Anne Landman's Collection
Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Why Is It A Problem?
Abstract
This Brown & Williamson (B&W) report, "Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Why is it a Problem?", appears to be an internally produced presentation about secondhand smoke. It is undated, but references a 1986 National Academy of Sciences report, which places it after that date.
The document presents reasons for dealing with the "Worst Case Scenario" about secondhand smoke, specifically pointing out that:
"1. ETS is chemically different than MS [mainstream] smoke." 2. ETS exposure is chronic. 3. The shape of the biological dose-response curve is unknown."
The document lists studies that have shown that secondhand smoke causes harm, and specifically points out the dangers is is said to pose to pregnant women, children and the lung function of adults:
"Dose-response relationships exist between low birthweight children and pregnant women with daily ETS exposure, number of cigarettes smoked by father...Household ETS exposure is linked to retarded growth and development and chronic ear infections."
"ETS exposure causes respiratory symptons in some children,"
"Decreases in lung function due to ETS: 0 to 0.5% per year. This effect not clinically important but may: --reflect pathophysiological effects --may be a factor is later development of chronic airflow obstruction."
The document also makes statements about the inadequacy of ventilation to deal with ETS. On page 17 (Bates No. 620002369) it states that a ventilation rate of 50-60 cubic feet per minute (cfm) per person is required to provide satisfactory indoor air quality when ETS is present. According to Don Shopland, (who brought this document to Doc-Alert's attention), under the old ASHRAE guidelines a rate of just 20-35 cfm per occupant was suggested when smokers were present.
The document goes on to state that,
"There is probably no practical ventilation rate that could satisfy 80% of more nonsmoking visitors," and that "segretation of smokers and nonsmokers is not a solution" because the "rate of migrations of smoke from smoking to nonsmoking areas is unknown," and "common ventilation/filtration systems negate any benefits of segregation."
The above report could hold important ramifications for public health authorities who are working to protect the public from exposure to secondhand smoke.
Fields
- Notes
Thanks to Don Shopland of Georgia for bringing this document to Doc-Alert's attention, and for summarizing some of the very important points made in the document.
- Quotes
[From Page 9-10, Bates No. 620002361/2362]
REASONS FOR ACCEPTING WORST CASE SCENARIO
1. ETS IS CHEMICALLY DIFFERENT FROM MS [mainstream] SMOKE,
2. ETS EXPOSURE IS CHRONIC.
THE SHAPE OF THE BIOLOGICAL DOSE-RESPONSE CURVE IS UNKNOWN.
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM STUDIES REVIEWED
CHILDHOOD STUDIES
1. RATIOS FOR INCREASED PREVALENCE OF RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS: 1.2 - 1.8, THEREFORE ETS EXPOSURE CAUSES RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS IN SOME CHILDREN.
2. DECREASES IN LUNG FUNCTION DUE TO ETS: 0 TO 0.5% PER YEAR. THIS EFFECT IS NOT CLINICALLY IMPORTANT BUT MAY:
- REFLECT PATHOPHYSIOLOGICAL EFFECTS
- BE A FACTOR IN LATER DEVELOPMENT OF CHRONIC AIRFLOW OBSTRUCTION,
3. DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS EXIST BETWEEN LOW BIRTHWEIGHT CHILDREN AND:
- PREGNANT WOMEN WITH DAILY ETS EXPOSURE.
- NUMBER OF CIGARETTES SMOKED BY FATHER.
4. HOUSEHOLD ETS EXPOSURE IS LINKED TO RETARDED GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AND CHRONIC EAR INFECTIONS.
[From Page 15-17, Bates Nos. 620002367/2369]
IMPACT OF ETS ON INDOOR AIR QUALITY
0DOUR
l. ETS AROUSES ODOUR RESPONSES. OBJECTIONABLE ODOUR GENERATED BY ETS GREATLY EXCEEDS THAT GENERATED BY SIMPLE OCCUPANCY UNDER COMPARABLE CONDITIONS OF OCCUPANCY, DENSITY, TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY.
2. TOBACCO SMOKE ODOUR IS STABLE OVER TIME. CURRENT VENTILATION AND AIR CLEANING REQUIREMENTS DO NOT REMOVE ODOUR.
3. 0DOUR DERIVES PRIMARILY FROM THE VAPOUR PHASE.
4. 0DOUR GOVERNS REACTIONS OF VISITORS. IRRITATION GOVERNS REACTIONS OF OCCUPANTS.
IRRITATION
1. EYE IRRITATION IS THE MOST IMPORTANT NEGATIVE FACTOR.
2. EYE BLINK CORRELATES WITH SENSORY IRRITATION AT HIGH LEVELS OF ETS (C0>5 PPM).
3. IRRITATION CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE PARTICULATE PHASE.
4. IRRITATION MAY REMAIN AFTER REMOVAL OF IRRITANT,
5. CUTANEOUS SENSITIVITY TO TOBACCO LEAF OR SMOKE EXTRACTS DOES NOT CORRELATE WITH SUBJECTIVE SYMPTOMS.
VENTILATION
1. LOW HUMIDITY EXACERBATES ODOUR AND IRRITATION TO ETS.
2. VENTILATION RATES OF 50-60 CFM PER PERSON ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE SATISFACTORY INDOOR AIR QUALITY WHERE ETS IS PRESENT.
3. THERE IS PROBABLY NO PRACTICAL VENTILATION RATE THAT COULD SATISFY 80% OR MORE NON-SMOKING VISITORS.
4. SEGREGATION OF SMOKER/NON-SMOKERS IS NOT A SOLUTION.
ASHRAE GUIDELINES FOR VENTILATION
TARGET: SATISFY 80% OF VISITORS TO A ROOM.
NON-SMOKING: 5-8 CFM PER OCCUPANT.
SMOKING: 20-35 CFM PER OCCUPANT.
ASHRAE GUIDELINES CONSIDERED INADEQUATE DUE TO:
1. BASED ON LITERATURE VALUES, ASHRAE GUIDELINES SATISFY 50-75% VISITORS AND NON-SMOKING OCCUPANTS NOT 80%.
2. NON-SMOKERS HAVE LOWER THRESHOLD VALUES FOR OBJECTIONS WHICH SHOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE.
SEGREGATION OF SMOKERS / NON-SMOKERS
NOT A SOLUTION:
1. RATE OF MIGRATION OF SMOKE FROM SMOKING TO NON-SMOKING AREAS IS UNKNOWN.
2. COMMON VENTILATION/FILTRATION SYSTEMS NEGATE ANY BENEFITS OF SEGREGATION.
- Company
- Brown & Williamson
- Region
- United States
- Litigation
- 10004026
- Type
- Report
- Subject
- secondhand smoke
- Secondhand Smoke/Constituents
- secondhand smoke/health effects
- Secondhand Smoke/Perception
- Secondhand Smoke/Toxicity
- Secondhand Smoke/Constituents
Page count mismatch (files 32, split 20)
Document Images
