AIMS: Relatively little is known about the attitudes of young people to restrictions on smoking in public places and to environmental second-hand smoke in housing estates. The objective was to explore the attitudes of young male adults after the new smoke-free legislation was implemented in Finland. METHODS: A survey of 1167 Finnish male military conscripts was performed. The main outcome variables were their attitudes to the new restrictions on smoking in public places and concerns about second-hand smoke in the home originating from their neighbours. RESULTS: Almost half of the youths (43.5%) reported that they supported the more restrictive smoking regulations, with 44.8% having a neutral view. Only 16.0% of the respondents were irritated about the second-hand smoke entering to their house from outside and 48.6% were not concerned about smoking in their neighbourhood. A total of 555 (47.6%) conscripts were current smokers. Current smokers were more often totally opposed to the legislation and had less negative views about the exposure to second-hand smoke than non-smokers. Strong nicotine dependence increased the feelings of anxiety and stigmatisation when the new restrictions were introduced. CONCLUSIONS: Finnish young men do accept new smoking restrictions. However, smoking with high nicotine dependence was surprisingly common among these young men and the negative attitude to the legislation can be traced to this group of smokers. The repulsion felt towards second-hand smoke by non-smokers represents an opportunity for public health initiatives to guarantee a smoke-free environment in public and private places.
AIMS: Relatively little is known about the attitudes of young people to restrictions on smoking in public places and to environmental second-hand smoke in housing estates. The objective was to explore the attitudes of young male adults after the new smoke-free legislation was implemented in Finland. METHODS: A survey of 1167 Finnish male military conscripts was performed. The main outcome variables were their attitudes to the new restrictions on smoking in public places and concerns about second-hand smoke in the home originating from their neighbours. RESULTS: Almost half of the youths (43.5%) reported that they supported the more restrictive smoking regulations, with 44.8% having a neutral view. Only 16.0% of the respondents were irritated about the second-hand smoke entering to their house from outside and 48.6% were not concerned about smoking in their neighbourhood. A total of 555 (47.6%) conscripts were current smokers. Current smokers were more often totally opposed to the legislation and had less negative views about the exposure to second-hand smoke than non-smokers. Strong nicotine dependence increased the feelings of anxiety and stigmatisation when the new restrictions were introduced. CONCLUSIONS: Finnish young men do accept new smoking restrictions. However, smoking with high nicotine dependence was surprisingly common among these young men and the negative attitude to the legislation can be traced to this group of smokers. The repulsion felt towards second-hand smoke by non-smokers represents an opportunity for public health initiatives to guarantee a smoke-free environment in public and private places.