Replies

Smokers who want to continue to deliberately inflict their carcinogens and toxins on unwilling non-smokers love to lie about the regulation of secondhand smoke. They love to claim that secondhand isn't harmful (a lie), that the government has no legal right to regulate bars and restaurants (another lie), and that banning smoking in places open to the public is somehow Socialist, Nazi, or "nanny-statist" (yet another lie). The truth is that they HAVE no valid arguments. Zero. Zip. Nada.

YES, SECONDHAND SMOKE IS HARMFUL TO HUMAN HEALTH

The following government agencies have all declared secondhand smoke/environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) to be a toxic and carcinogenic health hazard:

The Surgeon General
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
National Toxicology Program
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)

Smokers will loudly claim that the EPA's 1993 risk assessment that classified ETS as a "Group A" carcinogen was overturned. It wasn't. What happened was that representatives of the tobacco industry filed suit against the EPA relating to the findings of its ETS risk assessment in a tobacco-producing state, before a judge who - what a coincidence - turned out to be a former tobacco industry lobbyist. This judge somehow managed to rule - despite evidence to the contrary - that the EPA's finding that ETS caused lung cancer was invalid. However, this ruling was utterly vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth District on December 11, 2002, rendering it null and void. Despite what some people will try to tell you, the EPA 1993 risk assessment was NOT overruled: the attempt to invalidate it was what was overruled.

Cigarette smoke has been shown to contain well over 2000 chemicals and at least 40 known carcinogens. There is virtually a total consensus in the medical community and in the biological research community that secondhand smoke is hazardous to human health. Medical schools, teaching hospitals, and university medical research institutes all know and teach the hazards of secondhand smoke. In an amazing coincidence, virtually every public figure who maintains that secondhand smoke isn't a very real health hazard mysteriously either turns out to be a smoker or to have some kind of political or fiscal connection to the tobacco industry. Go figure.

In 2000 Philip Morris, one of the leading tobacco companies, let the cat out of the smoking bag. On its website, Philip Morris posted "...there is an overwhelming medical and scientific consensus that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema, and other serious diseases..." and that "There is no safe cigarette." That's right, a tobacco company admitted that. It's no longer deniable.

SURPRISE, THE GOVERNMENT ALREADY REGULATES BARS AND RESTAURANTS

Arguing that the government has no right to regulate bars and restaurants for health-related reasons is an act of total ignorance given that every existing bar or restaurant in the United States is currently subject to governmental health-related regulation. Yes, that's right: they are all already regulated for health purposes. Yes, every single one of them. Anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the food and drink business or is lying.

DARN, THE REGULATION OF PLACES TO EAT AND DRINK PREDATES ALL MODERN POLITICAL SYSTEMS

Smokers love to call the government health regulation of places to eat and drink "Socialist," "Nazi," or "nanny-statist." These are acts of simple ignorance, as inns and taverns were regulated by the English government in medieval times. Here in America such government regulation started well over 300 years ago, in the early 17th Century - which is, of course, long before anyone ever heard of Karl Marx, Adolf Hitler, or Hillary Clinton. Blaming modern political ideas for acts that date back to medieval times is just silly. But then, of course, any defense of public smoking is silly, as no one can *seriously* defend anything that deliberately inflicts carcinogens and toxins on unwilling victims.