The second-hand smoke debate continues

The Observer (Sarnia)
Wed 07 Jan 2004

Sir: Re: Letter to the editor from Don. R. Stephenson ("Health impact of second-hand smoke debated," The Observer, Dec. 18, 2003)

In case any of your readers are confused by the recent challenge to the medical evidence about second-hand smoke's dangers they should not be.

Gio Gori, the researcher mentioned in the above letter, is one of the American tobacco industry's most prominent consultants. Without knowing this, readers might be tempted by the apparently impressive array of "facts" mentioned in the letter.

Much more credible and relevant are several studies reported recently. In the first, researchers with the International Agency for Research on Cancer in Europe have found that exposure to second-hand smoke from spousal, workplace and social sources raises a person's risk of lung cancer by 22 per cent in people who have never smoked, and up to 32 per cent in those with the longest exposure. Researchers from Minnesota have published data showing that as little as four hours in a casino setting can produce high levels of two potent carcinogens in the blood of those exposed. Finally, the California Environmental Protection Agency has published research concluding that exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke can cause breast cancer.

These studies add to a mass of research by experts around the world, all of which point in the same direction: second-hand smoke is a proven cause of lung cancer, heart disease and other respiratory illness.

It is unfortunate that Lambton County has chosen not to proceed with a smoke-free bylaw, following the provincial government's announcement that it will legislate in this area by 2006. Council would do Lambton County citizens a great service by acting sooner rather than later to eliminate this entirely preventable health hazard from public place and workplace settings in the county.

Michael Perley
Director
Ontario Campaign for Action on Tobacco