Letters from Bill: Middleton Ban Proposal

Alderman Leo,

Despite what former Surgeon General Carmona has said, controversy remains concerning secondhand smoke. According to the most recent Gallup Poll, nearly half of Americans are not convinced that secondhand smoke is a severe health risk. The controversy has been further fueled by a recent UCLA study, the longest-running and highest-quality secondhand smoke study ever done, completed “too late” (2003) to be included in Surgeon General Carmona’s report, that found no link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer or heart disease.
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057

Furthermore, many citizens feel that a smoking ban is a violation of their freedom of expressive association and property rights. Many bar and restaurant owners feel a ban would hurt their businesses. Indeed, new research by Federal Reserve economist Dr. Michael Pakko demonstrates that smoking bans are a real threat to both casinos and mom and pop businesses.
Dr. Pakko has studied Delaware casinos and found a smoking ban cut their business by 14 percent. Dr. Pakko also believes smoking bans may cut bar jobs by 14 percent in some states.  He has just completed a review of the impact of a smoking ban on the bars and restaurants in the town of Columbia, Missouri. Bar business is down 11 percent. Restaurants that serve alcohol are down 6.5 percent. Though many Columbia businesses were already smoke-free before the smoking ban was imposed, Dr. Pakko shows that the smoking ban caused a 3.5 to 4.0 percent drop in the Columbia bar and restaurant business overall. Not a very attractive prospect for businesses in other towns and states considering smoking bans as a recession begins.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/regecon/op/CRE8OP-2008-002.pdf
http://research.stlouisfed.org/econ/pakko/mpbans.html
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Mar/20080329News002.asp

If a smoking ban threatens business, is a smoking ban really necessary to protect the health of workers? OSHA, the government agency charged with the protection of worker health, doesn’t think so and so has opted not to impose a workplace smoking ban. OSHA has established PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels) for all the measurable chemicals, including the 40 alleged carcinogens, in secondhand smoke. PELs are levels of exposure for an 8-hour workday for which, according to OSHA, any health risk is small enough to be tolerated. OSHA explains that under normal workplace circumstances, secondhand smoke “exposures would not exceed these permissible exposure limits (PELs)”
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTERPRETATIONS&p_id=24602

“Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)…It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded.” -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Ass’t Sec’y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997 http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_id=9991&p_table=STANDARDS
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9992

Still, people are bothered and worried by smoke. Please let me suggest a non threatening, painless alternative to a smoking ban. The Middleton City Council could simply require venues that allow smoking to purify their air
15 times or more per hour thru both electronic and HEPA air filtration machines separate from the establishment’s regular HVAC system as air filtration engineers recommend. Such air purification would not only remove tobacco smoke, but also viruses, bacteria, chemicals, pollen, dust, mold, fungi and, most importantly, radon decay products, which the EPA claims causes 21,000 lung cancer deaths per year, seven times more than secondhand smoke is reputed to cause. Commercial and industrial air filtration machines are affordable and readily available. Venues that allow smoking could be retrofitted without expensive ductwork or other construction costs. Here are a few companies offering this technology.
http://www.air-quality-eng.com/
http://www.smokeeaters.org/
http://www.industrial-maid.com/commercialaircleaners.htm
http://aircleaningequipment.com/items.php?subsection=11
http://www.nosmokeking.com/home2.html
http://www.jdstools.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWCATS&Category=12
http://www.fivehawk.com/technology.htm
http://www.casinoair.com/site/1272069/page/457110
http://www.airistar.com/src/CEM_12_05.pdf

The CDC even recommends that such air filtration systems be installed in buildings as a way of protecting workers from airborne chemical, biological or radiological attacks:
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2003-136/

Furthermore, an air filtration solution to the secondhand smoke problem would not displace smokers to poorly ventilated private homes and cars.
Research has shown that this displacement actually causes the secondhand smoke exposure levels of children to rise in communities in which a smoking ban has been imposed.
http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications.php?publication_id=3523

Alderman Leo, smoking bans have hurt and killed many mom and pop businesses across the country. But if Middleton lawmakers bring truly clean air to establishments thru contemporary air filtration technology, business in these establishments will not be hurt but would instead flourish as new patrons arrive who were kept away by the previous smoke.

                                          Sincerely,
                                          Bill Hannegan

P.S. I don’t work for any air filtration company. I just believe air filtraion is a great solution to this issue.