Smoke ban study on bar staff health
One of the largest studies in the world into the impact of banning smoking on the health of bar staff is to take place in Scotland.
Aberdeen University researchers are to assess the health of 360 bar staff from across Scotland in a £140,000 study.
The smoking ban comes into force across Scotland at 6am on Sunday.
Researchers hope some initial findings will be available within a few months.
Ill healthThe university's Dr Sean Semple told the BBC: "Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a cause of considerable ill-health, with estimates suggesting ETS causes between 1,500 and 2,000 non-smoker deaths every year in Scotland.
"Workers in the hospitality sector have particularly high levels of ETS exposure."
He said the introduction of smoke-free legislation in other countries suggested hospitality workers may quickly experience improvements in respiratory health.
Dr Semple added: "Our study sets out to find out whether the health of workers in Scotland's bars does improve after the ban is implemented."
Lung functionScientists have been gathering data on the lung functions of bar workers ahead of the ban.
The team will be going back to repeat their survey two months after the implementation of the ban, and then again at the beginning of 2007.
The study also aims to determine if bar workers who smoke are encouraged to give up smoking and whether the experience of working in a smoke-free environment has influenced their attitudes towards the ban.
Your Comments Liz Barber via email 24/03/2006"Why bother with the study at all? Dr Semple has already stated his views, the 'results' of the study will no doubt mirror them. Please note too, that this weeks random number for ETS related deaths is 1500 - 2000 all of which occur in Scotland. Only a few short month ago the figure was 1000, prior to that a guestimate of a few hundred throughout the uk. Junk stats taken from Junk science. We will soon have more people (allegedly) dying from ETS than smoking itself.
If anyone out there smells a rat, wonders if they're being had, doubts the credibility of the claims and questions the validity of a ban on smoking justified by those fraudulent claims please visit www.thebigdebate.org , our campaign is featured by the Morning Advertiser, who have been sterling in their support for the FREEDOM TO CHOOSE campaign.
Bill Gibson via email 24/03/2006"The last study this Uni carried out consisted of 50 bar staff this time around they plan to widen the net to include 350,,,so what
'There has never yet been a single scientific study proving that the low levels of smoke in a well-ventilated modern bar or restaurant has ever killed ANYONE
Almost all of the statistical studies are based on long term exposures sometimes dating back to the 1950s when there were no modern systems of air filtration and ventilation. Their experimental studies are based on concentrated "smoke-chamber" conditions far smokier than anything you'd find in a decent establishment. And their "air-pollution comparisons" between smoking pubs and non-smoking ones don't really measure air pollution... they just measure whether there's smoke in the place'
FACT: Modern Air Filtration will remove 98% of Airborne Pollutants making the indoor air cleaner than that found outdoors. The Scottish Executive ministers are well aware of this to the extent that they now fail to answer my correspondence directed to them even after repeated prompting."
Robert Feal-Martinez via email 24/03/2006"As with all junk science and junk scientists this one should be confined to the waste bin where it belongs. As Bill Gibson implies there was nothing scientific about the last study in America by Eisner. Nothing scientifc, questions like, now there's a smoking ban how do you feel? The only scietific bit was a Pulmonary Function Test which showed no clinical significance. What I would like to know, and perhaps the Morning Advertiser could assist. Where is the money for the research coming from?"
Morning Advertiser responds: I will endeavour to find out where the money is coming from but the study is being carried out by a university so I guess there in lies the answer.
Colin Grainger via email 24/03/2006"I agree with Liz. Dr Simple has already made his mind up. Its right there in his opening statement. I can save him the time and effort. He will find no improvement in health. Second hand smoke is harmless, all the science says so. Send me the £140,000 and I will save many thousands of lives in Africa by using the money for immunization programs and water supply.
Give it up Doc. Why dont you do what the ASH folks do? Just take any one of the 150 plus studies already done and simply alter the figures to suit what you want the funding group to hear. HMG and the Scottish Executive are both guilty of it, in the mistaken belief that they are doing whats best for us, so a precedent has been set.
Whatever you do, steer clear of the truth, because that way lies choice and common sense."
Sharon Donald via email 24/03/2006"Could I suggest that Dr Semple also carrys out tests on traffic pollution at the same time. If he does his job properly he will find that non smokers and smokers alike are are breathing in quite unacceptable levels of toxin but of course he wont admit to that. I would sooner stand next to a smoker than a car exhaust any day. The people of Scotland will be standing inside all of these smokefree bars to then spill out onto the pavement and breathe in the foul air outside. Its not smoking that causes ashma its traffic pollution and he well knows that. Its just easier to blame smoking and obtain another obsene amount of money to keep him and his kind in work."
To comment on this or any other story email us by clicking this link
