fbpx
Wikipedia

Passive smoking

January 01, 1970

"Second hand smoke" redirects here. For the Sublime album, see Second-hand Smoke.

Passive smoking is the inhalation of tobacco smoke, called passive smoke, secondhand smoke (SHS) or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), by individuals other than the active smoker. It occurs when tobacco smoke diffuses into the surrounding atmosphere as an aerosol pollutant, which leads to its inhalation by nearby bystanders within the same environment. Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke causes many of the same diseases caused by active smoking,[1][2] although to a lower prevalence due to the reduced concentration of smoke that enters the airway.

Tobacco smoke in an Irish pub before a smoking ban came into effect on March 29, 2004

According to latest WHO report, more than 1.3 million deaths are attributed to passive smoking worldwide every year.[3] The health risks of secondhand smoke are a matter of scientific consensus,[4][5][6] and have been a major motivation for smoking bans in workplaces and indoor venues, including restaurants, bars and night clubs, as well as some open public spaces.[7]

Concerns around secondhand smoke have played a central role in the debate over the harms and regulation of tobacco products. Since the early 1970s, the tobacco industry has viewed public concern over secondhand smoke as a serious threat to its business interests.[8] Despite the industry's awareness of the harms of secondhand smoke as early as the 1980s, the tobacco industry coordinated a scientific controversy with the purpose of stopping regulation of their products.[4]: 1242 [6]

Terminology

Fritz Lickint created the term "passive smoking" (“Passivrauchen”) in a publication in the German language during the 1930s. [9][10][11] Terms used include "environmental tobacco smoke" to refer to the airborne matter, while "involuntary smoking" and "passive smoking" refer to exposure to secondhand smoke.[12][13] The term "environmental tobacco smoke" can be traced back to a 1974 industry-sponsored meeting held in Bermuda, while the term "passive smoking" was first used in the title of a scientific paper in 1970.[13] The Surgeon General of the United States prefers to use the phrase "secondhand smoke" rather than "environmental tobacco smoke", stating that "The descriptor 'secondhand' captures the involuntary nature of the exposure, while 'environmental' does not."[1]: 9  Most researchers consider the term "passive smoking" to be synonymous with "secondhand smoke".[14] In contrast, a 2011 commentary in Environmental Health Perspectives argued that research into "thirdhand smoke" renders it inappropriate to refer to passive smoking with the term "secondhand smoke", which the authors stated constitutes a pars pro toto.[14]

The term "sidestream smoke" is sometimes used to refer to smoke that goes into the air directly from a burning cigarette, cigar, or pipe,[15] while "mainstream smoke" refers to smoke that a smoker exhales.

Effects

Secondhand smoke causes many of the same diseases as direct smoking, including cardiovascular diseases, lung cancer, and respiratory diseases.[1][2][16] These include:

  • Cancer:
    • General: overall increased risk;[17] reviewing the evidence accumulated on a worldwide basis, the International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2004 that "Involuntary smoking (exposure to secondhand or 'environmental' tobacco smoke) is carcinogenic to humans."[2] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that about 70 chemicals present in secondhand smoke are carcinogenic.[18]
    • Lung cancer: Passive smoking is a risk factor for lung cancer.[19][20] In the United States, secondhand smoke is estimated to cause more than 7,000 deaths from lung cancer a year among non-smokers.[21] A quarter of all cases occur in people who have never smoked.[22]
    • Breast cancer: The California Environmental Protection Agency concluded in 2005 that passive smoking increases the risk of breast cancer in younger, primarily premenopausal females by 70%[16] and the US Surgeon General has concluded that the evidence is "suggestive", but still insufficient to assert such a causal relationship.[1] In contrast, the International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2004 that there was "no support for a causal relation between involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke and breast cancer in never-smokers."[2] A 2015 meta-analysis found that the evidence that passive smoking moderately increased the risk of breast cancer had become "more substantial than a few years ago".[23]
    • Cervical cancer: A 2015 overview of systematic reviews found that exposure to secondhand smoke increased the risk of cervical cancer.[24]
    • Bladder cancer: A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis found that secondhand smoke exposure was associated with a significant increase in the risk of bladder cancer.[25]
  • Circulatory system: risk of heart disease[26][27] and reduced heart rate variability.[28]
    • Epidemiological studies have shown that both active and passive cigarette smoking increase the risk of atherosclerosis.[29]
    • Passive smoking is strongly associated with an increased risk of stroke, and this increased risk is disproportionately high at low levels of exposure.[30]
  • Lung problems:
  • Cognitive impairment and dementia: Exposure to secondhand smoke may increase the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia in adults 50 and over.[35] Children exposed to secondhand smoke show reduced vocabulary and reasoning skills when compared with non-exposed children as well as more general cognitive and intellectual deficits.[36]
  • Mental health: Exposure to secondhand smoke is associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms.[37]
  • During pregnancy:
    • Miscarriage: a 2014 meta-analysis found that maternal secondhand smoke exposure increased the risk of miscarriage by 11%.[38]
    • Low birth weight[16], part B, ch. 3.[39]
    • Premature birth[16], part B, ch. 3[40] (Evidence of the causal link is described only as "suggestive" by the US Surgeon General in his 2006 report.[41]) Laws limiting smoking decrease premature births.[42]
    • Stillbirth and congenital malformations in children[43]
    • Recent studies comparing females exposed to secondhand smoke and non-exposed females, demonstrate that females exposed while pregnant have higher risks of delivering a child with congenital abnormalities, longer lengths, smaller head circumferences, and neural tube defects.[44][45]
  • General:
    • Worsening of asthma, allergies, and other conditions.[46] A 2014 systematic review and meta-analysis found that passive smoking was associated with a slightly increased risk of allergic diseases among children and adolescents; the evidence for an association was weaker for adults.[47]
    • Type 2 diabetes.[48][49][50] It remains unclear whether the association between passive smoking and diabetes is causal.[51]
  • Risk of carrying Neisseria meningitidis or Streptococcus pneumoniae.[24]
  • A possible increased risk of periodontitis.[52]
  • Overall increased risk of death in both adults, where it was estimated to kill 53,000 nonsmokers per year in the U.S in 1991,[53][54] and in children.[55] The World Health Organization states that passive smoking causes about 600,000 deaths a year, and about 1% of the global burden of disease.[56] As of 2017, passive smoking causes about 900,000 deaths a year, which is about 1/8 of all deaths caused by smoking.[57]
  • Skin conditions: A 2016 systematic review and meta-analysis found that passive smoking was associated with a higher rate of atopic dermatitis.[58]

Risk to children

  • Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).[59] In his 2006 report, the US Surgeon General concludes: "The evidence is sufficient to infer a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke and sudden infant death syndrome."[60] Secondhand smoking has been estimated to be associated with 430 SIDS deaths in the United States annually.[61]
  • Asthma.[62][63][64] Secondhand smoke exposure is also associated with an almost doubled risk of hospitalization for asthma exacerbation among children with asthma.[65]
  • Lung infections,[66][67][68] also including more severe illness with bronchiolitis[69] and bronchitis,[70] and worse outcome,[69] as well as increased risk of developing tuberculosis if exposed to a carrier.[71] In the United States, it is estimated that secondhand smoke has been associated with between 150,000 and 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year.[61]
  • Impaired respiratory function and slowed lung growth[70]
  • Allergies[72]
  • Maternal passive smoking increases the risk of non-syndromic orofacial clefts by 50% among their children.[73]
  • Learning difficulties, developmental delays, executive function problems,[74] and neurobehavioral effects.[75][76] Animal models suggest a role for nicotine and carbon monoxide in neurocognitive problems.[68]
  • An increase in tooth decay (as well as related salivary biomarkers) has been associated with passive smoking in children.[77]
  • Increased risk of middle ear infections.[68][78][79]
  • Invasive meningococcal disease.[24][80]
  • Anesthesia complications and some negative surgical outcomes.[81]
  • Sleep disordered breathing: Most studies have found a significant association between passive smoking and sleep disordered breathing in children, but further studies are needed to determine whether this association is causal.[82]
  • Adverse effects on the cardiovascular system of children.[83]

Evidence

 
Exposure to secondhand smoke by age, race, and poverty level in the US in 2010

Epidemiological studies show that non-smokers exposed to secondhand smoke are at risk for many of the health problems associated with direct smoking.

In 1992, a review estimated that secondhand smoke exposure was responsible for 35,000 to 40,000 deaths per year in the United States in the early 1980s.[84] The absolute risk increase of heart disease due to ETS was 2.2%, while the attributable risk percent was 23%. A 1997 meta-analysis found that secondhand smoke exposure increased the risk of heart disease by a quarter,[85] and two 1999 meta-analyses reached similar conclusions.[86][87]

Evidence shows that inhaled sidestream smoke, the main component of secondhand smoke, is about four times more toxic than mainstream smoke. This fact has been known to the tobacco industry since the 1980s, though it kept its findings secret.[88][89][90][91] Some scientists believe that the risk of passive smoking, in particular the risk of developing coronary heart diseases, may have been substantially underestimated.[92]

In 1997, a meta-analysis on the relationship between secondhand smoke exposure and lung cancer concluded that such exposure caused lung cancer. The increase in risk was estimated to be 24% among non-smokers who lived with a smoker.[93] In 2000, Copas and Shi reported that there was clear evidence of publication bias in the studies included in this meta-analysis. They further concluded that after correcting for publication bias, and assuming that 40% of all studies are unpublished, this increased risk decreased from 24% to 15%.[94] This conclusion has been challenged on the basis that the assumption that 40% of all studies are unpublished was "extreme".[2]: 1269  In 2006, Takagi et al. reanalyzed the data from this meta-analysis to account for publication bias and estimated that the relative risk of lung cancer among those exposed to secondhand smoke was 1.19, slightly lower than the original estimate.[95] A 2000 meta-analysis found a relative risk of 1.48 for lung cancer among men exposed to secondhand smoke, and a relative risk of 1.16 among those exposed to it at work.[96] Another meta-analysis confirmed the finding of an increased risk of lung cancer among women with spousal exposure to secondhand smoke the following year. It found a relative risk of lung cancer of 1.29 for women exposed to secondhand smoke from their spouses.[97] A 2014 meta-analysis noted that "the association between exposure to secondhand smoke and lung cancer risk is well established."[98]

A minority of epidemiologists have found it hard to understand how secondhand smoke, which is more diluted than actively inhaled smoke, could have an effect that is such a large fraction of the added risk of coronary heart disease among active smokers.[99][100] One proposed explanation is that secondhand smoke is not simply a diluted version of "mainstream" smoke, but has a different composition with more toxic substances per gram of total particulate matter.[99] Passive smoking appears to be capable of precipitating the acute manifestations of cardio-vascular diseases (atherothrombosis) and may also have a negative impact on the outcome of patients who have acute coronary syndromes.[101]

In 2004, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) reviewed all significant published evidence related to tobacco smoking and cancer. It concluded:

These meta-analyses show that there is a statistically significant and consistent association between lung cancer risk in spouses of smokers and exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke from the spouse who smokes. The excess risk is of the order of 20% for women and 30% for men and remains after controlling for some potential sources of bias and confounding.[2]

Subsequent meta-analyses have confirmed these findings.[102][103]

The National Asthma Council of Australia cites studies showing that secondhand smoke is probably the most important indoor pollutant, especially around young children:[104]

  • Smoking by either parent, particularly by the mother, increases the risk of asthma in children.
  • The outlook for early childhood asthma is less favourable in smoking households.
  • Children with asthma who are exposed to smoking in the home generally have more severe disease.
  • Many adults with asthma identify ETS as a trigger for their symptoms.
  • Doctor-diagnosed asthma is more common among non-smoking adults exposed to ETS than those not exposed. Among people with asthma, higher ETS exposure is associated with a greater risk of severe attacks.

In France, exposure to secondhand smoke has been estimated to cause between 3,000[105] and 5,000 premature deaths per year, with the larger figure cited by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin during his announcement of a nationwide smoke-free law: "That makes more than 13 deaths a day. It is an unacceptable reality in our country in terms of public health."[106]

There is good observational evidence that smoke-free legislation reduces the number of hospital admissions for heart disease.[107][108]

Exposure and risk levels

The International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization concluded in 2004 that there was sufficient evidence that secondhand smoke caused cancer in humans.[2] Those who work in environments where smoke is not regulated are at higher risk.[109][103] Workers particularly at risk of exposure include those in installation repair and maintenance, construction and extraction, and transportation.[110]

Much research has come from studies of nonsmokers who are married to a smoker. The US Surgeon General, in his 2006 report, estimated that living or working in a place where smoking is permitted increases the non-smokers' risk of developing heart disease by 25–30% and lung cancer by 20–30%.[111]

Similarly, children who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke are shown to experience a range of adverse effects[112][113][114] and a higher risk of becoming smokers later in life.[115] The WHO has identified reduction of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke as key element for actions to encourage healthy child development.[116]

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention monitors the extent of and trends in exposure to environmental tobacco smoke by measuring serum cotinine in national health surveys.[117] The prevalence of secondhand smoke exposure among U.S. nonsmokers declined from 87.5% in 1988 to 25.2% in 2014. However, nearly half of blacks and the poor were exposed in 2014.

Interventions to reduce environmental tobacco smoke

A systematic review compared smoking control programmes and their effects on smoke exposure in children. The review distinguishes between community-based, ill-child and healthy-child settings and the most common types of interventions were counselling or brief advice during clinical visits. The review did not find superior outcomes for any intervention, and the authors caution that evidence from adult settings may not generalise well to children.[118]

Biomarkers

 
Breath CO monitor displaying carbon monoxide concentration of an exhaled breath sample (in ppm) with corresponding percent concentration of carboxyhemoglobin displayed below

Environmental tobacco smoke can be evaluated either by directly measuring tobacco smoke pollutants found in the air or by using biomarkers, an indirect measure of exposure. Carbon monoxide monitored through breath, nicotine, cotinine, thiocyanates, and proteins are the most specific biological markers of tobacco smoke exposure.[119][120] Biochemical tests are a much more reliable biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure than surveys. Certain groups of people are reluctant to disclose their smoking status and exposure to tobacco smoke, especially pregnant women and parents of young children. This is due to their smoking being socially unacceptable. Also, it may be difficult for individuals to recall their exposure to tobacco smoke.[121]

A 2007 study in the Addictive Behaviors journal found a positive correlation between secondhand tobacco smoke exposure and concentrations of nicotine and/or biomarkers of nicotine in the body. Significant biological levels of nicotine from secondhand smoke exposure were equivalent to nicotine levels from active smoking and levels that are associated with behaviour changes due to nicotine consumption.[122]

Cotinine

Cotinine, the metabolite of nicotine, is a biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure. Typically, cotinine is measured in the blood, saliva, and urine. Hair analysis has recently become a new, noninvasive measurement technique. Cotinine accumulates in hair during hair growth, which results in a measure of long-term, cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke.[123] Urinary cotinine levels have been a reliable biomarker of tobacco exposure and have been used as a reference in many epidemiological studies.[118] However, cotinine levels found in the urine reflect exposure only over the preceding 48 hours. Cotinine levels of the skin, such as the hair and nails, reflect tobacco exposure over the previous three months and are a more reliable biomarker.[119]

Carbon monoxide (CO)

Carbon monoxide monitored via breath is also a reliable biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure as well as tobacco use. With high sensitivity and specificity, it not only provides an accurate measure, but the test is also non-invasive, highly reproducible, and low in cost. Breath CO monitoring measures the concentration of CO in an exhalation in parts per million, and this can be directly correlated to the blood CO concentration (carboxyhemoglobin).[124] Breath CO monitors can also be used by emergency services to identify patients who are suspected of having CO poisoning.

Pathophysiology

A 2004 study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization concluded that non-smokers are exposed to the same carcinogens as active smokers. Sidestream smoke contains more than 4,000 chemicals, including 69 known carcinogens. Of special concern are polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines, and aromatic amines, such as 4-aminobiphenyl, all known to be highly carcinogenic. Mainstream smoke, sidestream smoke, and secondhand smoke contain largely the same components, however the concentration varies depending on type of smoke.[2] Several well-established carcinogens have been shown by the tobacco companies' own research to be present at higher concentrations in sidestream smoke than in mainstream smoke.[125]

Secondhand smoke has been shown to produce more particulate-matter (PM) pollution than an idling low-emission diesel engine. In an experiment conducted by the Italian National Cancer Institute, three cigarettes were left smoldering, one after the other, in a 60 m3 garage with a limited air exchange. The cigarettes produced PM pollution exceeding outdoor limits, as well as PM concentrations up to 10-fold that of the idling engine.[126]

Secondhand tobacco smoke exposure has immediate and substantial effects on blood and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack, particularly in people already at risk.[127] Exposure to tobacco smoke for 30 minutes significantly reduces coronary flow velocity reserve in healthy nonsmokers.[128] Secondhand smoke is also associated with impaired vasodilation among adult nonsmokers.[129] Secondhand smoke exposure also affects platelet function, vascular endothelium, and myocardial exercise tolerance at levels commonly found in the workplace.[130]

Pulmonary emphysema can be induced in rats through acute exposure to sidestream tobacco smoke (30 cigarettes per day) over a period of 45 days.[131] Degranulation of mast cells contributing to lung damage has also been observed.[132]

The term "third-hand smoke" was recently coined to identify the residual tobacco smoke contamination that remains after the cigarette is extinguished and secondhand smoke has cleared from the air.[133][134][135] Preliminary research suggests that by-products of third-hand smoke may pose a health risk,[136] though the magnitude of risk, if any, remains unknown. In October 2011, it was reported that Christus St. Frances Cabrini Hospital in Alexandria, Louisiana, would seek to eliminate third-hand smoke beginning in July 2012, and that employees whose clothing smelled of smoke would not be allowed to work. This prohibition was enacted because third-hand smoke poses a special danger for the developing brains of infants and small children.[137]

In 2008, there were more than 161,000 deaths attributed to lung cancer in the United States. Of these deaths, an estimated 10% to 15% were caused by factors other than first-hand smoking; equivalent to 16,000 to 24,000 deaths annually. Slightly more than half of the lung cancer deaths caused by factors other than first-hand smoking were found in nonsmokers. Lung cancer in non-smokers may well be considered one of the most common cancer mortalities in the United States. Clinical epidemiology of lung cancer has linked the primary factors closely tied to lung cancer in non-smokers as exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke, carcinogens including radon, and other indoor air pollutants.[138]

Opinion of public health authorities

There is widespread scientific consensus that exposure to secondhand smoke is harmful.[4] The link between passive smoking and health risks is accepted by every major medical and scientific organisation, including:

Public opinion

Recent major surveys conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control have found widespread public awareness that secondhand smoke is harmful. In both 1992 and 2000 surveys, more than 80% of respondents agreed with the statement that secondhand smoke was harmful. A 2001 study found that 95% of adults agreed that secondhand smoke was harmful to children, and 96% considered tobacco-industry claims that secondhand smoke was not harmful to be untruthful.[150]

A 2007 Gallup poll found that 56% of respondents felt that secondhand smoke was "very harmful", a number that has held relatively steady since 1997. Another 29% believe that secondhand smoke is "somewhat harmful"; 10% answered "not too harmful", while 5% said "not at all harmful".[151]

Controversy over harm

As part of its attempt to prevent or delay tighter regulation of smoking, the tobacco industry funded a number of scientific studies and, where the results cast doubt on the risks associated with secondhand smoke, sought wide publicity for those results. The industry also funded libertarian and conservative think tanks, such as the Cato Institute in the United States and the Institute of Public Affairs in Australia which criticised both scientific research on passive smoking and policy proposals to restrict smoking.[152][153] New Scientist and the European Journal of Public Health have identified these industry-wide coordinated activities as one of the earliest expressions of corporate denialism. Further, they state that the disinformation spread by the tobacco industry has created a tobacco denialism movement, sharing many characteristics of other forms of denialism, such as HIV-AIDS denialism.[154][155]

Industry-funded studies and critiques

Enstrom and Kabat

A 2003 study by James Enstrom and Geoffrey Kabat, published in the British Medical Journal, argued that the harms of passive smoking had been overstated.[156] Their analysis reported no statistically significant relationship between passive smoking and lung cancer, coronary heart disease (CHD), or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, though the accompanying editorial noted that "they may overemphasise the negative nature of their findings."[157] This paper was widely promoted by the tobacco industry as evidence that the harms of passive smoking were unproven.[158][159] The American Cancer Society (ACS), whose database Enstrom and Kabat used to compile their data, criticized the paper as "neither reliable nor independent", stating that scientists at the ACS had repeatedly pointed out serious flaws in Enstrom and Kabat's methodology prior to publication.[160] Notably, the study had failed to identify a comparison group of "unexposed" persons.[161]

Enstrom's ties to the tobacco industry also drew scrutiny; in a 1997 letter to Philip Morris, Enstrom requested a "substantial research commitment... in order for me to effectively compete against the large mountain of epidemiologic data and opinions that already exist regarding the health effects of ETS and active smoking."[162] In a US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies, the Enstrom and Kabat paper was cited by the US District Court as "a prime example of how nine tobacco companies engaged in criminal racketeering and fraud to hide the dangers of tobacco smoke."[163] The Court found that the study had been funded and managed by the Center for Indoor Air Research,[164] a tobacco industry front group tasked with "offsetting" damaging studies on passive smoking, as well as by Philip Morris who stated that Enstrom's work was "clearly litigation-oriented".[165] A 2005 paper in Tobacco Control argued that the disclosure section in the Enstrom and Kabat BMJ paper, although it met the journal's requirements, "does not reveal the full extent of the relationship the authors had with the tobacco industry."[166]

In 2006, Enstrom and Kabat published a meta-analysis of studies regarding passive smoking and coronary heart disease in which they reported a very weak association between passive smoking and heart disease mortality.[167] They concluded that exposure to secondhand smoke increased the risk of death from CHD by only 5%, although this analysis has been criticized for including two previous industry-funded studies that suffered from widespread exposure misclassification.[6]

Gori

Gio Batta Gori, a tobacco industry spokesman and consultant[168][169][170] and an expert on risk utility and scientific research, wrote in the libertarian Cato Institute's magazine Regulation that "...of the 75 published studies of ETS and lung cancer, some 70% did not report statistically significant differences of risk and are moot. Roughly 17% claim an increased risk and 13% imply a reduction of risk."[171]

Milloy

Steven Milloy, the "junk science" commentator for Fox News and a former Philip Morris consultant,[172][173] claimed that "of the 19 studies" on passive smoking "only 8— slightly more than 42%— reported statistically significant increases in heart disease incidence."[174]

Another component of criticism cited by Milloy focused on relative risk and epidemiological practices in studies of passive smoking. Milloy, who has a master's degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, argued that studies yielding relative risks of less than 2 were meaningless junk science. This approach to epidemiological analysis was criticized in the American Journal of Public Health:

A major component of the industry attack was the mounting of a campaign to establish a "bar" for "sound science" that could not be fully met by most individual investigations, leaving studies that did not meet the criteria to be dismissed as "junk science."[175]

The tobacco industry and affiliated scientists also put forward a set of "Good Epidemiology Practices" which would have the practical effect of obscuring the link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer; the privately stated goal of these standards was to "impede adverse legislation".[176] However, this effort was largely abandoned when it became clear that no independent epidemiological organization would agree to the standards proposed by Philip Morris et al.[177]

Levois and Layard

In 1995, Levois and Layard, both tobacco industry consultants, published two analyses in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology regarding the association between spousal exposure to secondhand smoke and heart disease. Both of these papers reported no association between secondhand smoke and heart disease.[178][179] These analyses have been criticized for failing to distinguish between current and former smokers, despite the fact that former smokers, unlike current ones, are not at a significantly increased risk of heart disease.[6][180]

World Health Organization controversy

A 1998 study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) on environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) found "weak evidence of a dose–response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS."[181]

In March 1998, before the study was published, reports appeared in the media alleging that the IARC and the World Health Organization (WHO) were suppressing information. The reports, appearing in the British Sunday Telegraph[182] and The Economist,[183] among other sources,[184][185][186] alleged that the WHO withheld from publication of its own report that supposedly failed to prove an association between passive smoking and a number of other diseases (lung cancer in particular).

