in public places (in the form of cigarettes, cigars, beedies or otherwise) "falls within the mischief of the penal provisions relating to public nuisance as contained in the indian penal code and also the definition of air pollution as contained in the statutes dealing with the protection and preservation of the environment, in particular, the air (prevention and control of pollution), act 1981." in 2003 india introduced a law that banned smoking in public places like restaurants, public transport or schools. the same law also made it illegal to advertise cigarettes or other tobacco products. in 2010 nepal planned to enact a new anti-smoking bill that would ban smoking in public places and outlaw all tobacco advertising to prevent young people from smoking. on 31 may 2011 venezuela introduced a restriction upon smoking in enclosed public and commercial spaces. smoking was first restricted in schools, hospitals, trains, buses and train stations in turkey in 1996. in 2008 a more comprehensive smoking ban was implemented, covering all public indoor venues. the plage lumière beach in la ciotat, france, became the first beach in europe to restrict smoking from august 2011, in an effort to encourage more tourists to visit the beach. in 2012, smoking in costa rica became subject to some of the most restrictive regulations in the world, with the practice being banned from many outdoor recreational and educational areas as well as in public buildings and vehicles. in december 2022, as part of an effort to become smoke-free by 2025, new zealand passed a bill that prohibits the sale of cigarettes to anyone born on or after 1 january 2009, and imposes major restrictions on availability and nicotine content. the bill was described as creating a "smoke-free generation" by effectively raising the minimum smoking age annually. total tobacco bans in 2004, bhutan became the first country to completely outlaw the cultivation, harvesting, production, and sale of tobacco products. penalties for violating the ban increased under the 'tobacco control act of bhutan 2010'. however, small allowances for personal possession were permitted as long as the possessor could prove that they have paid import duties. this was reversed in 2021 with the new tobacco control rules and regulations (tcrr) 2021 allowing the import, sales and consumption of tobacco products in order to stamp out cross-border smuggling. in january 2016, turkmenistan president gurbanguly berdymukhammedov reportedly banned all tobacco sales in the country. the pitcairn islands had previously banned the sale of cigarettes; however, it now permits sales from a government-run store. a proposal in iceland would ban tobacco sales from shops, making it prescription-only and therefore dispensable only in pharmacies on doctor's orders. in march 2012, brazil became the world's first country to ban all flavored tobacco, including the menthol-flavored kind. it also banned the majority of the estimated 600 additives used, permitting only eight. this regulation applies to domestic and internationally imported cigarettes. tobacco manufacturers had 18 months to remove the non-compliant cigarettes, and 24 months to remove the other forms of non-compliant tobacco. public support a 2007 gallup poll found that 54% of americans favoured completely smoke-free restaurants, 34% favoured completely smoke-free hotel rooms, and 29% favoured completely smoke-free bars. another gallup poll, of over 26,500 europeans, conducted in december 2008, found that "a majority of eu citizens support smoking bans in public places, such as offices, restaurants and bars." the poll further found that "support for workplace smoking restrictions is slightly higher than support for such restrictions in restaurants (84% vs. 79%). two-thirds support smoke-free bars, pubs and clubs." the support is highest in countries which have implemented clear smoking bans: "citizens in italy are the most prone to accept smoking restrictions in bars, pubs and clubs (93% – 87% "totally in favour"). sweden and ireland join italy at the higher end of the scale with approximately 80% of respondents supporting smoke-free bars, pubs and clubs (70% in both countries is totally in favor)." effects effects upon health several studies have documented health and economic benefits related to smoking bans. a 2009 report by the institute of medicine concluded that smoking bans reduced the risk of coronary heart disease and heart attacks, but the report's authors were unable to identify the magnitude of this reduction. also in 2009, a systematic review and meta-analysis found that bans on smoking in public places were associated with a significant reduction of incidence of heart attacks. the lead author of this meta-analysis, david meyers, said that this review suggested that a nationwide ban on smoking in public places could prevent between 100,000 and 225,000 heart attacks in the united states each year. a 2012 meta-analysis found that smoke-free legislation was associated with a lower rate of hospitalizations for cardiac, cerebrovascular, and respiratory diseases, and that "more comprehensive laws were associated with larger changes in risk." the senior author of this meta-analysis, stanton glantz, told usa today that, with respect to exemptions for certain facilities from smoking bans, "the politicians who put those exemptions in are condemning people to be put into the emergency room." a 2013 review found that smoking bans were associated with "significant reduction in acute mi risk", but noted that "studies with smaller population in the united states usually reported larger reductions, while larger studies reported relatively modest reductions". a 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis found that smoke-free legislation was associated with approximately 10% reductions in preterm births and hospital attendance for asthma, but not with a decrease in low birth weight. a 2016 cochrane review found that since the previous version of that review was published in 2010, the evidence that smoking bans improved health outcomes had become more robust, especially with respect to acute coronary syndrome admissions. however, other studies came to the conclusion that smoking bans have little or no short-term effect on myocardial infarction rates and other diseases. a 2010 study from the us used huge nationally representative databases to compare smoking-restricted areas with control areas and found no associations between smoking bans and short-term declines in heart attack rates. the authors have also analyzed