The writer, William Richards, is a true progressive/socialist.
He thinks Obamacare doesn't go far enough and favors public health insurance - national health care without any private companies involvement. He only agrees with Republicans when they compromise their principles or simply don't have any.... He gave Scott Brown a pat on the back on his vote to end the filibuster on the $15 billiion "jobs bill" that created no jobs!! Well.. it did for a while before those solar companies went bankrupt 
edit:
it may be another author of the same name but the text of the original article speaks for itself and in the same language/concepts as above....
This is the crux of the issue... Richards:
"His [Burslyn's](and CASAA's) claims about the even more negligible effect on "public health" are based on extrapolation only; if the user's health isn't bothered, then the health of others around him or her will not be bothered, either. In other words, the study does not actually assess the impact of second-hand smoke (or, rather vapor)."
... which is fueled by Burslyn's likely attempt to be 'fair and balanced' - something, btw, the other side never is : "it would be prudent to scrutinize the health of exposed individuals and examine how exposures could be reduced."
To their credit, I suppose, some liberal progressives still understand that Petro's 'leave me alone' still has some power of persuasion, so they have to make it so that 'others are harmed', not just the individual themselves.... hence the writer's comments:
"I'm not sure he (Bloomberg) stays up late worrying about the individual smoker, crushing a pack on his balcony with a $9.99 bottle of wine. But, he cares abstractly about healthcare costs and acutely about someone's Parliament puff trailing four feet into another taxpayer's face. Or, in this case, someone's vapor cloud."
When healthcare costs are socialized - then it is the 'duty' of every comrade to be health conscious because not doing so imposes costs on - steals from - those who are being health conscious
for the good of the state.
So... it would behoove whoever is doing the studies, to include 'second hand vapor' as part of the study. I've seen those studies, perhaps they were not of the one presented... or perhaps they were and the writer ignored them to be able to make his point.
Just kidding.... 
