Digest #18: This Month in Smoke-free News [Part 2]

E-Cigs on a Plane!
Just when e-cigarettes seemed like a healthier, more cost-effective alternative to cigarettes, e-smokers are facing some resistance with smoking on airplanes. Although e-cigarettes don't emit secondhand smoke, they do emit water vapor that, coming from the end of a cigarette-shaped device, sure appears like smoke. I must admit that it is a bit unfortunate that the innovative product can still send the wrong message.

"If you’re on a plane and someone does that, if someone in the back sees it they might not know and they might light up a regular one...I think what [the U.S. Department of Transportation is] doing there is trying to stop a problem before it becomes a problem." --Jim Freibeger, owner of Lite Up ‘n’ Live E-Cigarettes

Perhaps once the e-cigarette evolves into what the mainstream cigarette is today, it will become more acceptable. That's the worst-case scenario, anyway.

Smoking on the Big Screen
After what I thought was a clever title to the last topic, I suppose that it makes sense to introduce an issue I have hardly touched upon: cigarette use in movies. Believe it or not, the film that most recently brought this to the public's attention was rated PG. The culprit? Rango. The good news is that (and I haven't seen the movie yet) Rango, Johnny Depp's character, allegedly does not light up once. Phew! Apparently, it's the antagonist, or bad guy, who smokes in the film. Although the organization Smoke Free Movies suggests that bad guys may have more influence than good guys on children, I find that a little hard to believe. As long as the smoking bad guy is portrayed as foolish and/or evil throughout the script, I don't think I can totally support Smoke Free Movies on this one. Nevertheless, here's a shout-out to California Youth Advocacy Network (CYAN) for their great work in keeping the "good guys" from smoking on camera.

March Madness
The Big Ten basketball tournament saw a little more 'madness' in Indianapolis bars than originally anticipated this month when fans from the smoke-free states of Michigan and Ohio came to town. A minor planning mistake caused the only three participating bars where smoking is allowed to host fans from the smoke-free states. They'll know better next year! That is, unless Indiana goes smoke-free before then...Meanwhile, the Las Vegas Hilton just opened a very nice, smoke-free 'cave' in time for this year's NCAA men's basketball tournament

Speaking of Las Vegas, researchers from Stanford and Tufts measured air quality inside 66 casinos (most of which are actually outside of Las Vegas). Using a team of researchers who brought concealed air monitors into the casinos, they discovered the following:

• The only effective way to reduce secondhand smoke inside is to limit the number of smokers; ventilation and air cleaning do not work.
  
• "Less than 2 hours of exposure to secondhand smoke in half of the casinos surveyed is enough to impair the heart's ability to pump blood, placing susceptible casino patrons and workers at acute risk of heart disease."
• The air inside the three smoke-free casinos (only 12% of commercial casinos are smoke-free) surveyed was just as good as that of the outdoors.

On that note, I'd like to add that I was in Las Vegas a couple of weeks ago to participate in the Scale the Strat Fight For Air Climb, hosted by the American Lung Association in Nevada. It was a phenomenal event, and even though the Stratosphere did a great job facilitating the event, I thought it was a bit ironic that smoking was still permitted inside the casino and tower that weekend. Oh well, at least I got a killer room rate.

New Policy/Law Developments
The state of Nevada is contemplating a bill that would make all public college campuses smoke-free, including the University of Nevada-Las Vegas and the University of Nevada-Reno. Assemblyman Paul Aizley, who introduced the bill, has a simple premise: "Students at one of our campuses should be able to walk in between campuses, go outside to the student union, go to the health club and not have to inhale secondhand smoke." He's got my vote! California Assemblyman Marty Block recently submitted a similar bill for consideration. I will be following this closely, so hopefully there will be more news by next month.

A Republican legislator from Denton has proposed a smoke-free Texas, which would entail a smoking ban in workplaces and most public places.

"Although she believes in limited government, Crownover said it is unacceptable that 53,000 people die each year in the U.S. from secondhand smoke. 'I think this is the most important public health issue before the Legislature at this time." --The Texas Tribune

If nothing else, it's refreshing to hear that secondhand smoke is an issue that both liberals and conservatives can agree on. The bill has already passed a Senate committee, so it could go into effect as soon as September 1.

