Several Developed nations, such as the USA and the UK, have finally restricted tobacco smoking in most leisure establishments. Underpinning these restrictions is the justification that employees working in the buildings should not be at the mercy of secondary tobacco smoking, a life threatening health risk. In the United States, it's quite reasonable to envision that this move is influenced by the predictable potential lawsuits that might be brought by employees (that have no option but to be there) if and when they acquire smoking-related or bronchial illnesses in later life.
In the united kingdom, the prohibition on tobacco smoking in bars has had a significant negative impact on the licensed trade in general, and has caused something of a cultural upheaval in working class areas. It is arguable that because individuals cannot light up in bars, they’re drinking much more at home and consuming less expensive and less controlled alcoholic beverages, which is adding to many other social problems, disease frequency, and cases of domestic and violent criminal activity. A concept that was intended to be progressive with regards to enhancing the standard of living for people has in fact backfired spectacularly. This kind of regulation, even if it is misplaced, is irrevocable, so the snowball effect carries on.
Considering the constraints on smokers, these people continue to find a way to enjoy their addiction. Bars, night clubs, offices, and all other establishments now play host to groups of anxious cigarette smokers standing outside their front doors. Without doubt this was an unintentional result of what might at first have been a commendable endeavor to aid the country's health and fitness. The received wisdom is that if you make it tougher for cigarette smokers to smoke they will likely give up. The truth is it won't play out.
Increased taxes haven't proved helpful either, particularly in European countries where tobacco smuggling now makes up around 20% of tobacco trade revenues in lots of Developed countries. Even without having unlawful smuggling, considering that inside the European union there isn't any theoretical restriction to the quantity of cigarettes that an individual can transport across borders, it's actually less expensive to purchase a low-cost air flight to a place such as Portugal and bring back a bag full of packages of cigarettes than it is to acquire the same quantity in the united kingdom, which has the greatest tobacco costs in The european union. Obviously policy is not particularly good at causing a decrease in smoking tobacco, and there really is nowhere left to turn.
The cigarette corporations send out mixed messages, but in the end you can't really blame them: they're running a business to produce a financial gain, and as soon as one marketplace makes it tougher for them to promote their goods, they just shift and evolve their business structure into up and coming areas where there is no restriction. Since the majority of the retail price of a packet of cigarettes in the westernised nations is tax (52% in the USA, 77% in UK), in nations like China and Vietnam where taxes on cigarettes tend to be lower, cigarettes are inexpensive and abundant, the cigarette companies make massive profits, and the inhabitants continue to adopt smoking tobacco wholeheartedly.
Everybody walks around in circles declaring something has to be done, but there is not much that you can do while tobacco is still a legal product and the massive multinational vested interests carry on the cycle of supply and tax. E cigarettes are a phenomenon which possibly offers the only fresh alternative, at an individual, countrywide, and international level.