Is use of shisha/hookah smoking? Can UT Health Dept reinterpret legal definition of smoking?

[Bill Godshall]

Last week, the Utah Health Dept announced that it had reinterpreted the definition of "smoking" in the state's smokefree workplace law to also ban the use of shisha/hookah. A hookah bar owner has indicated he would sue the health department, and a state senator is now questioning the legal authority of the health department to unilaterally reinterpret the definition of "smoking" in the state's law.

Shisha is a tobacco product that is typically (in the middle east, India, and recently a fad a college campuses in the US) heated with charcoal (rather than burned) in a hookah pipe, and the resulting vapor, which is titrated through water in the pipe, is then inhaled. Shisha/hookah vapor/smoke contains higher levels of carbon monixide (CO) and several hundred other gases than does e-cigarette vapor, but contains very few carcinogens. So its in between cigarettes and e-cigarettes on the harm scale.

Utah Health Dept extends indoor smoking ban to shisha/hookah usage
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52478082-78/hookah-smoke-health-department.html.csp

Utah senator says hookah ban might be wrong
Utah senator says hookah ban might be wrong | The Salt Lake Tribune

 

[Bill Godshall]

A related news article

Smoking shisha: how bad is it for you?
Smoking shisha: how bad is it for you? | Society | The Guardian

I agree with and support Dr Kamal Chaouachi and his research findings regarding the health risks of shisha/hookah usage, which he claims is less hazardous than smoking cigarettes.

Interestingly, Chaouachi and his research have been denounced by Tom Eissenberg and several shisha prohibitionists who claim that shisha/hookah usage is just as or more hazardous than smoking cigarettes. Eissenberg has done several clinical studies on shisha/hookah use (at VCU).

 

[Bill Godshall]

The reason I posted this thread is because a successful legal challenge to the Utah Health Dept's new rule change (that reinterpreted the definition of "smoking" in the state's smokefree workplace law) might be helpful to our future efforts to prevent Boards of Health and City Councils from redefining "smoking" to include the usage of e-cigarettes.

On the other hand, if the Utah Health Dept wins, it (or other e-cigarette opponents) may next attempt to unilaterally reinterpret the definition of "smoking" to include the usage of e-cigarettes.

 

[Oliver]

Thanks for this, Bill.

In the UK there's been a steady drip of news stories against shisha. I'm guessing this is directly proportional to the increase in usage (it's become quite faddy in the UK too), and the anecdotal reports that shisha is being used by (otherwise) non-smokers.

Clearly, more unbiased research is needed.

 

[GIMike]

Clearly, more unbiased research is needed.

Are you sure that such a thing exists?

 

[Thulium]

Although Shisha does expose users to some smoke constituents, it is probably inaccurate to refer to it as a tobacco product. Although Shisha frequently contains tobacco and nicotine, it does not always. Many people enjoy Hookah with molasses that does not contain any tobacco or nicotine at all. Look here: Shisha and sheesha products - Smoking-Hookah.com --MOST of the brands listed here contain NO tobacco!

As you point out, Hookah is usually used with burning charcoals that produce high levels of carbon monoxide so users may be exposed to SOME of the hazardous byproducts of combustion from smoking...but considering that many Shishas contain no tobacco and it is not lit on fire, it is certainly not "tobacco smoke"

 

[GIMike]

The e-cig can be used to vape no-nicotine/tobacco products as well. I think the point of all this is, if it can be used for tobacco/nicotine uses, it should be banned. Let's take all the bibles out of churches in fear of somebody rolling up a RYO cig and smoking it too.

 

[Vocalek]

The e-cig can be used to vape no-nicotine/tobacco products as well. I think the point of all this is, if it can be used for tobacco/nicotine uses, it should be banned. Let's take all the bibles out of churches in fear of somebody rolling up a RYO cig and smoking it too.

OMG, are you being sarcastic again?

 

[GIMike]

OMG, are you being sarcastic again?

LOL! I think so?

 

[Oliver]

Are you sure that such a thing exists?

Well, no!

But that said, Dr. Chaouachi seems as dispassionate as one could hope for - check out the 'competing interests' in this paper: http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1477-7517-5-19.pdf

 

[Vocalek]

Well there is definitely something to be said for a paper that includes a statement urging smokers to switch to SNUS. And yes, that's one of the cleanest "competing interest" statements I have seen in the area of tobacco research.

 

[Bill Godshall]

The Utah Health Department has agreed to not enforce its new hookah ban after some Utah legislators challenged the Health Department's legal authority to reinterpret the definition of "smoking" to include hoohah usage.

Two news stories below, one from last week, and another from this week.

Utah senator says hookah ban might be wrong
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52484515-78/health-department-hookah-tobacco.html.csp

Utah Health Dept agrees to not enforce hookah ban after state legislators challenge its authority to reinterpret legal definition of "smoking"
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52578137-78/tobacco-health-smoke-department.html.csp

 

[chuffin']

Wow... um...

Historically I've smoked shishas quite a lot. My first time using one was 15 years ago, and my last time using one was about 6 months ago.

They produce copious amounts of thick creamy SMOKE. The burning charcoal is set on top of the a clay bowl packed with flavoured tobacco. The charcoal burns much hotter than 200 degrees celcius. You can smoke out a room in seconds with one of those bad boys.

I would say its somewhere between smoking cigarettes and inhaling burning milk cartons, on the harm scale