Last month, I briefly shared a news story about some teenagers in Texas who were trying to get their city to pass a smoking ordinance. Coincidence or not, three more instances of the younger generation taking action against the smoking culture have popped up in my Google Alerts over the past month:

• Over 500 middle school students in Alabama sent postcards to their state legislature, asking for a smoke-free Alabama.
• High school students in Gurnee, Illinois collected a large tube-full of cigarette butts at a local park as part of 'Kick Butts Day.' They plan to show what they found and share survey results about nearby residents' opinions about at an upcoming park district board meeting.
  
• A group of junior high school students in Minnetonka, Minnesota successfully persuaded their city council to prohibit smoking within 50 feet of city parks, beaches, hard courts, and ice rinks.

Digest #18: This Month in Smoke-free News [Part 1]

As we quickly approach the one-year anniversary of Smoke-free Digest, let me just say that every time I sit down to go through my weekly Google Alerts for "smoke-free" and "smoking ban," I still feel that I have so much to write about. One would think that I'd run out of content, or that it would at least get repetitive, but the fact that I can keep finding new angles to share with my audience goes to show how the smoke-free frontier is ever-changing. With that, here's the latest:

Tobacco-free Hiring
Last month, I spent a good amount of time discussing the controversy behind tobacco-free hiring at hospitals. Well, a couple of weeks ago, I ran across an article in The Arizona Republic that explained how many county employees in Phoenix are in outrage over a new saliva test requirement. Those who test negative for nicotine use (who make up approximately 90% of the workforce) receive a $480 medical insurance discount. Others view the insurance premium as a penalty, and I completely agree with them--but I don't think that there is anything wrong with it. I understand the concern among smokers (and many non-smokers) that having to submit to a saliva test is an infringement on personal liberties, but as I've explicated before, when the public's health is at stake, sacrifices need to be made. It's sort of analogous to airport security: Everyone must go through the same annoying, embarrassing process of removing belts and shoes and having their personal belongings X-rayed to ensure that nobody is carrying a bomb with them. Likewise, it is reasonable for every employee to be checked for nicotine use to find out who is carrying that bomb and treat them accordingly. After all, why should every employee pay the same amount for medical insurance when only a small minority is making a preventable (and punishable) choice that makes them exponentially more likely to collect on their insurance down the road?

New York, etc.
It's official: New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg signed the city's new public smoking ban into law. The ban will go into effect in late May, so I'm sure more news will arise then. In response to the news on the east coast, the Los Angeles Times is asking the same question I am--which city is going smoke-free next? LA just implemented a smoking ban in outdoor dining areas a couple of weeks ago, so it's probably only a matter of time until they extend it elsewhere.

Still, secondhand smoke still bothers many who live in New York apartments and co-ops. One couple is suing their neighbor, whose secondhand smoke is a constant hazard for them and their 3-year-old daughter, for up to $25,000. In an attempt to get the smoke out and fresh air into their apartment, they open the windows--even in the winter.

"We had to decide between getting sick from the cold or from the cigarette smoke." --Britt Ewen, NYC resident

The high-profile coverage from The Wall Street Journal and TIME, however, has sure brought the issue of residential secondhand smoke to the forefront of the public interest.

As I mentioned in December, Barnard College in Manhattan was looking to ban smoking on its campus, and as of March 21, it went smoke-free. Meanwhile, a libertarian student group at Yale recently protested a potential campus smoking ban. Do they really think that they can stop the trend? I thought those students are smart...

As long as I'm discussing developments in New England, I'd like to share a very well-written op-ed by Mark Gottlieb, executive director of the Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University School of Law. Gottlieb's article focuses on three reasons for why a public smoking ban in the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts is beneficial:

1. Secondhand smoke exposure is more dangerous than most people realize, and it is especially difficult to avoid on a windy day.
2. "Smoking is something I don’t want my kids to think is cool to do in the park." Enough said.
   
3. Cigarette-related litter is the most common litter in the world (and U.S.), can take up to a decade to degrade, is detrimental to wildlife, and is dangerous to children.

I can definitely relate to that last point. My parents have told me that when I was a toddler, I used to collect cigarette butts from the ground wherever we would go. Trust me, I was on to this issue a long time ago.

Part 2 to follow...