Google Answers Logo
View Question
 
Q: Second Hand Smoke ( Answered 5 out of 5 stars,   1 Comment )
Question  
Subject: Second Hand Smoke
Category: Health
Asked by: alexan07-ga
List Price: $5.00
Posted: 25 Feb 2003 02:32 PST
Expires: 27 Mar 2003 02:32 PST
Question ID: 166788
Please link to hard scientific evidence that second hand smoke is bad for you.
Answer  
Subject: Re: Second Hand Smoke
Answered By: tehuti-ga on 25 Feb 2003 04:29 PST
Rated:5 out of 5 stars
 
Hello alexan07

These are all references to articles in the medical journal literature
as found on the Medline database at the National Library of Medicine
http://www.nlm.nih.gov  The URLs are to the summaries of the articles,
from which extracts are quoted.  There are thousands of papers on the
subject, so this is just to give you some idea of the types of studies
conducted and the types of diseases investigated. If I have not
covered a specific condition in which you are interested, please
request further clarification of my answer.

1.  New Zealand Medical  Journal 2002 Nov 8;115(1165):U240    
Still dying from second-hand smoke at work: a brief review of the
evidence for smoke-free workplaces in New Zealand.
Wilson N, Thomson G.

“… The New Zealand evidence suggests that over 30% of workers continue
to be exposed to SHS in workplace settings. The best available
estimate is that SHS exposure in these settings causes around 100
avoidable deaths per year from lung cancer, coronary heart disease and
stroke collectively. National survey data and studies in hospitality
industry settings (measuring nicotine in hair and cotinine in saliva),
strongly indicate that smoke-free workplaces result in reduced
exposure to SHS.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12552286&dopt=Abstract

2. Rev Saude Publica 2000 Feb;34(1):39-43 
  [Effects of environmental tobacco smoke on lower respiratory system
of children under 5 years of age]  [Article in Portuguese]
Pereira ED, Torres L, Macedo J, Medeiros MM.

“…A cross sectional study of a total of 1,104 children under 5 years
old…. Among 611 children exposed to second-hand smoke, 82% had
respiratory problems…  Children whose parents were smokers at the time
of the survey were more likely to experience wheezing than children of
nonsmoking parents… shortness of breath… morning and day time or night
coughs… The odds ratio for asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia was
greater for children exposed to second-hand smoke”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10769359&dopt=Abstract

3. Journal of the American College of  Cardiology 1997
Dec;30(7):1878-85
Effects of second-hand smoke and gender on infarct size of young rats
exposed in utero and in the neonatal to adolescent period.
Zhu BQ, Sun YP, Sudhir K, Sievers RE, Browne AE, Gao L, Hutchison SJ,
Chou TM, Deedwania PC, Chatterjee K, Glantz SA, Parmley WW.

“We sought to assess the effects of second-hand smoke (SHS) and gender
on infarct size in young rats exposed in utero or in the neonatal to
adolescent period, or both…. Exposure to SHS in the neonatal to
adolescent period and male gender increased myocardial infarct size in
a young rat model of ischemia and reperfusion. These results are
consistent with epidemiologic studies demonstrating that SHS increases
the health risk to neonates and adolescents.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9385922&dopt=Abstract

4. Circulation 1994 Sep;90(3):1363-7 
  Inhalation of steady-state sidestream smoke from one cigarette
promotes arteriosclerotic plaque development.
Penn A, Chen LC, Snyder CA.
Nelson Institute of Environmental Medicine, New York University
Medical Center, Tuxedo 10987.

“A number of epidemiologic studies have suggested that every year
environmental tobacco smoke (second-hand smoke) is responsible for
tens of thousands of deaths, mostly from heart disease, in the United
States. Environmental tobacco smoke is composed mainly (80% to 85%) of
aged and diluted sidestream smoke… Among the thousands of compounds
that have been identified in environmental tobacco smoke are a number
of carcinogens, including polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
carcinogens, such as benzo(a)pyrene….  Thirty cockerels were exposed
to the steady-state sidestream smoke from 1 cigarette for 6 hours per
day for 16 weeks…  there was a statistically significant increase in
plaque size in the smoke-exposed cockerels…  levels of carbon monoxide
… measured independently over 1 to 3 hours in four bars where there
was heavy smoking….  were as high or higher …  than they were in the
exposure chambers during the 1-cigarette sidestream-smoke study.
CONCLUSIONS: Experimental exposure to secondhand smoke at levels equal
to or even below those routinely encountered by people in smoke-filled
environments is sufficient to promote arteriosclerotic plaque
development.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8087947&dopt=Abstract

5. American Journal of Medicine 1992 Jul 15;93(1A):38S-42S    
Passive smoking: the medical and economic issues.
Lesmes GR, Donofrio KH.

Since the late 1970s, the dangers associated with passive
(involuntary) smoking have been widely debated…  Those debates have
culminated in a report sponsored by the Environmental Protection
Agency and other federal agencies. The report concludes that
second-hand cigarette smoke kills 53,000 nonsmokers a year and is a
major cause of indoor air pollution.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1497002&dopt=Abstract

6. Chest 1991 Jul;100(1):39-43 
Respiratory illness in nonsmokers chronically exposed to tobacco smoke
in the work place.
White JR, Froeb HF, Kulik JA.

