Categorized | Classic, Health

Tags : ,

S’pore to become smoke-free island by 2015

Posted on 06 January 2014

Only three outdoor smoking points will be available and they will be mobile.

nee-soon-smoking-point

In a bid to combat smoking, Singapore is planning on going smoke-free by 2015.

This means that no one is allowed to smoke outdoors and only three designated smoking points will be allocated on the whole island.

Each designated smoking area will be three-by-three metres and have walls to hold smokers in. And they will all be mobile.

A health authority, Sio Hoon Kee, said the reason for this is simple: “As there are only three designated smoking corners for up to two and a half million smokers in Singapore, it is essential that we space them out and move them around so everyone can use it.”

There will not be a fixed schedule as to where the smoking points will be located next and it is not known how many areas it will cover in a day.

However, anyone caught smoking outdoors outside the perimeter of the designated smoking corners will be punished by being banned from smoking and they will be ordered to carry the mobile smoking corner around for a week and become a passive second-hand smoker.

 

Everything is banned in Singapore:

Government bans ’69’ sexual position

Cigarettes, alcohol completely sold out as S’pore announces plan to increase taxes from today

S’pore to ban eating in public after banning alcohol consumption in public after 10.30pm

Tan Tock Seng Hospital to ban all staff from using Facebook, social media

This post was written by:

- who has written 2620 posts on New Nation.

Wang Pei can be considered a new citizen of Singapore. She has been here all her life, just that her environment's changed beyond recognition.

Contact the author

  • SMOKER FTW

    biggest joke

    • kw ak

      smokers are real toxic decerebrates however

  • Nameless

    Ban sales of cigarettes. Yet Singapore don’t do that cause they want earn money. And fine those who violate the rules.

    • kw ak

      a smoking licence, $10000 / year

  • another idiot

    What a crap.! Ban ciggarettes first then can do this thing!!

    • kw ak

      what you trying to say?

  • A smoker

    That will never happen. If it do, this law never exist.

  • Kei

    Singapore is a FINE country

  • true Singaporean

    If what wtv stated is true. I dare the government to make Singapore “Alcohol free” as well! One very obvious reason to do it is because of the recent Little India riot.

  • danny

    this is fake

    • u noob

      NO SHIT

  • Pingback: Singapore to become smoke-free island by 2015 - www.hardwarezone.com.sg

  • mamalemon

    the health authority name like nice only. sio hoon kee. and he takes charge of smoking. LOL

  • Caleb

    lol… i dun mind carry around the mobile smoking corner…. so i still get to smoke anytime I want.

    • kw ak

      dumby smoker

  • Ah huat

    And only idiots believe this

    • kingkong

      Not just another Idiot, but a super Naive Idiot…

      She don’t understand it is the $$$ that is the root of all Sins… The $$$ will make the government think of something not to let people quit smoking totally. I bet smoker will continue to smoke even if a pack cost S$100…

  • Guest9954125654

    Stupid

  • blu3vs

    Go fuck spider better

  • DaughteroftheUndead

    awesome

  • Murderer

    Pertaining to the last paragraph, Don’t they always say 2nd hand smoker also will die faster? Can the person who force people to be 2nd hand smoker sued for murder?

  • http://www.lisabelle-artist.com/ Lisabelle

    The United Nations will decide what the rest of the world thinks of Singapore and it’s lack of compassion for humanity!

  • Khairul Ikhsan

    Singapore nowadays are already full of shit. Especially the government and those who implemented this shit. No point of doing this.

  • hellopanda

    Hire more people to go around those who smoke in prohibited areas first then tell us this kind of naive ambition bah

  • Bullshit news

    This is stupid… The goverment won’t do this, no cigarette sales means no tobacco taxes = lose alot of income

  • Costas Kitis

    That’s a very bad and evil thing to do

  • LOCAL SINGAPOREAN

    Singapore has become from bad to WORST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Jason

    If this really becomes true, Singapore is really becoming a joke

  • anonymouse

    Sorry Newnation, I found the article absolutely hilarious!

    But your humour can’t beat the idiots here who actually this is real xD

  • Ace

    Ciggar cannot be ban for some reason if ban will get fined or something like that

  • nameless

    WHEN BUY THE CIGARETTES WE PAY E TAX N CAN U TELL ME ALL E TAX GOES TO WHOES ACCOUNT?

  • Sandra

    I cannot believe the number of idiots who believe this article is true.. Nicely done NewNation, sparking irrational and stupid hate on the govt with shit like this. Haha.

    “A health authority , Sio Hoon Kee” << that's not a Chinese name, it means 'smoking a cigarette' in dialect. And there's still so many stupid statements like "banned from smoking", "carry the mobile smoking corner around for a week" and "become a passive second hand smoker". And how can there be only 3 smoking points on the entire island?! Just think, how is the govt supposed to pass all these stupid laws?

    This shows the number of Singaporeans who believe whatever the read or hear without validating the information. Many just jump onto the bandwagon of hating the govt for god knows what ridiculous reasons that may be untrue, which in this case is OBVIOUSLY untrue.

    This article made me laugh. Yet I felt so disappointed reading so many comments from people who think this is true. Oh well.

    • smoker4life

      wah so clever =) come i clap for u. Who the hell so free go see if its real of fake?where got time need earn money feed dog leh

      • Loooool

        we ARE feeding the dogs in parliament.

