England banning smoking in enclosed public place

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

If the public really wants smoke-free bars & restaurants, these places will prosper, and more and more places will adopt non-smoking policies.

your whole post hits the nail

The above quote - clearly around here we have restaurants that have huge waits to get into the no smoking section and nearly empty smoking sections. Those owners should be allowed succeed or fail based on their ability to recognize what's under their noses.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,009]

>Bars, restaurants, etc., ought to be able to decide for themselves whether
>to allow smoking.

I would agree, if those establishments have no employees, or only the owner as an employee. It's OK to allow people to enter a restaurant where smoking is allowed; they can make that decision. It is not OK to expose employees to that sort of a hazard, because they cannot as easily leave.

I know, I know, "they can just work somewhere else" or whatever. But in the real world people will often take the job they can get, instead of waiting for a job in a place they like better. Indeed, such decisions are encouraged by society (and by right wingers specifically.) In that way, employers have more of a responsibility to their employees than they have to their customers. It's why we have organizations like OSHA.

[AndyBoyd 0]

I'm actually not as much of a "right-winger" as my post makes it seem. In fact, I get accused of being a dirty "liberal" all the time.

[NCclimber 0]

Here's what OSHA had to say 10 years ago:

Quote

"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 Standards. . . . It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded."
- Greg Watchman, acting assistant secretary of OSHA, to Leroy J. Pletten, PhD, July 8, 1997.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I'm actually not as much of a "right-winger" as my post makes it seem. In fact, I get accused of being a dirty "liberal" all the time.

what next? Guarantee day-care employees a virus and bacteria free work environment?

[shropshire 0]

<>

That may be true in towns and cities but is much less the case in villages and the courtyside.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 3,009]

>Tending bar or waiting tables in establishment A is pretty much
>like tending bar or waiting tables in establishment B.

Would working in mine A be pretty much like working in mine B if mine B has pretty egregious safety problems? Should we take no note of mine B, since the miners who work in it can just leave if they don't want to face the possibility of an explosion or of black lung disease?

>If the majority of potential employees decide not to work in
>smoking bars/restaurants . . .

I'd say a significant percentage of those potential employees will have a choice between feeding their families and working in a smoking bar/restaurant. Not really a free choice, which makes them very unlike customers.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>Tending bar or waiting tables in establishment A is pretty much
>like tending bar or waiting tables in establishment B.

Would working in mine A be pretty much like working in mine B if mine B has pretty egregious safety problems? Should we take no note of mine B, since the miners who work in it can just leave if they don't want to face the possibility of an explosion or of black lung disease?

>If the majority of potential employees decide not to work in
>smoking bars/restaurants . . .

I'd say a significant percentage of those potential employees will have a choice between feeding their families and working in a smoking bar/restaurant. Not really a free choice, which makes them very unlike customers.

Lovely comparison, Bill.

OSHA establishes Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS). OSHA has stated that it's nearly impossible to exceed PELS for secondhand smoke in just about any work environment.

[AndyBoyd 0]

"I'd say a significant percentage of those potential employees will have a choice between feeding their families and working in a smoking bar/restaurant. Not really a free choice, which makes them very unlike customers."

I find it difficult to believe that there is a significant number of people who MUST work in the bar/restaurant industry or starve. There are many other types of jobs out there that people can find. And if someone chooses to work in the bar/restaurant industry, I also find it hard to believe that this individual MUST work in a smoking place. (The previous poster's argument that workers in a rural area might have fewer choices is a reasonable argument, I admit.) For the most part, though, in a capitalist, free-market economy, there are always choices for both consumers and employees, unless we allow the government to take those choices away from us. My argument is that we ought to be very careful about when & where we allow government to restrict our freedom of choice, and when & where we allow government to criminalize certain behaviors. Especially when there are other ways to resolve problems - i.e. let the free market run its course.

[shropshire 0]

Try telling that to Roy Castle's widow... He never smoked (apparently) and yet died of cancer, believed to have been caused by working (he was a trumpeter) in smokey clubs.


That aside, I choose not to breath in 2nd hand crap.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[billvon 3,009]

>OSHA establishes Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS). OSHA has
>stated that it's nearly impossible to exceed PELS for secondhand smoke in
>just about any work environment.

As someone who has asthma due to secondhand smoke I know for a fact that secondhand smoke is indeed a health hazard. Secondhand smoke causes:

about 3000 deaths from lung cancer a year
observably lowered lung function
severe lower respiratory tract infections
asthma and increased chance of developing asthma
chronic heart disease
low birthweight babies when pregnant women are exposed

[Stumpy 284]

I have recently moved to NZ where there is already no smoking indoors and has been for a while, and its such a fantastic thing. A lot of the places have heated outdoor areas where people can smoke but it is so nice and feels som much cleaner being in a bar with no ashtrays.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[shropshire 0]

> - we're planning some of thiose here too - Bonfires

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Lindsey 0]

I agree. I love that people can't smoke in restaurants in Arkansas anymore. Remember when people used to smoke on airplanes? Smokers bitched way back then when the airlines shut 'em down too, but it's much nicer now on long flights without the pollution.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I know, I know, "they can just work somewhere else" or whatever. But in the real world people will often take the job they can get, instead of waiting for a job in a place they like better. Indeed, such decisions are encouraged by society (and by right wingers specifically.) In that way, employers have more of a responsibility to their employees than they have to their customers. It's why we have organizations like OSHA.

