# Should smoking be banned in public restaurants? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 19, 2002, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912 "2002-12-19T22:15:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![More\_Cowbell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@More\_Cowbell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/More_Cowbell)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/81 "2002-12-21T04:23:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElJeffe \* > \*\*So you’re saying that the CRS and WHO are… what exactly? Run by Big Tobacco? Biased towards Big Tobacco? If you are, then you need to take off the tinfoil hat and take a big whiff of reality. If not, then I don’t quite make the connection. And by the way, smoking isn’t _my_ habit. As I made clear before, I hate the damned things. I just don’t let my hate of cigarettes blind me to things like logic and sloppy, biased research. > Jeff \*\* Well, WHO sponsor [World No Tobacco Day](http://www5.who.int/tobacco/page.cfm?sid=75) in which they state **"Second-hand smoke is a real and significant threat to public health. Supported by two decades of evidence, the scientific community now agrees that there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke."** I find nothing about the CRS and the debunking of any current studies on SHS. Have any cites? I was not the one who claimed that government agencies were biased. Hmmm… I wonder who said they were? > [@](#): > > Unless you can invalidate my link that showed how screwed-up the EPA’s study was, I refuse to take their word on anything pertaining to SHS seriously. They are a blatantly partisan and sloppy group that will do anything to prove their version of the truth. > [@](#): > > The EPA has ignored this, because it is inconvenient in light of their pre-established agenda. I wear the tinfoil hat because to make a fashion statement, but you can borrow it so the evil EPA doesn’t get you. Lets review, shall we. Enviornmental Protection Agency: "Secondhand smoke has been classified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of lung cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen). " World Health Organization: “the scientific community now agrees that there is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke.” Center for Disease Control: has the Office of Smoking and Health which, among it’s other objectives, is [protecting nonsmokers from environmental tobacco smoke (ETS)](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/mission.htm) And yet you continue to say that SHS is not harmful. And I’m the one who needs a whiff of reality. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/82 "2002-12-21T04:31:30Z")
Why is it so hard to avoid restaurants where you know people will be smoking? How can a smoking restaurant be an unsafe work environment if the employees are smokers as well? Why not just pass a law that smoking restaurants can only hire smokers? ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/83 "2002-12-21T05:19:54Z")
I’m glad people have the confidence to speak out about smoking issues so they can form groups that will only patronize non-smoking establishements… like congress, for example. ---
**Author:** ![TeaElle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8491ac/32.png) [@TeaElle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TeaElle)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/84 "2002-12-21T05:41:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > **Why is it so hard to avoid restaurants where you know people will be smoking?** Does Spokane have a no-smoking in restaurants law? If not, can you name five restaurants in the city of Spokane which do not allow smoking? When we lived in Pittsburgh, there were _no_ restaurants we could go to for a low to mid-priced meal without being exposed to smoke – certainly none of the national or regional chain restaurants were smoke free, nor any of the well-known local establishments recommended to us as newcomers to the city. Pittsburgh has a strong public smoking law, but it only kicks in when a restaurant holds fewer than X number of patrons, either 25 or 50. That meant that you couldn’t be assured of a smoke free environment unless you went to a very small bistro which wasn’t the kind of place where one would drop in for a casual meal. I can’t think of one place we could’ve gone. Not one, let aone five. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > \*\*How can a smoking restaurant be an unsafe work environment if the employees are smokers as well? Why not just pass a law that smoking restaurants can only hire smokers? \*\* That would be ridiculous. It couldn’t possibly be permissible to put that nature of restriction on hiring when it would have no bearing on one’s ability to do the job. Moreover, smoke is unsafe whether it is being inhaled by a smoker or non-smoker – you could even argue that smoke is more dangerous to smokers because it exacerbates the damage that they are aleady doing to themselves. There is also the question of scale – you may not become sick from spending several hours painting your house without a mask. You may become ill from the same amount of time in a paint factory without safety equipment. Likewise, as a smoker, you may only smoke one cigarette every hour or if you work somewhere that you can only smoke on breaks, one every few hours. That’s vastly different from being constantly exposed to the smoke of several cigarettes at once for the majority of a working day. ---
**Author:** ![Urban\_Ranger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Urban\_Ranger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urban_Ranger)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 1:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/85 "2002-12-21T13:30:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Susanann \* > Cars kill over 40,000 americans each year, without question. > > 4,739 pedestrians, some of them who were even toal non-drivers(i.e. very similar to second hand smoke deaths) are killed. [http://www.iihs.org/safety\_facts/fatality\_facts/peds.htm](http://www.iihs.org/safety_facts/fatality_facts/peds.htm) > > Why should people who are not in cars, who dont want cars, who choose to be a non-car person, or who are not allowed to drive, or any child, be killed by those who drive cars? > > No car should ever be allowed to be operated within 1000 feet of a pedistrian or any sidewalk, or within 1000 feet of any school, or government building, any business, or any public place where people are not in cars . > > If this saves just one childs life, why not outlaw cars to operated nearby anyone not in a car. > > Any problems with that? No, except cigarette smoking kills 10 times that much a year: > [@](#): > > Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. From [the CDC](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm) Now this red herring about cars that **always** can be buried. ---
**Author:** ![Urban\_Ranger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Urban\_Ranger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urban_Ranger)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/86 "2002-12-21T13:31:59Z")
Um, insert “brought up by smokers in these threads” after “always” ---
