Sample Speaking and Writing Points

March 2006

"[T]otal prohibition of smoking in the workplace strongly affects industry volume. Smokers facing these restrictions consume 11-15% less than average and quit at a rate that is 85% higher than average… Milder workplace restrictions, such as smoking only in designated areas have much less impact on quitting rates and very little effect on consumption."
-- Internal Memorandum from Philip Morris, Bates Nos. 2023914280/4284 (1992)

I. SECONDHAND SMOKE KILLS

Secondhand smoke kills 53,000 Americans prematurely each year.¹
Secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States. For every eight smokers the tobacco companies kill, they take one nonsmoker with them.^2,3
Along with benzene, diesel exhaust, and arsenic, secondhand smoke has been classified as a toxic air contaminant, an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.⁴
Even a little exposure can be fatal. The 2002 Environmental Health Information Service's 10th Report on Carcinogens classifies SHS as a Group A (Human) Carcinogen - a substance known to cause cancer in humans. There is no safe level of exposure for Group A toxins. In addition, the 2002 World Health Organization International Agency's (IARC) Monograph on Tobacco Smoking, both Active and Passive concluded that nonsmokers are exposed to the same carcinogens as active smokers.^5,6
The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has determined that the risk of acute myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease associated with exposure to tobacco smoke is non-linear at low doses, increasing rapidly with relatively small doses such as those received from secondhand smoke (SHS) or actively smoking one or two cigarettes a day, and has warned that all patients at increased risk of coronary heart disease or with known coronary artery disease should avoid all indoor environments that permit smoking.⁷
The effects of even brief exposure (minutes to hours) to secondhand smoke can be nearly as large (averaging 80% to 90%) as chronic active smoking.⁸
Secondhand smoke is as damaging to a fetus as if the mother were inhaling the smoke directly from a cigarette.⁹
Long-term exposure to secondhand smoke increases the risk of developing breast cancer in younger, primarily premenopausal, women.¹⁰
Food service workers have a 50% greater risk of dying from lung cancer than the general population, in part, because of secondhand smoke exposure in the workplace.^11,12
Smoke from the burning end of a cigarette contains more than 4,000 chemicals and, at least, 60 carcinogens including: formaldehyde, cyanide, arsenic, carbon monoxide, methane, and benzene. The smoker, and anyone else nearby, inhales these chemicals.¹³

II. VENTILATION IS NOT A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO GOING 100% SMOKEFREE

Ask the experts; there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Ventilation and air filtration cannot completely eliminate all the poisons and toxins in secondhand smoke. Government health agencies, numerous air filtration companies (such as The Sharper Image, Oreck, IQAir North America, and United Air Specialists), and the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers agree that the only effective way to eliminate the health risks of premature death and disease caused by exposure to secondhand smoke, is to make indoor areas 100% smokefree.^14,15
The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America adopted a disclaimer that states: "Some air cleaners may help to reduce secondhand smoke to a limited degree, but no air filtration or air purification system can completely eliminate all the harmful constituents of secondhand smoke. The U.S. Surgeon General has determined secondhand smoke to cause heart disease, lung cancer, and respiratory illness. Also, a simple reduction of secondhand smoke does not protect against the disease and death caused by exposure to secondhand smoke."¹⁶
Smoke-filled rooms can have up to six times the air pollution of a busy highway.¹⁷
Secondhand smoke knows no boundaries. Nonsmoking sections and smoking rooms do not eliminate nonsmokers' exposure to secondhand smoke.¹⁸

III. SMOKEFREE INDOOR AIR LAWS WORK

Smokefree air laws are a global trend. As of December 2005, more than 400 local municipalities, 15 states (including Delaware, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Washington which enjoy 100% comprehensive smokefree laws in all workplaces, restaurants, and bars), and dozens of countries throughout the world (including Ireland, Norway, Australia, Canada, Bhutan, and New Zealand) have a 100% smokefree provision in all workplaces and/or restaurants and/or bars. In the United States, more than 39 percent of the population is protected by a 100% smokefree provision.¹⁹
Smokefree air is good for health. Hospitality workers and businesses report improvements in their bottom-lines after smokefree laws go into effect. Almost immediately after implementation, hospitality workers report experiencing fewer respiratory and sensory problems.²⁰
Studies of hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction in Helena, Montana and Pueblo, Colorado before, during, and after a local law eliminating smoking in workplaces and public places was in effect, have determined that laws to enforce smokefree workplaces and public places may be associated with a reduction in morbidity from heart disease.^21,22
Smokefree air is good for business. All reputable studies have shown that smoke indoor air laws either have no impact or a positive impact on the economic health of businesses within the hospitality industry. In addition, going 100% smokefree indoors reduces maintenance costs and medical costs, legal liability, and increased worker productivity and moral.²³
The Society of Actuaries has determined that secondhand smoke costs the U.S. economy roughly $10 billion a year: $5 billion in estimated medical costs associated with secondhand smoke exposure, and another $4.6 billion in lost wages. This estimate does not include youth exposure to secondhand smoke.²⁴
Smokefree air laws are popular with the public and generally self-enforcing. Prior to implementation, public education about the health effects of secondhand smoke and the need for a clean indoor air law can help build support for the law and increase compliance.^25,26

