Anti-Cigarette Decisions and Smoking Bans

I was appalled to read that Los Angeles Councilman Joel Wachs rationalized his opposition to a restaurant smoking ban by dismissing it as a matter of exposure to “a few hours of smoke.” As a physician who cares for the victims of smoking on a day-to-day basis, I would like to assure the councilman that the issues involved in the exposure of the public to environmental cigarette smoke are far more profound than he apparently realizes.

One need not be a physician to realize that thousands of restaurant workers confront far more than “a few hours” of exposure and that they are not in the least protected by voluntary nonsmoking areas. Recent evidence on the effects of passive smoking suggest that these workers may face an increased cancer risk. Customers’ exposure to passive smoke, although less than that of employees, adds up over months and years.

The failure of the Beverly Hills restaurant smoking ban demonstrated the hazards of a piecemeal approach to this problem. A statewide restaurant smoking ban would eliminate restaurant owners’ concerns about smokers’ boycotts of restaurants in communities with smoking bans. In the meantime, local efforts such as Braude’s will protect some of us from the hazards of passive smoke exposure and will pave the way for broader action.

DANIEL J. STONE, M.D.

Los Angeles