“Passive smokers … reported significantly more cough, greater phlegm
production, more shortness of breath, greater eye irritation, more
chest colds and more days lost from work due to chest colds than
control subjects. Nonsmoking workers and their employers are likely to
incur significant financial loss because of missed workdays due to
illnesses resulting from exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2060388&dopt=Abstract

7. Postgrad Med 1981 Jul;70(1):77-9 
Secondhand cigarette smoke as a cause of chronic carbon monoxide
poisoning.
Kachulis CJ.

“Symptoms of carbon monoxide poisoning in a nonsmoking patient
continued for several years until her husband stopped smoking
cigarettes near her.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7243702&dopt=Abstract

8. Cardiovascular Nursing 2003 Jan-Mar;18(1):69-74 
Passive smoking and vascular disease.
Ahijevych K, Wewers ME.

“Passive smoking, or environmental tobacco smoke, is a causative
factor in cardiovascular disease. A 30-minute passive smoking exposure
was found to affect coronary flow velocity reserve in nonsmokers,
indicating endothelial dysfunction in coronary circulation...
Clinically relevant findings include a dose-response relationship
between passive smoking exposure and heart disease and partial
reversibility of physical effects after eliminating passive smoking
exposure.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12537093&dopt=Abstract

9. American Journal of Epidemiol 2002 Aug 1;156(3):268-73 
Environmental tobacco smoke and risk of malignant lymphoma in pet
cats.
Bertone ER, Snyder LA, Moore AS.

 “… To evaluate whether exposure to household environmental tobacco
smoke (ETS) may increase the risk of feline malignant lymphoma, the
authors conducted a case-control study of this relation in 80 cats
with malignant lymphoma and 114 controls with renal disease…  After
adjustment for age and other factors, the relative risk of malignant
lymphoma for cats with any household ETS exposure was 2.4… Risk
increased with both duration and quantity of exposure, with evidence
of a linear trend. Cats with 5 or more years of ETS exposure had a
relative risk of 3.2 …  compared with those in nonsmoking households.
These findings suggest that passive smoking may increase the risk of
malignant lymphoma in cats and that further study of this relation in
humans is warranted.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12142262&dopt=Abstract

10. Neoplasma 2002;49(2):75-80 
A case-control study of lung cancer in Polish women.
Rachtan J.

“A total of 242 women with histologically confirmed primary lung
cancer and 352 healthy controls were involved in the study…. Passive
smoking exposure during childhood significantly increased the risk [of
lung cancer]”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12088109&dopt=Abstract

11. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2002 Feb;11(1):27-38 
Active and passive smoking and the risk of stomach cancer, by subsite,
in Canada.
Mao Y, Hu J, Semenciw R, White K; Canadian Cancer Registries
Epidemiology Research Group.

 “Mailed questionnaires were used to obtain information on 1171 newly
diagnosed histologically confirmed stomach cancer cases and 2207
population controls…  findings suggest that active and passive smoking
may play an important role in the development of cardial stomach
cancer.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11917206&dopt=Abstract

12. International Journal of Cancer 2001 Sep15;93(6):902-6 
Lifetime residential and workplace exposure to environmental tobacco
smoke and lung cancer in never-smoking women, Canada 1994-97.
Johnson KC, Hu J, Mao Y; The Canadian Cancer Registries Epidemiology
Research Group.

“Although the risk of lung cancer among never-smokers living with a
spouse who smokes has been extensively studied, the impact of lifetime
residential and workplace environmental tobacco smoke has received
less attention. As part of a large population-based case-control study
of lung cancer, we collected lifetime residential and occupational
passive smoking information from 71 women with lung cancer and 761
healthy control subjects, all of whom reported being lifetime
nonsmokers….  Our results are consistent with the literature
suggesting that long-term, regular exposure to either residential or
occupational environmental tobacco smoke is associated with increased
lung cancer risk in never-smoking women.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11519055&dopt=Abstract

Search strategy: 1. second hand smoke   2. passive smoking
alexan07-ga rated this answer:5 out of 5 stars

Comments  
Subject: Re: Second Hand Smoke
From: joequad_ga-ga on 28 Jun 2004 11:27 PDT
 
There was a show on Showtime recently that dealt with secondhand
smoke. It said that most information on secondhand smoke went back to
the EPA?s 1992 study. What most people don?t know is that study was
thrown out buy the court for lack of credible science. The show also
commented on the study by the W.H.O. that said there was a 25%
increased chance of getting cancer living with a smoker on there cover
sheet. They arrived at that figure by studying 1 million households.
The in crease from a non smoking household to a smoking household went
from 10 to 12.5. Granted that is a 25% increase but out of 1,000,000
is statistically no existent. Granted smoking is bad for the smoker
and I by no means encourage no one to smoke but from several reputable
sources on this show they said there was no comprehensive study that
showed a definitive link from secondhand smoke and cancer. I know this
is not a politically correct stance but according to my information
it?s fact.

Important Disclaimer: Answers and comments provided on Google Answers are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Google does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. Please read carefully the Google Answers Terms of Service.

If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by emailing us at answers-support@google.com with the question ID listed above. Thank you.
Search Google Answers for
Google Answers  


Google Home - Answers FAQ - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy