Why Separate Smoking Rooms Do Not Protect Us
Some people say that the market provides a solution to the problem of secondhand smoke.

According to the Indiana Restaurant Association, one solution is to have separate smoking and no smoking sections in a restaurant or bar. Allowing smoke in one part of the same air space, however, cannot stop the dangerous smoke from infiltrating the other parts of the building. Think of trying to swim in a pool where someone had urinated. Click Here.

A study was done in bars in Bloomington, Indianapolis and Fort Wayne to determine how clean the air was. The study measured air quality in the Bloomington bars both before and after Bloomington prohibited smoking in bars. The air quality in Bloomington before its ban was just as bad as the bars in Indianapolis. The air quality after the ban was below the EPA standard for outdoor air. In Fort Wayne, however, where its smoking restrictions still allow for separate smoking and non-smoking rooms (see Fort Wayne City Code, Section 95.63(A)(2)), the air quality was as bad as that found where smoking is freely allowed. For a copy of the study, Click Here.

For a summary of information showing ventilation as an inadequate protection from the dangers of secondhand smoke, Click Here.

The tobacco industry knows that ventilation is not an adequate solution to protect people from dangerous secondhand smoke. The Philip Morris web site (Accessed May 16, 2005, at http://www.pmoptions.com/en/policies_practices/public_place_smoking.asp) says

"While not shown to address the health effects of secondhand smoke, ventilation can help improve the air quality of an establishment by reducing the sight and smell of smoke and by controlling smoke drift."

In spite of that, the tobacco industry continues to perpetuate the myth. A study of the industry's own documents showed that tobacco paid many "experts" to suggest there was scientific evidence to show that secondhand smoke could be eliminated by sophisticated ventilation systems. One such "expert," a Virginia Polytechnic Institute professor, was paid $1 million. For a copy of the study, Click Here.

The Tobacco Industry's Fraud
The Tobacco Industry's Efforts to Stop Local Laws to Protect Health

For many years, the tobacco industry advertised its products by suggesting smoking was good for health. The tobacco industry denied that cigarettes were addictive. In fact, seven tobacco company CEOs testified before Congress, under oath, on April 14, 1994, that nicotine is not addictive. Click Here for a video clip. We later learned, in part from Jeffrey Wigand, a former tobacco company scientist, that the tobacco companies added ammonia to cigarettes with the specific purpose of making tobacco more addictive. Jeffrey Wigand's story was portrayed in the 1999 movie, "The Insider," starring Russell Crowe.

In 1998, the major tobacco companies entered into a settlement agreement with the Attorneys General from 46 states, including Indiana. In that agreement, the tobacco companies agreed to stop their lobbying efforts to prevent laws that restricted advertising and sales to youth. To see the Master Settlement Agreement, Click Here. That agreement, however, did nothing to prevent the tobacco companies from lobbying against local restrictions on secondhand smoke, such as Proposal 45, 2005. To see the types of lobbying the tobacco companies agreed to forego, go to the Master Settlement Agreement, and move to Exhibit F at page 203 of the .pdf document.

In order to stop local governments from passing laws to restrict where smoking is allowed, the tobacco industry has a specific game plan to deceive the public. Their plan includes arguing that smoking is a right, and local laws interfere with that right, arguing that the hospitality industry will lose business, hiring surrogates to do their dirty work for them, denying secondhand smoke is dangerous, and making false claims that secondhand smoke can be eliminated by confining it to separate rooms or with filters and ventilation systems. For a complete list of tobacco's dirty tricks, compiled by the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation, Click Here. See if you can identify which have already been used to oppose Proposal 45, 2005.

The tobacco industry has been working actively since 1995 in a well-organized effort to recruit local hospitality industry allies to speak out against local laws to restrict secondhand smoke. In June of 1995, a tobacco planner laid out the details by which Phillip Morris would recruit members of the hospitality industry to oppose local laws. The planner said:

"Our goal is to see some form of preemption/accommodation legislation passed in all 50 states by the end of next year. The achievement of universal preemption/accommodation is imperative?. The immediate implications for our business are clear: if our consumers have fewer opportunities to enjoy our products, they will use them less frequently and the result will be an adverse impact on our bottom line."

The complete report and presentation can be found at http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ehf36e00.