smaller studies using subsamples and revealed that large short-term increases in myocardial infarction incidence following a smoking ban are as common as the large decreases. effects upon tobacco consumption smoking bans are generally acknowledged to reduce rates of smoking; smoke-free workplaces reduce smoking rates among workers, and restrictions upon smoking in public places reduce general smoking rates through a combination of stigmatisation and reduction in the social cues for smoking. the world health organization considers smoking bans to have an influence on reducing demand for tobacco by producing an environment where smoking becomes increasingly more difficult and to help shift social norms away from the acceptance of smoking in everyday life. along with tax measures, cessation measures, and education, smoking bans are viewed by public health experts as an important element in reducing smoking rates and promoting positive health outcomes. when effectively implemented, they are seen as an important element of policy to support behaviour change in favour of a healthy lifestyle. however, reports in the popular press after smoking bans have been enacted often present conflicting accounts as regards perceptions of effectiveness. one report stated that cigarette sales in ireland and scotland increased after their smoking bans were implemented. in contrast, another report states that in ireland, cigarette sales fell by 16% in the six months after implementation of the ban. in the uk, cigarette sales fell by 11% during july 2007, the first month of the nationwide smoking ban, compared with july 2006. a 1992 document from phillip morris summarised the tobacco industry's concern about the effects of smoking bans: "total prohibition of smoking in the workplace strongly effects tobacco industry volume. smokers facing these restrictions consume 11%–15% less than average and quit at a rate that is 84% higher than average." in the united states, the cdc reported a levelling-off of smoking rates in recent years despite a large number of ever more comprehensive smoking bans and large tax increases. it has also been suggested that a "backstop" of hardcore smokers has been reached: those unmotivated and increasingly defiant in the face of further legislation. the smoking ban in new york city was credited with the reduction in adult smoking rates at nearly twice the rate as in the rest of the country, "and life expectancy has climbed three years in a decade". in sweden, use of snus, as an alternative to smoking, has risen steadily since that nation's smoking ban. smoking restrictions may make it easier for smokers to quit. a survey suggests 22% of uk smokers may have considered quitting in response to that nation's smoking ban. restaurant smoking restrictions may help to stop young people from becoming habitual smokers. a study of massachusetts youths, found that those in towns with smoking bans were 35 percent less likely to be habitual smokers. economic impact smoking is forbidden on some streets in japan. smokers utilise smoking lounges, such as this one in tokyo. many studies have been published in the health industry literature on the economic effect of smoking bans. the majority of these government and academic studies have found that there is no negative economic impact associated with smoking restrictions and many have found that there may be a positive effect on local businesses. a 2003 review of 97 such studies of the economic effects of a smoking ban on the hospitality industry found that the "best-designed" studies concluded that smoking bans did not harm businesses. similarly, a 2014 meta-analysis found no significant gains or losses in revenue in restaurants and bars affected by smoking bans. in addition, such laws may reduce health care costs, improve work productivity, and lower the overall cost of labour in the community thus protected, making that workforce more attractive for employers. studies funded by the bar and restaurant associations have sometimes claimed that smoking bans have a negative effect on restaurant and bar profits. such associations have also criticised studies which found that such legislation had no impact. many bar and restaurant associations have relationships with the tobacco industry and are sponsored by them. australia a government survey in sydney found that the proportion of the population attending pubs and clubs rose after smoking was banned inside them. however, a clubsnsw report in august 2008 blamed the smoking ban for new south wales clubs suffering their worst fall in income ever, amounting to a decline of $385 million. income for clubs was down 11% in new south wales. sydney cbd club income fell 21.7% and western sydney clubs lost 15.5%. germany some smoking restrictions were introduced in german hotels, restaurants, and bars in 2008 and early 2009. the restaurant industry has claimed that some businesses in the states which restricted smoking in late 2007 (lower saxony, baden-württemberg, and hessen) experienced reduced profits. the german hotel and restaurant association (dehoga) claimed that the smoking ban deterred people from going out for a drink or meal, stating that 15% of establishments that adopted a ban in 2007 saw turnover fall by around 50%. however, a study by the university of hamburg (ahlfeldt and maennig 2010) finds negative impacts on revenues, if any, only in the very short run. in the medium and long run, a recovery of revenues took place. these results suggest either, that the consumption in bars and restaurants is not affected by smoking bans in the long run, or, that negative revenue impacts by smokers are compensated by increasing revenues through non-smokers. ireland the republic of ireland was the first country to introduce fully smoke-free workplaces (march 2004). the irish workplace smoke-free law was introduced with the intention of protecting workers from secondhand smoke and to discourage smoking in a nation with a high percentage of smokers. in ireland, the main opposition to the ban came from publicans. many pubs introduced "outdoor" arrangements (generally heated areas with shelters). it was speculated by opponents that the smoke-free workplaces law would increase the amount of drinking and smoking in the home, but recent studies showed this was not the case. ireland's office of tobacco control website indicates that "an evaluation of the official hospitality sector data shows there has been no adverse economic effect from the introduction of this measure (the march 2004 national smoking ban in bars, restaurants,