In response, the WHO issued a press release stating that the results of the study had been "completely misrepresented" in the popular press and were in fact very much in line with similar studies demonstrating the harms of passive smoking.[187] The study was published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in October of the same year, and concluded the authors found "no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk" but "did find weak evidence of a dose–response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS."[181] An accompanying editorial summarized:

When all the evidence, including the important new data reported in this issue of the Journal, is assessed, the inescapable scientific conclusion is that ETS is a low-level lung carcinogen.[188]

With the release of formerly classified tobacco industry documents through the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, it was found (by Elisa Ong and Stanton Glantz) that the controversy over the WHO's alleged suppression of data had been engineered by Philip Morris, British American Tobacco, and other tobacco companies in an effort to discredit scientific findings which would harm their business interests.[189] A WHO inquiry, conducted after the release of the tobacco-industry documents, found that this controversy was generated by the tobacco industry as part of its larger campaign to cut the WHO's budget, distort the results of scientific studies on passive smoking, and discredit the WHO as an institution. This campaign was carried out using a network of ostensibly independent front organizations and international and scientific experts with hidden financial ties to the industry.[190]

EPA lawsuit

In 1993, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a report estimating that 3,000 lung cancer related deaths in the United States were caused by passive smoking annually.[191]

Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and groups representing growers, distributors and marketers of tobacco took legal action, claiming that the EPA had manipulated this study and ignored accepted scientific and statistical practices.

The United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled in favor of the tobacco industry in 1998, finding that the EPA had failed to follow proper scientific and epidemiologic practices and had "cherry picked" evidence to support conclusions which they had committed to in advance.[192] The court stated in part, "EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun…adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the Agency's public conclusion... In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment, disregarded information and made findings on selective information; did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information; deviated from its Risk Assessment Guidelines; failed to disclose important findings and reasoning…"

In 2002, the EPA successfully appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The EPA's appeal was upheld on the preliminary grounds that their report had no regulatory weight, and the earlier finding was vacated.[193]

In 1998, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the publication by its National Toxicology Program of the 9th Report on Carcinogens, listed environmental tobacco smoke among the known carcinogens, observing of the EPA assessment that "The individual studies were carefully summarized and evaluated."[194]

Tobacco-industry funding of research

The tobacco industry's role in funding scientific research on secondhand smoke has been controversial.[195] A review of published studies found that tobacco-industry affiliation was strongly correlated with findings exonerating secondhand smoke; researchers affiliated with the tobacco industry were 88 times more likely than independent researchers to conclude that secondhand smoke was not harmful.[196] In a specific example which came to light with the release of tobacco-industry documents, Philip Morris executives successfully encouraged an author to revise his industry-funded review article to downplay the role of secondhand smoke in sudden infant death syndrome.[197] The 2006 U.S. Surgeon General's report criticized the tobacco industry's role in the scientific debate:

The industry has funded or carried out research that has been judged to be biased, supported scientists to generate letters to editors that criticized research publications, attempted to undermine the findings of key studies, assisted in establishing a scientific society with a journal, and attempted to sustain controversy even as the scientific community reached consensus.[198]

This strategy was outlined at an international meeting of tobacco companies in 1988, at which Philip Morris proposed to set up a team of scientists, organized by company lawyers, to "carry out work on ETS to keep the controversy alive."[199] All scientific research was subject to oversight and "filtering" by tobacco-industry lawyers:

Philip Morris then expect the group of scientists to operate within the confines of decisions taken by PM scientists to determine the general direction of research, which apparently would then be 'filtered' by lawyers to eliminate areas of sensitivity.[199]

Philip Morris reported that it was putting "...vast amounts of funding into these projects... in attempting to coordinate and pay so many scientists on an international basis to keep the ETS controversy alive."[199]

Tobacco industry response

Measures to tackle secondhand smoke pose a serious economic threat to the tobacco industry, having broadened the definition of smoking beyond a personal habit to something with a social impact. In a confidential 1978 report, the tobacco industry described increasing public concerns about secondhand smoke as "the most dangerous development to the viability of the tobacco industry that has yet occurred."[200] In United States of America v. Philip Morris et al., the District Court for the District of Columbia found that the tobacco industry "... recognized from the mid-1970s forward that the health effects of passive smoking posed a profound threat to industry viability and cigarette profits," and that the industry responded with "efforts to undermine and discredit the scientific consensus that ETS causes disease."[4]

Accordingly, the tobacco industry have developed several strategies to minimise the impact on their business:

  • The industry has sought to position the secondhand smoke debate as essentially concerned with civil liberties and smokers' rights rather than with health, by funding groups such as FOREST.[201]
  • Funding bias in research;[8] in all reviews of the effects of secondhand smoke on health published between 1980 and 1995, the only factor associated with concluding that secondhand smoke is not harmful was whether an author was affiliated with the tobacco industry.[196] However, not all studies that failed to find evidence of harm were by industry-affiliated authors.
  • Delaying and discrediting legitimate research (see[8] for an example of how the industry attempted to discredit Takeshi Hirayama's landmark study, and[202] for an example of how it attempted to delay and discredit a major Australian report on passive smoking)
  • Promoting "good epidemiology" and attacking so-called junk science (a term popularised by industry lobbyist Steven Milloy): attacking the methodology behind research showing health risks as flawed and attempting to promote sound science. Ong & Glantz (2001) cite an internal Phillip Morris memo giving evidence of this as company policy.[177]
  • Creation of outlets for favourable research. In 1989, the tobacco industry established the International Society of the Built Environment, which published the peer-reviewed journal Indoor and Built Environment. This journal did not require conflict-of-interest disclosures from its authors. With documents made available through the Master Settlement, it was found that the executive board of the society and the editorial board of the journal were dominated by paid tobacco-industry consultants. The journal published a large amount of material on passive smoking, much of which was "industry-positive".[203]

Citing the tobacco industry's production of biased research and efforts to undermine scientific findings, the 2006 U.S. Surgeon General's report concluded that the industry had "attempted to sustain controversy even as the scientific community reached consensus... industry documents indicate that the tobacco industry has engaged in widespread activities... that have gone beyond the bounds of accepted scientific practice."[204] The U.S. District Court, in U.S.A. v. Philip Morris et al., found that "...despite their internal acknowledgment of the hazards of secondhand smoke, Defendants have fraudulently denied that ETS causes disease."[205]

Position of major tobacco companies

The positions of major tobacco companies on the issue of secondhand smoke is somewhat varied. In general, tobacco companies have continued to focus on questioning the methodology of studies showing that secondhand smoke is harmful. Some (such as British American Tobacco and Philip Morris) acknowledge the medical consensus that secondhand smoke carries health risks, while others continue to assert that the evidence is inconclusive. Several tobacco companies advocate the creation of smoke-free areas within public buildings as an alternative to comprehensive smoke-free laws.[206]

US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies

On September 22, 1999, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a racketeering lawsuit against Philip Morris and other major cigarette manufacturers.[207] Almost 7 years later, on August 17, 2006, U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Kessler found that the Government had proven its case and that the tobacco company defendants had violated the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).[4] In particular, Judge Kessler found that PM and other tobacco companies had:

  • conspired to minimize, distort and confuse the public about the health hazards of smoking;
  • publicly denied, while internally acknowledging, that secondhand tobacco smoke is harmful to nonsmokers, and
  • destroyed documents relevant to litigation.

The ruling found that tobacco companies undertook joint efforts to undermine and discredit the scientific consensus that secondhand smoke causes disease, notably by controlling research findings via paid consultants. The ruling also concluded that tobacco companies were fraudulently continuing to deny the health effects of ETS exposure.[4]

On May 22, 2009, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the lower court's 2006 ruling.[208][209][210]

Smoke-free laws

See also: Smoking ban, List of smoking bans, and Smoking bans in private vehicles

As a consequence of the health risks associated with secondhand smoke, many national and local governments have outlawed smoking in indoor public places, including restaurants, cafés, and nightclubs, as well as some outdoor open areas.[211] Ireland was the first country in the world to institute a comprehensive national ban on smoking in all indoor workplaces on 29 March 2004. Since then, many others have followed suit. The countries which have ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) have a legal obligation to implement effective legislation "for protection from exposure to tobacco smoke in indoor workplaces, public transport, indoor public places and, as appropriate, other public places." (Article 8 of the FCTC[212]) The parties to the FCTC have further adopted Guidelines on the Protection from Exposure to secondhand Smoke which state that "effective measures to provide protection from exposure to tobacco smoke ... require the total elimination of smoking and tobacco smoke in a particular space or environment in order to create a 100% smoke-free environment."[213]

Opinion polls have shown considerable support for smoke-free laws. In June 2007, a survey of 15 countries found 80% approval for such laws.[214] A survey in France, reputedly a nation of smokers, showed 70% support.[106]

Effects

Smoking bans by governments result in decreased harm from secondhand smoke, including less admissions for acute coronary syndrome.[215] In the first 18 months after the town of Pueblo, Colorado, enacted a smoke-free law in 2003, hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped 27%. Admissions in neighbouring towns without smoke-free laws showed no change, and the decline in heart attacks in Pueblo was attributed to the resulting reduction in secondhand smoke exposure.[216] A 2004 smoking ban instituted in Massachusetts workplaces decreased workers' secondhand smoke exposure from 8% of workers in 2003 to 5.4% of workers in 2010.[110] A 2016 review also found that bans and policy changes in specific locations such as hospitals or universities can lead to reduced smoking rates. In prison settings bans might lead to reduced mortality and to lower exposure to secondhand smoke.[217]

In 2001, a systematic review for the Guide to Community Preventive Services acknowledged strong evidence of the effectiveness of smoke-free policies and restrictions in reducing expose to secondhand smoke. A follow-up to this review, identified the evidence on which the effectiveness of smoking bans reduced the prevalence of tobacco use. Articles published until 2005, were examined to further support this evidence. The examined studies provided sufficient evidence that smoke-free policies reduce tobacco use among workers when implemented in worksites or by communities.[218]

While a number of studies funded by the tobacco industry have claimed a negative economic impact from smoke-free laws, no independently funded research has shown any such impact. A 2003 review reported that independently funded, methodologically sound research consistently found either no economic impact or a positive impact from smoke-free laws.[219]

Air nicotine levels were measured in Guatemalan bars and restaurants before and after an implemented smoke-free law in 2009. Nicotine concentrations significantly decreased in both the bars and restaurants measured. Also, the employees' support for a smoke-free workplace substantially increased in the post-implementation survey compared to pre-implementation survey.[220]

Public opinion

Recent surveys taken by the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco demonstrate supportive attitudes of the public, towards smoke-free policies in outdoor areas. A vast majority of the public supports restricting smoking in various outdoor settings. The respondents' support for the policies were for varying reasons such as litter control, establishing positive smoke-free role models for youth, reducing youth opportunities to smoke, and avoiding exposure to secondhand smoke.[221]

Alternative forms

Alternatives to smoke-free laws have also been proposed as a means of harm reduction, particularly in bars and restaurants. For example, critics of smoke-free laws cite studies suggesting ventilation as a means of reducing tobacco smoke pollutants and improving air quality.[222] Ventilation has also been heavily promoted by the tobacco industry as an alternative to outright bans, via a network of ostensibly independent experts with often undisclosed ties to the industry.[223] However, not all critics have connections to the industry.

The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) officially concluded in 2005 that while completely isolated smoking rooms do eliminate the risk to nearby non-smoking areas, smoking bans are the only means of eliminating health risks associated with indoor exposure. They further concluded that no system of dilution or cleaning was effective at eliminating risk.[224] The U.S. Surgeon General and the European Commission Joint Research Centre have reached similar conclusions.[204][225] The implementation guidelines for the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control states that engineering approaches, such as ventilation, are ineffective and do not protect against secondhand smoke exposure.[213] However, this does not necessarily mean that such measures are useless in reducing harm, only that they fall short of the goal of reducing exposure completely to zero.

Others have suggested a system of tradable smoking pollution permits, similar to the cap-and-trade pollution permits systems used by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in recent decades to curb other types of pollution.[226] This would guarantee that a portion of bars/restaurants in a jurisdiction will be smoke-free, while leaving the decision to the market.

In animals

Main article: Animals and tobacco smoke

Multiple studies have been conducted to determine the carcinogenicity of environmental tobacco smoke to animals. These studies typically fall under the categories of simulated environmental tobacco smoke, administering condensates of sidestream smoke, or observational studies of cancer among pets.

To simulate environmental tobacco smoke, scientists expose animals to sidestream smoke, that which emanates from the cigarette's burning cone and through its paper, or a combination of mainstream and sidestream smoke.[2] The IARC monographs conclude that mice with prolonged exposure to simulated environmental tobacco smoke, that is six hours a day, five days a week, for five months with a subsequent four-month interval before dissection, will have significantly higher incidence and multiplicity of lung tumors than with control groups.

The IARC monographs concluded that sidestream smoke condensates had a significantly higher carcinogenic effect on mice than did mainstream smoke condensates.[2]

