Fast-food not an argument against a ban on smoking

Editor,

Reading Monday's editorial regarding smoking on campus left me wondering if the Daily Lobo staff was trying to be sarcastic. It's not that the editorial was ridiculous in itself; it's simply that the article was highly redundant of the last two years of debates on smoking on campus.

How many times do we have to make the argument that one's consumption of greasy foods does not directly harm the health of someone sitting right next to him or her as compared to a completely different outcome with smoking? The Daily Lobo staff is absolutely correct in saying that banning fatty and unhealthy foods on campus will never happen. But it is not only because the purchasing of those foods create revenue for the University. It's also because it is someone's individual right to clog their arteries to whatever extent he or she wishes.

With smoking, as I've stated on numerous occasions, the smoke from a cigarette, cigar or pipe is released into community air. Carcinogens fill the lungs of others and even attach to the clothing of others. It's not just an inconvenience as many think. It's a serious health concern that we see played out often as nonsmokers are diagnosed with cancer and other smoke-related conditions.

I agree that obesity, car emissions and numerous other health concerns deserve much attention from the University. Still, using these other concerns as arguments against moving toward a smoke-free campus is ridiculous. Instead of whining about fatty foods on campus, start a coalition and make a change for the better. That is exactly what a group of students did when we began pushing for clean air on our university.

Kristen Woodruff

UNM student