Sally took a job as a waitress in a bar during the evenings. The supplemental income was just what she needed; what she did not know was that the job was silently killing her. Within 4 years, Sally had developed advanced lung cancer and subsequently succumbed to the disease (Chaikoolvatana et al., 2013). Her death is but one example of the many people who have not only been affected by second hand smoke but have subsequently lost their health and their lives due to this factor. As such, rather than advocating a complete ban on smoking, or a ban on the sale of cigarettes etc, this author is advocating that a set of laws and regulations be observed which will push smoking back into the personal arena of responsibility where it belongs. Smoking as a practice is innately dangerous to one’s health. As such, if such a practice is to be carried out, it should necessarily be done within the privacy of one’s own home, vehicle, or other similar location in which the damaging effects to secondary non-users will be severely limited. In this manner both the civil liberties of the smoker and the individual health rights of the non-smoker are persevered in a way to maximize the utility to both (Kulo et al., 2013). Furthermore, such a logical progression is also a helpful step in removing smoking from the public’s eye. With firmer and stricter controls being instituted with relation to advertising cigarettes, it only stands to reason that a further progression will be to regulate the manner in which smoking appears within our own society. Yet, even the societal response that has been engaged has not helped to banish smoking entirely. Rather, although drastic reductions in smoking were realized between the 1980s and 2000, the rate of reduction in smoking that has been realized since has been minimal. Moreover, even though the government has engaged in an aggressive labeling campaign that provides horrific images of how smoking can ultimately destroy one’s health, the rate of smoking has not decreased. Instead, smoking rates have maintained a rather uniform level. Regardless, even as the smoking rates have remained static, it must be understood that those individuals who are affected by second hand smoke drastically outnumber those smokers that exist within society. This partially helps to explain the drive to banish smoking to non-public places as a means of reducing the negative health impacts upon those individuals who would otherwise be exposed. Yet, regardless of the steps that are taken to prevent health damage from smoking, tens of thousands of individuals are negatively affected by second-hand smoke each and every day. Regardless, the litany of different diseases and health impacts that have thus far been listed should help to encourage any individual that may be residing on the figurative fence with regards to the dangers of smoking against ever taking up the habit; or in the chance that they have already – to quit as soon as possible. References Chaikoolvatana, A., Manwong, M., Junnual, N., Chaikoolvatana, C., Thongnun, W., Apirakmontree, J., & ... Pongpaew, M. (2013). Effects of a cigarette smoking prevention program among junior high school students in north-east Thailand: a pilot survey. Journal Of The Medical Association Of Thailand = Chotmaihet Thangphaet, 96(6), 730-741. doi:10.1325/2013/5221957 Ghiringhelli, L. (2012). RT students educate local children on the dangers of smoking. AARC Times, 36(2), 46. doi:10.14574/2012/2568313 Kalkhoran, S., Neilands, T. B., & Ling, P. M. (2013). Secondhand smoke exposure and smoking behavior among young adult bar patrons. American Journal Of Public Health, 103(11), 2048-2055. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301287 Kulo, N., Surkovic, I., Dedic, A., Nukovic, E., & Foco, F. (2013). Correlation between smoking and oral mucosa - findings in student population in Sarajevo. Healthmed, 7(9), 2660-2665. doi:10.1515/2013/1525657 Low, A., Unsworth, L., Low, A., & Miller, I. (2007). Avoiding the danger that stop smoking services may exacerbate health inequalities: building equity into performance assessment. BMC Public Health, 7198-9. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-7-198 Macy, J. T., Chassin, L., & Presson, C. C. (2012). Smoking behaviors and attitudes during adolescence prospectively predict support for tobacco control policies in adulthood. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 14(7), 871-879. doi:10.1325/2012/2455651 McEwen, A., & Grothier, L. (2013). Smoking cessation: the heart of the matter. British Journal Of Cardiac Nursing, 8(9), 438-442. Small, S. P., Kushner, K., & Neufeld, A. (2012). Dealing with a latent danger: parents communicating with their children about smoking. Nursing Research & Practice, 1-15. doi:10.1155/2012/382075 Read More