**Author:** ![Susanann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@Susanann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susanann)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/87 "2002-12-21T13:55:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Urban Ranger \* > \*\*No, except cigarette smoking kills 10 times that much a year: > > From [the CDC](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm) > > ## quote: > > ## Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. > > Now this red herring about cars that **always** can be buried. \*\* No. NOt true. Most of the people who the CDC says die from smoking are in their 70’s, or 80’s. Just what do you expect? Those who die in their 70’s, if they say they smoked in their life, it is included in the CDC figures, very unscientific. For the truth , go to: Smoking Does Not Cause Lung Cancer (According to WHO/CDC Data) [http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Editorial%201-4.html](http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Editorial%201-4.html) Smoking Does Not Cause Lung Cancer (According to WHO/CDC Data) By: James P. Siepmann, MD "Yes, it is true, smoking does not cause lung cancer. It is only one of many risk factors for lung cancer. I initially was going to write an article on how the professional literature and publications misuse the language by saying "smoking causes lung cancer"1,2, but the more that I looked into how biased the literature, professional organizations, and the media are, I modified this article to one on trying to put the relationship between smoking and cancer into perspective. (No, I did not get paid off by the tobacco companies, or anything else like that.) When the tobacco executives testified to Congress that they did not believe that smoking caused cancer, there answers were probably truthful and I agree with that statement. Now if they were asked if smoking increases the risk of getting lung cancer, then the answer based upon current evidence should be “yes.” But even so, the risk of a smoker getting lung cancer is much less than anyone would suspect. Based upon what the media and anti-tobacco organizations say, one would think that if you smoke, you get lung cancer (a 100% correlation) or at least expect a 50+% occurrence before someone used the word “cause.” Would you believe that the real number is \< 10% (see Appendix A)? Yes, a US white male (USWM) cigarette smoker has an 8% lifetime chance of dying from lung cancer but the USWM nonsmoker also has a 1% chance of dying from lung cancer (see Appendix A). In fact, the data used is biased in the way they are collected and the actual risk for a smoker is probably less." For the entire article, go to: [http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Editorial%201-4.html](http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Editorial%201-4.html) ---
**Author:** ![Susanann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7ab992/32.png) [@Susanann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susanann)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/88 "2002-12-21T14:05:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Urban Ranger \* > \*\*No, except cigarette smoking kills 10 times that much a year: > > ## From [the CDC](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm)quote: > > Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. > > Now this red herring about cars that **always** can be buried. \*\* Here are the correct statistics in graph form which show the untruths about the dangers of cigarette smoking from CDC and WHO: [http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/graph.gif](http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/graph.gif) ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/89 "2002-12-21T16:05:19Z")
Take a look at the references which your own cite gives. > [@](#): > > Tobacco smoking and chewing are almost certainly the major preventable causes of cancer today. > … > Cigarette smoking remains the primary cause of preventable death and morbidity in the United States. > … > Tobacco smoking is the most important cause of lung cancer and accounts for about 80-90% of all cases of lung cancer among men and about 50-80% among women. > … > We have demonstrated that smoking is a major cause of death in China… > … > The complexity of tobacco smoke leads to some confusion about the mechanisms by which it causes lung cancer. > … > Tobacco smoking is the most important cause of lung cancer and accounts for about 80-90% of all cases of lung cancer among men and about 50-80% among women. These are somehow the references he uses to prove that smoking **doesn’t** cause cancer? Gimme a break. ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/90 "2002-12-21T16:06:58Z")
Oh, also? The man who wrote that article owns the whole domain. It is **not** a recognized academic journal. ---
**Author:** ![Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Helen\_s\_Eidolon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Helen_s_Eidolon)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/91 "2002-12-21T16:18:12Z")
Sorry for posting in a row. According to statscan (the website run by Statistics Canada) and according to [this](http://129.33.170.32/ccs/internet/standard/0,2283,3172_14459__langId-en,00.html) website (the Canadian Cancer Society) the statistics on your website, where he states: > [@](#): > > lung cancer accounts for only 2% of the annual deaths worldwide and only 3% in the US. are wrong. The Canadian statistics are at 4.5% for women, and 8.1% for men. Unless the United States is miraculously a whole bunch healthier than that… ---
