[r9etb]

did you ever approach your employer along these lines prior to the smoking ban being put in place at your workplace?

Nope -- didn't have to, as it turned out. And people were better off for it.

At any rate, that's not at all my point. Milloy's article appears to go beyond this one flawed study, to imply that there is no harm from second-hand smoke.

My anecdotal example suggests that it is at least possible that smoke-free buildings are "healthier" than ones where smoking is permitted. I suggested a study that would provide evidence one way or the other -- for all I know, it's even been done by one insurance company or other.

Perhaps Milloy has covered it elsewhere, but I find it rather telling that did not see fit to even consider the question of whether second-hand smoke causes health issues.

[Old Professer]

The building would be healthier if everyone quit exhaling their germs as well but it would also be emptier.

If you never requested a reprieve from all the ETS you say you were exposed to then I can only conclude that you are either very timid or prone to exaggeration.

[Madame Dufarge]

Milloy's article appears to go beyond this one flawed study

Could you point out the "flaws," please?