You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 273 No. 10, March 8, 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  ARTICLE
 This Article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA

The status of local smoking regulations in North Carolina following a state preemption bill

E. Conlisk, M. Siegel, E. Lengerich, W. Mac Kenzie, S. Malek and M. Eriksen
North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of Adult Health Promotion, Raleigh 27611-7687.

OBJECTIVE. To determine the number and protectiveness of local smoking regulations adopted before the implementation of a preemptive statewide smoking control bill. METHOD. Review of local smoking control regulations from all 100 counties and 85 municipalities with populations greater than 5000 in North Carolina. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES. Adoption of local smoking control regulations before and during the 3-month delay in enactment of the preemptive bill. Protectiveness of regulations was based on restrictions on smoking and requirements for separate ventilation systems at private work sites: none (smoking unrestricted); minimal (smoking restricted to designated areas); partial (smoking restricted to designated areas served by separate ventilation systems); and complete (smoking prohibited). Because some regulations would be phased in gradually over the next 5 years, we evaluated the requirements that will be in effect by January 1, 2000. RESULTS. Between July 15 and October 15, 1993, the number of local smoking regulations in North Carolina increased from 16 to 105. By the year 2000, 59% of private employees still will not be guaranteed any protection from work site environmental tobacco smoke; 19% will have minimal protection, 22% will have partial protection, and none will have complete protection. CONCLUSIONS. The 3-month delay in preemption created an unnatural time frame for communities to organize, debate, and adopt smoking restrictions. Despite the adoption of 89 new regulations, no private employees will be guaranteed complete protection from work site environmental tobacco smoke by the year 2000; new regulations can no longer be adopted. HB 957 has been a setback for public health in North Carolina.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

The North Carolina Youth Empowerment Study (NCYES): A Participatory Research Study Examining the Impact of Youth Empowerment for Tobacco Use Prevention
Ribisl et al.
Health Educ Behav 2004;31:597-614.
ABSTRACT  

Boards of Health as Venues for Clean Indoor Air Policy Making
Dearlove and Glantz
Am. J. Public Health 2002;92:257-265.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

State laws on youth access to tobacco in the United States: measuring their extensiveness with a new rating system
Alciati et al.
Tobacco Control 1998;7:345-352.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1995 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.