**Author:** ![More\_Cowbell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@More\_Cowbell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/More_Cowbell)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/92 "2002-12-21T19:49:56Z")
**Susanann** , thanks for the laugh. It was a joke, right? You honestly believe smoking doesn’t kill people and that the CDC and WHO support this assumption? The CDC’s _Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report_ for April 2002 says differently, just a couple among a list of many. [ul][li]Cigarette smoking continues to be a leading cause of death in the Unites States, and imposes substantial measurable costs to society. From 1995–1999, smoking killed over 440,000 people in the United States each year.[/li][li]Estimates show that smoking caused over $150 billion in annual health-related economic losses from 1995 to 1999 including $81.9 billion in mortality-related productivity losses (average for 1995–1999) and $75.5 billion in excess medical expenditures in 1998.[/li][li]Among adults, the study estimates that most deaths were from lung cancer (124,813), ischemic heart disease (81,976) and chronic airway obstruction (64,735).[/li][li]Excluding adult deaths from exposure to secondhand smoke, adult males and females lost an average of 13.2 and 14.5 years of life respectively, because they smoked.[/li][/ul] That is from the [CDC itself](http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/economics/mmwr5114.highlights.htm). ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2002, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/93 "2002-12-21T23:49:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tlw \* > **Does Spokane have a no-smoking in restaurants law? If not, can you name five restaurants in the city of Spokane which do not allow smoking?** Every restaurant has a colored sticker on the front door: red if smoking is allowed everywhere, yellow if there are separate smoking/nonsmoking sections, and green if the whole restaurant is nonsmoking. (I assume this is the result of a law.) Every restaurant I visit is either yellow or green. I can’t name five nonsmoking restaurants off the top of my head, but I doubt I could name more than ten restaurants anyway. I could come up with a list in ten minutes with a phone book if you really want one. > [@](#): > > **That would be ridiculous. It couldn’t possibly be permissible to put that nature of restriction on hiring when it would have no bearing on one’s ability to do the job. Moreover, smoke is unsafe whether it is being inhaled by a smoker or non-smoker – you could even argue that smoke is more dangerous to smokers because it exacerbates the damage that they are aleady doing to themselves.** You could argue that, but it would be ridiculous and beside the point. If someone is smoking 20 cigarettes a day, he already knows the health effects of tobacco. Why does the state need to protect him from making an informed choice to work in a place where people smoke? ---
**Author:** ![Urban\_Ranger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Urban\_Ranger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urban_Ranger)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2002, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/94 "2002-12-23T12:23:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Susanann \* > Here are the correct statistics in graph form which show the untruths about the dangers of cigarette smoking from CDC and WHO: > > [http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/graph.gif](http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/graph.gif) On what basis do you conclude that the statistics you linked to are correct while CDC and WHO are lying? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2002, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/95 "2002-12-23T15:30:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr2001 \* > **Why is it so hard to avoid restaurants where you know people will be smoking?** Maybe your place of residence differs from mine, but before they started passing anti-smoking laws, I don’t remember there being such a thing as a non-smoking restaurant. Some places had non-smoking sections, where it took as much as four or five minutes for the smoke to drift over. ALL restaurants were full of smoke. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2002, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/96 "2002-12-23T15:37:11Z")
One of my Christmas projects is to get fines in place for a new non-smoking bylaw for a courageous little town way up north of here. If we are successful, the other towns in the region will probably follow. I’m really happy to be doing something that will save lives, particularly since smoking killed both my parents just as they were looking forward to retirement. Here is an interesting link to the [Ontario Campaign for Action on Tobacco (OCAT)"](http://www.ocat.org/), which was founded by: Ontario Medical Association Canadian Cancer Society (Ontario division) Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario Ontario Lung Association Non-Smokers’ Rights Association and supported by: Alcohol and Drug Concerns Inc. Association of Local Public Health Agencies Cancer Care Ontario Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies Ontario College of Family Physicians Ontario Federation of Home and School Associations Ontario Association of Naturopathic Doctors Ontario Physical and Health Education Association Ontario Public Health Association Ontario Tobacco Free Network Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada Registered Nurses Association of Ontario There is a lot of good information to be had there, particularly with regard to making laws that actually hold up in (Canadian) courts. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2002, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/97 "2002-12-23T15:42:38Z")
Concerning the above OCAT page, if you get 404ed when clicking on the side-bar links, just scroll down to the bottom of the main page and use the links there. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2002, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/98 "2002-12-23T19:35:32Z")
It’s a little bit interesting to me that not one person so far has mentioned the fact that not allowing smoking in restaurants causes smokers to not smoke for about one hour. One measly hour. Good lord, people, how addicted are you that you think there needs to be this much fuss about taking one hour away from your addiction? (Yes, yes, I know, it’s all about the rights - lose the right to smoke 24 hours a day, everywhere you please, and next thing you know storm troopers will be breaking down your doors demanding your firstborn.) ---
**Author:** ![Ms2001](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ms2001/32/18463_2.png) [@Ms2001](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ms2001)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/99 "2002-12-24T02:19:50Z")
**featherlou** : Sure, smokers can wait until they leave the restaurant. And no one _really_ needs to wear green shirts in a restaurant either. It’s simple to just put another shirt on over it for an hour or two. Does that mean it’s a good idea to pass a law that no restaurant owner can allow his patrons to wear green shirts? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [December 24, 2002, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912/100 "2002-12-24T02:24:54Z")
Mr2001: That is an invalid analogy as the presence or lack thereof someone else’s green shirt does not affect another person’s health. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-smoking-be-banned-in-public-restaurants/143912.md?page=6)