Observational studies

Secondhand smoke is popularly recognised as a risk factor for cancer in pets.[227] A study conducted by the Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine and the University of Massachusetts Amherst linked the occurrence of feline oral cancer to exposure to environmental tobacco smoke through an overexpression of the p53 gene.[228] Another study conducted at the same universities concluded that cats living with a smoker were more likely to get feline lymphoma; the risk increased with the duration of exposure to secondhand smoke and the number of smokers in the household.[229] A study by Colorado State University researchers, looking at cases of canine lung cancer, was generally inconclusive, though the authors reported a weak relation for lung cancer in dogs exposed to environmental tobacco smoke. The number of smokers within the home, the number of packs smoked in the home per day, and the amount of time that the dog spent within the home had no effect on the dog's risk for lung cancer.[230]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d e (PDF). Surgeon General of the United States. 2006-06-27. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-02-26. Retrieved 2012-07-24. Secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in children and in adults who do not smoke
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k IARC 2004 "There is sufficient evidence that involuntary smoking (exposure to secondhand or 'environmental' tobacco smoke) causes lung cancer in humans"
  3. ^ "Tobacco". www.who.int. Retrieved 2024-02-24.
  4. ^ a b c d e f Kessler 2006
  5. ^ Samet JM (2008). "Secondhand smoke: facts and lies". Salud Pública de México. 50 (5): 428–34. doi:10.1590/S0036-36342008000500016. PMID 18852940.
  6. ^ a b c d Tong, Elisa K.; Glantz, Stanton A. (16 October 2007). "Tobacco Industry Efforts Undermining Evidence Linking Secondhand Smoke With Cardiovascular Disease". Circulation. 116 (16): 1845–1854. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.715888. PMID 17938301. S2CID 4021497.
  7. ^ "CDC - Fact Sheet - Smoke-Free Policies Reduce Smoking - Smoking & Tobacco Use". Smoking and Tobacco Use. Retrieved 2015-04-24.
  8. ^ a b c Diethelm, Pascal; McKee, Martin (2006). Lifting the smokescreen: tobacco industry strategy to defeat smoke free policies and legislation (PDF). p. 5. ISBN 978-1-904097-57-0. OCLC 891398524. The industry quickly realised that, if it wanted to continue to prosper, it became vital that research did not demonstrate that tobacco smoke was a dangerous community air pollutant. This requirement has been the central pillar of its passive smoking policy from the early 1970s to the present day
  9. ^ Gourd, Katherine (2014). "Fritz Lickint". The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine. 2 (5). The Lancet: 358–359. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70064-5. PMID 24726404. Retrieved 7 December 2023.
  10. ^ "Chapter 32 History of Tobacco" (PDF). www.afro.who.int. World Health Organization. 2017. Retrieved 7 December 2023.
  11. ^ Brawley, Otis W.; Glynn, Thomas J.; Khuri, Fadlo R.; Wender, Richard C. (18 November 2013). "The first surgeon general's report on smoking and health: The 50th anniversary". CA. 64 (1): 5–8. doi:10.3322/caac.21210. PMID 24249254.
  12. ^ . United States Environmental Protection Agency. Archived from the original on 5 September 2015. Retrieved 6 September 2015.
  13. ^ a b Chapman, S. (1 June 2003). "Other people's smoke: what's in a name?". Tobacco Control. 12 (2): 113–4. doi:10.1136/tc.12.2.113. PMC 1747703. PMID 12773710.
  14. ^ a b Protano, Carmela; Vitali, Matteo (1 October 2011). "The New Danger of Thirdhand Smoke: Why Passive Smoking Does Not Stop at Secondhand Smoke". Environmental Health Perspectives. 119 (10): a422. doi:10.1289/ehp.1103956. PMC 3230455. PMID 21968336.
  15. ^ IARC 2004, p. 1191: "During smoking of cigarettes, cigars, pipes and other tobacco productions, in addition to the mainstream smoke drawn and inhaled by the smokers, a stream of smoke is released between puffs into the air from the burning cone. Once released, this stream (also known as the sidestream smoke) is mixed with exhaled mainstream smoke as well as the air in an indoor environment to form the secondhand smoke to which ..."
  16. ^ a b c d e California Environmental Protection Agency: Air Resources Board (24 June 2005). Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant (Report).
  17. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 30–46
  18. ^ "Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts". CDC. 5 January 2021. Retrieved August 5, 2021.
  19. ^ Alberg, Anthony J.; Brock, Malcolm V.; Ford, Jean G.; Samet, Jonathan M.; Spivack, Simon D. (1 May 2013). "Epidemiology of Lung Cancer". Chest. 143 (5_suppl): e1S–e29S. doi:10.1378/chest.12-2345. PMC 4694610. PMID 23649439.
  20. ^ Bhatnagar, A; Whitsel, LP; Ribisl, KM; Bullen, C; Chaloupka, F; Piano, MR; Robertson, RM; McAuley, T; Goff, D; Benowitz, N; American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee, Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes, Research (14 October 2014). "Electronic cigarettes: a policy statement from the American Heart Association". Circulation. 130 (16): 1418–36. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000107. PMC 7643636. PMID 25156991. S2CID 16075813.
  21. ^ "Health Effects of Secondhand Smoke". November 24, 2014. Retrieved 30 May 2015.
  22. ^ Pallis, Athanasios G.; Syrigos, Konstantinos N. (December 2013). "Lung cancer in never smokers: Disease characteristics and risk factors". Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology. 88 (3): 494–503. doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2013.06.011. ISSN 1040-8428. PMID 23921082.
  23. ^ Macacu, Alina; Autier, Philippe; Boniol, Mathieu; Boyle, Peter (November 2015). "Active and passive smoking and risk of breast cancer: a meta-analysis" (PDF). Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 154 (2): 213–224. doi:10.1007/s10549-015-3628-4. PMID 26546245. S2CID 4680641.
  24. ^ a b c Lee, Chien-Chang; Middaugh, Nicole A.; Howie, Stephen R. C.; Ezzati, Majid (7 December 2010). "Association of Secondhand Smoke Exposure with Pediatric Invasive Bacterial Disease and Bacterial Carriage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis". PLOS Medicine. 7 (12): e1000374. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1039907C. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000374. PMC 4595077. PMID 21151890.
  25. ^ Cumberbatch, Marcus G.; Rota, Matteo; Catto, James W.F.; La Vecchia, Carlo (September 2016). "The Role of Tobacco Smoke in Bladder and Kidney Carcinogenesis: A Comparison of Exposures and Meta-analysis of Incidence and Mortality Risks" (PDF). European Urology. 70 (3): 458–466. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.042. PMID 26149669.
  26. ^ Surgeon General 2006, Ch. 8
  27. ^ Lv, X; Sun, J; Bi, Y; Xu, M; Lu, J; Zhao, L; Xu, Y (15 November 2015). "Risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease associated with secondhand smoke exposure: a systematic review and meta-analysis". International Journal of Cardiology. 199: 106–15. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.07.011. PMID 26188829.
  28. ^ Dinas, PC; Koutedakis, Y; Flouris, AD (20 February 2013). "Effects of active and passive tobacco cigarette smoking on heart rate variability". International Journal of Cardiology. 163 (2): 109–15. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.10.140. PMID 22100604.
  29. ^ Zou, N; Hong, J; Dai, QY (20 February 2009). "Passive cigarette smoking induces inflammatory injury in human arterial walls". Chinese Medical Journal. 122 (4): 444–448. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.2009.04.0016. PMID 19302752.
  30. ^ Oono, I.P.; Mackay, D.F.; Pell, J.P. (December 2011). "Meta-analysis of the association between secondhand smoke exposure and stroke". Journal of Public Health. 33 (4): 496–502. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdr025. PMID 21422014.
  31. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 555–8
  32. ^ Bentayeb, Malek; Simoni, Marzia; Norback, Dan; Baldacci, Sandra; Maio, Sara; Viegi, Giovanni; Annesi-Maesano, Isabella (6 December 2013). "Indoor air pollution and respiratory health in the elderly". Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part A. 48 (14): 1783–1789. doi:10.1080/10934529.2013.826052. PMID 24007433. S2CID 41862447.
  33. ^ Dogar, O. F.; Pillai, N.; Safdar, N.; Shah, S. K.; Zahid, R.; Siddiqi, K. (November 2015). "Second-hand smoke and the risk of tuberculosis: a systematic review and a meta-analysis". Epidemiology and Infection. 143 (15): 3158–3172. doi:10.1017/S0950268815001235. PMC 9150979. PMID 26118887. S2CID 206285892.
  34. ^ Hur, Kevin; Liang, Jonathan; Lin, Sandra Y. (January 2014). "The role of secondhand smoke in sinusitis: a systematic review: Sinusitis and secondhand smoke". International Forum of Allergy & Rhinology. 4 (1): 22–28. doi:10.1002/alr.21232. PMID 24574074. S2CID 9537143.
  35. ^ Chen, R; Hu, Z; Orton, S; Chen, RL; Wei, L (December 2013). "Association of passive smoking with cognitive impairment in nonsmoking older adults: a systematic literature review and a new study of Chinese cohort". Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology. 26 (4): 199–208. doi:10.1177/0891988713496165. hdl:2436/621630. PMID 23877565. S2CID 43097513.
  36. ^ Ling, Jonathan; Heffernan, Thomas (24 March 2016). "The Cognitive Deficits Associated with Second-Hand Smoking". Frontiers in Psychiatry. 7: 46. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00046. PMC 4805605. PMID 27047401.
  37. ^ Zeng, Yan-Ni; Li, Ya-Min (10 December 2015). "Secondhand smoke exposure and mental health in adults: a meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies". Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 51 (9): 1339–48. doi:10.1007/s00127-015-1164-5. PMID 26661619. S2CID 7772929.
  38. ^ Pineles, B. L.; Park, E.; Samet, J. M. (10 February 2014). "Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Miscarriage and Maternal Exposure to Tobacco Smoke During Pregnancy". American Journal of Epidemiology. 179 (7): 807–823. doi:10.1093/aje/kwt334. PMC 3969532. PMID 24518810.
  39. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 198–205
  40. ^ Cui, H; Gong, TT; Liu, CX; Wu, QJ (25 January 2016). "Associations between Passive Maternal Smoking during Pregnancy and Preterm Birth: Evidence from a Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies". PLOS ONE. 11 (1): e0147848. Bibcode:2016PLoSO..1147848C. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147848. PMC 4726502. PMID 26808045.
  41. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 194–7
  42. ^ Been, Jasper; Nurmatov, U. B.; Cox, B; Nawrot, T. S.; Van Schayck, C. P.; Sheikh, A (28 March 2014). "Effect of smoke-free legislation on perinatal and child health: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Lancet. 383 (9928): 1549–60. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60082-9. PMID 24680633. S2CID 8532979.
  43. ^ Leonardi-Bee, J; Britton, J; Venn, A (April 2011). "Secondhand smoke and adverse fetal outcomes in nonsmoking pregnant women: a meta-analysis". Pediatrics. 127 (4): 734–41. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-3041. PMID 21382949. S2CID 19866471.
  44. ^ Salmasi G, Grady R, Jones J, McDonald SD (2010). "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses". Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 89 (4): 423–41. doi:10.3109/00016340903505748. PMID 20085532. S2CID 9206564.
  45. ^ Wang, Meng; Wang, Zhi-Ping; Zhang, Meng; Zhao, Zhong-Tang (13 August 2013). "Maternal passive smoking during pregnancy and neural tube defects in offspring: a meta-analysis". Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 289 (3): 513–521. doi:10.1007/s00404-013-2997-3. PMID 23942772. S2CID 6526042.
  46. ^ Janson C (2004). "The effect of passive smoking on respiratory health in children and adults". Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 8 (5): 510–6. PMID 15137524.
  47. ^ Saulyte, Jurgita; Regueira, Carlos; Montes-Martínez, Agustín; Khudyakov, Polyna; Takkouche, Bahi; Novotny, Thomas E. (11 March 2014). "Active or Passive Exposure to Tobacco Smoking and Allergic Rhinitis, Allergic Dermatitis, and Food Allergy in Adults and Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis". PLOS Medicine. 11 (3): e1001611. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001611. PMC 3949681. PMID 24618794.
  48. ^ Wei, X; E, M; Yu, S (January 2015). "A meta-analysis of passive smoking and risk of developing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus". Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice. 107 (1): 9–14. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2014.09.019. PMID 25488377.
  49. ^ Wang, Y; Ji, J; Liu, YJ; Deng, X; He, QQ (2013). "Passive smoking and risk of type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies". PLOS ONE. 8 (7): e69915. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...869915W. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069915. PMC 3724674. PMID 23922856.
  50. ^ Sun, K; Liu, D; Wang, C; Ren, M; Yang, C; Yan, L (November 2014). "Passive smoke exposure and risk of diabetes: a meta-analysis of prospective studies". Endocrine. 47 (2): 421–7. doi:10.1007/s12020-014-0194-1. PMID 24532101. S2CID 3276501.
  51. ^ Pan, An; Wang, Yeli; Talaei, Mohammad; Hu, Frank B; Wu, Tangchun (December 2015). "Relation of active, passive, and quitting smoking with incident type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis". The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology. 3 (12): 958–967. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00316-2. PMC 4656094. PMID 26388413.
  52. ^ Akinkugbe, Aderonke A.; Slade, Gary D.; Divaris, Kimon; Poole, Charles (November 2016). "Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association Between Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Periodontitis Endpoints Among Nonsmokers". Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 18 (11): 2047–56. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntw105. PMC 5055738. PMID 27083214.
  53. ^ Glantz SA, Parmley WW (1991). "Passive smoking and heart disease. Epidemiology, physiology, and biochemistry". Circulation. 83 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1161/01.cir.83.1.1. PMID 1984876.
  54. ^ Taylor AE, Johnson DC, Kazemi H (1992). "Environmental tobacco smoke and cardiovascular disease. A position paper from the Council on Cardiopulmonary and Critical Care, American Heart Association". Circulation. 86 (2): 699–702. doi:10.1161/01.cir.86.2.699. PMID 1638735.
  55. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 376–380
  56. ^ "Second-hand smoke". WHO website. Retrieved 24 April 2015.
  57. ^ "The last gasp". The Economist. 19 July 2017. Retrieved 20 July 2017.
  58. ^ Kantor, R; Kim, A; Thyssen, JP; Silverberg, JI (December 2016). "Association of atopic dermatitis with smoking: A systematic review and meta-analysis". Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 75 (6): 1119–1125.e1. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2016.07.017. PMC 5216172. PMID 27542586.
  59. ^ Anderson, HR; Cook, DG (November 1997). "Passive smoking and sudden infant death syndrome: review of the epidemiological evidence". Thorax. 52 (11): 1003–9. doi:10.1136/thx.52.11.1003. PMC 1758452. PMID 9487351.
  60. ^ Surgeon General 2006, p. 194
  61. ^ a b August 2006.
  62. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 311–9
  63. ^ Vork KL, Broadwin RL, Blaisdell RJ (2007). "Developing Asthma in Childhood from Exposure to Secondhand Tobacco Smoke: Insights from a Meta-Regression". Environ. Health Perspect. 115 (10): 1394–400. doi:10.1289/ehp.10155. PMC 2022647. PMID 17938726.
  64. ^ Tinuoye, O.; Pell, J. P.; Mackay, D. F. (28 March 2013). "Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Physician-Diagnosed Childhood Asthma". Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 15 (9): 1475–1483. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt033. PMID 23539174.
  65. ^ Wang, Zhen; May, Sara M.; Charoenlap, Suvanee; Pyle, Regan; Ott, Nancy L.; Mohammed, Khaled; Joshi, Avni Y. (November 2015). "Effects of secondhand smoke exposure on asthma morbidity and health care utilization in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. 115 (5): 396–401.e2. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2015.08.005. PMID 26411971.
  66. ^ de Jongste JC, Shields MD (2003). "Cough • 2: Chronic cough in children". Thorax. 58 (11): 998–1003. doi:10.1136/thorax.58.11.998. PMC 1746521. PMID 14586058.
  67. ^ Dybing E, Sanner T (1999). "Passive smoking, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and childhood infections". Hum Exp Toxicol. 18 (4): 202–5. doi:10.1191/096032799678839914. PMID 10333302. S2CID 21365217.
  68. ^ a b c DiFranza JR, Aligne CA, Weitzman M (2004). "Prenatal and postnatal environmental tobacco smoke exposure and children's health". Pediatrics. 113 (4 Suppl): 1007–15. doi:10.1542/peds.113.S3.1007. PMID 15060193. S2CID 248349.
  69. ^ a b Chatzimichael, A; Tsalkidis, A; Cassimos, D; Gardikis, S; Tripsianis, G; Deftereos, S; Ktenidou-Kartali, S; Tsanakas, I (June 2007). "The role of breastfeeding and passive smoking on the development of severe bronchiolitis in infants". Minerva Pediatrica. 59 (3): 199–206. PMID 17519864.
  70. ^ a b Preventing Smoking and Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Before, During, and After Pregnancy 2011-09-11 at the Wayback Machine. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. July 2007.
  71. ^ Jafta, N; Jeena, PM; Barregard, L; Naidoo, RN (May 2015). "Childhood tuberculosis and exposure to indoor air pollution: a systematic review and meta-analysis". The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease. 19 (5): 596–602. doi:10.5588/ijtld.14.0686. PMID 25868030.
  72. ^ Feleszko, W; Ruszczyński, M; Jaworska, J; Strzelak, A; Zalewski, BM; Kulus, M (November 2014). "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and risk of allergic sensitisation in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Archives of Disease in Childhood. 99 (11): 985–92. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2013-305444. PMID 24958794. S2CID 206856566.
  73. ^ Sabbagh, HJ; Hassan, MH; Innes, NP; Elkodary, HM; Little, J; Mossey, PA (2015). "Passive smoking in the etiology of non-syndromic orofacial clefts: a systematic review and meta-analysis". PLOS ONE. 10 (3): e0116963. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1016963S. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0116963. PMC 4356514. PMID 25760440.
  74. ^ Pagani, Linda S. (July 2014). "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and brain development: The case of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder". Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 44: 195–205. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.03.008. PMID 23545330. S2CID 20470659.
  75. ^ (PDF). The Collaborative on Health and the Environment's Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative. July 1, 2008. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-03-27.
  76. ^ Chen, Ruoling; Clifford, Angela; Lang, Linda; Anstey, Kaarin J. (October 2013). "Is exposure to secondhand smoke associated with cognitive parameters of children and adolescents?—a systematic literature review". Annals of Epidemiology. 23 (10): 652–661. doi:10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.07.001. hdl:1885/10932. PMID 23969303.
  77. ^ Avşar, A.; Darka, Ö.; Topaloğlu, B.; Bek, Y. (October 2008). "Association of passive smoking with caries and related salivary biomarkers in young children". Archives of Oral Biology. 53 (10): 969–974. doi:10.1016/j.archoralbio.2008.05.007. PMID 18672230.
  78. ^ Surgeon General 2006, pp. 293–309
  79. ^ Jones, Laura L.; Hassanien, A; Cook, DG; Britton, J; Leonardi-Bee, J (1 January 2012). "Parental Smoking and the Risk of Middle Ear Disease in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis". Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 166 (1): 18–27. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.158. PMID 21893640.
  80. ^ Lee, Chien-Chang; Middaugh, Nicole A.; Howie, Stephen R. C.; Ezzati, Majid; Lanphear, Bruce P. (7 December 2010). "Association of Secondhand Smoke Exposure with Pediatric Invasive Bacterial Disease and Bacterial Carriage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis". PLOS Medicine. 7 (12): e1000374. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000374. PMC 2998445. PMID 21151890.
  81. ^ Chiswell, C; Akram, Y (February 2017). "Impact of environmental tobacco smoke exposure on anaesthetic and surgical outcomes in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Archives of Disease in Childhood. 102 (2): 123–130. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2016-310687. PMC 5284464. PMID 27417307.
  82. ^ Jara, SM; Benke, JR; Lin, SY; Ishman, SL (January 2015). "The association between secondhand smoke and sleep-disordered breathing in children: a systematic review". The Laryngoscope. 125 (1): 241–7. doi:10.1002/lary.24833. PMID 25130300. S2CID 23401780.
  83. ^ Raghuveer, Geetha; White, David A.; Hayman, Laura L.; Woo, Jessica G.; Villafane, Juan; Celermajer, David; Ward, Kenneth D.; de Ferranti, Sarah D.; Zachariah, Justin (18 October 2016). "Cardiovascular Consequences of Childhood Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure: Prevailing Evidence, Burden, and Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association". Circulation. 134 (16): e336–59. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000000443. PMC 5207215. PMID 27619923.
  84. ^ Steenland, K. (1 January 1992). "Passive smoking and the risk of heart disease". JAMA. 267 (1): 94–99. doi:10.1001/jama.267.1.94. PMID 1727204.
  85. ^ Law, M R; Morris, J K; Wald, N J (18 October 1997). "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and ischaemic heart disease: an evaluation of the evidence". BMJ. 315 (7114): 973–980. doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7114.973. PMC 2127675. PMID 9365294.
  86. ^ Thun, M; Henley, J; Apicella, L (December 1999). "Epidemiologic studies of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease and ETS exposure from spousal smoking". Environmental Health Perspectives. 107 (suppl 6): 841–846. doi:10.1289/ehp.99107s6841. JSTOR 3434563. PMC 1566204. PMID 10592140.
  87. ^ He, Jiang; Vupputuri, Suma; Allen, Krista; Prerost, Monica R.; Hughes, Janet; Whelton, Paul K. (25 March 1999). "Passive Smoking and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease — A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiologic Studies". New England Journal of Medicine. 340 (12): 920–926. doi:10.1056/NEJM199903253401204. PMID 10089185.
  88. ^ Diethelm PA, Rielle JC, McKee M (2005). "The whole truth and nothing but the truth? The research that Philip Morris did not want you to see". Lancet. 366 (9479): 86–92. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66474-4. PMID 15993237. S2CID 10442244.
  89. ^ Schick S, Glantz S (2005). "Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke". Tobacco Control. 14 (6): 396–404. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.011288. PMC 1748121. PMID 16319363.
  90. ^ Schick S, Glantz SA (2006). "Sidestream cigarette smoke toxicity increases with aging and exposure duration". Tobacco Control. 15 (6): 424–9. doi:10.1136/tc.2006.016162. PMC 2563675. PMID 17130369.
  91. ^ Schick, S. F.; Glantz, S. (1 August 2007). "Concentrations of the Carcinogen 4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-Pyridyl)-1-Butanone in Sidestream Cigarette Smoke Increase after Release into Indoor Air: Results from Unpublished Tobacco Industry Research". Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. 16 (8): 1547–1553. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0210. PMID 17684127. S2CID 690030.
  92. ^ Whincup, Peter H; Gilg, Julie A; Emberson, Jonathan R; Jarvis, Martin J; Feyerabend, Colin; Bryant, Andrew; Walker, Mary; Cook, Derek G (24 July 2004). "Passive smoking and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: prospective study with cotinine measurement". BMJ. 329 (7459): 200–205. doi:10.1136/bmj.38146.427188.55. PMC 487731. PMID 15229131.
  93. ^ Hackshaw, A K; Law, M R; Wald, N J (18 October 1997). "The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke". BMJ. 315 (7114): 980–988. doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7114.980. PMC 2127653. PMID 9365295.
  94. ^ Copas, J B; Shi, JQ (12 February 2000). "Reanalysis of epidemiological evidence on lung cancer and passive smoking". BMJ. 320 (7232): 417–418. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7232.417. PMC 27286. PMID 10669446.
  95. ^ Takagi, Hisato; Sekino, Seishiro; Kato, Takayoshi; Matsuno, Yukihiro; Umemoto, Takuya (February 2006). "Revisiting evidence on lung cancer and passive smoking: Adjustment for publication bias by means of "trim and fill" algorithm". Lung Cancer. 51 (2): 245–246. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2005.11.004. PMID 16386820.
  96. ^ Zhong, Lijie; Goldberg, Mark S; Parent, Marie-Élise; Hanley, James A (January 2000). "Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and the risk of lung cancer: a meta-analysis". Lung Cancer. 27 (1): 3–18. doi:10.1016/s0169-5002(99)00093-8. PMID 10672779.
  97. ^ Taylor, Richard; Gumming, Robert; Woodward, Alistair; Black, Megan (June 2001). "Passive smoking and lung cancer: a cumulative meta-analysis". Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health. 25 (3): 203–211. doi:10.1111/j.1467-842x.2001.tb00564.x. PMID 11494987. S2CID 25724906.
  98. ^ Kim, Claire H.; Lee, Yuan-Chin Amy; Hung, Rayjean J.; McNallan, Sheila R.; Cote, Michele L.; Lim, Wei-Yen; Chang, Shen-Chih; Kim, Jin Hee; Ugolini, Donatella; Chen, Ying; Liloglou, Triantafillos; Andrew, Angeline S.; Onega, Tracy; Duell, Eric J.; Field, John K.; Lazarus, Philip; Le Marchand, Loic; Neri, Monica; Vineis, Paolo; Kiyohara, Chikako; Hong, Yun-Chul; Morgenstern, Hal; Matsuo, Keitaro; Tajima, Kazuo; Christiani, David C.; McLaughlin, John R.; Bencko, Vladimir; Holcatova, Ivana; Boffetta, Paolo; Brennan, Paul; Fabianova, Eleonora; Foretova, Lenka; Janout, Vladimir; Lissowska, Jolanta; Mates, Dana; Rudnai, Peter; Szeszenia-Dabrowska, Neonila; Mukeria, Anush; Zaridze, David; Seow, Adeline; Schwartz, Ann G.; Yang, Ping; Zhang, Zuo-Feng (15 October 2014). "Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke and lung cancer by histological type: A pooled analysis of the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO): Secondhand tobacco smoke and lung cancer". International Journal of Cancer. 135 (8): 1918–1930. doi:10.1002/ijc.28835. PMC 4126868. PMID 24615328.
