Senate kills ban on smoking in restaurants

A bartender in a decently ventilated bar breathes only a fraction of a cigarette per hour.

Do antismokers really believe that a non-smoking restaurant worker breathes anything like a pack of cigarettes per 8 hour shift? If someone could prove that to me, I might reconsider my position on smoking bans.

Bill Hannegan wrote:

A bartender in a decently ventilated bar breathes only a fraction of a cigarette per hour.

British Medical Association condemns tobacco industry ventilation claims.

EXCERPTS from: BMA condemns tobacco industry ventilation claims - News-Medical.Net January 13, 2005

Following a conference held this morning by the Scottish Licensed Trade Association, the BMA stressed that ventilation does not protect employees or customers from the deadly effects of passive smoke and condemned arguments otherwise as untrue and based on flawed science.

Research in America found that there was 50 times more air pollution in a smoky bar than in New York's Holland tunnel at rush hour, and studies have found that ventilation in bars does not reduce the risk to the health of customers or staff.

The tobacco industry has proposed that ventilation is the solution to the problem of passive smoke, however, scientific evidence proves that conventional ventilation and air-cleaning systems do not provide effective protection against the health hazards of second hand smoke.

Ventilation systems use a filtration method to re-circulate air. However, while this method can clear the smoky atmosphere, the toxins present in the gas of second hand smoke remains.

Dr Peter Terry, Chairman of BMA Scotland said: "Passive smoke kills. Businesses installing expensive ventilation systems will do so in the belief that they are protecting staff and the public from the ill-effects of second hand smoke. The sad truth is that they are mistaken.

"Although good ventilation can help reduce the irritability of smoke, it does not eliminate its poisonous components. Tobacco smoke contains 4,000 toxins and more than 50 cancer-causing substances. Many of these are odourless, invisible gasses, which are not removed by ventilation systems.

"Partial bans on smoking in enclosed public places would not protect people from the harmful health effects of exposure to passive smoke, and voluntary measures have failed.

"Smoke free enclosed public places are what Scotland wants and needs. Our only hope now is that our MSPs are not wavered by misleading claims fuelled by the tobacco industry. The only way to protect the significant majority of the population who do not smoke is to legislate for smoke free enclosed public places."

I don't buy it. Why does ventilation work for everything except ETS?
http://www.nycclash.com/Filtration.html

Bill Hannegan wrote:

I don't buy it. Why does ventilation work for everything except ETS?
http://www.nycclash.com/Filtration.html

The article that your fringe group (http://www.nycclash.com/Filtration.html ) is quoting came from: Restoration Environmental Contractors.(http://www.environmentalhazards.com/news/SARS... ).

This company is in the business of selling and installing ventilation systems; how unbiased do you think they are going to be? I am sure that they are going to say that their systems do not work, hardly!

Also, notice that nowhere on their website (that I could find) do they claim to get rid of ETS.

Send them a note asking why they do not mention ETS.

It dosent really matter anyway. If it doesnt pass now, it will pass later on. Eventually, there will be no smoking in almost all public places. It doesnt matter if you agree or not, it doesnt even matter if its fair, its going to happen. You may be able to pospone it, but you cant stop it.

Bill Hannegan wrote:

A bartender in a decently ventilated bar breathes only a fraction of a cigarette per hour.

Of course, only about 5% of bars are "decently" ventilated, so bartenders are still exposed to other peoples idiotic habit.

Hey, idiotic habit its a bit crass. Okay you despise smoking, but the bottom line, its all about choice.6523

Then the law should make bars get decently ventilated. ETS is not the only thing gotten rid of by ventilation. One doctor told me that breathing avian flu in a bar worried him more than the smoke.

These laws are made to ensure that undesirable adults are removed from the new 'Designer' society. Most smokers are decent people who do consider other people and would be delighted to see well ventilated bars and venues where adults can meet. Evidence from Ireland shows that the natural drop in smoking levels has stopped and smoking may even be on the rise. 600 pubs in mainly country areas have closed. After only 3 weeks Scottish smokers are having foster children taken from them and animal charities are even considering refusing to let animals go to smoking households.
A total ban in all public places is only the start.

Here is an instance of a pub going under:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/4...
For what?

