The Indiana General Assembly has the opportunity this week to pass legislation that would better safeguard the health of millions of Hoosiers. That legislation -- a workplace smoking ban that would include most restaurants in the state -- does need to be strengthened in conference committee after the Senate last week added several nonsensical exemptions to the proposed ban. Yet, even in its current form, the bill, if it becomes law, would be a significant improvement over the status quo.
The debate on the Senate floor last week revealed that some lawmakers still don't understand why secondhand smoke poses such a grave health hazard to Indiana workers. It also exposed the weakness of the arguments used to water down the bill.To help underscore why a comprehensive workplace smoking ban is necessary, The Star Editorial Board reviews the scientific research on secondhand smoke and dissects a few of the arguments against the measure.
So why all the fuss about secondhand smoke?
The medical community is strongly united around the fact that secondhand smoke is dangerous to your health. In 2006, the U.S. Surgeon General found "overwhelming scientific evidence" that thousands of Americans die every year from cancer and heart disease because they were exposed to secondhand smoke. The Environmental Protection Agency and the National Toxicology Program both classify secondhand smoke as a "known human carcinogen." Research also indicates that secondhand smoke triggers respiratory tract and lung infections and aggravates asthma symptoms, including in children.But is it really that dangerous just to work around people who are smoking?
There's compelling evidence that workplace smoking bans save lives. Research from the Mayo Clinic, released late last year, found that heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths were cut by half in the decade after Minnesota's Olmsted County adopted a smoking ban. The Institute of Medicine in 2009 released an analysis of 11 studies and found that all of them showed a decrease in the rate of heart attacks after smoking bans were implemented.
OK, so even if it's agreed that secondhand smoking is dangerous and workplace smoking bans save lives, isn't it still up to business owners to decide for themselves what to allow or not allow on their properties?Business owners certainly have the freedom and right to make many decisions about how to run their operations. But it's long been accepted that businesses can't knowingly permit conditions that harm the health of their workers. If there's clear evidence that secondhand smoke poses a significant health hazard -- and there is -- then the ability of businesses to make independent decisions is necessarily compromised, just as it is already in regard to other dangerous substances or conditions.
We keep giving up our freedoms. I just want to be left alone to enjoy a smoke when and where I want. What's wrong with that?
It's one thing to make a decision about your own health. But you don't have a right to hurt someone else's health, including the waiters, bartenders and chefs paid to serve you. Indiana is late to the game on this issue -- 22 states already have comprehensive workplace smoking bans that include restaurants and bars. Those states wrestled with many of the same questions that Indiana lawmakers are now considering. But ultimately they moved forward, and the research strongly indicates that it was the right call. Indiana should do the same this week.
