Quote:
|
Originally Posted by maximusveritas
I didn't read the whole thing and I realize this was written 2 years ago, but this line made me laugh :
"I can tell you that second hand smoke is not a health hazard to anyone and never was, and the EPA has always known it."
|
That was a reference to the famous 1993 EPA report on environmental tobbacco smoke which claimed that ETS was responsible for 3,000 deaths per year and considered it a Class A carcinogen. In 1995 that report was subject to review by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) which noted, among other things, that "the EPA
ignored nearly two-thirds of the data. The EPA then doubled their margin of error to come up with their desired results. Even with all this manipulation, the numbers are still far too low to be considered statistically significant." In light of that and a whole list of examples of statistical manipulation in the report the CRS rejected the findings of the EPA report.
For some odd reason, this fact was given little or no publicity. In fact the EPA report is still cited as a reference to influence public policy.
In 1998 federal district court judge William Osteen made a ruling that invalidated the EPA report. "Judge Osteen determined that the EPA had "cherry picked" its data and had grossly manipulated "scientific procedure and scientific norms" in order to rationalize the agency's own preconceived conclusion that passive smoking caused 3,000 lung cancer deaths a year. In addition, Osteen ruled that the EPA had violated the Radon Act, which was the agency's authority for disseminating its "de facto regulatory scheme" that intended to prohibit passive smoking."
To this day, the EPA report remains at the foundation of public opinion and public policy.
To let you know where I'm coming from. - I'm a practicing internal medicine physician I'm not a smoker, nor have I ever been. I believe tobbacco smoke is certainly a serious health hazard, but the risks of second hand smoke is debatable (but it's certainly a nuisance). Smokers are unquestionably at increased risk for coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and lung cancer. The EPA report about environmental tobbacco smoke was cited as gospel to me in medical school and I believed it - until I looked at the EPA's own data. You only need a basic familarity with statistics to see that the report was a sham.
In the end I'd certainly prefer to live my life without second hand smoke, but I'd rather base all my beliefs on objective, substantiated facts rather than personal opinion.