  99. ^ a b Novak K (2007). "Passive smoking: out from the haze". Nature. 447 (7148): 1049–51. Bibcode:2007Natur.447.1049N. doi:10.1038/4471049a. PMID 17597735. S2CID 9627500.
  100. ^ Bailar, John C. (25 March 1999). "Passive Smoking, Coronary Heart Disease, and Meta-Analysis". New England Journal of Medicine. 340 (12): 958–959. doi:10.1056/NEJM199903253401211. PMID 10089192.
  101. ^ Raupach, Tobias; Schäfer, Katrin; Konstantinides, Stavros; Andreas, Stefan (1 February 2006). "Secondhand smoke as an acute threat for the cardiovascular system: a change in paradigm". European Heart Journal. 27 (4): 386–392. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi601. PMID 16230308.
  102. ^ Taylor, R.; Najafi, F.; Dobson, A. (1 October 2007). "Meta-analysis of studies of passive smoking and lung cancer: effects of study type and continent". International Journal of Epidemiology. 36 (5): 1048–1059. doi:10.1093/ije/dym158. PMID 17690135.
  103. ^ a b Stayner, Leslie; Bena, James; Sasco, Annie J.; Smith, Randall; Steenland, Kyle; Kreuzer, Michaela; Straif, Kurt (March 2007). "Lung Cancer Risk and Workplace Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke". American Journal of Public Health. 97 (3): 545–551. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.061275. PMC 1805004. PMID 17267733.
  104. ^ . Archived from the original on 2006-08-05. Retrieved 2006-07-26.
  105. ^ Wirth, N.; Abou-Hamdan, K.; Spinosa, A.; Bohadana, A.; Martinet, Y. (March 2005). "Le tabagisme passif" [Passive smoking]. Revue de Pneumologie Clinique (in French). 61 (1): 7–15. doi:10.1016/s0761-8417(05)84776-5. PMID 15772574.
  106. ^ a b "France to ban smoking in public". BBC. 2006-10-08. Retrieved 2006-10-09.
  107. ^ Meyers, David G.; Neuberger, John S.; He, Jianghua (September 2009). "Cardiovascular Effect of Bans on Smoking in Public Places". Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 54 (14): 1249–1255. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.022. PMID 19778665.
  108. ^ Lin, Hualiang; Wang, Hongchun; Wu, Wei; Lang, Lingling; Wang, Qinzhou; Tian, Linwei (December 2013). "The effects of smoke-free legislation on acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis". BMC Public Health. 13 (1): 529. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-529. PMC 3671962. PMID 23721370.
  109. ^ Wells, A J (July 1998). "Lung cancer from passive smoking at work". American Journal of Public Health. 88 (7): 1025–1029. doi:10.2105/ajph.88.7.1025. PMC 1508269. PMID 9663148.
  110. ^ a b Fitzsimmons, Kathleen (21 November 2013). "Reducing Worker Exposure to ETS". National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Retrieved 14 January 2015.
  111. ^ Office on Smoking Health (US) (2006). The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General. Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US). PMID 20669524. Retrieved 2015-04-24.
  112. ^ Pugmire, Juliana; Sweeting, Helen; Moore, Laurence (February 2017). "Environmental tobacco smoke exposure among infants, children and young people: now is no time to relax". Archives of Disease in Childhood. 102 (2): 117–118. doi:10.1136/archdischild-2016-311652. PMID 28100555. S2CID 41806496.
  113. ^ Strachan, D P; Cook, D G (October 1997). "Health effects of passive smoking. 1. Parental smoking and lower respiratory illness in infancy and early childhood". Thorax. 52 (10): 905–914. doi:10.1136/thx.52.10.905. PMC 1758431. PMID 9404380.
  114. ^ Strachan, D. P.; Cook, D. G. (1 January 1998). "Health effects of passive smoking. 4. Parental smoking, middle ear disease and adenotonsillectomy in children". Thorax. 53 (1): 50–56. doi:10.1136/thx.53.1.50. PMC 1758689. PMID 9577522.
  115. ^ Song, Anna V.; Glantz, Stanton A.; Halpern-Felsher, Bonnie L. (December 2009). "Perceptions of Second-hand Smoke Risks Predict Future Adolescent Smoking Initiation". Journal of Adolescent Health. 45 (6): 618–625. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.04.022. PMC 2814413. PMID 19931835.
  116. ^ [WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control "WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control"]. The World Health Organization. WHO. 2013. Retrieved 2020-03-23. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  117. ^ Tsai, James; Homa, David M.; Gentzke, Andrea S.; Mahoney, Margaret; Sharapova, Saida R.; Sosnoff, Connie S.; Caron, Kevin T.; Wang, Lanqing; Melstrom, Paul C.; Trivers, Katrina F. (7 December 2018). "Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Among Nonsmokers — United States, 1988–2014". MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 67 (48): 1342–1346. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6748a3. PMC 6329485. PMID 30521502.
  118. ^ a b Behbod, Behrooz; Sharma, Mohit; Baxi, Ruchi; Roseby, Robert; Webster, Premila (31 January 2018). "Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 1 (1): CD001746. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001746.pub4. PMC 6491082. PMID 29383710.
  119. ^ a b Metz-Favre C, Donnay C, de Blay F (February 2005). "[Markers of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure]". Rev Mal Respir (in French). 22 (1 Pt 1): 81–92. doi:10.1016/S0761-8425(05)85439-7. PMID 15968761.
  120. ^ McClure JB (April 2002). "Are biomarkers useful treatment aids for promoting health behavior change? An empirical review". Am J Prev Med. 22 (3): 200–7. doi:10.1016/S0749-3797(01)00425-1. PMID 11897465.
  121. ^ Klesges RC, Debon M, Ray JW (October 1995). "Are self-reports of smoking rate biased? Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey". J Clin Epidemiol. 48 (10): 1225–33. doi:10.1016/0895-4356(95)00020-5. PMID 7561984.
  122. ^ Okoli CT, Kelly T, Hahn EJ (October 2007). "Secondhand smoke and nicotine exposure: a brief review". Addict Behav. 32 (10): 1977–88. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.12.024. PMID 17270359.
  123. ^ Florescu A, Ferrence R, Einarson T, Selby P, Soldin O, Koren G (February 2009). "Methods for quantification of exposure to cigarette smoking and environmental tobacco smoke: focus on developmental toxicology". Ther Drug Monit. 31 (1): 14–30. doi:10.1097/FTD.0b013e3181957a3b. PMC 3644554. PMID 19125149.
  124. ^ Irving JM, Clark EC, Crombie IK, Smith WC (January 1988). "Evaluation of a portable measure of expired-air carbon monoxide". Prev Med. 17 (1): 109–15. doi:10.1016/0091-7435(88)90076-X. PMID 3362796.
  125. ^ Schick S, Glantz S (2005). "Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke: more toxic than mainstream smoke". Tob. Control. 14 (6): 396–404. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.011288. PMC 1748121. PMID 16319363.
  126. ^ Invernizzi G, Ruprecht A, Mazza R, et al. (2004). "Particulate matter from tobacco versus diesel car exhaust: an educational perspective". Tob Control. 13 (3): 219–21. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.005975. PMC 1747905. PMID 15333875.
  127. ^ Barnoya J, Glantz SA (2005). "Cardiovascular effects of secondhand smoke: nearly as large as smoking". Circulation. 111 (20): 2684–98. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.492215. PMID 15911719. S2CID 2291566.
  128. ^ Otsuka R, Watanabe H, Hirata K, et al. (2001). "Acute effects of passive smoking on the coronary circulation in healthy young adults". JAMA. 286 (4): 436–41. doi:10.1001/jama.286.4.436. PMID 11466122.
  129. ^ Celermajer, David S.; Adams, Mark R.; Clarkson, Peter; Robinson, Jacqui; McCredie, Robyn; Donald, Ann; Deanfield, John E. (18 January 1996). "Passive Smoking and Impaired Endothelium-Dependent Arterial Dilatation in Healthy Young Adults". New England Journal of Medicine. 334 (3): 150–155. doi:10.1056/NEJM199601183340303. PMID 8531969.
  130. ^ Howard, G; Thun, MJ (December 1999). "Why is environmental tobacco smoke more strongly associated with coronary heart disease than expected? A review of potential biases and experimental data". Environmental Health Perspectives. 107 (Suppl 6): 853–8. doi:10.2307/3434565. JSTOR 3434565. PMC 1566209. PMID 10592142.
  131. ^ Cendon, S.P.; Battlehner, C.; Lorenzi-Filho, G.; Dohlnikoff, M.; Pereira, P.M.; Conceição, G.M.S.; Beppu, O.S.; Saldiva, P.H.N. (October 1997). "Pulmonary emphysema induced by passive smoking: an experimental study in rats". Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research. 30 (10): 1241–1247. doi:10.1590/s0100-879x1997001000017. PMID 9496445.
  132. ^ Eren, U.; Kum, S.; Sandikci, M.; Kara, E. (2006). "Effects of long-term passive smoking on the mast cells in rat lungs". Revue de Médecine Vétérinaire. 6: 319–322.
  133. ^ Matt GE, Quintana PJ, Hovell MF, et al. (March 2004). "Households contaminated by environmental tobacco smoke: sources of infant exposures". Tob Control. 13 (1): 29–37. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.003889. PMC 1747815. PMID 14985592.
  134. ^ Winickoff JP, Friebely J, Tanski SE, et al. (January 2009). "Beliefs about the health effects of "thirdhand" smoke and home smoking bans". Pediatrics. 123 (1): e74–9. doi:10.1542/peds.2008-2184. PMC 3784302. PMID 19117850.
  135. ^ Rabin, Roni Caryn (2009-01-02). "A New Cigarette Hazard: 'Third-Hand Smoke'". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-01-12.
  136. ^ Sleiman, M.; Gundel, L. A.; Pankow, J. F.; Jacob, P.; Singer, B. C.; Destaillats, H. (13 April 2010). "Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential thirdhand smoke hazards". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107 (15): 6576–6581. doi:10.1073/pnas.0912820107. PMC 2872399. PMID 20142504.
  137. ^ Louisiana Hospital to Ban Odor of Smoke on Workers' Clothes, Fox News, October 3, 2011
  138. ^ Samet, J. M.; Avila-Tang, E.; Boffetta, P.; Hannan, L. M.; Olivo-Marston, S.; Thun, M. J.; Rudin, C. M. (15 September 2009). "Lung Cancer in Never Smokers: Clinical Epidemiology and Environmental Risk Factors". Clinical Cancer Research. 15 (18): 5626–5645. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-0376. PMC 3170525. PMID 19755391.
  139. ^ "Environmental Tobacco Smoke" (PDF). 11th Report on Carcinogens. U.S. National Institutes of Health. (PDF) from the original on 2008-07-16. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  140. ^ "Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet". U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017-02-21.
  141. ^ . U.S. National Cancer Institute. Archived from the original on 2007-09-05. Retrieved 2007-08-22.
  142. ^ "Health Effects of Exposure to Secondhand Smoke". United States Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved 2007-09-24.
  143. ^ "The Truth about Secondhand Smoke". American Heart Association. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  144. ^ . American Lung Association. Archived from the original on 2007-09-18. Retrieved 2007-09-24.
  145. ^ . American Cancer Society. Archived from the original on 2007-09-14. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  146. ^ "AMA: Surgeon General's secondhand smoke report a wake-up call to lawmakers" (Press release). American Medical Association. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  147. ^ . American Academy of Pediatrics. Archived from the original on 2007-10-15. Retrieved 2007-10-02.
  148. ^ (PDF). Australian National Public Health Partnership. November 2000. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-02-12. Retrieved 2007-09-11.
  149. ^ Two relevant reports have been published by the Scientific Committee:
    • A 1998 report of the SCOTH concluded that passive smoking was a cause of lung cancer, heart disease, and other health problems.
    • A 2004 update by the SCOTH 2012-02-06 at the Wayback Machine, reviewing new evidence published since the 1998 report, found that recent research had confirmed the initially reported link between passive smoking and health risks.
  150. ^ Surgeon General 2006, p. 588 Ch. 10
  151. ^ Saad, Lydia (25 July 2007). "More Smokers Feeling Harassed by Smoking Bans". Gallup. Retrieved 20 February 2015.
  152. ^ "Cato and the tobacco industry". Accessed 8 April 2011.
  153. ^ Nahan, Mike. The Australian, 10 April 2000, "The IPA sings its own song".
  154. ^ Shermer, Michael (May 2010). "I am a sceptic, but I'm not a denier". New Scientist. 206 (2760): 36–37. Bibcode:2010NewSc.206R..36S. doi:10.1016/S0262-4079(10)61210-9.
  155. ^ Diethelm, P.; McKee, M. (16 October 2008). "Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?". The European Journal of Public Health. 19 (1): 2–4. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckn139. PMID 19158101. S2CID 8098426.
  156. ^ Enstrom JE, Kabat GC (2003). "Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98". BMJ. 326 (7398): 1057. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7398.1057. PMC 155687. PMID 12750205.
  157. ^ Davey Smith G (2003). "Effect of passive smoking on health: More information is available, but the controversy still persists". BMJ. 326 (7398): 1048–9. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7398.1048. PMC 1125974. PMID 12750182.
  158. ^ Kessler 2006, p. 1383
  159. ^ Tong EK, Glantz SA (2007). "Tobacco industry efforts undermining evidence linking secondhand smoke with cardiovascular disease". Circulation. 116 (16): 1845–54. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.715888. PMID 17938301. S2CID 4021497.
  160. ^ "American Cancer Society Condemns Tobacco Industry Study for Inaccurate Use of Data" (PDF) (Press release). American Cancer Society. 2003-05-13. Retrieved 2007-08-29.
  161. ^ Thun, Michael J (4 October 2003). "More misleading science from the tobacco industry". BMJ. 327 (7418): E237–E238. doi:10.1136/bmjusa.03070002. S2CID 74351979.
  162. ^ "Proposed Research on the relationship of Low Levels of Active Smoking to Mortality: Letter from James Enstrom to Philip Morris Scientific Affairs office". 1997-01-01. Retrieved 2007-08-29.
  163. ^ Dalton R (March 2007). "Passive-smoking study faces review". Nature. 446 (7133): 242. Bibcode:2007Natur.446..242D. doi:10.1038/446242a. PMID 17361147. S2CID 27691890.
  164. ^ Kessler 2006, p. 1380
  165. ^ Kessler 2006, pp. 1380–3
  166. ^ Bero, LA; Glantz, S; Hong, MK (April 2005). "The limits of competing interest disclosures". Tobacco Control. 14 (2): 118–26. PMC 1748015. PMID 15791022.
  167. ^ Enstrom, JE; Kabat, GC (March 2006). "Environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease mortality in the United States--a meta-analysis and critique". Inhalation Toxicology. 18 (3): 199–210. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.495.2191. doi:10.1080/08958370500434255. PMID 16399662. S2CID 7457133.
  168. ^ Kessler 2006, p. 162
  169. ^ United States of America v. Philip Morris et al., United States Factual Memorandum Pursuant to Order No. 470, Section V, United States District Court for the District of Columbia. p. 44
  170. ^ ETS / IAQ SCIENTIFIC CONSULTANTS, from the Legacy Tobacco Documents Archive. Retrieved July 19, 2007.
  171. ^ Gori, Gio Batta (Spring 2007). (PDF). Regulation. 30 (1): 14–7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2009-01-16.
  172. ^ Smoked Out: Pundit for Hire, by Paul D. Thacker. Published in The New Republic on January 26, 2006. Retrieved August 22, 2007.
  173. ^ Philip Morris budget for "Strategy and Social Responsibility", listing Milloy as a paid consultant. Retrieved August 22, 2007.
  174. ^ "Secondhand Joking", by Steven Milloy. Retrieved May 31, 2013.
  175. ^ Samet JM, Burke TA (2001). "Turning Science Into Junk: The Tobacco Industry and Passive Smoking". Am J Public Health. 91 (11): 1742–4. doi:10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1742. PMC 1446866. PMID 11684591.
  176. ^ Scientific Communications Through the Media[permanent dead link], from the Philip Morris document archive. Retrieved October 3, 2007. Also cited in Ong, Elisa K.; Glantz, Stanton A. (November 2001). "Constructing 'Sound Science' and 'Good Epidemiology': Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations Firms". American Journal of Public Health. 91 (11): 1749–1757. doi:10.2105/ajph.91.11.1749. PMC 1446868. PMID 11684593.
  177. ^ a b Ong EK, Glantz SA (2001). "Constructing "Sound Science" and "Good Epidemiology": Tobacco, Lawyers, and Public Relations Firms". Am J Public Health. 91 (11): 1749–57. doi:10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1749. PMC 1446868. PMID 11684593.
  178. ^ Layard, M.W. (February 1995). "Ischemic Heart Disease and Spousal Smoking in the National Mortality Followback Survey". Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 21 (1): 180–183. doi:10.1006/rtph.1995.1022. PMID 7784629.
  179. ^ Levois, M.E.; Layard, M.W. (February 1995). "Publication Bias in the Environmental Tobacco Smoke/Coronary Heart Disease Epidemiologic Literature". Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 21 (1): 184–191. doi:10.1006/rtph.1995.1023. PMID 7784630.
  180. ^ Law, Malcolm R; Wald, Nicholas J (July 2003). "Environmental tobacco smoke and ischemic heart disease". Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases. 46 (1): 31–38. doi:10.1016/s0033-0620(03)00078-1. PMID 12920699.
  181. ^ a b Boffetta, Paolo; Agudo, Antonio; Ahrens, Wolfgang; Benhamou, Ellen; Benhamou, Simone; Darby, Sarah C.; Ferro, Gilles; Fortes, Cristina; Gonzalez, Carlos A.; Jöckel, Karl-Heinz; Krauss, Martin; Kreienbrock, Lothar; Kreuzer, Michaela; Mendes, Anabela; Merletti, Franco; Nyberg, Fredrik; Pershagen, Göran; Pohlabeln, Hermann; Riboli, Elio; Schmid, Giovanni; Simonato, Lorenzo; Tre'daniel, Jean; Whitley, Elise; Wichmann, Heinz-Erich; Winck, Carlos; Zambon, Paola; Saracci, Rodolfo (7 October 1998). "Multicenter Case-Control Study of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Europe". JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 90 (19): 1440–1450. doi:10.1093/jnci/90.19.1440. PMID 9776409.
  182. ^ . Archived from the original on 2007-10-13.
  183. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-29.
  184. ^ Le Grand C. Anti-smokers blown away by study. Australian 1998, March 10.
  185. ^ WHO Rejects smoking link with lung cancer. Zimbabwe Independent 1998, Oct 23.
  186. ^ No Link Between Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer. The Times 1998, March 9.
  187. ^ "Passive smoking does cause lung cancer, do not let them fool you". The Ceylon Medical Journal. 43 (2): 98. June 1998. PMID 9704550.
  188. ^ Blot, William J.; McLaughlin, Joseph K. (7 October 1998). "Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer Risk: What Is the Story Now?". JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 90 (19): 1416–1417. doi:10.1093/jnci/90.19.1416. PMID 9776401.
  189. ^ Ong EK, Glantz SA (2000). "Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer's second-hand smoke study". Lancet. 355 (9211): 1253–9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02098-5. PMID 10770318. S2CID 25145666.
  190. ^ "Tobacco Companies Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities at the World Health Organization" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2004-08-21. Retrieved 2008-12-30.
  191. ^ US Environmental Protection Agency. "Respiratory health effects of passive smoking: Lung cancer and other disorders".
  192. ^ . Archived from the original on 2000-08-15.
  193. ^ (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-10-09. Retrieved 2008-12-30.
  194. ^ U.S. Department of Health; Human Services; National Toxicology Program, eds. (December 2–3, 1998). "Final Report on Carcinogens – Background Document for Environmental Tobacco Smoke". (PDF). Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. p. 24. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-29.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  195. ^ Thun MJ (2003). "Passive smoking: Tobacco industry publishes disinformation". BMJ. 327 (7413): 502–3, author reply 504–5. doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7413.502-c. PMC 188400. PMID 12946979.
  196. ^ a b Barnes DE, Bero LA (1998). "Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions". JAMA. 279 (19): 1566–70. doi:10.1001/jama.279.19.1566. PMID 9605902.
  197. ^ Tong EK, England L, Glantz SA (2005). "Changing conclusions on secondhand smoke in a sudden infant death syndrome review funded by the tobacco industry". Pediatrics. 115 (3): e356–66. doi:10.1542/peds.2004-1922. PMID 15741361. S2CID 33226933.
  198. ^ "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke" (PDF). Executive Summary. Surgeon General of the United States. 2006. p. 21. Retrieved 2009-01-28.
  199. ^ a b c . Archived from the original on 2007-10-13. Retrieved 2007-08-27.
  200. ^ A Study of Public Attitudes toward Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 1978, produced for the Tobacco Institute and released under the terms of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement.
  201. ^ Smith, E. A.; Malone, R. E. (5 January 2007). "'We will speak as the smoker': the tobacco industry's smokers' rights groups". The European Journal of Public Health. 17 (3): 306–313. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckl244. PMC 2794244. PMID 17065174.
  202. ^ Trotter L, Chapman S (2003). ""Conclusions about exposure to ETS and health that will be unhelpful to us"*: How the tobacco industry attempted to delay and discredit the 1997 Australian National Health and Medical Research Council report on passive smoking". Tob Control. 12 (Suppl 3:iii): 102–6. doi:10.1136/tc.12.suppl_3.iii102. PMC 1766130. PMID 14645955.
  203. ^ Garne D, Watson M, Chapman S, Byrne F (2005). "Environmental tobacco smoke research published in the journal Indoor and Built Environment and associations with the tobacco industry". Lancet. 365 (9461): 804–9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)17990-2. PMID 15733724. S2CID 23160158.
  204. ^ a b "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke" (PDF). Executive Summary. Surgeon General of the United States. 2006. Retrieved 2009-01-28.
  205. ^ Kessler 2006, p. 1523
  206. ^ The most current positions of major tobacco companies on the issue of passive smoking can be found on their websites. As of 13 January 2009, the following websites contain tobacco-industry positions on the topic:
  207. ^ Litigation Against Tobacco Companies U.S. Department of Justice
  208. ^ Appeal Ruling, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 22 May 2009
  209. ^ Altria, Cigarette Makers Lose 'Lights' Ruling Appeal Bloomberg news, 22 May 2009
  210. ^ U.S. appeals court agrees tobacco companies lied Reuters, 22 May 2009
  211. ^ Smokers Daring Bloomberg To Ticket Them Under Park Ban 2013-11-26 at the Wayback Machine
  212. ^ "WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2005-02-27. Retrieved 2009-01-12. Parties recognize that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that exposure to tobacco causes death, disease and disability
  213. ^ a b "Guidelines on the Protection from Exposure to Secondhand Smoke" (PDF). Framework Convention for Tobacco Control. World Health Organization. 2007. Retrieved 2009-01-29.
  214. ^ Market Research World
  215. ^ Frazer, Kate; Callinan, Joanne E; McHugh, Jack; van Baarsel, Susan; Clarke, Anna; Doherty, Kirsten; Kelleher, Cecily (4 February 2016). "Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016 (2): CD005992. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005992.pub3. PMC 6486282. PMID 26842828.
  216. ^ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (January 2009). "Reduced hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction after implementation of a smoke-free ordinance—City of Pueblo, Colorado, 2002–2006". MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 57 (51): 1373–7. PMID 19116606.
  217. ^ Frazer, Kate; McHugh, Jack; Callinan, Joanne E; Kelleher, Cecily (27 May 2016). "Impact of institutional smoking bans on reducing harms and secondhand smoke exposure". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016 (5): CD011856. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011856.pub2. PMC 10164285. PMID 27230795.
  218. ^ Hopkins DP, Razi S, Leeks KD, Priya Kalra G, Chattopadhyay SK, Soler RE (2010). "Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use. A systematic review". Am J Prev Med. 38 (2 Suppl): S275–89. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2009.10.029. PMID 20117612.
  219. ^ Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, Glantz S (Mar 2003). "Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality industry". Tobacco Control. 12 (1): 13–20. doi:10.1136/tc.12.1.13. PMC 1759095. PMID 12612356.
  220. ^ Barnoya J, Arvizu M, Jones MR, Hernandez JC, Breysse PN, Navas-Acien A (November 2010). "Secondhand smoke exposure in bars and restaurants in Guatemala City: before and after smoking ban evaluation". Cancer Causes Control. 22 (1): 151–6. doi:10.1007/s10552-010-9673-8. PMID 21046446. S2CID 673901.
  221. ^ Thomson, George; Wilson, Nick; Edwards, Richard (June 2009). "At the frontier of tobacco control: A brief review of public attitudes toward smoke-free outdoor places". Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 11 (6): 584–590. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntp046. PMID 19359392.
  222. ^ "No ifs or butts". Building. 7 March 2005.
  223. ^ Drope J, Bialous SA, Glantz SA (March 2004). "Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke-free environments in North America". Tob Control. 13 (Suppl 1): i41–7. doi:10.1136/tc.2003.004101. PMC 1766145. PMID 14985616. The industry developed a network of ventilation 'experts' to promote its position that smoke-free environments were not necessary, often without disclosing the financial relationship between these experts and the industry.
  224. ^ "ASHRAE Position Document on Environmental Tobacco Smoke" (PDF). American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers. July 2020.
  225. ^ (PDF). European Commission Joint Research Centre. 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 27, 2009. Retrieved 2009-01-28.
  226. ^ Haveman, Robert; John Mullahy (September 25, 2005). . Wisconsin State Journal. p. B2. Archived from the original on January 4, 2009. Retrieved 2009-01-28.
  227. ^ Thompson, Andrea (2007-08-31). "Secondhand Smoke Causes Cancer in Pets". LiveScience. Retrieved 2007-08-31.
  228. ^ Snyder LA, Bertone ER, Jakowski RM, Dooner MS, Jennings-Ritchie J, Moore AS (2004). "p53 expression and environmental tobacco smoke exposure in feline oral squamous cell carcinoma". Vet Pathol. 41 (3): 209–14. doi:10.1354/vp.41-3-209. PMID 15133168. S2CID 24749614.
  229. ^ Bertone ER, Snyder LA, Moore AS (2002). "Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Risk of Malignant Lymphoma in Pet Cats". American Journal of Epidemiology. 156 (3): 268–273. doi:10.1093/aje/kwf044. PMID 12142262.
  230. ^ Reif JS, Dunn K, Ogilvie GK, Harris CK (1992). "Passive smoking and canine lung cancer risk". Am J Epidemiol. 135 (3): 234–9. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116276. PMID 1546698.

