Quote Originally Posted by Amanda
The most frequently cited case study on secondhand smoke was conducted in 1993, and the people who commandeered the study intentionally manipulated the results. Simply put, they came up with a set of figures, arbitrarily doubled the margin of error....then arbitrarily doubled the margin of error again...and then came up with oft-cited number of 56,000 annual deaths associated with secondhand cigarette smoke. While I'm no scientist, I wouldn't dispute that prolific exposure to secondhand smoke probably does cause a marginal number of deaths per year, it's far from being an epidemic....and I would surmise that the kind of casual secondhand smoke exposure endured by non-smoking bar and restaurant patrons has never killed anybody. The entire "second-hand" debate is the product of convenience. Those who don't like the smell of smoke can defer to junk science and declare the area around a smoldering cigarette or cigar to be a toxic waste dump putting them and their children in bodybags. Meanwhile, they probably inhale 100 times more carcinogens per year sitting in traffic jams on crowded freeways than they do sitting across the bar from somebody trying to enjoy a cigarette in peace.

cigar_no_baka, you may be right in your contention that drinkers will be the next to be marginalized, but I'm less sure. Smoking is "the other guy's bad habit". Most people don't smoke, even recreationally. Most people, on the other hand, do partake in an alcoholic beverage reguarly or semi-regularly. With that in mind, the urgency of passing legislation to "protect the children" from drinkers is far less cataclysmic than it is for smokers. Society is willing to put up with the hundreds of thousands of alcohol-related fatalities per year than they are smoking-related deaths because the council members don't want to miss out on the opportunity to have a few cocktails following the city council meeting where they banned "public" smoking. On the other hand, I do expect we will see significant sin taxes imposed on alcohol in the years to come. Revenue will diminish from tobacco taxes with diminishing usage, so they'll be desperately seeking a new trough to feed from.
Well, I don't see them banning alcohol (tried that in the roarin' twenties and they saw how well that went), but marginalizing and demonizing them...yes, I can see that coming.