Make Dining Smoke-Free

LONDON—On Monday, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg continued his support for non-smoker’s rights by proposing legislation that would ban smoking in all restaurants and bars across the city. If successful, this legislation would safeguard the rights o f hospitality workers and improve the physical health of New Yorkers without imposing significant economic burdens on the restaurant industry as a whole.

Secondhand smoke is a killer. It contains over 4,000 substances, of which more than 42 are known t o cause cancer. Earlier this year, the International Association for Research on Cancer (IARC) released a study which concluded that passive smoking is a direct cause of lung cancer in non-smokers. Results showed that exposure to secondhand smoke at the w orkplace increased the risk of developing lung cancer by 16 to 19 percent. Lung tumors that developed as a result of being exposed to secondhand smoke resembled those that developed as a result of active smoking, reinforcing the link between passive smo ki ng and increased cancer risks. The study also found a link between passive smoking and cancer in the nasopharynx, nasal cavity, paranasal sinuses, cervix, gastrointestinal tract and breast.

This danger is not just a hypothetical problem. Studies by t he National Cancer Institute in conjunction with the California Environmental Protection Agency have found that between 40,000 and 58,000 Americans die every year as a direct consequence of secondhand smoke, over twice as many as die from AIDS. While it i s clear that many of these deaths are caused by exposure to smoke at home, it would be foolish to underestimate the number of deaths precipitated by exposure to smoke in the workplace.

It is due to a growing awareness of these risks, and not just becau se of the unpleasantness of cigarette smoke, that there has been a slew of legislation in the past few years banning smoking from the workplace. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has classified secondhand smoke as a “potential occupational carcinogen” and has recommended that employers minimize occupational exposure in “all non-industrial work environments” by using “all available preventive measures.” While much attention and legislation has been targeted at employees in corporate offices and retail shops, workers in restaurants and bars have been woefully ignored.

In New York City, for instance, smoking is permitted at over 13,000 restaurants and bars. Under legislation passed in 1995, smoking is permitted in restaurants with under 35 seats, as well as all stand-alone bars and the bar areas of all restaurants. In addition, smoking is permitted on all terraces and outdoor dining areas. The proposed legislation would close these loopholes and allow all New York City restaurant and bar em ployees to work in a completely smoke-free environment.

Not only would smoke-free restaurants benefit employees, they would also benefit society as a whole. A 1997 study in the journal Tobacco Control predicted that if all workplaces in the United States became smoke-free, 178,000 s mokers would quit and, among those who continued to smoke, they would consume 10 billion fewer cigarettes a year.

Bloomberg’s proposal, however, has still been met by intense criticism from both restaurant associations as well as Big Tobacco. They argue that smoking bans lead to significant loss of restaurant revenues, causing bankruptcies and layoffs that would eventually be detrimental to restaurant employees. They argue that properly ventilated designated smoking areas in restaurants do not pose an increased health risk to restaurant employees.

Restaurant associations often quote a survey result that showed a 30 percent decrease in restaurant revenue after the implementation of a total smoking ban in Beverly Hills, California. This survey, howeve r, was commissioned by a public relations company working for Phillip Morris and was based on a survey that was not scientifically rigorous. Studies of the actual sales tax data showed that the smoking ban in Beverley Hills had no effect on restaurant sal es. A recent analysis in the Journal of Public Health Management and Practice found that, using the sales tax data from 81 localities, laws restricting smoking in restaurants had no effect on revenues.

What is even more shocking than tobacco companies concocting data, is that the restaurant associations that oppose smoking restrictions are often in the pay of Big Tobacco itself. A study conducted by University of California at San Francisco found that eight national and over 60 regional restaurant asso ciations had close links to Big Tobacco, including the New York Tavern and Restaurant Association, which received funding from the tobacco industry throughout the 1990s. Many of these associations advocated an “accommodation” policy, where restaurants would designate separate smoking and non-smoking areas. This type of partial regulation does not go far enough to give restaurant employees a smoke-free environment. Research conducted by the School of Public Health at the University of California Berkeley, found that even in restaurants where customers may only smoke in designated areas, staff exposure to secondhand smoke was still up to half that of staff in restaurants with no smoking restrictions at all. This study included participants who worked in res taurants with separate ventilation systems for smoking and non-smoking areas.

It is vitally important that New York legislature does not heed the criticism from Big Tobacco and its lackeys. Enacting these smoke-free laws in New York will likely lead the way for similar legislation to be enacted across the country. Smoke-free restaurants and bars would allow tens of thousands more New Yorkers to work in a smoke-free environment, with negligible economic consequences. The only lost profits will be those of Big Tobacco.

Nicholas F. Josefowitz ’05, a Crimson editor, is a history concentrator in Mather House. He has been hanging around outside office buildings in central London asking the nicotine-addicted corporate types to pick up their buts and not to use the world as an ashtray.”