PACT Deaths

The Pennsylvania Alliance to Control Tobacco reports that "nearly 1,800 nonsmoking Pennsylvania casino employees will die from lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses caused by secondhand smoke" during the next 40 years. Or is it 300? The latter figure is cited in a press release dated October 18, while the former is from a statement (PDF) issued three days before that. At this rate, the 40-year death toll should be down to less than a quarter of a person by now, all without the need for a government-imposed smoking ban.

[Thanks to Bill Hannegan for the tip.]

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Abdul||

    So, if smoking is banned in the casinos, will the employees live forever?

    How do I get me one of them jobs?

  • ||

    Casino employees are little Eichmanns anyway. Good riddance.

    (Sorry, but the GF lost a crapload of money at the boat last night. Not to worry, I punished her suitably)

  • M||

    Isn't gambling the whole point of those places?

  • Ska||

    Because, you know, Pennsylvanians are otherwise immune to lung cancer and heart disease. 2nd hand smoke must be the culprit.

  • dbust1||

    I can only assume that these facts come on the heels of the recent announcements about a new casino in Pittsburgh. How ironic that a city that once had the dirtiest air in the nation (black skies at noon) should be concerned with the "dangers" of second hand smoke.

  • ed||

    Welcome to Pennsylvania: "The New California"!

  • JBinMO||

    Casinos are useing slave labor?

  • ||

    LOL, JBinMo. I'm sure the employees care as much as the Londoner I saw in Sainsbury's the other week buying several cartons of cigarettes boldly emblazoned "Smoking Kills."

  • Paul||

    Oh hey, you know those people that go around with real human lungs and show you a smoker's lung, then compare it to the non-smoker's lung? The non-smoker's lung was presumably exposed to a lifetime of second-hand smoke, so why doesn't it look at least half as bad?

  • ||

    Facts? We don't need no stinking facts!

  • ||

    Does anyone who writes for this blog or who posts here believe in anything but constant negativity?!

  • ||

    Give them a break, Jacob. If you were just pulling numbers out of your ass for a living, you'd have a hard time keeping your story straight too.

    ;-)

  • New World Dan||

    While I oppose smoking bans on principle, I gotta admit that it's a hell of a lot nicer going to the bars now that MN has the statewide smoking ban in place.

  • Ska||

    The Ridler | October 31, 2007, 2:07pm | #

    Does anyone who writes for this blog or who posts here believe in anything but constant negativity?!


    Only when I'm high or getting head. Or both.

  • ||

    1,800 nonsmoking Pennsylvania casino employees will die from lung cancer, heart disease, and other illnesses

    Am I the only one who has never met a non-smoker with emphesyma?

  • Paul||

    While I oppose smoking bans on principle, I gotta admit that it's a hell of a lot nicer going to the bars now that MN has the statewide smoking ban in place.

    While I oppose limits to the free speech, It sure has been a hell of a lot nicer now that I don't have to hear shit I disagree with.

  • Paul||

    Am I the only one who has never met a non-smoker with emphesyma

    You are not, sir. I too have never met a non-smoker with emphysema. Or a non-smoker with one of those voice box thingies and a hole in their throat from...second hand smoke. I almost doubled over in laughter when I wrote that, but it's true.

  • Paul||

    No one's responding to my "lung exposed to second hand smoke" comment.

  • Juanita||

    Your right to smoke ends where my personal air begins, and secondhand smoke kills children. Why do you people hate children?

  • ||

    I like this quote from the press release

    ""Twenty times OSHA's Significant Risk Level will eventually kill 44 casino workers every year. This is comparable to the total number of deaths from coal mine disasters in 2006 - and we all appreciate that coal mining can be a dangerous job," Repace said. "Working in a casino should be a safe way to make a living - except that secondhand smoke makes it a hazardous occupation.""

    So the coal miners are just SOL in his opinion?

  • antagonist||

    Juaniat,

    I don't hate children. i think they taste good. Especially when smoked.

  • Ryan||

    While I oppose limits to the free speech, It sure has been a hell of a lot nicer now that I don't have to hear shit I disagree with.

    What, is McCain-Feingold stricter where you live? I thought free speech was alive and well until 60 days prior to an election.

  • Paul||

    I thought free speech was alive and well until 60 days prior to an election.

    I'm assuming you're being ironic here. Because if you are, it's golden.

    BTW: besides the chattering classes, who pays attention to elections more than 60 days prior to?

  • VM||

    Juanita | October 31, 2007, 2:32pm | #
    Your right to smoke ends where my personal air begins, and secondhand smoke kills children. Why do you people hate children?



    cuz they grow up into big, card-carrying Juanitas!

    hugs and kisses,
    Evelyn

  • ||

    Why do you people hate children?

    Juanita, It's because they won't get real jobs, and I'm not allowed to have sex with them.

  • Paul||

    J sub, a NAMBLA membership may be in your future.

  • R C Dean||

    I thought free speech was alive and well until 60 days prior to an election.

    Don't forget, that's sixty days prior to both the primary and the general.

    In a Presidential election, that essentially means no free speech during the preceding calendar year.

  • ||

    J sub, a NAMBLA membership may be in your future.

    I just ate. Therefore I'm terrified to click on that link.

  • ||

    Ok I screwed up my courage, threw a disgust filter in, here goes ...

    Whew! It's a Wiki article, not a site for those perverts. Paul, your consideration for others is noted and appreciated.

  • Rhywun||

    While I oppose limits to the free speech, It sure has been a hell of a lot nicer now that I don't have to hear shit I disagree with.