External links

Scientific bodies
  • , from the U.S. National Cancer Institute
  • "Environmental Tobacco Smoke" (PDF). (PDF) from the original on 2008-07-16. (219 KB). From the 11th Report on Carcinogens of the U.S. National Institutes of Health
  • U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Coordinating Center for Health Promotion; National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; Office on Smoking and Health (2006-06-27). "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General". Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Ga.: Surgeon General of the United States. PMID 20669524. O2NLM: WA 754 H4325 2006. Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  • World Health Organization; International Agency for Research on Cancer (2004). Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking (PDF). IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Vol. 83. Lyon, France: IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. ISBN 978-92-832-1283-6.
  • Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Tobacco Smoke in the Workplace from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke, from the California Environmental Protection Agency
  • Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Children Aged 3-19 Years with and Without Asthma in the United States, 1999-2010 National Center for Health Statistics
  • Öberg, Mattias; Jaakkola, Maritta S; Woodward, Alistair; Peruga, Armando; Prüss-Ustün, Annette (January 2011). "Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second-hand smoke: a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries". The Lancet. 377 (9760): 139–146. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61388-8. PMID 21112082. S2CID 7179156.
Tobacco industry
  • "Tobacco Company Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 21, 2004. Retrieved October 5, 2020. (1.55 MB): Report of the Committee of Experts on Tobacco Industry Documents from the World Health Organization
  • The Legacy Tobacco Documents Library and British American Tobacco Documents Archive from the University of California, San Francisco
  • Philip Morris USA Document Archive, made public as a result of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement
Other links
  • Guidelines Protection from Exposure to Secondhand Smoke, by WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
  • WHO Policy recommendations on protection from exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke
  • Small, Elysia; Shah, Hina P.; Davenport, Jake J.; Geier, Jacqueline E.; Yavarovich, Kate R.; Yamada, Hidetaka; Sabarinath, Sreedharan N.; Derendorf, Hartmut; Pauly, James R.; Gold, Mark S.; Bruijnzeel, Adrie W. (January 2010). "Tobacco smoke exposure induces nicotine dependence in rats". Psychopharmacology. 208 (1): 143–158. doi:10.1007/s00213-009-1716-z. PMC 3586198. PMID 19936715.
  • Kessler, Gladys (August 17, 2006). "United States of America v. Philip Morris et al.: Final Opinion of Judge Gladys Kessler" (PDF). United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

