Note: For your comments to be considered for publication on this blog you MUST provide your full name. Pseudonyms and first names only are not acceptable. Thank you.
I fortuitously noticed this story on-line earlier this morning (it’s not in the printed version of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch yet) and after reading it checked out the comments. Sure enough, they’re overwhelmingly negative, panning the researchers’ conclusions even before knowing them, and putting forward spurious reasons why this research will be flawed.
Only one comment at the time I checked supported smoke-free air:
David Hartstein said on: September 8, 2010, 8:40 am
I agree that even with proper ventilation, it seems obvious that second hand smoke would still negatively impact the health of others in the space. I support the smoking ban and personally have stopped going to places that are smokey. To me, when one person’s choices impact the health and well-being of others, it is reasonable to restrict that activity to the privacy of one’s own home.
The on-line story is pasted below. To read comments please click here. I’ve added a couple of comments (please see below following story) and invite you to do likewise.
By MICHELE MUNZ email@example.com 314-340-8263 | Posted: Wednesday, September 8, 2010 5:41 am | (14) Comments
Researchers at Washington University are expected to announce today the results of the first study to monitor secondhand smoke exposure in St. Louis area bars and restaurants and whether ventilation systems work in purifying the air.
The study was a joint effort between the Siteman Cancer Center at Washington University School of Medicine and the Center for Tobacco Policy Research at Washington University. Researchers looked at airborne nicotine levels, nicotine levels in employees’ hair samples, employees’ health, employees’ knowledge about smoke-free policies and the effectiveness of ventilation systems.
Key players are scheduled to discuss the findings at a 1 p.m. press conference. John Postel, marketing and entertainment manager of the Highlands Brewing Co. in Kirkwood, where a smoking ban went into effect over nine months ago, is also on the list to speak.
A smoking ban in public places in St. Louis and St. Louis County takes effect Jan. 2. However, casino floors, some hotel rooms, private clubs (mainly veterans and fraternal organizations) and tobacco stores are exempt. The county also exempts bars where income from food is 25 percent or less of gross receipts.
In the city, small bars — less than 2,000 square feet where food sales are “incidental” to alcohol consumption — have five years to comply with the ban.
Bans are already in effect in Clayton, Kirkwood, Arnold, Ballwin and Lake Saint Louis and throughout the state of Illinois. Some of the municipal laws, such as one that goes into effect Jan. 1 in Brentwood, ban smoking in all bars.
My comments posted to date on the Post-Dispatch:
Martin Pion said on: September 8, 2010, 9:34 am
I wasn’t aware of this study but I’m delighted to learn of it.
MoGASP has funded independent studies in Ballwin and Arnold restaurants and bars in the past but those results have not been published in peer-reviewed journals. These new studies of smoke-free environments vs. ventilation solutions would probably be a spur to submitting our result for publication.
In research, it’s important to obtain more than one set of data.
Martin Pion, B.Sc. President, MoGASP
Martin Pion said on: September 8, 2010, 10:05 am
Tony Palazzolo wrote: “You already know that nicotine levels are higher in places that allow smoking than not …. nicotine sticks to clothing … which is not harmful in anyway.”
I’m baffled by your logic. Nicotine in the air is a unique surrogate for SHS. What research can you point to showing that the nicotine being measured in smoking-permitted environments is mainly or even partially due to clothing?
This is a red herring.
Martin Pion, B.Sc., President, Missouri GASP