REFERENCES

National Cancer Institute, "Health effects of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke: the report of the California Environmental Protection Agency" Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph 10, [n.d.].
Glantz, S.A. and Parmley, W., "Passive Smoking and Heart Disease: Epidemiology, Physiology, and Biochemistry," Circulation, 1991; 83(1): 1-12.
Taylor, A., et. al., "Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Cardiovascular Disease," Circulation, 1992; 86: 699-702.
[n.a.], "Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant," California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, June 2005. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/ets/dreport/dreport.htm. Accessed on June 3, 2005.
Report on Carcinogens, Tenth Edition; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Toxicology Program, December 2002. Available at: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/roc/toc10.html. Downloaded on November 25, 2003.
International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph's Program, "Monograph on Tobacco Smoking, both Active and Passive," World Health Organization, June 2002. Available at: http://www.iarc.fr/pageroot/PRELEASES/pr141a.html. Downloaded on November 25, 2003.
Pechacek, Terry F.; Babb, Stephen, "Commentary: How acute and reversible are the cardiovascular risks of secondhand smoke?" British Medical Journal 328: 980-983, April 24, 2004.
Barnoya, J. and Glantz, S.A., "Cardiovascular effects of secondhand smoke: nearly as large as smoking," Circulation 111(20): 2684-2698, May 24, 2005.
Grant, S.G., "Qualitatively and quantitatively similar effects of active and passive maternal tobacco smoke exposure on in utero mutagenesis at the HPRT locus," BMC Pediatrics, 2005, 5:20. Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2431-5-20.pdf. Accessed on September 7, 2005.
[n.a.], "Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant," California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, June 2005. Available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/ets/dreport/dreport.htm. Accessed on June 3, 2005.
Shopland, D.R.; Anderson, C.M.; Burns, D.M.; Gerlach, K.K., "Disparities in smoke-free workplace policies among food service workers," Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(4): 347-356, April 2004.
Siegel, M., "Involuntary Smoking in Restaurant Workplace: A Review of Employee Exposure and Health Effects." JAMA, 270:490-493, 1993. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8320789&dopt=Abstract.
Environmental Protection Agency, Indoor Air Facts, No. 5, 1989.
[n.a.], "Ventilation and Air Filtration: What the Air Filtration Companies and Tobacco Industry are Saying," Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, August 1, 2005. Download at http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?id=267.
Samet, J.; Bohanon, Jr., H.R.; Coultas, D.B.; Houston, T.P.; Persily, A.K.; Schoen, L.J.; Spengler, J.; Callaway, C.A., "ASHRAE position document on environmental tobacco smoke," American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), [2005?].
[n.a.], "[AAFA web page re: air filters]," Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, [n.d.]. Download at http://www.aafa.org/display.cfm?id=8&sub=16&cont=37. Accessed on February 2, 2005.
Centers for Disease Control, "It's Time to Stop Being a Passive Victim," 1993.
The Health Consequences of Involuntary Smoking: A Report of the U.S. Surgeon General, 1986.
[n.a.], "[ANR Ordinance Database re: current smokefree air laws]," American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, December 9, 2005.
Farrelly, M.C.; Nonnemaker, J.M.; Chou, R.; Hyland, A.; Peterson, K.K.; and Bauer, U.E., "Changes in hospitality workers' exposure to secondhand smoke following the implementation of New York's smoke-free law," Tobacco Control 2005; 14: 236-241. doi:10.1136tc.2004.008839. Download abstract at http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/236.
Sargent, Richard P.; Shepard, Robert M.; Glantz, Stanton A., "Reduced incidence of admissions for myocardial infarction associated with public smoking ban: before and after study," British Medical Journal, 328: 977-980, April 24, 2004.
Bartecchi, C.; Alsever, R.N.; Nevin-Woods, C.; Thomas, W.M.; Estacio, R.O.; Bucher-Bartelson, B.; Krantz, M.J., "A reduction in the incidence of acute myocardial infarction associated with a citywide smoking ordinance," Pueblo, CO: Pueblo City-County Health Department, [2005].
Scollo, Lal, Hyland, Glantz, "Review of the Quality of Studies on Economic Effects of Smoke-Free Policies on the Hospitality Industry," Tobacco Control, 2003 12:13-20.
Behan, D.F.; Eriksen, M.P.; Lin, Y., "Economic Effects of Environmental Tobacco Smoke," Society of Actuaries, March 31, 2005. Download at http://www.soa.org/ccm/content/areas-of-practice/life-insurance/research/economic-effects-of-environmental-tobacco-smoke-SOA/?printerFriendly=1. Accessed on August 17, 2005.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs-August 1999. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, [n.d.].
[n.a.], "Patron Surveys and Consumer Behavior," Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, October 2005. Download at http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?id=259.