January 01, 1970
passive, smoking, second, hand, smoke, redirects, here, sublime, album, second, hand, smoke, inhalation, tobacco, smoke, called, passive, smoke, secondhand, smoke, environmental, tobacco, smoke, individuals, other, than, active, smoker, occurs, when, tobacco, . Second hand smoke redirects here For the Sublime album see Second hand Smoke Passive smoking is the inhalation of tobacco smoke called passive smoke secondhand smoke SHS or environmental tobacco smoke ETS by individuals other than the active smoker It occurs when tobacco smoke diffuses into the surrounding atmosphere as an aerosol pollutant which leads to its inhalation by nearby bystanders within the same environment Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke causes many of the same diseases caused by active smoking 1 2 although to a lower prevalence due to the reduced concentration of smoke that enters the airway Tobacco smoke in an Irish pub before a smoking ban came into effect on March 29 2004 According to latest WHO report more than 1 3 million deaths are attributed to passive smoking worldwide every year 3 The health risks of secondhand smoke are a matter of scientific consensus 4 5 6 and have been a major motivation for smoking bans in workplaces and indoor venues including restaurants bars and night clubs as well as some open public spaces 7 Concerns around secondhand smoke have played a central role in the debate over the harms and regulation of tobacco products Since the early 1970s the tobacco industry has viewed public concern over secondhand smoke as a serious threat to its business interests 8 Despite the industry s awareness of the harms of secondhand smoke as early as the 1980s the tobacco industry coordinated a scientific controversy with the purpose of stopping regulation of their products 4 1242 6 Contents 1 Terminology 2 Effects 2 1 Risk to children 3 Evidence 3 1 Exposure and risk levels 3 2 Interventions to reduce environmental tobacco smoke 3 3 Biomarkers 3 3 1 Cotinine 3 3 2 Carbon monoxide CO 4 Pathophysiology 5 Opinion of public health authorities 6 Public opinion 7 Controversy over harm 7 1 Industry funded studies and critiques 7 1 1 Enstrom and Kabat 7 1 2 Gori 7 1 3 Milloy 7 1 4 Levois and Layard 7 1 5 World Health Organization controversy 7 1 6 EPA lawsuit 7 1 7 Tobacco industry funding of research 7 2 Tobacco industry response 7 2 1 Position of major tobacco companies 7 3 US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies 8 Smoke free laws 8 1 Effects 8 2 Public opinion 8 3 Alternative forms 9 In animals 9 1 Observational studies 10 See also 11 References 12 External linksTerminologyFritz Lickint created the term passive smoking Passivrauchen in a publication in the German language during the 1930s 9 10 11 Terms used include environmental tobacco smoke to refer to the airborne matter while involuntary smoking and passive smoking refer to exposure to secondhand smoke 12 13 The term environmental tobacco smoke can be traced back to a 1974 industry sponsored meeting held in Bermuda while the term passive smoking was first used in the title of a scientific paper in 1970 13 The Surgeon General of the United States prefers to use the phrase secondhand smoke rather than environmental tobacco smoke stating that The descriptor secondhand captures the involuntary nature of the exposure while environmental does not 1 9 Most researchers consider the term passive smoking to be synonymous with secondhand smoke 14 In contrast a 2011 commentary in Environmental Health Perspectives argued that research into thirdhand smoke renders it inappropriate to refer to passive smoking with the term secondhand smoke which the authors stated constitutes a pars pro toto 14 The term sidestream smoke is sometimes used to refer to smoke that goes into the air directly from a burning cigarette cigar or pipe 15 while mainstream smoke refers to smoke that a smoker exhales EffectsSecondhand smoke causes many of the same diseases as direct smoking including cardiovascular diseases lung cancer and respiratory diseases 1 2 16 These include Cancer General overall increased risk 17 reviewing the evidence accumulated on a worldwide basis the International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2004 that Involuntary smoking exposure to secondhand or environmental tobacco smoke is carcinogenic to humans 2 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that about 70 chemicals present in secondhand smoke are carcinogenic 18 Lung cancer Passive smoking is a risk factor for lung cancer 19 20 In the United States secondhand smoke is estimated to cause more than 7 000 deaths from lung cancer a year among non smokers 21 A quarter of all cases occur in people who have never smoked 22 Breast cancer The California Environmental Protection Agency concluded in 2005 that passive smoking increases the risk of breast cancer in younger primarily premenopausal females by 70 16 and the US Surgeon General has concluded that the evidence is suggestive but still insufficient to assert such a causal relationship 1 In contrast the International Agency for Research on Cancer concluded in 2004 that there was no support for a causal relation between involuntary exposure to tobacco smoke and breast cancer in never smokers 2 A 2015 meta analysis found that the evidence that passive smoking moderately increased the risk of breast cancer had become more substantial than a few years ago 23 Cervical cancer A 2015 overview of systematic reviews found that exposure to secondhand smoke increased the risk of cervical cancer 24 Bladder cancer A 2016 systematic review and meta analysis found that secondhand smoke exposure was associated with a significant increase in the risk of bladder cancer 25 Circulatory system risk of heart disease 26 27 and reduced heart rate variability 28 Epidemiological studies have shown that both active and passive cigarette smoking increase the risk of atherosclerosis 29 Passive smoking is strongly associated with an increased risk of stroke and this increased risk is disproportionately high at low levels of exposure 30 Lung problems Risk of asthma 31 Risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD 32 According to a 2015 review passive smoking may increase the risk of tuberculosis infection and accelerate the progression of the disease but the evidence remains weak 33 The majority of studies on the association between secondhand smoke exposure and sinusitis have found a significant association between the two 34 Cognitive impairment and dementia Exposure to secondhand smoke may increase the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia in adults 50 and over 35 Children exposed to secondhand smoke show reduced vocabulary and reasoning skills when compared with non exposed children as well as more general cognitive and intellectual deficits 36 Mental health Exposure to secondhand smoke is associated with an increased risk of depressive symptoms 37 During pregnancy Miscarriage a 2014 meta analysis found that maternal secondhand smoke exposure increased the risk of miscarriage by 11 38 Low birth weight 16 part B ch 3 39 Premature birth 16 part B ch 3 40 Evidence of the causal link is described only as suggestive by the US Surgeon General in his 2006 report 41 Laws limiting smoking decrease premature births 42 Stillbirth and congenital malformations in children 43 Recent studies comparing females exposed to secondhand smoke and non exposed females demonstrate that females exposed while pregnant have higher risks of delivering a child with congenital abnormalities longer lengths smaller head circumferences and neural tube defects 44 45 General Worsening of asthma allergies and other conditions 46 A 2014 systematic review and meta analysis found that passive smoking was associated with a slightly increased risk of allergic diseases among children and adolescents the evidence for an association was weaker for adults 47 Type 2 diabetes 48 49 50 It remains unclear whether the association between passive smoking and diabetes is causal 51 Risk of carrying Neisseria meningitidis or Streptococcus pneumoniae 24 A possible increased risk of periodontitis 52 Overall increased risk of death in both adults where it was estimated to kill 53 000 nonsmokers per year in the U S in 1991 53 54 and in children 55 The World Health Organization states that passive smoking causes about 600 000 deaths a year and about 1 of the global burden of disease 56 As of 2017 passive smoking causes about 900 000 deaths a year which is about 1 8 of all deaths caused by smoking 57 Skin conditions A 2016 systematic review and meta analysis found that passive smoking was associated with a higher rate of atopic dermatitis 58 Risk to children Sudden infant death syndrome SIDS 59 In his 2006 report the US Surgeon General concludes The evidence is sufficient to infer a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke and sudden infant death syndrome 60 Secondhand smoking has been estimated to be associated with 430 SIDS deaths in the United States annually 61 Asthma 62 63 64 Secondhand smoke exposure is also associated with an almost doubled risk of hospitalization for asthma exacerbation among children with asthma 65 Lung infections 66 67 68 also including more severe illness with bronchiolitis 69 and bronchitis 70 and worse outcome 69 as well as increased risk of developing tuberculosis if exposed to a carrier 71 In the United States it is estimated that secondhand smoke has been associated with between 150 000 and 300 000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age resulting in between 7 500 and 15 000 hospitalizations each year 61 Impaired respiratory function and slowed lung growth 70 Allergies 72 Maternal passive smoking increases the risk of non syndromic orofacial clefts by 50 among their children 73 Learning difficulties developmental delays executive function problems 74 and neurobehavioral effects 75 76 Animal models suggest a role for nicotine and carbon monoxide in neurocognitive problems 68 An increase in tooth decay as well as related salivary biomarkers has been associated with passive smoking in children 77 Increased risk of middle ear infections 68 78 79 Invasive meningococcal disease 24 80 Anesthesia complications and some negative surgical outcomes 81 Sleep disordered breathing Most studies have found a significant association between passive smoking and sleep disordered breathing in children but further studies are needed to determine whether this association is causal 82 Adverse effects on the cardiovascular system of children 83 Evidence nbsp Exposure to secondhand smoke by age race and poverty level in the US in 2010 Epidemiological studies show that non smokers exposed to secondhand smoke are at risk for many of the health problems associated with direct smoking In 1992 a review estimated that secondhand smoke exposure was responsible for 35 000 to 40 000 deaths per year in the United States in the early 1980s 84 The absolute risk increase of heart disease due to ETS was 2 2 while the attributable risk percent was 23 A 1997 meta analysis found that secondhand smoke exposure increased the risk of heart disease by a quarter 85 and two 1999 meta analyses reached similar conclusions 86 87 Evidence shows that inhaled sidestream smoke the main component of secondhand smoke is about four times more toxic than mainstream smoke This fact has been known to the tobacco industry since the 1980s though it kept its findings secret 88 89 90 91 Some scientists believe that the risk of passive smoking in particular the risk of developing coronary heart diseases may have been substantially underestimated 92 In 1997 a meta analysis on the relationship between secondhand smoke exposure and lung cancer concluded that such exposure caused lung cancer The increase in risk was estimated to be 24 among non smokers who lived with a smoker 93 In 2000 Copas and Shi reported that there was clear evidence of publication bias in the studies included in this meta analysis They further concluded that after correcting for publication bias and assuming that 40 of all studies are unpublished this increased risk decreased from 24 to 15 94 This conclusion has been challenged on the basis that the assumption that 40 of all studies are unpublished was extreme 2 1269 In 2006 Takagi et al reanalyzed the data from this meta analysis to account for publication bias and estimated that the relative risk of lung cancer among those exposed to secondhand smoke was 1 19 slightly lower than the original estimate 95 A 2000 meta analysis found a relative risk of 1 48 for lung cancer among men exposed to secondhand smoke and a relative risk of 1 16 among those exposed to it at work 96 Another meta analysis confirmed the finding of an increased risk of lung cancer among women with spousal exposure to secondhand smoke the following year It found a relative risk of lung cancer of 1 29 for women exposed to secondhand smoke from their spouses 97 A 2014 meta analysis noted that the association between exposure to secondhand smoke and lung cancer risk is well established 98 A minority of epidemiologists have found it hard to understand how secondhand smoke which is more diluted than actively inhaled smoke could have an effect that is such a large fraction of the added risk of coronary heart disease among active smokers 99 100 One proposed explanation is that secondhand smoke is not simply a diluted version of mainstream smoke but has a different composition with more toxic substances per gram of total particulate matter 99 Passive smoking appears to be capable of precipitating the acute manifestations of cardio vascular diseases atherothrombosis and may also have a negative impact on the outcome of patients who have acute coronary syndromes 101 In 2004 the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC of the World Health Organization WHO reviewed all significant published evidence related to tobacco smoking and cancer It concluded These meta analyses show that there is a statistically significant and consistent association between lung cancer risk in spouses of smokers and exposure to second hand tobacco smoke from the spouse who smokes The excess risk is of the order of 20 for women and 30 for men and remains after controlling for some potential sources of bias and confounding 2 Subsequent meta analyses have confirmed these findings 102 103 The National Asthma Council of Australia cites studies showing that secondhand smoke is probably the most important indoor pollutant especially around young children 104 Smoking by either parent particularly by the mother increases the risk of asthma in children The outlook for early childhood asthma is less favourable in smoking households Children with asthma who are exposed to smoking in the home generally have more severe disease Many adults with asthma identify ETS as a trigger for their symptoms Doctor diagnosed asthma is more common among non smoking adults exposed to ETS than those not exposed Among people with asthma higher ETS exposure is associated with a greater risk of severe attacks In France exposure to secondhand smoke has been estimated to cause between 3 000 105 and 5 000 premature deaths per year with the larger figure cited by Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin during his announcement of a nationwide smoke free law That makes more than 13 deaths a day It is an unacceptable reality in our country in terms of public health 106 There is good observational evidence that smoke free legislation reduces the number of hospital admissions for heart disease 107 108 Exposure and risk levels The International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization concluded in 2004 that there was sufficient evidence that secondhand smoke caused cancer in humans 2 Those who work in environments where smoke is not regulated are at higher risk 109 103 Workers particularly at risk of exposure include those in installation repair and maintenance construction and extraction and transportation 110 Much research has come from studies of nonsmokers who are married to a smoker The US Surgeon General in his 2006 report estimated that living or working in a place where smoking is permitted increases the non smokers risk of developing heart disease by 25 30 and lung cancer by 20 30 111 Similarly children who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke are shown to experience a range of adverse effects 112 113 114 and a higher risk of becoming smokers later in life 115 The WHO has identified reduction of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke as key element for actions to encourage healthy child development 116 The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention monitors the extent of and trends in exposure to environmental tobacco smoke by measuring serum cotinine in national health surveys 117 The prevalence of secondhand smoke exposure among U S nonsmokers declined from 87 5 in 1988 to 25 2 in 2014 However nearly half of blacks and the poor were exposed in 2014 Interventions to reduce environmental tobacco smoke A systematic review compared smoking control programmes and their effects on smoke exposure in children The review distinguishes between community based ill child and healthy child settings and the most common types of interventions were counselling or brief advice during clinical visits The review did not find superior outcomes for any intervention and the authors caution that evidence from adult settings may not generalise well to children 118 Biomarkers nbsp Breath CO monitor displaying carbon monoxide concentration of an exhaled breath sample in ppm with corresponding percent concentration of carboxyhemoglobin displayed below Environmental tobacco smoke can be evaluated either by directly measuring tobacco smoke pollutants found in the air or by using biomarkers an indirect measure of exposure Carbon monoxide monitored through breath nicotine cotinine thiocyanates and proteins are the most specific biological markers of tobacco smoke exposure 119 120 Biochemical tests are a much more reliable biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure than surveys Certain groups of people are reluctant to disclose their smoking status and exposure to tobacco smoke especially pregnant women and parents of young children This is due to their smoking being socially unacceptable Also it may be difficult for individuals to recall their exposure to tobacco smoke 121 A 2007 study in the Addictive Behaviors journal found a positive correlation between secondhand tobacco smoke exposure and concentrations of nicotine and or biomarkers of nicotine in the body Significant biological levels of nicotine from secondhand smoke exposure were equivalent to nicotine levels from active smoking and levels that are associated with behaviour changes due to nicotine consumption 122 Cotinine Cotinine the metabolite of nicotine is a biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure Typically cotinine is measured in the blood saliva and urine Hair analysis has recently become a new noninvasive measurement technique Cotinine accumulates in hair during hair growth which results in a measure of long term cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke 123 Urinary cotinine levels have been a reliable biomarker of tobacco exposure and have been used as a reference in many epidemiological studies 118 However cotinine levels found in the urine reflect exposure only over the preceding 48 hours Cotinine levels of the skin such as the hair and nails reflect tobacco exposure over the previous three months and are a more reliable biomarker 119 Carbon monoxide CO Carbon monoxide monitored via breath is also a reliable biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure as well as tobacco use With high sensitivity and specificity it not only provides an accurate measure but the test is also non invasive highly reproducible and low in cost Breath CO monitoring measures the concentration of CO in an exhalation in parts per million and this can be directly correlated to the blood CO concentration carboxyhemoglobin 124 Breath CO monitors can also be used by emergency services to identify patients who are suspected of having CO poisoning PathophysiologyA 2004 study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization concluded that non smokers are exposed to the same carcinogens as active smokers Sidestream smoke contains more than 4 000 chemicals including 69 known carcinogens Of special concern are polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons tobacco specific N nitrosamines and aromatic amines such as 4 aminobiphenyl all known to be highly carcinogenic Mainstream smoke sidestream smoke and secondhand smoke contain largely the same components however the concentration varies depending on type of smoke 2 Several well established carcinogens have been shown by the tobacco companies own research to be present at higher concentrations in sidestream smoke than in mainstream smoke 125 Secondhand smoke has been shown to produce more particulate matter PM pollution than an idling low emission diesel engine In an experiment conducted by the Italian National Cancer Institute three cigarettes were left smoldering one after the other in a 60 m3 garage with a limited air exchange The cigarettes produced PM pollution exceeding outdoor limits as well as PM concentrations up to 10 fold that of the idling engine 126 Secondhand tobacco smoke exposure has immediate and substantial effects on blood and blood vessels in a way that increases the risk of a heart attack particularly in people already at risk 127 Exposure to tobacco smoke for 30 minutes significantly reduces coronary flow velocity reserve in healthy nonsmokers 128 Secondhand smoke is also associated with impaired vasodilation among adult nonsmokers 129 Secondhand smoke exposure also affects platelet function vascular endothelium and myocardial exercise tolerance at levels commonly found in the workplace 130 Pulmonary emphysema can be induced in rats through acute exposure to sidestream tobacco smoke 30 cigarettes per day over a period of 45 days 131 Degranulation of mast cells contributing to lung damage has also been observed 132 The term third hand smoke was recently coined to identify the residual tobacco smoke contamination that remains after the cigarette is extinguished and secondhand smoke has cleared from the air 133 134 135 Preliminary research suggests that by products of third hand smoke may pose a health risk 136 though the magnitude of risk if any remains unknown In October 2011 it was reported that Christus St Frances Cabrini Hospital in Alexandria Louisiana would seek to eliminate third hand smoke beginning in July 2012 and that employees whose clothing smelled of smoke would not be allowed to work This prohibition was enacted because third hand smoke poses a special danger for the developing brains of infants and small children 137 In 2008 there were more than 161 000 deaths attributed to lung cancer in the United States Of these deaths an estimated 10 to 15 were caused by factors other than first hand smoking equivalent to 16 000 to 24 000 deaths annually Slightly more than half of the lung cancer deaths caused by factors other than first hand smoking were found in nonsmokers Lung cancer in non smokers may well be considered one of the most common cancer mortalities in the United States Clinical epidemiology of lung cancer has linked the primary factors closely tied to lung cancer in non smokers as exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke carcinogens including radon and other indoor air pollutants 138 Opinion of public health authoritiesThere is widespread scientific consensus that exposure to secondhand smoke is harmful 4 The link between passive smoking and health risks is accepted by every major medical and scientific organisation including World Health Organization 2 U S National Institutes of Health 139 Centers for Disease Control 140 United States Surgeon General 1 U S National Cancer Institute 141 United States Environmental Protection Agency 142 California Environmental Protection Agency 16 American Heart Association 143 American Lung Association 144 and American Cancer Society 145 American Medical Association 146 American Academy of Pediatrics 147 Australian National Health and Medical Research Council 148 United Kingdom Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health 149 Public opinionRecent major surveys conducted by the U S National Cancer Institute and Centers for Disease Control have found widespread public awareness that secondhand smoke is harmful In both 1992 and 2000 surveys more than 80 of respondents agreed with the statement that secondhand smoke was harmful A 2001 study found that 95 of adults agreed that secondhand smoke was harmful to children and 96 considered tobacco industry claims that secondhand smoke was not harmful to be untruthful 150 A 2007 Gallup poll found that 56 of respondents felt that secondhand smoke was very harmful a number that has held relatively steady since 1997 Another 29 believe that secondhand smoke is somewhat harmful 10 answered not too harmful while 5 said not at all harmful 151 Controversy over harmAs part of its attempt to prevent or delay tighter regulation of smoking the tobacco industry funded a number of scientific studies and where the results cast doubt on the risks associated with secondhand smoke sought wide publicity for those results The industry also funded libertarian and conservative think tanks such as the Cato Institute in the United States and the Institute of Public Affairs in Australia which criticised both scientific research on passive smoking and policy proposals to restrict smoking 152 153 New Scientist and the European Journal of Public Health have identified these industry wide coordinated activities as one of the earliest expressions of corporate denialism Further they state that the disinformation spread by the tobacco industry has created a tobacco denialism movement sharing many characteristics of other forms of denialism such as HIV AIDS denialism 154 155 Industry funded studies and critiques Enstrom and Kabat A 2003 study by James Enstrom and Geoffrey Kabat published in the British Medical Journal argued that the harms of passive smoking had been overstated 156 Their analysis reported no statistically significant relationship between passive smoking and lung cancer coronary heart disease CHD or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease though the accompanying editorial noted that they may overemphasise the negative nature of their findings 157 This paper was widely promoted by the tobacco industry as evidence that the harms of passive smoking were unproven 158 159 The American Cancer Society ACS whose database Enstrom and Kabat used to compile their data criticized the paper as neither reliable nor independent stating that scientists at the ACS had repeatedly pointed out serious flaws in Enstrom and Kabat s methodology prior to publication 160 Notably the study had failed to identify a comparison group of unexposed persons 161 Enstrom s ties to the tobacco industry also drew scrutiny in a 1997 letter to Philip Morris Enstrom requested a substantial research commitment in order for me to effectively compete against the large mountain of epidemiologic data and opinions that already exist regarding the health effects of ETS and active smoking 162 In a US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies the Enstrom and Kabat paper was cited by the US District Court as a prime example of how nine tobacco companies engaged in criminal racketeering and fraud to hide the dangers of tobacco smoke 163 The Court found that the study had been funded and managed by the Center for Indoor Air Research 164 a tobacco industry front group tasked with offsetting damaging studies on passive smoking as well as by Philip Morris who stated that Enstrom s work was clearly litigation oriented 165 A 2005 paper in Tobacco Control argued that the disclosure section in the Enstrom and Kabat BMJ paper although it met the journal s requirements does not reveal the full extent of the relationship the authors had with the tobacco industry 166 In 2006 Enstrom and Kabat published a meta analysis of studies regarding passive smoking and coronary heart disease in which they reported a very weak association between passive smoking and heart disease mortality 167 They concluded that exposure to secondhand smoke increased the risk of death from CHD by only 5 although this analysis has been criticized for including two previous industry funded studies that suffered from widespread exposure misclassification 6 Gori Gio Batta Gori a tobacco industry spokesman and consultant 168 169 170 and an expert on risk utility and scientific research wrote in the libertarian Cato Institute s magazine Regulation that of the 75 published studies of ETS and lung cancer some 70 did not report statistically significant differences of risk and are moot Roughly 17 claim an increased risk and 13 imply a reduction of risk 171 Milloy Steven Milloy the junk science commentator for Fox News and a former Philip Morris consultant 172 173 claimed that of the 19 studies on passive smoking only 8 slightly more than 42 reported statistically significant increases in heart disease incidence 174 Another component of criticism cited by Milloy focused on relative risk and epidemiological practices in studies of passive smoking Milloy who has a master s degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health argued that studies yielding relative risks of less than 2 were meaningless junk science This approach to epidemiological analysis was criticized in the American Journal of Public Health A major component of the industry attack was the mounting of a campaign to establish a bar for sound science that could not be fully met by most individual investigations leaving studies that did not meet the criteria to be dismissed as junk science 175 The tobacco industry and affiliated scientists also put forward a set of Good Epidemiology Practices which would have the practical effect of obscuring the link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer the privately stated goal of these standards was to impede adverse legislation 176 However this effort was largely abandoned when it became clear that no independent epidemiological organization would agree to the standards proposed by Philip Morris et al 177 Levois and Layard In 1995 Levois and Layard both tobacco industry consultants published two analyses in the journal Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology regarding the association between spousal exposure to secondhand smoke and heart disease Both of these papers reported no association between secondhand smoke and heart disease 178 179 These analyses have been criticized for failing to distinguish between current and former smokers despite the fact that former smokers unlike current ones are not at a significantly increased risk of heart disease 6 180 World Health Organization controversy A 1998 study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC on environmental tobacco smoke ETS found weak evidence of a dose response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS 181 In March 1998 before the study was published reports appeared in the media alleging that the IARC and the World Health Organization WHO were suppressing information The reports appearing in the British Sunday Telegraph 182 and The Economist 183 among other sources 184 185 186 alleged that the WHO withheld from publication of its own report that supposedly failed to prove an association between passive smoking and a number of other diseases lung cancer in particular In response the WHO issued a press release stating that the results of the study had been completely misrepresented in the popular press and were in fact very much in line with similar studies demonstrating the harms of passive smoking 187 The study was published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in October of the same year and concluded the authors found no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk but did find weak evidence of a dose response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS 181 An accompanying editorial summarized When all the evidence including the important new data reported in this issue of the Journal is assessed the inescapable scientific conclusion is that ETS is a low level lung carcinogen 188 With the release of formerly classified tobacco industry documents through the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement it was found by Elisa Ong and Stanton Glantz that the controversy over the WHO s alleged suppression of data had been engineered by Philip Morris British American Tobacco and other tobacco companies in an effort to discredit scientific findings which would harm their business interests 189 A WHO inquiry conducted after the release of the tobacco industry documents found that this controversy was generated by the tobacco industry as part of its larger campaign to cut the WHO s budget distort the results of scientific studies on passive smoking and discredit the WHO as an institution This campaign was carried out using a network of ostensibly independent front organizations and international and scientific experts with hidden financial ties to the industry 190 EPA lawsuit