Smoke-Free Public Housing Would = Better Health and Savings

By Sharyn Alden, HBNS Contributing WriterResearch Source: Journal of Preventive Medicine

Newswise — Establishing smoke-free policies for public housing would help protect residents, visitors and employees from the harmful effects of smoking and result in significant cost savings, reports a new study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.

Despite this, the study’s lead author, Brian A. King, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health, said, “Smoke-free prevalence in U.S. subsidized housing remains low. That’s because some multi-unit housing operators have concerns about vacancy, the legality of such polices and increased staff time for enforcement. But the experiences of multi-unit operators with smoke-free policies suggest these misconceptions are unfounded.”

Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) secondhand smoke is a major cause of disease including lung cancer and heart disease in non-smokers who are otherwise healthy.Even though the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development encourages public housing authorities, owners and managers to adopt smoke-free policies in subsidized housing, implementation and enforcement in all states is a slow process.

The CDC study estimates cost savings of $341 million in second-hand smoke related health care expenditures, $108 million in renovation expenses, and $72 million in smoking-related fire losses.

Between 2009 and 2010, 7.1 million people lived in subsidized housing and 2.1 million lived in public housing owned or operated by a government housing authority. In January 2012, there were approximately 3,500 Public Housing Authorities in the U.S., but only 250 had instituted smoke-free policies.

Michael C. Fiore, M.D., professor of medicine and director of the Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention at the University of Wisconsin noted, “This is an important study because decisions made on policy levels may not translate to the appropriate standard of care for low income people and those who live in subsidized housing. The article provides a powerful message. Everyone deserves to be healthy and those who live in subsidized housing shouldn’t be penalized.”

Fiore explained, “Over the past two decades science has made a compelling case that second-hand smoke is not an inconvenience but is harmful, and in some cases, deadly. Up to 50,000 people in the U.S. die of second-hand smoke each year.”

King added smoke-free policies do not prohibit smokers from residing at a property. They simply prevent smokers from smoking in settings where secondhand smoke can affect others.

“Among the large number of people living in subsidized housing in the U.S, many are children, the elderly and disabled,” he said. “These people are especially sensitive to secondhand smoke exposure.”

TERMS OF USE: This story is protected by copyright. When reproducing any material, including interview excerpts, attribution to the Health Behavior News Service, part of the Center for Advancing Health, is required. While the information provided in this news story is from the latest peer-reviewed research, it is not intended to provide medical advice or treatment recommendations. For medical questions or concerns, please consult a health care provider.

For More Information:

American Journal of Preventive Medicine: Contact the editorial office at (858) 534-9340 or [email protected].

Brian A. King, PhD, MPH, Richard M. Peck, PhD, Stephen D. Babb, MPH (2013). Cost-Savings Associated with Prohibiting Smoking in U.S. Subsidized Housing http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.024