Should we ban smoking at work?

SMOKERS could cost $ 388 billion to the Australian economy during the working lives of the Australian people.

Research that has just been published shows that the indirect costs of smoking, including smoking breaks, exposure to second-hand smoke and the costs of absenteeism for employers, could have a greater financial impact than the direct costs badociated with health care.

The shocking results prompted Chris McMillan, CEO of Cancer Council Queensland, to call for workplaces to consider banning smoking altogether.

"Having a smoke-free workplace not only improves the health of those who smoke, it increases productivity, decreases absenteeism, and protects employees from second-hand smoke," she said.

By calculating the number of years of life lost, quality of life lost, and productivity lost, Monash University researchers calculated the total financial loss based on the gross domestic product generated per worker in 2016.

The research, published in the medical journal The BMJ focused on the indirect economic impact of smoking on productivity at work.

"We are in the process of quantifying the costs in terms of hospitalizations, but there is evidence that suggests that the indirect costs of smoking are very high and may be higher than the direct costs," he said. Dr. Alice Owen. I said.

The study, which used a new method of quantifying productivity, led the researchers to conclude that the argument in favor of expanding Australia's already stringent tobacco laws was " convincing".

Modeling has shown that in addition to the loss of GDP, three million years of life would be lost from the current population of smokers.

If a 50% reduction in smoking rates were achieved, a saving of $ 194 billion in GDP could be achieved but should be offset by the cost of prevention programs.

"The likely economic benefits arising from productivity gains mean that a greater investment in reducing the adoption of smoking is warranted," the paper says.