Chris Brosk wrote:

These laws are made to ensure that undesirable adults are removed from the new 'Designer' society. Most smokers are decent people who do consider other people and would be delighted to see well ventilated bars and venues where adults can meet. Evidence from Ireland shows that the natural drop in smoking levels has stopped and smoking may even be on the rise. 600 pubs in mainly country areas have closed. After only 3 weeks Scottish smokers are having foster children taken from them and animal charities are even considering refusing to let animals go to smoking households.
A total ban in all public places is only the start.

They are not trying to remove undesirable adults, just the undesirable smoke. Smokers are welcome in any of these businesses, they just cant smoke inside. As far as businesses closing, newspaper articles from towns in this area show that when businesses here go non smoking, their customer count goes up. As far as foster children go, some agencies in this country already screen out smoking households. You stated that most smokers are decent people who consider others. I think that that is true also. Unfortunatly, its the small percent who are not considerate who will ruin it for the rest of you.

Businesses forced by law to be smoke-free often suffer and fail:
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/badforbiz.html

Make yourself heard!

A team of researchers around the UK is currently conducting the survey on views and opinions of smokers (including opinions on smoking ban). The findings will be communicated to policy-makers and hopefully will have an impact.

Your opinion matters.
To have a say go to:

http://psy.ex.ac.uk/smoking-survey

They are asking smokers for their views on smoking? Great. After that, we can ask some crack addicts about their views on cocain. Then, we can ask some pot heads about their views on legalizing marijuana. Great strategy guys. Gee, I wonder what their position will be ? lol

Sorry about the typos, I was busy laughing.

all smoking in all public places should be stopped. i work in a SMOKING OFFICE, and i hate going home smelling like someone else's ashtray. and as far as restaurants go, it's a no brainer. smoke when you get home. or at least outside. geesh.

Roxanne, that sucks! Did you know it was a smoking office when you took the job? The only reason I ask is, that if a potential employer was creating an environment that was detrimental to my health, I think I would have gone elsewhere. I am a smoker, and I pride myself on being considerate. I just want to go to a place that indulges this bad habit. But to create a blanket policy, well, I have a problem with that. We have bars that cater to a variety of folks...gays, republicans, Polish people. I digress, my point is should be up to the proprietor. If he wants to pander to the Marlboro crowd, then folks who hate tobacco, need not apply. I know this will annoy Andy from Amherst to no end, but its still about choice.

I would just like to say that as a fomer smoker and also as an young adult who enjoys the bar scene, I would find the ban to be both good and bad. At the bar where I most commonly hang out, I recently had a discussion with the owner who explained that if the ban did go through, that he would make no attempt to work with his smoking customers. I was appalled! I believe that smoking and drinking tend to go hand in hand ("I only smoke when I drink" is a common remark that I hear often) and also as a female, I think that it will possibly put his customers at risk since they would have to exit the bar and stand in public and have to leave their drink. Get a damn liquor license for a deck/patio outside, allow both your smokers and nonsmokers to be happy. I think that if owners work with all their employees and customers, that everyone could come out a little bit happier and a lot more healthier. But thats the problem, a lot of owners either can not afford or do not want to make changes that could possibly ensure the safety of all their customers. But then again, smokers are a dying breed, so why would anyone want to make them happy.

Concerned American wrote:

Roxanne, that sucks! Did you know it was a smoking office when you took the job? The only reason I ask is, that if a potential employer was creating an environment that was detrimental to my health, I think I would have gone elsewhere. I am a smoker, and I pride myself on being considerate. I just want to go to a place that indulges this bad habit. But to create a blanket policy, well, I have a problem with that. We have bars that cater to a variety of folks...gays, republicans, Polish people. I digress, my point is should be up to the proprietor. If he wants to pander to the Marlboro crowd, then folks who hate tobacco, need not apply. I know this will annoy Andy from Amherst to no end, but its still about choice.

Its not about choice. I know you desperatly want to make it sound like it is, so that you can toot the "loss of freedom" horn, but that wont work. Its about not poisoning the person next to you, and thats not your choice anymore, no matter how strong your drug addiction, and no matter how much it clouds your judgement.
Cocaine and morphine used to available at the local drug store. Driving with an open beer in your lap used to be legal. After a while, folks realized that these were not good ideas, and something was done about them. Guess whats next.