In 1993 the United States Environmental Protection Agency EPA issued a report estimating that 3 000 lung cancer related deaths in the United States were caused by passive smoking annually 191 Philip Morris R J Reynolds Tobacco Company and groups representing growers distributors and marketers of tobacco took legal action claiming that the EPA had manipulated this study and ignored accepted scientific and statistical practices The United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina ruled in favor of the tobacco industry in 1998 finding that the EPA had failed to follow proper scientific and epidemiologic practices and had cherry picked evidence to support conclusions which they had committed to in advance 192 The court stated in part EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the Agency s public conclusion In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment disregarded information and made findings on selective information did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information deviated from its Risk Assessment Guidelines failed to disclose important findings and reasoning In 2002 the EPA successfully appealed this decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit The EPA s appeal was upheld on the preliminary grounds that their report had no regulatory weight and the earlier finding was vacated 193 In 1998 the U S Department of Health and Human Services through the publication by its National Toxicology Program of the 9th Report on Carcinogens listed environmental tobacco smoke among the known carcinogens observing of the EPA assessment that The individual studies were carefully summarized and evaluated 194 Tobacco industry funding of research The tobacco industry s role in funding scientific research on secondhand smoke has been controversial 195 A review of published studies found that tobacco industry affiliation was strongly correlated with findings exonerating secondhand smoke researchers affiliated with the tobacco industry were 88 times more likely than independent researchers to conclude that secondhand smoke was not harmful 196 In a specific example which came to light with the release of tobacco industry documents Philip Morris executives successfully encouraged an author to revise his industry funded review article to downplay the role of secondhand smoke in sudden infant death syndrome 197 The 2006 U S Surgeon General s report criticized the tobacco industry s role in the scientific debate The industry has funded or carried out research that has been judged to be biased supported scientists to generate letters to editors that criticized research publications attempted to undermine the findings of key studies assisted in establishing a scientific society with a journal and attempted to sustain controversy even as the scientific community reached consensus 198 This strategy was outlined at an international meeting of tobacco companies in 1988 at which Philip Morris proposed to set up a team of scientists organized by company lawyers to carry out work on ETS to keep the controversy alive 199 All scientific research was subject to oversight and filtering by tobacco industry lawyers Philip Morris then expect the group of scientists to operate within the confines of decisions taken by PM scientists to determine the general direction of research which apparently would then be filtered by lawyers to eliminate areas of sensitivity 199 Philip Morris reported that it was putting vast amounts of funding into these projects in attempting to coordinate and pay so many scientists on an international basis to keep the ETS controversy alive 199 Tobacco industry response Measures to tackle secondhand smoke pose a serious economic threat to the tobacco industry having broadened the definition of smoking beyond a personal habit to something with a social impact In a confidential 1978 report the tobacco industry described increasing public concerns about secondhand smoke as the most dangerous development to the viability of the tobacco industry that has yet occurred 200 In United States of America v Philip Morris et al the District Court for the District of Columbia found that the tobacco industry recognized from the mid 1970s forward that the health effects of passive smoking posed a profound threat to industry viability and cigarette profits and that the industry responded with efforts to undermine and discredit the scientific consensus that ETS causes disease 4 Accordingly the tobacco industry have developed several strategies to minimise the impact on their business The industry has sought to position the secondhand smoke debate as essentially concerned with civil liberties and smokers rights rather than with health by funding groups such as FOREST 201 Funding bias in research 8 in all reviews of the effects of secondhand smoke on health published between 1980 and 1995 the only factor associated with concluding that secondhand smoke is not harmful was whether an author was affiliated with the tobacco industry 196 However not all studies that failed to find evidence of harm were by industry affiliated authors Delaying and discrediting legitimate research see 8 for an example of how the industry attempted to discredit Takeshi Hirayama s landmark study and 202 for an example of how it attempted to delay and discredit a major Australian report on passive smoking Promoting good epidemiology and attacking so called junk science a term popularised by industry lobbyist Steven Milloy attacking the methodology behind research showing health risks as flawed and attempting to promote sound science Ong amp Glantz 2001 cite an internal Phillip Morris memo giving evidence of this as company policy 177 Creation of outlets for favourable research In 1989 the tobacco industry established the International Society of the Built Environment which published the peer reviewed journal Indoor and Built Environment This journal did not require conflict of interest disclosures from its authors With documents made available through the Master Settlement it was found that the executive board of the society and the editorial board of the journal were dominated by paid tobacco industry consultants The journal published a large amount of material on passive smoking much of which was industry positive 203 Citing the tobacco industry s production of biased research and efforts to undermine scientific findings the 2006 U S Surgeon General s report concluded that the industry had attempted to sustain controversy even as the scientific community reached consensus industry documents indicate that the tobacco industry has engaged in widespread activities that have gone beyond the bounds of accepted scientific practice 204 The U S District Court in U S A v Philip Morris et al found that despite their internal acknowledgment of the hazards of secondhand smoke Defendants have fraudulently denied that ETS causes disease 205 Position of major tobacco companies The positions of major tobacco companies on the issue of secondhand smoke is somewhat varied In general tobacco companies have continued to focus on questioning the methodology of studies showing that secondhand smoke is harmful Some such as British American Tobacco and Philip Morris acknowledge the medical consensus that secondhand smoke carries health risks while others continue to assert that the evidence is inconclusive Several tobacco companies advocate the creation of smoke free areas within public buildings as an alternative to comprehensive smoke free laws 206 US racketeering lawsuit against tobacco companies On September 22 1999 the U S Department of Justice filed a racketeering lawsuit against Philip Morris and other major cigarette manufacturers 207 Almost 7 years later on August 17 2006 U S District Court Judge Gladys Kessler found that the Government had proven its case and that the tobacco company defendants had violated the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act RICO 4 In particular Judge Kessler found that PM and other tobacco companies had conspired to minimize distort and confuse the public about the health hazards of smoking publicly denied while internally acknowledging that secondhand tobacco smoke is harmful to nonsmokers and destroyed documents relevant to litigation The ruling found that tobacco companies undertook joint efforts to undermine and discredit the scientific consensus that secondhand smoke causes disease notably by controlling research findings via paid consultants The ruling also concluded that tobacco companies were fraudulently continuing to deny the health effects of ETS exposure 4 On May 22 2009 a three judge panel of the U S Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the lower court s 2006 ruling 208 209 210 Smoke free lawsSee also Smoking ban List of smoking bans and Smoking bans in private vehicles As a consequence of the health risks associated with secondhand smoke many national and local governments have outlawed smoking in indoor public places including restaurants cafes and nightclubs as well as some outdoor open areas 211 Ireland was the first country in the world to institute a comprehensive national ban on smoking in all indoor workplaces on 29 March 2004 Since then many others have followed suit The countries which have ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control FCTC have a legal obligation to implement effective legislation for protection from exposure to tobacco smoke in indoor workplaces public transport indoor public places and as appropriate other public places Article 8 of the FCTC 212 The parties to the FCTC have further adopted Guidelines on the Protection from Exposure to secondhand Smoke which state that effective measures to provide protection from exposure to tobacco smoke require the total elimination of smoking and tobacco smoke in a particular space or environment in order to create a 100 smoke free environment 213 Opinion polls have shown considerable support for smoke free laws In June 2007 a survey of 15 countries found 80 approval for such laws 214 A survey in France reputedly a nation of smokers showed 70 support 106 Effects Smoking bans by governments result in decreased harm from secondhand smoke including less admissions for acute coronary syndrome 215 In the first 18 months after the town of Pueblo Colorado enacted a smoke free law in 2003 hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped 27 Admissions in neighbouring towns without smoke free laws showed no change and the decline in heart attacks in Pueblo was attributed to the resulting reduction in secondhand smoke exposure 216 A 2004 smoking ban instituted in Massachusetts workplaces decreased workers secondhand smoke exposure from 8 of workers in 2003 to 5 4 of workers in 2010 110 A 2016 review also found that bans and policy changes in specific locations such as hospitals or universities can lead to reduced smoking rates In prison settings bans might lead to reduced mortality and to lower exposure to secondhand smoke 217 In 2001 a systematic review for the Guide to Community Preventive Services acknowledged strong evidence of the effectiveness of smoke free policies and restrictions in reducing expose to secondhand smoke A follow up to this review identified the evidence on which the effectiveness of smoking bans reduced the prevalence of tobacco use Articles published until 2005 were examined to further support this evidence The examined studies provided sufficient evidence that smoke free policies reduce tobacco use among workers when implemented in worksites or by communities 218 While a number of studies funded by the tobacco industry have claimed a negative economic impact from smoke free laws no independently funded research has shown any such impact A 2003 review reported that independently funded methodologically sound research consistently found either no economic impact or a positive impact from smoke free laws 219 Air nicotine levels were measured in Guatemalan bars and restaurants before and after an implemented smoke free law in 2009 Nicotine concentrations significantly decreased in both the bars and restaurants measured Also the employees support for a smoke free workplace substantially increased in the post implementation survey compared to pre implementation survey 220 Public opinion Recent surveys taken by the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco demonstrate supportive attitudes of the public towards smoke free policies in outdoor areas A vast majority of the public supports restricting smoking in various outdoor settings The respondents support for the policies were for varying reasons such as litter control establishing positive smoke free role models for youth reducing youth opportunities to smoke and avoiding exposure to secondhand smoke 221 Alternative forms Alternatives to smoke free laws have also been proposed as a means of harm reduction particularly in bars and restaurants For example critics of smoke free laws cite studies suggesting ventilation as a means of reducing tobacco smoke pollutants and improving air quality 222 Ventilation has also been heavily promoted by the tobacco industry as an alternative to outright bans via a network of ostensibly independent experts with often undisclosed ties to the industry 223 However not all critics have connections to the industry The American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE officially concluded in 2005 that while completely isolated smoking rooms do eliminate the risk to nearby non smoking areas smoking bans are the only means of eliminating health risks associated with indoor exposure They further concluded that no system of dilution or cleaning was effective at eliminating risk 224 The U S Surgeon General and the European Commission Joint Research Centre have reached similar conclusions 204 225 The implementation guidelines for the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control states that engineering approaches such as ventilation are ineffective and do not protect against secondhand smoke exposure 213 However this does not necessarily mean that such measures are useless in reducing harm only that they fall short of the goal of reducing exposure completely to zero Others have suggested a system of tradable smoking pollution permits similar to the cap and trade pollution permits systems used by the United States Environmental Protection Agency in recent decades to curb other types of pollution 226 This would guarantee that a portion of bars restaurants in a jurisdiction will be smoke free while leaving the decision to the market In animalsMain article Animals and tobacco smoke Multiple studies have been conducted to determine the carcinogenicity of environmental tobacco smoke to animals These studies typically fall under the categories of simulated environmental tobacco smoke administering condensates of sidestream smoke or observational studies of cancer among pets To simulate environmental tobacco smoke scientists expose animals to sidestream smoke that which emanates from the cigarette s burning cone and through its paper or a combination of mainstream and sidestream smoke 2 The IARC monographs conclude that mice with prolonged exposure to simulated environmental tobacco smoke that is six hours a day five days a week for five months with a subsequent four month interval before dissection will have significantly higher incidence and multiplicity of lung tumors than with control groups The IARC monographs concluded that sidestream smoke condensates had a significantly higher carcinogenic effect on mice than did mainstream smoke condensates 2 Observational studies Secondhand smoke is popularly recognised as a risk factor for cancer in pets 227 A study conducted by the Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine and the University of Massachusetts Amherst linked the occurrence of feline oral cancer to exposure to environmental tobacco smoke through an overexpression of the p53 gene 228 Another study conducted at the same universities concluded that cats living with a smoker were more likely to get feline lymphoma the risk increased with the duration of exposure to secondhand smoke and the number of smokers in the household 229 A study by Colorado State University researchers looking at cases of canine lung cancer was generally inconclusive though the authors reported a weak relation for lung cancer in dogs exposed to environmental tobacco smoke The number of smokers within the home the number of packs smoked in the home per day and the amount of time that the dog spent within the home had no effect on the dog s risk for lung cancer 230 See alsoHealth effects of tobacco Third hand smoke Tobacco control Philip Morris v UruguayReferences a b c d e The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke A Report of the Surgeon General PDF Surgeon General of the United States 2006 06 27 Archived from the original PDF on 2019 02 26 Retrieved 2012 07 24 Secondhand smoke causes premature death and disease in children and in adults who do not smoke a b c d e f g h i j k IARC 2004 There is sufficient evidence that involuntary smoking exposure to secondhand or environmental tobacco smoke causes lung cancer in humans Tobacco www who int Retrieved 2024 02 24 a b c d e f Kessler 2006 Samet JM 2008 Secondhand smoke facts and lies Salud Publica de Mexico 50 5 428 34 doi 10 1590 S0036 36342008000500016 PMID 18852940 a b c d Tong Elisa K Glantz Stanton A 16 October 2007 Tobacco Industry Efforts Undermining Evidence Linking Secondhand Smoke With Cardiovascular Disease Circulation 116 16 1845 1854 doi 10 1161 CIRCULATIONAHA 107 715888 PMID 17938301 S2CID 4021497 CDC Fact Sheet Smoke Free Policies Reduce Smoking Smoking amp Tobacco Use Smoking and Tobacco Use Retrieved 2015 04 24 a b c Diethelm Pascal McKee Martin 2006 Lifting the smokescreen tobacco industry strategy to defeat smoke free policies and legislation PDF p 5 ISBN 978 1 904097 57 0 OCLC 891398524 The industry quickly realised that if it wanted to continue to prosper it became vital that research did not demonstrate that tobacco smoke was a dangerous community air pollutant This requirement has been the central pillar of its passive smoking policy from the early 1970s to the present day Gourd Katherine 2014 Fritz Lickint The Lancet Respiratory Medicine 2 5 The Lancet 358 359 doi 10 1016 S2213 2600 14 70064 5 PMID 24726404 Retrieved 7 December 2023 Chapter 32 History of Tobacco PDF www afro who int World Health Organization 2017 Retrieved 7 December 2023 Brawley Otis W Glynn Thomas J Khuri Fadlo R Wender Richard C 18 November 2013 The first surgeon general s report on smoking and health The 50th anniversary CA 64 1 5 8 doi 10 3322 caac 21210 PMID 24249254 Health Effects of Exposure to Secondhand Smoke United States Environmental Protection Agency Archived from the original on 5 September 2015 Retrieved 6 September 2015 a b Chapman S 1 June 2003 Other people s smoke what s in a name Tobacco Control 12 2 113 4 doi 10 1136 tc 12 2 113 PMC 1747703 PMID 12773710 a b Protano Carmela Vitali Matteo 1 October 2011 The New Danger of Thirdhand Smoke Why Passive Smoking Does Not Stop at Secondhand Smoke Environmental Health Perspectives 119 10 a422 doi 10 1289 ehp 1103956 PMC 3230455 PMID 21968336 IARC 2004 p 1191 During smoking of cigarettes cigars pipes and other tobacco productions in addition to the mainstream smoke drawn and inhaled by the smokers a stream of smoke is released between puffs into the air from the burning cone Once released this stream also known as the sidestream smoke is mixed with exhaled mainstream smoke as well as the air in an indoor environment to form the secondhand smoke to which a b c d e California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board 24 June 2005 Proposed Identification of Environmental Tobacco Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant Report Surgeon General 2006 pp 30 46 Secondhand Smoke SHS Facts CDC 5 January 2021 Retrieved August 5 2021 Alberg Anthony J Brock Malcolm V Ford Jean G Samet Jonathan M Spivack Simon D 1 May 2013 Epidemiology of Lung Cancer Chest 143 5 suppl e1S e29S doi 10 1378 chest 12 2345 PMC 4694610 PMID 23649439 Bhatnagar A Whitsel LP Ribisl KM Bullen C Chaloupka F Piano MR Robertson RM McAuley T Goff D Benowitz N American Heart Association Advocacy Coordinating Committee Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing Council on Clinical Cardiology and Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research 14 October 2014 Electronic cigarettes a policy statement from the American Heart Association Circulation 130 16 1418 36 doi 10 1161 CIR 0000000000000107 PMC 7643636 PMID 25156991 S2CID 16075813 Health Effects of Secondhand Smoke November 24 2014 Retrieved 30 May 2015 Pallis Athanasios G Syrigos Konstantinos N December 2013 Lung cancer in never smokers Disease characteristics and risk factors Critical Reviews in Oncology Hematology 88 3 494 503 doi 10 1016 j critrevonc 2013 06 011 ISSN 1040 8428 PMID 23921082 Macacu Alina Autier Philippe Boniol Mathieu Boyle Peter November 2015 Active and passive smoking and risk of breast cancer a meta analysis PDF Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 154 2 213 224 doi 10 1007 s10549 015 3628 4 PMID 26546245 S2CID 4680641 a b c Lee Chien Chang Middaugh Nicole A Howie Stephen R C Ezzati Majid 7 December 2010 Association of Secondhand Smoke Exposure with Pediatric Invasive Bacterial Disease and Bacterial Carriage A Systematic Review and Meta analysis PLOS Medicine 7 12 e1000374 Bibcode 2015PLoSO 1039907C doi 10 1371 journal pmed 1000374 PMC 4595077 PMID 21151890 Cumberbatch Marcus G Rota Matteo Catto James W F La Vecchia Carlo September 2016 The Role of Tobacco Smoke in Bladder and Kidney Carcinogenesis A Comparison of Exposures and Meta analysis of Incidence and Mortality Risks PDF European Urology 70 3 458 466 doi 10 1016 j eururo 2015 06 042 PMID 26149669 Surgeon General 2006 Ch 8 Lv X Sun J Bi Y Xu M Lu J Zhao L Xu Y 15 November 2015 Risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease associated with secondhand smoke exposure a systematic review and meta analysis International Journal of Cardiology 199 106 15 doi 10 1016 j ijcard 2015 07 011 PMID 26188829 Dinas PC Koutedakis Y Flouris AD 20 February 2013 Effects of active and passive tobacco cigarette smoking on heart rate variability International Journal of Cardiology 163 2 109 15 doi 10 1016 j ijcard 2011 10 140 PMID 22100604 Zou N Hong J Dai QY 20 February 2009 Passive cigarette smoking induces inflammatory injury in human arterial walls Chinese Medical Journal 122 4 444 448 doi 10 3760 cma j issn 0366 6999 2009 04 0016 PMID 19302752 Oono I P Mackay D F Pell J P December 2011 Meta analysis of the association between secondhand smoke exposure and stroke Journal of Public Health 33 4 496 502 doi 10 1093 pubmed fdr025 PMID 21422014 Surgeon General 2006 pp 555 8 Bentayeb Malek Simoni Marzia Norback Dan Baldacci Sandra Maio Sara Viegi Giovanni Annesi Maesano Isabella 6 December 2013 Indoor air pollution and respiratory health in the elderly Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A 48 14 1783 1789 doi 10 1080 10934529 2013 826052 PMID 24007433 S2CID 41862447 Dogar O F Pillai N Safdar N Shah S K Zahid R Siddiqi K November 2015 Second hand smoke and the risk of tuberculosis a systematic review and a meta analysis Epidemiology and Infection 143 15 3158 3172 doi 10 1017 S0950268815001235 PMC 9150979 PMID 26118887 S2CID 206285892 Hur Kevin Liang Jonathan Lin Sandra Y January 2014 The role of secondhand smoke in sinusitis a systematic review Sinusitis and secondhand smoke International Forum of Allergy amp Rhinology 4 1 22 28 doi 10 1002 alr 21232 PMID 24574074 S2CID 9537143 Chen R Hu Z Orton S Chen RL Wei L December 2013 Association of passive smoking with cognitive impairment in nonsmoking older adults a systematic literature review and a new study of Chinese cohort Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology 26 4 199 208 doi 10 1177 0891988713496165 hdl 2436 621630 PMID 23877565 S2CID 43097513 Ling Jonathan Heffernan Thomas 24 March 2016 The Cognitive Deficits Associated with Second Hand Smoking Frontiers in Psychiatry 7 46 doi 10 3389 fpsyt 2016 00046 PMC 4805605 PMID 27047401 Zeng Yan Ni Li Ya Min 10 December 2015 Secondhand smoke exposure and mental health in adults a meta analysis of cross sectional studies Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 51 9 1339 48 doi 10 1007 s00127 015 1164 5 PMID 26661619 S2CID 7772929 Pineles B L Park E Samet J M 10 February 2014 Systematic Review and Meta Analysis of Miscarriage and Maternal Exposure to Tobacco Smoke During Pregnancy American Journal of Epidemiology 179 7 807 823 doi 10 1093 aje kwt334 PMC 3969532 PMID 24518810 Surgeon General 2006 pp 198 205 Cui H Gong TT Liu CX Wu QJ 25 January 2016 Associations between Passive Maternal Smoking during Pregnancy and Preterm Birth Evidence from a Meta Analysis of Observational Studies PLOS ONE 11 1 e0147848 Bibcode 2016PLoSO 1147848C doi 10 1371 journal pone 0147848 PMC 4726502 PMID 26808045 Surgeon General 2006 pp 194 7 Been Jasper Nurmatov U B Cox B Nawrot T S Van Schayck C P Sheikh A 28 March 2014 Effect of smoke free legislation on perinatal and child health a systematic review and meta analysis Lancet 383 9928 1549 60 doi 10 1016 S0140 6736 14 60082 9 PMID 24680633 S2CID 8532979 Leonardi Bee J Britton J Venn A April 2011 Secondhand smoke and adverse fetal outcomes in nonsmoking pregnant women a meta analysis Pediatrics 127 4 734 41 doi 10 1542 peds 2010 3041 PMID 21382949 S2CID 19866471 Salmasi G Grady R Jones J McDonald SD 2010 Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and perinatal outcomes a systematic review and meta analyses Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 89 4 423 41 doi 10 3109 00016340903505748 PMID 20085532 S2CID 9206564 Wang Meng Wang Zhi Ping Zhang Meng Zhao Zhong Tang 13 August 2013 Maternal passive smoking during pregnancy and neural tube defects in offspring a meta analysis Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 289 3 513 521 doi 10 1007 s00404 013 2997 3 PMID 23942772 S2CID 6526042 Janson C 2004 The effect of passive smoking on respiratory health in children and adults Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 8 5 510 6 PMID 15137524 Saulyte Jurgita Regueira Carlos Montes Martinez Agustin Khudyakov Polyna Takkouche Bahi Novotny Thomas E 11 March 2014 Active or Passive Exposure to Tobacco Smoking and Allergic Rhinitis Allergic Dermatitis and Food Allergy in Adults and Children A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis PLOS Medicine 11 3 e1001611 doi 10 1371 journal pmed 1001611 PMC 3949681 PMID 24618794 Wei X E M Yu S January 2015 A meta analysis of passive smoking and risk of developing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 107 1 9 14 doi 10 1016 j diabres 2014 09 019 PMID 25488377 Wang Y Ji J Liu YJ Deng X He QQ 2013 Passive smoking and risk of type 2 diabetes a meta analysis of prospective cohort studies PLOS ONE 8 7 e69915 Bibcode 2013PLoSO 869915W doi 10 1371 journal pone 0069915 PMC 3724674 PMID 23922856 Sun K Liu D Wang C Ren M Yang C Yan L November 2014 Passive smoke exposure and risk of diabetes a meta analysis of prospective studies Endocrine 47 2 421 7 doi 10 1007 s12020 014 0194 1 PMID 24532101 S2CID 3276501 Pan An Wang Yeli Talaei Mohammad Hu Frank B Wu Tangchun December 2015 Relation of active passive and quitting smoking with incident type 2 diabetes a systematic review and meta analysis The Lancet Diabetes amp Endocrinology 3 12 958 967 doi 10 1016 S2213 8587 15 00316 2 PMC 4656094 PMID 26388413 Akinkugbe Aderonke A Slade Gary D Divaris Kimon Poole Charles November 2016 Systematic Review and Meta analysis of the Association Between Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Periodontitis Endpoints Among Nonsmokers Nicotine amp Tobacco Research 18 11 2047 56 doi 10 1093 ntr ntw105 PMC 5055738 PMID 27083214 Glantz SA Parmley WW 1991 Passive smoking and heart disease Epidemiology physiology and biochemistry Circulation 83 1 1 12 doi 10 1161 01 cir 83 1 1 PMID 1984876 Taylor AE Johnson DC Kazemi H 1992 Environmental tobacco smoke and cardiovascular disease A position paper from the Council on Cardiopulmonary and Critical Care American Heart Association Circulation 86 2 699 702 doi 10 1161 01 cir 86 2 699 PMID 1638735 Surgeon General 2006 pp 376 380 Second hand smoke WHO website Retrieved 24 April 2015 The last gasp The Economist 19 July 2017 Retrieved 20 July 2017 Kantor R Kim A Thyssen JP Silverberg JI December 2016 Association of atopic dermatitis with smoking A systematic review and meta analysis Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 75 6 1119 1125 e1 doi 10 1016 j jaad 2016 07 017 PMC 5216172 PMID 27542586 Anderson HR Cook DG November 1997 Passive smoking and sudden infant death syndrome review of the epidemiological evidence Thorax 52 11 1003 9 doi 10 1136 thx 52 11 1003 PMC 1758452 PMID 9487351 Surgeon General 2006 p 194 a b Secondhand Smoke and Children Fact Sheet American Lung Association August 2006 Surgeon General 2006 pp 311 9 Vork KL Broadwin RL Blaisdell RJ 2007 Developing Asthma in Childhood from Exposure to Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Insights from a Meta Regression Environ Health Perspect 115 10 1394 400 doi 10 1289 ehp 10155 PMC 2022647 PMID 17938726 Tinuoye O Pell J P Mackay D F 28 March 2013 Meta Analysis of the Association Between Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Physician Diagnosed Childhood Asthma Nicotine amp Tobacco Research 15 9 1475 1483 doi 10 1093 ntr ntt033 PMID 23539174 Wang Zhen May Sara M Charoenlap Suvanee Pyle Regan Ott Nancy L Mohammed Khaled Joshi Avni Y November 2015 Effects of secondhand smoke exposure on asthma morbidity and health care utilization in children a systematic review and meta analysis Annals of Allergy Asthma amp Immunology 115 5 396 401 e2 doi 10 1016 j anai 2015 08 005 PMID 26411971 de Jongste JC Shields MD 2003 Cough 2 Chronic cough in children Thorax 58 11 998 1003 doi 10 1136 thorax 58 11 998 PMC 1746521 PMID 14586058 Dybing E Sanner T 1999 Passive smoking sudden infant death syndrome SIDS and childhood infections Hum Exp Toxicol 18 4 202 5 doi 10 1191 096032799678839914 PMID 10333302 S2CID 21365217 a b c DiFranza JR Aligne CA Weitzman M 2004 Prenatal and postnatal environmental tobacco smoke exposure and children s health Pediatrics 113 4 Suppl 1007 15 doi 10 1542 peds 113 S3 1007 PMID 15060193 S2CID 248349 a b Chatzimichael A Tsalkidis A Cassimos D Gardikis S Tripsianis G Deftereos S Ktenidou Kartali S Tsanakas I June 2007 The role of breastfeeding and passive smoking on the development of severe bronchiolitis in infants Minerva Pediatrica 59 3 199 206 PMID 17519864 a b Preventing Smoking and Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Before During and After Pregnancy Archived 2011 09 11 at the Wayback Machine Centers for Disease Control and Prevention July 2007 Jafta N Jeena PM Barregard L Naidoo RN May 2015 Childhood tuberculosis and exposure to indoor air pollution a systematic review and meta analysis The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease 19 5 596 602 doi 10 5588 ijtld 14 0686 PMID 25868030 Feleszko W Ruszczynski M Jaworska J Strzelak A Zalewski BM Kulus M November 2014 Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and risk of allergic sensitisation in children a systematic review and meta analysis Archives of Disease in Childhood 99 11 985 92 doi 10 1136 archdischild 2013 305444 PMID 24958794 S2CID 206856566 Sabbagh HJ Hassan MH Innes NP Elkodary HM Little J Mossey PA 2015 Passive smoking in the etiology of non syndromic orofacial clefts a systematic review and meta analysis PLOS ONE 10 3 e0116963 Bibcode 2015PLoSO 1016963S doi 10 1371 journal pone 0116963 PMC 4356514 PMID 25760440 Pagani Linda S July 2014 Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and brain development The case of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder Neuroscience amp Biobehavioral Reviews 44 195 205 doi 10 1016 j neubiorev 2013 03 008 PMID 23545330 S2CID 20470659 Scientific Consensus Statement on Environmental Agents Associated with Neurodevelopmental Disorders PDF The Collaborative on Health and the Environment s Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative July 1 2008 Archived from the original PDF on 2009 03 27 Chen Ruoling Clifford Angela Lang Linda Anstey Kaarin J October 2013 Is exposure to secondhand smoke associated with cognitive parameters of children and adolescents a systematic literature review Annals of Epidemiology 23 10 652 661 doi 10 1016 j annepidem 2013 07 001 hdl 1885 10932 PMID 23969303 Avsar A Darka O Topaloglu B Bek Y October 2008 Association of passive smoking with caries and related salivary biomarkers in young children Archives of Oral Biology 53 10 969 974 doi 10 1016 j archoralbio 2008 05 007 PMID 18672230 Surgeon General 2006 pp 293 309 Jones Laura L Hassanien A Cook DG Britton J Leonardi Bee J 1 January 2012 Parental Smoking and the Risk of Middle Ear Disease in Children A Systematic Review and Meta analysis Archives of Pediatrics amp Adolescent Medicine 166 1 18 27 doi 10 1001 archpediatrics 2011 158 PMID 21893640 Lee Chien Chang Middaugh Nicole A Howie Stephen R C Ezzati Majid Lanphear Bruce P 7 December 2010 Association of Secondhand Smoke Exposure with Pediatric Invasive Bacterial Disease and Bacterial Carriage A Systematic Review