Why Colleges Should Adopt Smoke-Free Campus Policies
This paper argues that colleges and universities should adopt comprehensive smoke-free campus policies. Drawing on research from the American Cancer Society and peer-reviewed studies, the paper explains the chemical composition and health hazards of secondhand and thirdhand smoke, both of which affect non-smokers in campus common areas. The paper also reviews evidence from a meta-analysis of twenty-six studies demonstrating that smoke-free workplace policies measurably reduce smoking prevalence and daily cigarette consumption. The author contends that banning smoking on campus benefits all stakeholders — protecting non-smokers from carcinogen exposure while simultaneously providing smokers with a meaningful incentive to quit — making such a policy a net gain for campus health and institutional responsibility.
- Introduction: Thesis: colleges should adopt smoke-free policies
- The Dangers of Secondhand Smoke: Chemical hazards of secondhand and thirdhand smoke
- Smoking Bans and Cessation Benefits: Bans reduce smoking rates and cigarette consumption
- Discussion and Conclusion: Counterarguments addressed; ban benefits everyone
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper integrates credible scientific sources — including the American Cancer Society and a BMJ meta-analysis — to ground its policy argument in evidence rather than opinion alone.
- It anticipates and directly addresses counterarguments (personal choice, inconvenience to smokers), strengthening the overall persuasive structure.
- The discussion section personalizes the argument with first-person experience, bridging empirical evidence and practical, lived impact on campus.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of a meta-analytic citation to support a policy claim. By referencing Fichtenberg (2002), which synthesized twenty-six independent studies, the author shows how aggregate evidence is more persuasive than a single study, lending statistical credibility (confidence intervals included) to the argument that smoke-free environments reduce tobacco use.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a clear thesis in the introduction, moves into a research-grounded section on secondhand and thirdhand smoke hazards, then pivots to the policy benefits of smoking bans for smokers themselves. The final discussion section weighs counterarguments, reaffirms the thesis, and closes with a "win-win" framing. This classic problem-evidence-solution structure suits a persuasive policy essay at the undergraduate level.
Introduction
Colleges and universities across the country should institute smoke-free campus policies. The health consequences of smoking tobacco products are well established — smoking is harmful not only to the smoker but also to anyone in the near vicinity through secondhand smoke exposure. On many college campuses today, students huddle near doorways or common outdoor areas to smoke, inadvertently creating an unsafe environment for innocent bystanders.
Beyond the immediate health risks associated with secondhand smoke, colleges and universities have a broader responsibility to send a clear message about the importance of health — for individuals and for the community as a whole. Universities are supposed to be a beacon of learning and higher education in society. That role would be strengthened by creating a safe environment for all students and faculty, and by instituting policies that are both progressive and responsible.
The Dangers of Secondhand Smoke
Researchers are continually finding that secondhand smoke is even more dangerous than previously imagined. Secondhand smoke (SHS), also referred to as environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in the literature, is composed of two primary sources (American Cancer Society, n.d.):
Sidestream smoke — smoke from the lighted end of a cigarette, pipe, or cigar.
Mainstream smoke — the smoke exhaled by a smoker.
Although both forms of smoke are harmful, secondhand smoke produced from sidestream smoke contains higher concentrations of cancer-causing agents (carcinogens) and is more toxic than mainstream smoke. Furthermore, the particles in sidestream smoke are smaller, making it easier for them to penetrate the lungs and cells of the body. Tobacco smoke is a mixture of gases and particles containing more than 7,000 chemical compounds; more than 250 of these chemicals are known to be harmful, and at least 69 are known to cause cancer (American Cancer Society, n.d.).
Not only do these chemicals flood the air around smokers, but there is also evidence that they persist far longer than previously believed. Thirdhand smoke is generally defined as residual nicotine and other chemicals left on a variety of surfaces by tobacco smoke; it contains many potential health hazards and cancer-causing substances (Dale, 2014). Studies show that thirdhand smoke clings to hair, skin, clothes, furniture, drapes, walls, bedding, carpets, dust, vehicles, and other surfaces, even long after smoking has stopped (Dale, 2014). By permitting smoking to continue on college and university campuses, these institutions risk the health of students and faculty by exposing non-smokers to both secondhand and thirdhand smoke.
Works Cited
American Cancer Society. (n.d.). What is secondhand smoke? Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke
Dale, L. (2014, July 10). What is thirdhand smoke, and why is it a concern? Retrieved from The Mayo Clinic: http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/adult-health/expert-answers/third-hand-smoke/faq-20057791
Fichtenberg, C. (2002, March 21). Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: Systematic review. Retrieved from The BMJ: http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7357/188
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.