2015
DOI: 10.4103/0019-509x.178447
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Indoor air quality due to secondhand smoke: Signals from selected hospitality locations in rural and urban areas of Bangalore and Dharwad districts in Karnataka, India

Abstract: The patrons and the workers in the hospitality sector continue to be exposed to secondhand smoke despite the enactment of COTPA, which bans smoking in public places. This situation demands stringent measures for effective implementation of the Smoke Free Act and negative response to smoking among civil society.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In some LMICs, there is a lack of motivation to enforce smoke-free policies at the ground level 24,25,66,82,99-101 . Enforcement of smoke-free policies typically involves both enforcement officers and venue managers.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In some LMICs, there is a lack of motivation to enforce smoke-free policies at the ground level 24,25,66,82,99-101 . Enforcement of smoke-free policies typically involves both enforcement officers and venue managers.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Enforcement officers may not feel they have time or may think that public smoking is not a problem that warrants their attention. Some enforcement officers have said they have more important crimes to address 101 . Others may lack the will to enforce a policy because of lack of confidence that the government will back them if they are challenged 25 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 19 ] The reasons were socio-cultural issues,[ 20 ] limited awareness of the enforcing agencies about provisions of the act,[ 21 ] low competence of the public to keep a vigil on violations of the section,[ 21 - 23 ] and failure to sustain rural parts of the state smoke-free. [ 22 ]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall, lower compliance (58.95%) to Section 5 [ Table 3 ] was reported to be due to (1) tobacco industry exploits at the PoS by promoting and advertising its products through attractive displays in the form of dangles, boards,[ 31 , 32 ] posters,[ 33 ] brand colors[ 34 ] and the unit cost of the tobacco products[ 35 ] and/or (2) weaker enforcement unable to eliminate existing ambiguity in board size, number, area of placement. [ 22 , 32 , 36 ]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%