The science about second-hand smoke exposure risks INDOORS is already sketchy. The idea that a few whiffs of smoke OUTDOORS has any real health risks (or that bans have any health benefits) is pure fiction, but lawmakers won't let that stop them.
Why does this have anything to do with tobacco harm reduction? Because these baseless outdoor "smoking bans" are increasingly not even limited to smoking. Many are attempting to include not only vaping in the bans, but even smoke-free products that create no emissions at all.
Ban in the works as Buena Park takes stand against smoking
“The updated science debunks the alarmist fantasies that were used to sell smoking bans to the public, allowing for a more sober analysis suggesting that current restrictions on smoking are extreme from a risk-reduction standpoint.”
“We find no evidence that legislated U.S. smoking bans were associated with short-term reductions in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction or other diseases in the elderly, children or working age adults.”
Read more:
Secondhand Smoke Is Not Nearly As Dangerous As We Thought. Shouldn’t That Matter?
"What this study basically showed is what people kind of knew already: At low passive exposures the risk is not that great.”
"The STRONGEST REASON to avoid passive cigarette smoke is TO CHANGE SOCIETAL BEHAVIOR: to not live in a society where smoking* is a norm."
*That goal has clearly morphed into "to not live in a society where ANY FORM OF NICOTINE USE is a norm."
Read more:
Study Finds No Link Between Secondhand Smoke And Cancer
