Board of Commissioners Need to Balance Public Health Against Issues of Privacy and the Economy in  Anti Smoking Debate

 

by Robert E. Martin

"Your body belongs to the nation! Your body belongs to the Fuhrer! You have the duty to be healthy! Food is not a private matter!"

                                -       German National Socialist Slogans

I realize this is the edition where I'm supposed to recap the 'Year in Politics'; but insofar as the proposed 'Anti-Smoking Ban' will be taken up for consideration by the Saginaw County Board of Commissioners in January, coupled with the word that Midland is considering a similar ordinance, it becomes necessary to address not only the misconceptions about the alleged health hazards of second-hand smoke, but the more serious issue of how public health activism is forcing us to surrender individualism & freedom in favor of governmental paternalism and statistical fraud in exchange for the vague perception of 'better' health.
 

As reported in our November edition, the genesis for this broadly sweeping legislation was predicated upon a so-called 'scientific study' conducted by the Saginaw County Public Health Department that solicited opinions from only 464 'randomly selected' residents during a phone survey conducted for 5 days in the month of May. In short, each sampled voice spoke for 450 people not contacted for an opinion.

 

It is important to challenge not only this study itself, which is obviously flawed and under sampled; but also the methodology used. Who funded and audited this study and was it audited by an accredited third party? Indeed, Public Health Director Natasha Coulouris should openly answer these questions before any action is taken, as at a glance it is apparent there is no basis for claiming this proposal has the informed consent of the people.

 

SKEWERED FIGURES AND BAD SCIENCE

 

Anti-smokers have long tried to restrict smoking on grounds it is bad for one's health, but this sort of paternalism is neither effective nor wise when it comes to setting laws of public policy.
 

The theory that ETS (environmental tobacco smoke) is bad for the health of others comprises the principal ammunition used to advance smoking bans, and it centers on three central claims.

 

1)The EPA says secondhand smoke causes 3,000 cancer fatalities each year in Americans. 2) The American Heart Association says it causes 50,000 fatal heart attacks. 3) An unspecified number of Americans are dying from respiratory illnesses attributable to secondhand smoke.

 

But if you use the statistics from actual smokers and compare them to studies on secondhand smoke, you find it takes 20 years or more for damage to manifest itself in a smoker, whereas ETS is hundreds of times more dilute than mainstream smoke. Consequently, non-smokers would have to live with ETS for upwards of 2,000 years to incur the same damage.
 

More telling than this, however, is the fact that smoke from charcoal contains many of the same components as those most feared in tobacco smoke (carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, carcinogens, and so forth) yet a 10 lb. Bag of charcoal produces as much smoke and harmful chemicals as 160 packs of cigarettes. Does this mean Public Health will seek to pass laws banning outdoor barbecues on the same grounds as they advance for smoking bans?
 

The reason science enjoys such credibility is that it should be structured to encourage a wide scrutiny of methods, data, and findings, peer review, and a healthy debate from all viewpoints. In the end, faulty data and fanciful theories are laid to rest, with truth emerging as the winner.
 

Scientists like everyone else are subject to personal bias. They can set out to prove a theory, ignore data, which contradicts a favored hypothesis, and read into data facts, which simply aren't there.
 

With this debate, however, it is nearly impossible to find anyone both disinterested enough and of sufficient standing to be heard - it's a war of credibility over conflicting interpretations of biased reports - in short, it's politics.

 

I mention this because of the 30 studies on Spousal smoking referred to in the leading EPA report, only six found any significant association between secondhand smoke and cancer in non-smokers married to smokers. Moreover, the studies used by the EPA were limited to 11 studies done in the United States.
 

One of the largest and most recent studies - The Brownson Study - was partially funded by the National Cancer Institute. The results showed those exposed to secondhand smoke for less than 40 years actually experienced fewer cancers than the control group. This study was available to the EPA but not used in its report. Why? Because leading anti-smokers pervade both the EPA and the Science Advisory Board.
 

Again, it's all about politics.

 

Balance Competing Interests

 

By closing the ban to tavern owners & restaurants, and should this ordinance be passed, the County is setting itself up for discriminatory lawsuits predicated on established constitutional grounds of equal protection.
 

While higher courts in recent years have unfortunately held that smoking is not a protected individual right guaranteed under the Constitution, from Austin, Texas down through the alphabet, communities throughout the U.S. that have adopted anti-smoking bans all start the same way. First, they ban it in public buildings, then they move to private office and retail buildings, and finally they successfully press the issue of exemptions to bars, restaurants & taverns.
 

The 2002 County Business Patterns Reports (from the 2002 US Census) lists the Bay, Saginaw, Midland metro areas as the number one of the Top 10 employer industries as "food service and drinking places", with over 16,000 employees. (The second largest is Educational Services at a little over 12,000).
 

That, ladies & gentlemen, is a lot of dollars and something I would argue of very special interest to Saginaw County, especially in the face of Delphi cuts.
 

Communities that have successfully banned smoking in bars & restaurants have resulted in those businesses dropping revenue by as much as 20 percent!  Indeed, one village in Ireland that banned smoking last year is now looking at bringing it back for this very reason, and the proprietors of the Red Eye Coffee Shop in Old Town Saginaw, which recently banned smoking, has also reported a significant drop in revenue.
 

If nothing else, The Board of Commissioners should consider these figures when determining the baseline of the Public Health Department's study and the need for accurate information for quantifiable comparison.
 

On the flip side, smokers' contributions to the State Economy are more than twice as large as combined FY2001 revenues from the alcohol beverage, malt, and wine tax.
 

In 1991, Willard G. Manning published a landmark study on the costs to society of alcohol & tobacco. Manning was no friend of tobacco and assumed smoking caused premature death, extra sick leave, and fires; nevertheless, when he completed his study it became clear smokers pay more to society than they take from society.
 

28 communities where local government passed tobacco control ordinances have been challenged in courts between 1987 and 2003. Of those ordinances 14 were upheld, nine overturned, and four amended or rescinded to avoid potential lawsuits. Of those four amended, two were only slightly altered by adding the reasonable approach of allowing smoking in private workplaces with designated smoking areas.
 

One of the most recent cases that Saginaw County needs to consider stems out of Rhode Island. The ACLU challenged a smoking ban in one community on the grounds that government power has limits.
 

If I have a private workspace that excludes the public and is marked as a smoking area, it enjoys the same status of exemption from the statute as bars & restaurants receive.
 

The Rhode Island exemption allows smoking in 'A private, enclosed office, if all persons present consent, and further provided that this exception shall not be construed to permit smoking in the reception areas of lobbies or offices unless designated as smoking areas.'
 

This language needs to be included in any ordinance that Saginaw County plans to consider; but the more important question is whether it should be enacted at all.

 

Thus far the Commission is purportedly split 8-7 in favor of this measure, so I implore all of you that care about your constitutional rights and the future of our local economy to speak out against this dangerous legislation.
 

Politics is all about the 'art of compromise', and the current language of this legislation reflects nothing remotely resembling it.
 

The author William Burroughs once wrote that 80 percent of the world's problems could be solved if people would simply mind their own business, but make no mistake - this legislation goes too far.
 

And the people of Saginaw County deserve answers to each of the questions raised before any final vote is taken.