[Just another Joe]

One of the silliest things that smokers do is to claim that the government somehow has no right to regulate health issues in businesses that serve food or drink.

There is no valid scientific evidence that ETS is a health issue to the vast majority of people.
Do we ban peanuts in bars and restaurants because some few people have an allergic reaction to peanuts? No.

Why should ETS be any different on health issues?

[SheLion]

Good to see you, Joe!

[E Rocc]

Why should ETS be any different on health issues?

The smoke nannies want ETS to be the only workplace chemical not controlled using PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels). Originally they wanted OSHA to issue a PEL of zero. OSHA declined, realizing that:

1) There is no such thing as "zero" in chemical analysis. There is only "below detection limit".

2) They would be declaring ETS to be more toxic than cyanide, which has a finite PEL.

Since OSHA's demurral, the SNs have simply pushed for a ban ignoring the basic principle of industrial hygiene.

-Eric