That's an argument against tax-subsidized healthcare rather than for a smoking ban. Because otherwise you've just nationalized people's bodies.

Why stop at smoking after all? Anyone not doing an hour of cardio daily is being irresponsible with the body entrusted to them by society and is in need of a visit to a reformation camp.

The linked article is about improved health outcomes due to secondhand smoke bans in public areas:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD005992...

You're free to continue smoking in the privacy of your own home.

> You're free to continue smoking in the privacy of your own home.

Not where I live, was banned years ago.

Where is that, and is that in your own house or is it a apartment that is owned by a landlord/collection of tenants?

Apartment.

*For now.

Making it to where people don't have the right to put certain things into their body, healthy or unhealthy, is a stepping stone to a more fascist world. And a bit hypocritical if you're pushing for assisted suicide. Second-hand smoke bans, that's great. But I'd tell someone who vapes to quit peacocking in a bar before I'd tell a cigarette smoker that they're destroying their body in the privacy of their own home.

AFAIK, there are no smoking bans on people in their own homes, and even in that case it might be reasonable in apartments without airtight party walls.