Weren't you supposed to be one of the free market wingnuts when it came to what private businesses could choose to do? People can choose a different job? And then this?!

--
I have a hard time believing that there is any PEL metric that wouldn't be exceeded in the bars I remember before the California ban. I think my clothes got a higher dose than is 'hardless' to humans.

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Quote

I know, I know, "they can just work somewhere else" or whatever. But in the real world people will often take the job they can get, instead of waiting for a job in a place they like better. Indeed, such decisions are encouraged by society (and by right wingers specifically.) In that way, employers have more of a responsibility to their employees than they have to their customers. It's why we have organizations like OSHA.

Weren't you supposed to be one of the free market wingnuts when it came to what private businesses could choose to do? People can choose a different job? And then this?!

--
I have a hard time believing that there is any PEL metric that wouldn't be exceeded in the bars I remember before the California ban. I think my clothes got a higher dose than is 'hardless' to humans.

How do you feel about work environments that expose workers to asbestos? or to excessive radiation? There's a difference between private businesses making choices that workers don't like and doing things that endanger workers' health.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

How do you feel about work environments that expose workers to asbestos? or to excessive radiation? There's a difference between private businesses making choices that workers don't like and doing things that endanger workers' health.

Which ones are which? The bar smoke seems to step over the line of 'don't like.' I don't even want to be there for an hour or two - they're there for 8+ hours.

OSHA performs a needed role, though sometimes the devil is in the details. In college I banged my elbow while stocking cases of liquor and foolishly went upstairs to see if I could ice it for a few minutes as preventative medicine. After all the paperwork associated with that, I learned it would be easier just to walk over to the freezer section and get something cold.

I think that California's laws should allow for bars and companies to have designated smoking rooms. If the owner doesn't have a smoking employee, he or she can service that crowd.

SF dealt with the extremeness of the ban by ignoring violations, which is pretty much the worst solution.

[Lindsey 0]

I think it's clear that working in a smoke-filled room is not good for your health. I like people not being able to smoke in restaurants here. I think, though, that banning smoking in bars and adult-only businesses is a little over-kill.

I tend to think that most people aren't stuck having to earn a living at such an establishment, and if that's where they work, it probably has involved their own choices. But I do see and understand that the decision to allow smoking is a little different situation than choices private businesses make that don't endanger their employees' health.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Secondhand smoke causes:

about 3000 deaths from lung cancer a year

Can you provide a list of the people who died of lung cancer in 2006, in which secondhand smoke was shown to be the cause of their cancer?

Ten percent of the 3000 deaths should suffice.

[Lindsey 0]

My aunt will probably be one of those this year. She has metastases to her liver, bone, brain, kidneys now. Never smoked, but her husband did. Of course that's not proof that her cancer was caused by second-hand smoke.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

My aunt will probably be one of those this year. She has metastases to her liver, bone, brain, kidneys now. Never smoked, but her husband did. Of course that's not proof that her cancer was caused by second-hand smoke.

So cancer everywhere but the lungs? Yeah, I think you need a much high burden of proof.

Very sorry it is happening.

[billvon 3,009]

>Can you provide a list of the people who died of lung cancer in 2006,
>in which secondhand smoke was shown to be the cause of their cancer?

You mean like a death certificate? Nope, that's not listed. My mother died of lung cancer (that metastasized to her brain) after smoking two packs a day for about 40 years. Cause of death was metastatic cancer. No mention of smoking.

In the 1950's cigarette companies attempted to capitalize on this by claiming that no one ever proved that cigarettes caused even one cancer death. Fortunately we know better nowadays.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

>Can you provide a list of the people who died of lung cancer in 2006,
>in which secondhand smoke was shown to be the cause of their cancer?

You mean like a death certificate? Nope, that's not listed. My mother died of lung cancer (that metastasized to her brain) after smoking two packs a day for about 40 years. Cause of death was metastatic cancer. No mention of smoking.

No. Just a list of people, where the consensus opinion is their exposure to ETS was a primary factor in their death.

BTW The cause of death section on most death certificates asks for information on the deceased person's smoking history.

[Lindsey 0]

BTW The cause of death section on most death certificates asks for information on the deceased person's smoking history.


I've filled in the cause of death on quite a few death certificates. I've never seen information on smoking history on one. Maybe I've just overlooked it. Who would provide that information? Just curious.

I doubt that there is such a list of people anywhere handy.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

BTW The cause of death section on most death certificates asks for information on the deceased person's smoking history.


I've filled in the cause of death on quite a few death certificates. I've never seen information on smoking history on one. Maybe I've just overlooked it. Who would provide that information? Just curious.

I was basing my statement on the CDCs Physician's Handbook on Medical Certification of Death. Sorry if I was wrong about that.