Post in Smoking Illegal?

Mar 28 21:22 UTC

On Mar 27 2008, <email obscured> wrote:

>On Mar 27 2008, Dean Sheldon wrote:
>
>
>> I find it most interesting that people think it is perfectly OK for the
>> government to stomp the rights of privately owned businesses by
>> outlawing smoking ( a perfectly legal activity) in bars and restaurants.

Dean,

If you need additional proof that secondhand smoke represents a public
health issue for St. Paul hospitality workers check out the findings of
this recently released U of MN study.

U of M study provides first scientific evidence that the Freedom to Breathe
Act is creating healthier workplaces for hospitality employees

Study found an 85 percent decrease in carcinogen levels in study
participants

MINNEAPOLIS, Minn., March 27, 2008  A new study released today by the
University of Minnesota Cancer Center and ClearWay MinnesotaSM found that
since the Freedom to Breathe Act went into effect on October 1, 2007,
hospitality workers have significantly reduced exposure to a
tobacco-specific cancer causing chemical.

The study measured workers exposure to cotinine (a measure of nicotine
exposure) and NNAL, a by-product of a potent lung cancer-causing toxin,
before and after the law took effect. The study included nonsmoking
employees of bars, restaurants and bowling alleys from throughout the
state. Each participant submitted urine samples taken before and after the
law was enacted, as well as a detailed questionnaire, to the University of
Minnesota research team for analysis. Major findings include an 83 percent
decrease in cotinine levels and an 85 percent decrease in NNAL levels
inside study participants bodies.

Dr. Dorothy Hatsukami, a nationally respected tobacco researcher, served as
the lead investigator for the study. The comprehensive smoking ban has had
a significant impact in reducing bodily exposure to a powerful lung cancer
cancer-causing agent and nicotine in our hospitality workers.

Protecting our workers (and patrons) from known cancer causing agents,
which has been demonstrated to be present in the urine of these workers
prior to the smoking ban, should continue to be a high priority, said Dr.
Hatsukami, Forster Family Professor in Cancer Prevention, University of
Minnesota Cancer Center.

The findings substantiate previous University of Minnesota Cancer Center
studies that have shown that nonsmoking restaurant workers and casino
patrons have significantly higher levels of cancer-causing toxins in their
bodies after working in or visiting establishments that allow smoking.
Other research has estimated that restaurant and bar employees who do not
smoke have about a 50 percent higher risk of contracting lung cancer than
the general population. This risk has been related in part to exposure to
secondhand smoke in their workplace.

We have known for a long time that secondhand smoke is dangerous to
nonsmokers. This study underscores the health risks faced by Minnesota
hospitality workers prior to the passage of the smoke-free law, said Dr.
Barbara Schillo, Director of Research for ClearWay Minnesota. These data
provide conclusive evidence that the Freedom to Breathe Act is working to
create healthier workplaces for all Minnesotans.

Methodology This study involved 24 nonsmoking bar, restaurant and bowling
alley employees who typically were not exposed to secondhand smoke except
in their workplaces. Subjects were asked to collect urine samples and
complete exposure questionnaires prior to the smoke-free law after working
a shift equal to or greater than six hours. The second urine sample and
questionnaires were collected four to six weeks after the smoke-free law
went into effect and after working a shift equal to or greater than six
hours. These urine samples were assessed for total NNAL and total cotinine.
To view the report, visit www.tturc.umn.edu or www.clearwaymn.org.

 more 