For me it comes down to the ventilation system in the bars themselves, and the effectiveness those systems might or might not have. Given the post I made yesterday about the new evidence out showing the effects of even a small amount of secondhand smoke on heart disease rates, a ventilation system would need to be hospital grade in the smoking rooms, and separate from the ventilation system of the nonsmoking rooms for this to truly reduce the risks associated with someone entering that establishment.
Can this even be done? Well an engineer at Honeywell doesn't think so. From an article in the Christian Science Monitor: "There have been big changes in the past several years, says Scott Roberts, North American sales and marketing manager for Honeywell Commercial Air Products in Niceville, Fla. ... Still, Mr. Roberts concedes that he can't make any health claims for the new systems. "Second-hand smoke is significantly reduced," he says, but adds, "Any amount is not good.'" The link:
http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durableRedirect.pl?/durable/2001/03/21/ fp2s2-csm.shtml
A physicist, James Repace, an expert on secondhand smoke, told Assembly members that purification technology will never be able to remove the contaminants generated by burning cigarettes....Repace, who has done field studies in bars on the effects of tobacco smoke, said concentrations of carcinogens can't be removed by ventilation and filtration technology....To cut contamination to safe levels, a bar would need a machine "comparable to a tornado" that produces 100,000 air changes per hour, Repace said. Repace worked for 30 years with the federal government as a research physicist for the Navy, Occupational Safety & Health Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Now retired, he consults with governments proposing smoking bans. The link:
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp? storyID=229005&category=STATE&newsdate=3/16/2004
The problem seems to be the stuff simply doesn't get out of the air fast enough not to be harmful. And it is the non smelly stuff that is part of the problem -- the actual smoke can be removed without eliminating some of the heavier particulate matter, which is left behind. Also, the particulate matter is easily transfered between rooms on people's clothes, and by the air currents created by their movement.
This same problem can be seen in water filters. Anyone can purchase a $29.00 filter at the local hardware store that reduces some of the taste issues associated with water from the tap, but does that mean the water is pure? Nope. Lead, arsenic, bacteria, and other nasty things slip right through the charcoal filter and are still in the glass. The taste is better, but the bad stuff is still there. To remove all of the bad stuff you have to spend the big bucks on a reverse osmosis filter, or a distiller.
Now, am I comparing Minneapolis tap water to secondhand smoke as a health hazard? No, I am just using a filtration example to show that even if we can not smell it or taste it, it might still be just as bad for us.
That is why I can't support the concept of separate smoking rooms. Doesn't work.
Andrew Reineman Linden Hills
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