and Meta analysis PLOS Medicine 7 12 e1000374 doi 10 1371 journal pmed 1000374 PMC 2998445 PMID 21151890 Chiswell C Akram Y February 2017 Impact of environmental tobacco smoke exposure on anaesthetic and surgical outcomes in children a systematic review and meta analysis Archives of Disease in Childhood 102 2 123 130 doi 10 1136 archdischild 2016 310687 PMC 5284464 PMID 27417307 Jara SM Benke JR Lin SY Ishman SL January 2015 The association between secondhand smoke and sleep disordered breathing in children a systematic review The Laryngoscope 125 1 241 7 doi 10 1002 lary 24833 PMID 25130300 S2CID 23401780 Raghuveer Geetha White David A Hayman Laura L Woo Jessica G Villafane Juan Celermajer David Ward Kenneth D de Ferranti Sarah D Zachariah Justin 18 October 2016 Cardiovascular Consequences of Childhood Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Exposure Prevailing Evidence Burden and Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Circulation 134 16 e336 59 doi 10 1161 CIR 0000000000000443 PMC 5207215 PMID 27619923 Steenland K 1 January 1992 Passive smoking and the risk of heart disease JAMA 267 1 94 99 doi 10 1001 jama 267 1 94 PMID 1727204 Law M R Morris J K Wald N J 18 October 1997 Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and ischaemic heart disease an evaluation of the evidence BMJ 315 7114 973 980 doi 10 1136 bmj 315 7114 973 PMC 2127675 PMID 9365294 Thun M Henley J Apicella L December 1999 Epidemiologic studies of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease and ETS exposure from spousal smoking Environmental Health Perspectives 107 suppl 6 841 846 doi 10 1289 ehp 99107s6841 JSTOR 3434563 PMC 1566204 PMID 10592140 He Jiang Vupputuri Suma Allen Krista Prerost Monica R Hughes Janet Whelton Paul K 25 March 1999 Passive Smoking and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease A Meta Analysis of Epidemiologic Studies New England Journal of Medicine 340 12 920 926 doi 10 1056 NEJM199903253401204 PMID 10089185 Diethelm PA Rielle JC McKee M 2005 The whole truth and nothing but the truth The research that Philip Morris did not want you to see Lancet 366 9479 86 92 doi 10 1016 S0140 6736 05 66474 4 PMID 15993237 S2CID 10442244 Schick S Glantz S 2005 Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke more toxic than mainstream smoke Tobacco Control 14 6 396 404 doi 10 1136 tc 2005 011288 PMC 1748121 PMID 16319363 Schick S Glantz SA 2006 Sidestream cigarette smoke toxicity increases with aging and exposure duration Tobacco Control 15 6 424 9 doi 10 1136 tc 2006 016162 PMC 2563675 PMID 17130369 Schick S F Glantz S 1 August 2007 Concentrations of the Carcinogen 4 Methylnitrosamino 1 3 Pyridyl 1 Butanone in Sidestream Cigarette Smoke Increase after Release into Indoor Air Results from Unpublished Tobacco Industry Research Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers amp Prevention 16 8 1547 1553 doi 10 1158 1055 9965 EPI 07 0210 PMID 17684127 S2CID 690030 Whincup Peter H Gilg Julie A Emberson Jonathan R Jarvis Martin J Feyerabend Colin Bryant Andrew Walker Mary Cook Derek G 24 July 2004 Passive smoking and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke prospective study with cotinine measurement BMJ 329 7459 200 205 doi 10 1136 bmj 38146 427188 55 PMC 487731 PMID 15229131 Hackshaw A K Law M R Wald N J 18 October 1997 The accumulated evidence on lung cancer and environmental tobacco smoke BMJ 315 7114 980 988 doi 10 1136 bmj 315 7114 980 PMC 2127653 PMID 9365295 Copas J B Shi JQ 12 February 2000 Reanalysis of epidemiological evidence on lung cancer and passive smoking BMJ 320 7232 417 418 doi 10 1136 bmj 320 7232 417 PMC 27286 PMID 10669446 Takagi Hisato Sekino Seishiro Kato Takayoshi Matsuno Yukihiro Umemoto Takuya February 2006 Revisiting evidence on lung cancer and passive smoking Adjustment for publication bias by means of trim and fill algorithm Lung Cancer 51 2 245 246 doi 10 1016 j lungcan 2005 11 004 PMID 16386820 Zhong Lijie Goldberg Mark S Parent Marie Elise Hanley James A January 2000 Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and the risk of lung cancer a meta analysis Lung Cancer 27 1 3 18 doi 10 1016 s0169 5002 99 00093 8 PMID 10672779 Taylor Richard Gumming Robert Woodward Alistair Black Megan June 2001 Passive smoking and lung cancer a cumulative meta analysis Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 25 3 203 211 doi 10 1111 j 1467 842x 2001 tb00564 x PMID 11494987 S2CID 25724906 Kim Claire H Lee Yuan Chin Amy Hung Rayjean J McNallan Sheila R Cote Michele L Lim Wei Yen Chang Shen Chih Kim Jin Hee Ugolini Donatella Chen Ying Liloglou Triantafillos Andrew Angeline S Onega Tracy Duell Eric J Field John K Lazarus Philip Le Marchand Loic Neri Monica Vineis Paolo Kiyohara Chikako Hong Yun Chul Morgenstern Hal Matsuo Keitaro Tajima Kazuo Christiani David C McLaughlin John R Bencko Vladimir Holcatova Ivana Boffetta Paolo Brennan Paul Fabianova Eleonora Foretova Lenka Janout Vladimir Lissowska Jolanta Mates Dana Rudnai Peter Szeszenia Dabrowska Neonila Mukeria Anush Zaridze David Seow Adeline Schwartz Ann G Yang Ping Zhang Zuo Feng 15 October 2014 Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke and lung cancer by histological type A pooled analysis of the International Lung Cancer Consortium ILCCO Secondhand tobacco smoke and lung cancer International Journal of Cancer 135 8 1918 1930 doi 10 1002 ijc 28835 PMC 4126868 PMID 24615328 a b Novak K 2007 Passive smoking out from the haze Nature 447 7148 1049 51 Bibcode 2007Natur 447 1049N doi 10 1038 4471049a PMID 17597735 S2CID 9627500 Bailar John C 25 March 1999 Passive Smoking Coronary Heart Disease and Meta Analysis New England Journal of Medicine 340 12 958 959 doi 10 1056 NEJM199903253401211 PMID 10089192 Raupach Tobias Schafer Katrin Konstantinides Stavros Andreas Stefan 1 February 2006 Secondhand smoke as an acute threat for the cardiovascular system a change in paradigm European Heart Journal 27 4 386 392 doi 10 1093 eurheartj ehi601 PMID 16230308 Taylor R Najafi F Dobson A 1 October 2007 Meta analysis of studies of passive smoking and lung cancer effects of study type and continent International Journal of Epidemiology 36 5 1048 1059 doi 10 1093 ije dym158 PMID 17690135 a b Stayner Leslie Bena James Sasco Annie J Smith Randall Steenland Kyle Kreuzer Michaela Straif Kurt March 2007 Lung Cancer Risk and Workplace Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke American Journal of Public Health 97 3 545 551 doi 10 2105 AJPH 2004 061275 PMC 1805004 PMID 17267733 Health effects of indoor air pollution Archived from the original on 2006 08 05 Retrieved 2006 07 26 Wirth N Abou Hamdan K Spinosa A Bohadana A Martinet Y March 2005 Le tabagisme passif Passive smoking Revue de Pneumologie Clinique in French 61 1 7 15 doi 10 1016 s0761 8417 05 84776 5 PMID 15772574 a b France to ban smoking in public BBC 2006 10 08 Retrieved 2006 10 09 Meyers David G Neuberger John S He Jianghua September 2009 Cardiovascular Effect of Bans on Smoking in Public Places Journal of the American College of Cardiology 54 14 1249 1255 doi 10 1016 j jacc 2009 07 022 PMID 19778665 Lin Hualiang Wang Hongchun Wu Wei Lang Lingling Wang Qinzhou Tian Linwei December 2013 The effects of smoke free legislation on acute myocardial infarction a systematic review and meta analysis BMC Public Health 13 1 529 doi 10 1186 1471 2458 13 529 PMC 3671962 PMID 23721370 Wells A J July 1998 Lung cancer from passive smoking at work American Journal of Public Health 88 7 1025 1029 doi 10 2105 ajph 88 7 1025 PMC 1508269 PMID 9663148 a b Fitzsimmons Kathleen 21 November 2013 Reducing Worker Exposure to ETS National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health NIOSH Retrieved 14 January 2015 Office on Smoking Health US 2006 The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke A Report of the Surgeon General Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General Centers for Disease Control and Prevention US PMID 20669524 Retrieved 2015 04 24 Pugmire Juliana Sweeting Helen Moore Laurence February 2017 Environmental tobacco smoke exposure among infants children and young people now is no time to relax Archives of Disease in Childhood 102 2 117 118 doi 10 1136 archdischild 2016 311652 PMID 28100555 S2CID 41806496 Strachan D P Cook D G October 1997 Health effects of passive smoking 1 Parental smoking and lower respiratory illness in infancy and early childhood Thorax 52 10 905 914 doi 10 1136 thx 52 10 905 PMC 1758431 PMID 9404380 Strachan D P Cook D G 1 January 1998 Health effects of passive smoking 4 Parental smoking middle ear disease and adenotonsillectomy in children Thorax 53 1 50 56 doi 10 1136 thx 53 1 50 PMC 1758689 PMID 9577522 Song Anna V Glantz Stanton A Halpern Felsher Bonnie L December 2009 Perceptions of Second hand Smoke Risks Predict Future Adolescent Smoking Initiation Journal of Adolescent Health 45 6 618 625 doi 10 1016 j jadohealth 2009 04 022 PMC 2814413 PMID 19931835 WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control The World Health Organization WHO 2013 Retrieved 2020 03 23 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a Check url value help Tsai James Homa David M Gentzke Andrea S Mahoney Margaret Sharapova Saida R Sosnoff Connie S Caron Kevin T Wang Lanqing Melstrom Paul C Trivers Katrina F 7 December 2018 Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Among Nonsmokers United States 1988 2014 MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 67 48 1342 1346 doi 10 15585 mmwr mm6748a3 PMC 6329485 PMID 30521502 a b Behbod Behrooz Sharma Mohit Baxi Ruchi Roseby Robert Webster Premila 31 January 2018 Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children s exposure to environmental tobacco smoke Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1 1 CD001746 doi 10 1002 14651858 CD001746 pub4 PMC 6491082 PMID 29383710 a b Metz Favre C Donnay C de Blay F February 2005 Markers of environmental tobacco smoke ETS exposure Rev Mal Respir in French 22 1 Pt 1 81 92 doi 10 1016 S0761 8425 05 85439 7 PMID 15968761 McClure JB April 2002 Are biomarkers useful treatment aids for promoting health behavior change An empirical review Am J Prev Med 22 3 200 7 doi 10 1016 S0749 3797 01 00425 1 PMID 11897465 Klesges RC Debon M Ray JW October 1995 Are self reports of smoking rate biased Evidence from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey J Clin Epidemiol 48 10 1225 33 doi 10 1016 0895 4356 95 00020 5 PMID 7561984 Okoli CT Kelly T Hahn EJ October 2007 Secondhand smoke and nicotine exposure a brief review Addict Behav 32 10 1977 88 doi 10 1016 j addbeh 2006 12 024 PMID 17270359 Florescu A Ferrence R Einarson T Selby P Soldin O Koren G February 2009 Methods for quantification of exposure to cigarette smoking and environmental tobacco smoke focus on developmental toxicology Ther Drug Monit 31 1 14 30 doi 10 1097 FTD 0b013e3181957a3b PMC 3644554 PMID 19125149 Irving JM Clark EC Crombie IK Smith WC January 1988 Evaluation of a portable measure of expired air carbon monoxide Prev Med 17 1 109 15 doi 10 1016 0091 7435 88 90076 X PMID 3362796 Schick S Glantz S 2005 Philip Morris toxicological experiments with fresh sidestream smoke more toxic than mainstream smoke Tob Control 14 6 396 404 doi 10 1136 tc 2005 011288 PMC 1748121 PMID 16319363 Invernizzi G Ruprecht A Mazza R et al 2004 Particulate matter from tobacco versus diesel car exhaust an educational perspective Tob Control 13 3 219 21 doi 10 1136 tc 2003 005975 PMC 1747905 PMID 15333875 Barnoya J Glantz SA 2005 Cardiovascular effects of secondhand smoke nearly as large as smoking Circulation 111 20 2684 98 doi 10 1161 CIRCULATIONAHA 104 492215 PMID 15911719 S2CID 2291566 Otsuka R Watanabe H Hirata K et al 2001 Acute effects of passive smoking on the coronary circulation in healthy young adults JAMA 286 4 436 41 doi 10 1001 jama 286 4 436 PMID 11466122 Celermajer David S Adams Mark R Clarkson Peter Robinson Jacqui McCredie Robyn Donald Ann Deanfield John E 18 January 1996 Passive Smoking and Impaired Endothelium Dependent Arterial Dilatation in Healthy Young Adults New England Journal of Medicine 334 3 150 155 doi 10 1056 NEJM199601183340303 PMID 8531969 Howard G Thun MJ December 1999 Why is environmental tobacco smoke more strongly associated with coronary heart disease than expected A review of potential biases and experimental data Environmental Health Perspectives 107 Suppl 6 853 8 doi 10 2307 3434565 JSTOR 3434565 PMC 1566209 PMID 10592142 Cendon S P Battlehner C Lorenzi Filho G Dohlnikoff M Pereira P M Conceicao G M S Beppu O S Saldiva P H N October 1997 Pulmonary emphysema induced by passive smoking an experimental study in rats Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research 30 10 1241 1247 doi 10 1590 s0100 879x1997001000017 PMID 9496445 Eren U Kum S Sandikci M Kara E 2006 Effects of long term passive smoking on the mast cells in rat lungs Revue de Medecine Veterinaire 6 319 322 Matt GE Quintana PJ Hovell MF et al March 2004 Households contaminated by environmental tobacco smoke sources of infant exposures Tob Control 13 1 29 37 doi 10 1136 tc 2003 003889 PMC 1747815 PMID 14985592 Winickoff JP Friebely J Tanski SE et al January 2009 Beliefs about the health effects of thirdhand smoke and home smoking bans Pediatrics 123 1 e74 9 doi 10 1542 peds 2008 2184 PMC 3784302 PMID 19117850 Rabin Roni Caryn 2009 01 02 A New Cigarette Hazard Third Hand Smoke New York Times Retrieved 2009 01 12 Sleiman M Gundel L A Pankow J F Jacob P Singer B C Destaillats H 13 April 2010 Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface mediated reactions of nicotine with nitrous acid leading to potential thirdhand smoke hazards Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107 15 6576 6581 doi 10 1073 pnas 0912820107 PMC 2872399 PMID 20142504 Louisiana Hospital to Ban Odor of Smoke on Workers Clothes Fox News October 3 2011 Samet J M Avila Tang E Boffetta P Hannan L M Olivo Marston S Thun M J Rudin C M 15 September 2009 Lung Cancer in Never Smokers Clinical Epidemiology and Environmental Risk Factors Clinical Cancer Research 15 18 5626 5645 doi 10 1158 1078 0432 CCR 09 0376 PMC 3170525 PMID 19755391 Environmental Tobacco Smoke PDF 11th Report on Carcinogens U S National Institutes of Health Archived PDF from the original on 2008 07 16 Retrieved 2007 08 27 Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet U S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 2017 02 21 Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke U S National Cancer Institute Archived from the original on 2007 09 05 Retrieved 2007 08 22 Health Effects of Exposure to Secondhand Smoke United States Environmental Protection Agency Retrieved 2007 09 24 The Truth about Secondhand Smoke American Heart Association Retrieved 2007 08 27 Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet American Lung Association Archived from the original on 2007 09 18 Retrieved 2007 09 24 Secondhand Smoke American Cancer Society Archived from the original on 2007 09 14 Retrieved 2007 08 27 AMA Surgeon General s secondhand smoke report a wake up call to lawmakers Press release American Medical Association Retrieved 2007 08 27 Tobacco s Toll Implications for the Pediatrician American Academy of Pediatrics Archived from the original on 2007 10 15 Retrieved 2007 10 02 National Response to Passive Smoking in Enclosed Public Places and Workplaces PDF Australian National Public Health Partnership November 2000 Archived from the original PDF on 2014 02 12 Retrieved 2007 09 11 Two relevant reports have been published by the Scientific Committee A 1998 report of the SCOTH concluded that passive smoking was a cause of lung cancer heart disease and other health problems A 2004 update by the SCOTH Archived 2012 02 06 at the Wayback Machine reviewing new evidence published since the 1998 report found that recent research had confirmed the initially reported link between passive smoking and health risks Surgeon General 2006 p 588 Ch 10 Saad Lydia 25 July 2007 More Smokers Feeling Harassed by Smoking Bans Gallup Retrieved 20 February 2015 Cato and the tobacco industry Accessed 8 April 2011 Nahan Mike The Australian 10 April 2000 The IPA sings its own song Shermer Michael May 2010 I am a sceptic but I m not a denier New Scientist 206 2760 36 37 Bibcode 2010NewSc 206R 36S doi 10 1016 S0262 4079 10 61210 9 Diethelm P McKee M 16 October 2008 Denialism what is it and how should scientists respond The European Journal of Public Health 19 1 2 4 doi 10 1093 eurpub ckn139 PMID 19158101 S2CID 8098426 Enstrom JE Kabat GC 2003 Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians 1960 98 BMJ 326 7398 1057 doi 10 1136 bmj 326 7398 1057 PMC 155687 PMID 12750205 Davey Smith G 2003 Effect of passive smoking on health More information is available but the controversy still persists BMJ 326 7398 1048 9 doi 10 1136 bmj 326 7398 1048 PMC 1125974 PMID 12750182 Kessler 2006 p 1383 Tong EK Glantz SA 2007 Tobacco industry efforts undermining evidence linking secondhand smoke with cardiovascular disease Circulation 116 16 1845 54 doi 10 1161 CIRCULATIONAHA 107 715888 PMID 17938301 S2CID 4021497 American Cancer Society Condemns Tobacco Industry Study for Inaccurate Use of Data PDF Press release American Cancer Society 2003 05 13 Retrieved 2007 08 29 Thun Michael J 4 October 2003 More misleading science from the tobacco industry BMJ 327 7418 E237 E238 doi 10 1136 bmjusa 03070002 S2CID 74351979 Proposed Research on the relationship of Low Levels of Active Smoking to Mortality Letter from James Enstrom to Philip Morris Scientific Affairs office 1997 01 01 Retrieved 2007 08 29 Dalton R March 2007 Passive smoking study faces review Nature 446 7133 242 Bibcode 2007Natur 446 242D doi 10 1038 446242a PMID 17361147 S2CID 27691890 Kessler 2006 p 1380 Kessler 2006 pp 1380 3 Bero LA Glantz S Hong MK April 2005 The limits of competing interest disclosures Tobacco Control 14 2 118 26 PMC 1748015 PMID 15791022 Enstrom JE Kabat GC March 2006 Environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease mortality in the United States a meta analysis and critique Inhalation Toxicology 18 3 199 210 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 495 2191 doi 10 1080 08958370500434255 PMID 16399662 S2CID 7457133 Kessler 2006 p 162 United States of America v Philip Morris et al United States Factual Memorandum Pursuant to Order No 470 Section V United States District Court for the District of Columbia p 44 ETS IAQ SCIENTIFIC CONSULTANTS from the Legacy Tobacco Documents Archive Retrieved July 19 2007 Gori Gio Batta Spring 2007 Stoking the Rigged Terror of Secondhand Smoke PDF Regulation 30 1 14 7 Archived from the original PDF on 2009 01 16 Smoked Out Pundit for Hire by Paul D Thacker Published in The New Republic on January 26 2006 Retrieved August 22 2007 Philip Morris budget for Strategy and Social Responsibility listing Milloy as a paid consultant Retrieved August 22 2007 Secondhand Joking by Steven Milloy Retrieved May 31 2013 Samet JM Burke TA 2001 Turning Science Into Junk The Tobacco Industry and Passive Smoking Am J Public Health 91 11 1742 4 doi 10 2105 AJPH 91 11 1742 PMC 1446866 PMID 11684591 Scientific Communications Through the Media permanent dead link from the Philip Morris document archive Retrieved October 3 2007 Also cited in Ong Elisa K Glantz Stanton A November 2001 Constructing Sound Science and Good Epidemiology Tobacco Lawyers and Public Relations Firms American Journal of Public Health 91 11 1749 1757 doi 10 2105 ajph 91 11 1749 PMC 1446868 PMID 11684593 a b Ong EK Glantz SA 2001 Constructing Sound Science and Good Epidemiology Tobacco Lawyers and Public Relations Firms Am J Public Health 91 11 1749 57 doi 10 2105 AJPH 91 11 1749 PMC 1446868 PMID 11684593 Layard M W February 1995 Ischemic Heart Disease and Spousal Smoking in the National Mortality Followback Survey Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 21 1 180 183 doi 10 1006 rtph 1995 1022 PMID 7784629 Levois M E Layard M W February 1995 Publication Bias in the Environmental Tobacco Smoke Coronary Heart Disease Epidemiologic Literature Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 21 1 184 191 doi 10 1006 rtph 1995 1023 PMID 7784630 Law Malcolm R Wald Nicholas J July 2003 Environmental tobacco smoke and ischemic heart disease Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases 46 1 31 38 doi 10 1016 s0033 0620 03 00078 1 PMID 12920699 a b Boffetta Paolo Agudo Antonio Ahrens Wolfgang Benhamou Ellen Benhamou Simone Darby Sarah C Ferro Gilles Fortes Cristina Gonzalez Carlos A Jockel Karl Heinz Krauss Martin Kreienbrock Lothar Kreuzer Michaela Mendes Anabela Merletti Franco Nyberg Fredrik Pershagen Goran Pohlabeln Hermann Riboli Elio Schmid Giovanni Simonato Lorenzo Tre daniel Jean Whitley Elise Wichmann Heinz Erich Winck Carlos Zambon Paola Saracci Rodolfo 7 October 1998 Multicenter Case Control Study of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Europe JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 90 19 1440 1450 doi 10 1093 jnci 90 19 1440 PMID 9776409 Passive Smoking Doesn t Cause Cancer Official Archived from the original on 2007 10 13 Smokescreens The World Health Organization is showing signs of allowing politics to get in the way of truth The Economist March 14th 1998 PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2007 11 29 Le Grand C Anti smokers blown away by study Australian 1998 March 10 WHO Rejects smoking link with lung cancer Zimbabwe Independent 1998 Oct 23 No Link Between Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer The Times 1998 March 9 Passive smoking does cause lung cancer do not let them fool you The Ceylon Medical Journal 43 2 98 June 1998 PMID 9704550 Blot William J McLaughlin Joseph K 7 October 1998 Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer Risk What Is the Story Now JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute 90 19 1416 1417 doi 10 1093 jnci 90 19 1416 PMID 9776401 Ong EK Glantz SA 2000 Tobacco industry efforts subverting International Agency for Research on Cancer s second hand smoke study Lancet 355 9211 1253 9 doi 10 1016 S0140 6736 00 02098 5 PMID 10770318 S2CID 25145666 Tobacco Companies Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities at the World Health Organization PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2004 08 21 Retrieved 2008 12 30 US Environmental Protection Agency Respiratory health effects of passive smoking Lung cancer and other disorders The Osteen Decision Archived from the original on 2000 08 15 Flue Cured Tobacco Cooperative vs EPA PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2008 10 09 Retrieved 2008 12 30 U S Department of Health Human Services National Toxicology Program eds December 2 3 1998 Final Report on Carcinogens Background Document for Environmental Tobacco Smoke Meeting of the NTP Board of Scientific Counselors Report on Carcinogens Subcommittee PDF Research Triangle Park North Carolina p 24 Archived from the original PDF on 2007 11 29 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint location missing publisher link Thun MJ 2003 Passive smoking Tobacco industry publishes disinformation BMJ 327 7413 502 3 author reply 504 5 doi 10 1136 bmj 327 7413 502 c PMC 188400 PMID 12946979 a b Barnes DE Bero LA 1998 Why review articles on the health effects of passive smoking reach different conclusions JAMA 279 19 1566 70 doi 10 1001 jama 279 19 1566 PMID 9605902 Tong EK England L Glantz SA 2005 Changing conclusions on secondhand smoke in a sudden infant death syndrome review funded by the tobacco industry Pediatrics 115 3 e356 66 doi 10 1542 peds 2004 1922 PMID 15741361 S2CID 33226933 The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke PDF Executive Summary Surgeon General of the United States 2006 p 21 Retrieved 2009 01 28 a b c Minutes of a meeting of Philip Morris with British tobacco companies to discuss tobacco industry strategy on passive smoking Archived from the original on 2007 10 13 Retrieved 2007 08 27 A Study of Public Attitudes toward Cigarette Smoking and the Tobacco Industry in 1978 produced for the Tobacco Institute and released under the terms of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement Smith E A Malone R E 5 January 2007 We will speak as the smoker the tobacco industry s smokers rights groups The European Journal of Public Health 17 3 306 313 doi 10 1093 eurpub ckl244 PMC 2794244 PMID 17065174 Trotter L Chapman S 2003 Conclusions about exposure to ETS and health that will be unhelpful to us How the tobacco industry attempted to delay and discredit the 1997 Australian National Health and Medical Research Council report on passive smoking Tob Control 12 Suppl 3 iii 102 6 doi 10 1136 tc 12 suppl 3 iii102 PMC 1766130 PMID 14645955 Garne D Watson M Chapman S Byrne F 2005 Environmental tobacco smoke research published in the journal Indoor and Built Environment and associations with the tobacco industry Lancet 365 9461 804 9 doi 10 1016 S0140 6736 05 17990 2 PMID 15733724 S2CID 23160158 a b The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke PDF Executive Summary Surgeon General of the United States 2006 Retrieved 2009 01 28 Kessler 2006 p 1523 The most current positions of major tobacco companies on the issue of passive smoking can be found on their websites As of 13 January 2009 the following websites contain tobacco industry positions on the topic British American Tobacco 1 Imperial Tobacco Imperial Tobacco Group PLC Media Our view Smoking and health Environmental tobacco smoke Archived from the original on 2009 01 16 Retrieved 2008 10 25 Philip Morris USA Archived 2010 10 06 at the Wayback Machine and International R J Reynolds Tobacco Company R J Reynolds Tobacco Company Smoking amp Health Summary of Opinions Archived from the original on 2006 11 18 Retrieved 2006 11 19 Litigation Against Tobacco Companies U S Department of Justice Appeal Ruling U S Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 22 May 2009 Altria Cigarette Makers Lose Lights Ruling Appeal Bloomberg news 22 May 2009 U S appeals court agrees tobacco companies lied Reuters 22 May 2009 Smokers Daring Bloomberg To Ticket Them Under Park Ban Archived 2013 11 26 at the Wayback Machine WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control PDF World Health Organization 2005 02 27 Retrieved 2009 01 12 Parties recognize that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that exposure to tobacco causes death disease and disability a b Guidelines on the Protection from Exposure to Secondhand Smoke PDF Framework Convention for Tobacco Control World Health Organization 2007 Retrieved 2009 01 29 Market Research World Frazer Kate Callinan Joanne E McHugh Jack van Baarsel Susan Clarke Anna Doherty Kirsten Kelleher Cecily 4 February 2016 Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from secondhand smoke exposure smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016 2 CD005992 doi 10 1002 14651858 CD005992 pub3 PMC 6486282 PMID 26842828 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CDC January 2009 Reduced hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction after implementation of a smoke free ordinance City of Pueblo Colorado 2002 2006 MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 57 51 1373 7 PMID 19116606 Frazer Kate McHugh Jack Callinan Joanne E Kelleher Cecily 27 May 2016 Impact of institutional smoking bans on reducing harms and secondhand smoke exposure Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016 5 CD011856 doi 10 1002 14651858 CD011856 pub2 PMC 10164285 PMID 27230795 Hopkins DP Razi S Leeks KD Priya Kalra G Chattopadhyay SK Soler RE 2010 Smokefree policies to reduce tobacco use A systematic review Am J Prev Med 38 2 Suppl S275 89 doi 10 1016 j amepre 2009 10 029 PMID 20117612 Scollo M Lal A Hyland A Glantz S Mar 2003 Review of the quality of studies on the economic effects of smoke free policies on the hospitality industry Tobacco Control 12 1 13 20 doi 10 1136 tc 12 1 13 PMC 1759095 PMID 12612356 Barnoya J Arvizu M Jones MR Hernandez JC Breysse PN Navas Acien A November 2010 Secondhand smoke exposure in bars and restaurants in Guatemala City before and after smoking ban evaluation Cancer Causes Control 22 1 151 6 doi 10 1007 s10552 010 9673 8 PMID 21046446 S2CID 673901 Thomson George Wilson Nick Edwards Richard June 2009 At the frontier of tobacco control A brief review of public attitudes toward smoke free outdoor places Nicotine amp Tobacco Research 11 6 584 590 doi 10 1093 ntr ntp046 PMID 19359392 No ifs or butts Building 7 March 2005 Drope J Bialous SA Glantz SA March 2004 Tobacco industry efforts to present ventilation as an alternative to smoke free environments in North America Tob Control 13 Suppl 1 i41 7 doi 10 1136 tc 2003 004101 PMC 1766145 PMID 14985616 The industry developed a network of ventilation experts to promote its position that smoke free environments were not necessary often without disclosing the financial relationship between these experts and the industry ASHRAE Position Document on Environmental Tobacco Smoke PDF American Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers July 2020 Institute for Health and Consumer Protection Activity Report 2003 PDF European Commission Joint Research Centre 2003 Archived from the original PDF on March 27 2009 Retrieved 2009 01 28 Haveman Robert John Mullahy September 25 2005 Let Bars Buy Sell Smoking Permits Wisconsin State Journal p B2 Archived from the original on January 4 2009 Retrieved 2009 01 28 Thompson Andrea 2007 08 31 Secondhand Smoke Causes Cancer in Pets LiveScience Retrieved 2007 08 31 Snyder LA Bertone ER Jakowski RM Dooner MS Jennings Ritchie J Moore AS 2004 p53 expression and environmental tobacco smoke exposure in feline oral squamous cell carcinoma Vet Pathol 41 3 209 14 doi 10 1354 vp 41 3 209 PMID 15133168 S2CID 24749614 Bertone ER Snyder LA Moore AS 2002 Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Risk of Malignant Lymphoma in Pet Cats American Journal of Epidemiology 156 3 268 273 doi 10 1093 aje kwf044 PMID 12142262 Reif JS Dunn K Ogilvie GK Harris CK 1992 Passive smoking and canine lung cancer risk Am J Epidemiol 135 3 234 9 doi 10 1093 oxfordjournals aje a116276 PMID 1546698 External linksScientific bodies Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke from the U S National Cancer Institute Environmental Tobacco Smoke PDF Archived PDF from the original on 2008 07 16 219 KB From the 11th Report on Carcinogens of the U S National Institutes of Health U S Dept of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Coordinating Center for Health Promotion National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion Office on Smoking and Health 2006 06 27 The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke A Report of the Surgeon General Publications and Reports of the Surgeon General Atlanta Ga Surgeon General of the United States PMID 20669524 O2NLM WA 754 H4325 2006 Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke a href Template Cite journal html title Template Cite journal cite journal a Cite journal requires journal help World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer 2004 Tobacco Smoke and Involuntary Smoking PDF IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans Vol 83 Lyon France IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans ISBN 978 92 832 1283 6 Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet from the U S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tobacco Smoke in the Workplace from the U S Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke from the California Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Children Aged 3 19 Years with and Without Asthma in the United States 1999 2010 National Center for Health Statistics Oberg Mattias Jaakkola Maritta S Woodward Alistair Peruga Armando Pruss Ustun Annette January 2011 Worldwide burden of disease from exposure to second hand smoke a retrospective analysis of data from 192 countries The Lancet 377 9760 139 146 doi 10 1016 S0140 6736 10 61388 8 PMID 21112082 S2CID 7179156 Tobacco industry Tobacco Company Strategies to Undermine Tobacco Control Activities PDF Archived from the original PDF on August 21 2004 Retrieved October 5 2020 1 55 MB Report of the Committee of Experts on Tobacco Industry Documents from the World Health Organization The Legacy Tobacco Documents Library and British American Tobacco Documents Archive from the University of California San Francisco Philip Morris USA Document Archive made public as a result of the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement Other links Guidelines Protection from Exposure to Secondhand Smoke by WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control WHO Policy recommendations on protection from exposure to second hand tobacco smoke Small Elysia Shah Hina P Davenport Jake J Geier Jacqueline E Yavarovich Kate R Yamada Hidetaka Sabarinath Sreedharan N Derendorf Hartmut Pauly James R Gold Mark S Bruijnzeel Adrie W January 2010 Tobacco smoke exposure induces nicotine dependence in rats Psychopharmacology 208 1 143 158 doi 10 1007 s00213 009 1716 z PMC 3586198 PMID 19936715 Kessler Gladys August 17 2006 United States of America v Philip Morris et al Final Opinion of Judge Gladys Kessler PDF United States District Court for the District of Columbia How Secondhand Cigarette Smoke Changes Your Genes Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Passive smoking amp oldid 1214966179, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.