Tobacco Documents Online

~~~ Jv~s ~Isrxur~t P. ANTHONY RIDDER' Y..+..frwt,..rt Pusfiw. ROB'ERT D. 1N6tE YYT ArMdf!111 .walFuewt..r Ed~l.r ROB ELDER RQBERT J. CDCHNuAR JIOHt+f'K, BAKER E.tar Dryw14y E.erws.. Ee,tw W.e.awt;EeNe.. DEAN BARTE£' G'ETa E ~£AL K , YWr,P.e.«4nt~~ -~ Or.ets'~Oprt.tmn. Saks a ~MwretwK~. Editorials Friday. May 20. 1'9g3 Clearing theair C MOKE gipts ~ in your eyes, nose, throat and& lungs when you work next to tobacco addicts. The San Francisco - Board of Supervisors is'trying to clear the air , by reqniring, employers to provide "reason- able" accommodations for noe-srnokers, or ban smoking in the off3ce: Enployess could be : fined $500 a' day for failure ta comply. Tbe ordinance passed its first reading on a 9=Z vote Monday and must past a second time and be -• signed by the mayor before it goes into effect 90 days later. - . The ordinance wouldn't force an employer to create no-szt'noi<ing, areas, or make any "..structural changes;, uniess non-smokers cozn- :: piained. But' it would put the rf ght to inhale clean air above the right to exhale tobacco fumes. T'tie ordinance applies to offices where ~ertoployees work in enciimsed areas; it exempts federal and state off ce building5 and private -homes ~ used' as workplacex.. . If smoking was simply irritating to nor~ sctsokers (77 percent say it is), it wouldn't mes it' regulation any more than popping :gµrn. humming off-key or showing baby pictures. If' secondhand s=nokeaffeeted'the health of only a aandful of ultra,sensitive pnople„it wouldn't, : require a sweeping law to handle the problerm.. In fact, the evidence is mounting,that second- ~., tiand smoke is more than am irritant; it is a Jiealth ba7ard _* When a smoker lights up, two-thirds of the fumes'& go inta ttoe! environment. The "sides, tre,am'• smoke frocr~ the burning end of a cigarette contains much higher concentrations of noxious compounds than the "mainstream" smoke inhaled and exisa9e+d through a filter. Levels of some dangerous subsiancrs are sev- lOB eral1 times higher than tlie' federal limits for inTh~ e's no' clear proof that secondhand smoke increases the risk of'lung cancer, lieart or respiratory disease for healthy adult non, sasokers. However, a 1982' study of' workers who Dad inhaled their colleagues' smoke for many years fflund i changes In the small air- ways of the lungs that could be precursors of e:mphysenaa, chronic bronchitis or other breathing problem.s. In additioni a srnoky environment can aggravate'the symptoms of people with heart and respiratory disease or with allergies, causing headaches, coughing, congestion, shortness of breath, dsest pain, elevated blood pressure and heart rates and irregular heart beats: The effects' can be disabling, or even ldfe tlireatening. to the 5,5 inillion Californians who suffer frmrm heart and lung diseases. The 9th 1Da tSrcuit Court of Appeals recog- nized that a smoky environment can be disa- bling in a 1982 ruling,involving Irene Parodi{ a' Fresnont'records clerk who suffers from asth- matic bronctiitfls: The court ruled that her empioyer, the federal gpvernrnent, must pro• vide her a smoke-free work space or allow her to : collect disability benefits. Non-smokers are', becoming more aggres- sive about'' demanding clean air, and' employ, ers are becoming more' willing, to segregate smokers, but the air hasn't cleared~ in many offices. Regulating secondhand smoke in the workplace is as reasonable as other health and safety regulations. If the San Francisco ordi- nance proves its effectiweness, other citiCs and counties shouid follow suit. JERRY CEPACAS AMWMf X/Mar ~. JOHN HAdME'TT Vr. Plre..denv Lmpl.yre/Cwe.wwny RrWa.m