Kudos for championing smoking ban

Emeritus Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
My View - The Sun Daily
January 15, 2019

MALAYSIA’S record on tobacco control is often regarded as “weak” and “failing” compared with its immediate neighbours in the north and south. Both countries demonstrated greater political will in protecting the health of their citizens.

Much of what they did is also doable in Malaysia if only it showed similar political commitment and determination. To be sure, it is not rocket science and hence it boggles the mind why Malaysia is more noted for its “corrupt” and “unethical” practices that clandestinely keep smoking an “uncontrolled” habit nationwide.

Worse, it spreads the deadly habits to other unsuspecting “potential users” who are below the age of 18. So much so there is a common insinuation that each time contraband tobacco products are seized and confiscated by the relevant authorities, chances are it is because the kickbacks have not been “settled”.

What with the widespread of such under the table practices revealed of late involving an extensive range of sectors, it serves to add credit to the ongoing suspicion. However, that seems to be over now.

Beginning this year, the “new” Ministry of Health (MoH) took the bull by the horns.

For the longest time, the bull has been let loose causing millions to waste their innocent lives away senselessly in view of the fact that tobacco is a well-known “killer” according to the World Health Organisation more than a decade ago.

Yet we did not really care until recently when it was fully recognised by the “new” government as exemplified by the “new” ruling on smoking at eateries and food outlets including open-air joints.

The health minister of late said there is no letting up in asserting the long-awaited ruling.

In this case, a three-metre “no smoking zone” away from the dining area becomes the point of contention.

Those who disagreed tend to myopically argue about the potential loss of “money” at the expense of the potential loss of precious life.

However, the minister reportedly was quoted as saying that feedback about the ban has been positive and receptive generally since more can take their family members to eat out without having to worry about toxic tobacco fumes. This means more and more people are aware of the threat posed by tobacco use.

The minister also shot down funny ideas like banning smoking within a limited time period. In other words, smoking is allowed (if not encouraged?) after the said period. Proponents of such a ludicrous suggestion clearly are ignorant of the effects, that second-hand smoke tends to linger on for a long time or the larger goal of making smoking more “difficult” and “inconvenient” to facilitate quitting the bad habit for that matter.

This is comparable to the steps taken to discourage corruption when eliminating it is near impossible.

The deterrent moves have been shown to cause more people to quit in contrast to the absurd suggestion of having to stand in the middle of the road to light up just because most public spaces are made smoke-free.

In this regard the announcement to expand the smoking ban to campuses and colleges (just like schools) must be welcomed; the sooner the better.

After all, many campuses are already designated smoke-free for at least a decade. More significantly, the best way to shun the deadly habit of smoking is through education and that means all education institutions throughout the country must be smoke-free without exception.

This can create a culture of a tobacco-free lifestyle as part of an informed decision through evident-based learning and education.

The resulting multiplier effects are even greater because it has been shown that children can better influence adults, especially parents, to quit smoking.

In fact, most parents do so to safeguard the health of their loved ones more than themselves.

In the same breath, all houses of worship must also be smoke-free. All religious teachings advocate protection of life and the promotion of health.

Especially in mosques given the fatwa that pronounced tobacco use as forbidden (haram), just like alcoholic drinks. The fact that such a fatwa has not been gazetted is no excuse because it is a mere legal process, whereas in substance it is morally “wrong” to go against a fatwa regardless.

Campuses like the International Islamic University Malaysia should take this up at par with the non-use and sale of alcoholic beverages, which is also forbidden, without even the need for any signage to indicate so.

Having said this, it is equally vital to provide information referring to a helpline or resources on how to quit smoking attached to every “No Smoking” signage.

This is of utmost importance if more are expected to turn over a new leaf. The helpline (or quitline) can be the ultimate turning point in abandoning tobacco use forever: viz., the ultimate objective in the banning exercise to start off with.

Given such a strong commitment and political will never seen before, MoH must soldier on. Kudos to its minister for the courageous leadership, to unrelentingly pursue such a life-worthy cause – better late than never.

In the final analysis, it is not just about creating a smoke-free environment, but more for an enduring tobacco-free culture against a product so toxic that it is noted to kill its customers and users in an agonising way.