      • Then why are you here commenting when you’re supposedly busy earning money and feeding the dogs? And by the way, I knew this article was fake the time I got to the third paragraph, so I guess too bad for you?

    • kw ak

      I believe killing is allowed for stupid smokers

  • smoker4life

    bullshit.. ah men so free meh? if really like tat whose the first to start transporting the thing? ah long ar??

  • sam

    Sio hoon kee lol

  • Unknown

    Well one should consider the consequences of this policy. Adopting a utilitarian principle, the benefits on the society (clean air and the damage averted from 2nd hand smoke) are likely to outweigh the cost (setting up of the tent and inconvenience borne by smokers). This is a trial run in a localized area, so the news should not be re-phrased to say that there are only “three designated smoking corners”. Furthermore, the percentage of smokers in Singapore is very low compared to international standards, 2.5 million smokers is almost a one in every two persons in Singapore. I hope people realize that this is a satirical website. Do exercise your judicial judgment on the news posts.

  • Sheldon Cooper

    BAZINGA!

    only geniuses would know the meaning behind this.

  • Booms

    LOL … “A health authority, Sio Hoon Kee” SIO HOON KEE

  • harleyrider1778

    This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

    http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/28/16741714-lungs-from-pack-a-day-smokers-safe-for-transplant-study-finds?lite

    Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

    By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

    Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

    What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

    “I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study………………………

    Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

    The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

    Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

    146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

    A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

    Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!

  • harleyrider1778

    Leave smokers alone

    The real tragedy here is smokers that have been beaten down for the sole reason of being smokers, thanks to a top-down campaign to cast them aside for the crime of enjoying something some people object to

    by Richard White on 8 January 2014 06:54

    When George Godber spoke at the 3rd World Conference on Smoking and Health in 1975, he gave his vision of the future: “our target must be, in the long-term, the elimination of cigarette smoking…”, he said.

    “We may not have eliminated cigarette smoking completely by the end of this century, but we ought to have reached a position where a relatively few addicts still use cigarettes, but only in private at most in the company of consenting adults… The practice ought to be an enclosed one, not to be endured by the non-smoker in ordinary social intercourse; and no one …should be allowed to use advertisement or any indirect means to suggest otherwise.”

    In 1975, the general public would have scoffed at such a notion, but it was the apparent threat of secondhand smoke to non-smokers that gave anti-smokers the golden key to legislation restricting smoking from any indoor area.

    It didn’t matter that the 1992 EPA report first demonstrating harm only managed to do so by cherry-picking studies and lowering the confidence interval – and even then, finding that for every 40,000 worker-years of exposure to omnipresent smoke as in the 1960s, there would be approximately one extra instance of lung cancer – nor that only 15 percent of the studies done on secondhand smoke and lung cancer managed to find any scientifically significant result at all – and even then the results were less “deadly” than wearing a bra.

    With the 2007 blanket smoking ban in the UK, anti-smokers have become ever bolder – pushing for smoking bans in cars, hospital grounds, care homes, even talking about private homes.

    All of this is based on the harm posed from passive smoking, despite the statistically insignificant relative risk only existing for those living or working with smokers for hours on end, day after day, for decades.

    The mantra that secondhand smoke kills thousands a year has continued even though the large prospective studies show otherwise – Enstrom and Kabat found no risk, the WHO found no risk, and now, a new study examined in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute has found no risk, despite the researchers expecting to find one.

    Within the study article, though, comes the admission of its roots in Godber’s 1975 comments – Jyoti Patel, MD, explained that there is only a borderline risk of lung cancer from secondhand smoke, but that “[t]he strongest reason to avoid passive cigarette smoke is to change societal behavior: to not live in a society where smoking is a norm”.

    And therein lies a chilling message: puritans, with the full backing of the medical establishment, will fabricate health risks to make sure we aren’t doing what they don’t think we should be doing – regardless of the consequences for families and businesses.

    It was a given that smoking bans would not pass on that basis, though – health needed to be put at risk to get people to listen. The fabrication is based on distorting science and using weak study models that produce biased results.
    http://www.thecommentator.com/article/4578/leave_smokers_alone

  • Sheriru

    Whether this is true or not! Isn’t it too cruel? U all never smoke den u all do this? If u all smoke, will u still do all this & spoil it urself? Pls, think of it, u alrdy say half a million smokers! If u wanna smoke free, ban cig first! If not don’t talk so much!

  • uselessSINGAPOREAN

    Wtf. Stupid scheme. Just ban it completely bah. Whats the point? How about alcohol?. Does that mean i carry a bottle of whiskey in my bag? I bet alot of people sure fo crazy and flip more cars. Cocks. Really talking cock.

  • deathbylife

    Fake. Who believes this mist be born stupid….

  • Don’t Be Stupid

    You’re an idiot if you believe this…

  • zz top

    are they mental!

  • Hola

    Just come to Malaysia and smoke all you want

  • momo

    Stop discrimination of smokers!!! Protest!! If this gonna happen, I swear after my marriage this November, I will have my child born in HK instead! Disappointed with such a communist thought

  • Pingback: Cigarettes, alcohol completely sold out as S’pore announces plan to increase taxes from today | New Nation

  • kw ak

    great

  • all

    why does the government don’t ban ciggarette? When the people smoke to much ciggarette it can lead to cancer. Smoking is bad for your heath. When you are involve in smoking, why don’t you quit? Smoking kills people

Trending Travel Videos