    While I oppose limits to property rights, it sure has been a hell of a lot nicer now that I don't have to live next door to those--

  • ||

    Repace is an internationally renowned secondhand smoke "scientist"? He is a fucking parasite. As for his claim that smoke is 20 times the OSHA, where did that come from? Oh yeah, his ass.
    OSHA has measured ETS and results can be seen here http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/04/american-cancer-society-test-results.html. Lets try 25,000 safer than OSHA PELs.

  • ||

    People please think clearly about this. How did Repace and crew carry a toaster size machine, about the size of a bomb, past casino security and then carry it around for hours taking measurements, not gambling, and escape the notice of casino security cameras? Pennsylvania casino officials aren't buying it. They call their camera surveillance systems "comprehensive" and don't believe Repace could have pulled off these tests.

    Pennsylvania antismoking activist Bill Godshall claims he took Repace aside and told him the 1771 figure was too high to be plausible. Godshall claims Repace recalculated, found he had made an error, and thus had new numbers for PACT to push at the Pennsylvania Senate and a new press release.

  • LightningBoy||

    Juanita; "Your right to smoke ends where my personal air begins, and secondhand smoke kills children. Why do you people hate children?"

    That crap goes both ways.
    Your "personal air" (you know,...that air with your name on each molecule) stops at the front door of my restaurant business. Once inside, your breathing MY air, and I prefer it with the scent of stale Marlboro and fresh brewed coffee. Your personal preference for a smoke free environment is irrelevant if you make a bad decision for yourself and enter private property where smoking is permitted.
    Try exercising your brain by making a wise choice for yourself, and don't go there. See it's easy, and no one who doesn't specifically want to be, is ever hurt.
    It's called CHOICE, try thinking for yourself instead of relying on the government to do it for you.

  • ||

    LightningBoy, I'm sure that the staff, especially ones who develop respiratory problems really enjoy your second hand crap.

  • ||

    If Repace believed his own tripe, it would be hard to escape being noticed with his respirator suit.

    So much for the deadly effects, he is soo scared, he can't resist visiting every venue a wisp of second hand smoke can be found.

    I really hope he is working hard to protect his own employees from the "deadly effects".

    One also has to wonder if his employees have been properly informed and if they actually made a conscious decision to work in such a hazardous environment without proper safety gear. Repace of all people should know what he subjects his workers to. Should the labor board be advised and hopefully an investigation launched?

  • ||

    Pete--

    I'm pretty certain that LightningBoy's staff are indentured servants, shanghaied somewhere on the high seas and forced to work there. Also pretty certain that if they'd never worked there they'd none of them have ever caught so much as a cold. In fact, they'd never have caught chicken pox or measles in the 2nd and 4th grade since exposure to secondhand smoke is retroactive. Repace and his team snuck into the time machine and measured the air, proving that smoke from the 20th century traveled back in time and caused Biblical plagues. Banzhaf is representing Job in his lawsuit against Phillip Morris.

  • ||

    I do so love to hear the parroted prose spewing from those who believe mimicking others makes them seem intelligent.

    Has anyone heard this little tune before?
    "Your right to smoke ends where my personal air begins, and secondhand smoke kills children."

    First unless you hold tittle to it, you have no claim on the air or do you have any legal right to tell others what they may or may not do with their own bodies, For reference see Roe VS Wade. You don't like the smoke in the bars? Get off your ass and leave, they don't make a lot selling prune juice anyway.

    Second; primary smoking takes 30 years for the effects to be seen in statistics among smokers who are usually adults by that time.

    If second hand smoke is now believed to be more deadly than smoking, perhaps you should consider starting smoking to protect yourself, but only if you are submissive to the fears promoted by the lunatics of science.

    Second hand smoke kills no one, just ask Sir Richard Doll. Oh Yea, he avoided smoking and died anyway, so much for benefits.

    Statistics promote virtual fears by the most crude methods of so called "science" we know. Epidemiology was meant to find direction never could it create a scientific fact Because if it ever did we could guarantee that fact was a methodological error. The epidemiology process has to; by statistical probability produce just as many positives as negative findings. The lack of negative findings should indicate to anyone with a shred of intelligence and the fortitude to investigate the research, a substantial level of deception is afoot. Ecological Fallacy absolutely destroys the insignificant proof they tell us is irrefutable[look it up]. We are being taken to the cleaners by a hail of ad agency spin, promoting; cessation devices, Insurance premiums and any other product which will increase sales and profits through a joint effort.

    What is really scary in all this is the promotion of Public Health as the reinvention of Eugenics is the big winner in the paternalist marketplace, where fear rules all intelligence.

  • Untermensch||

    Am I the only one who had trouble parsing Kevin's incoherent ramblings and punctuation to figure out what in the world he was trying to say (or not figure it out, in my case)?

  • ||

    You know, when you go away for a few days, it's really striking how shallow some of the commentary on this site is.

  • ||

    "Am I the only one who had trouble parsing Kevin's incoherent ramblings and punctuation to figure out what in the world he was trying to say (or not figure it out, in my case)?"

    I totally agree. You apparently are not able to understand and you are by the look of it; alone.

    Try the narration and lower your stress level;
    [http://www.regent.edu/acad/schedu/uselesseaters/]

    Although Public Health supports targeting individuals, we all know it to be a reprehensible act. Smoking and obesity are obvious visual characteristics, Hitler started there first as well. The only non normal individuals are those who promote hatred in targeting innocent individuals. It is not a careless rant calling Public Health authorities Fascists, it is now an entirely valid observation, which needs to be exposed, before they do any more damage.

  • ||

    Mussolini defined fascism as an industrial socialism. Few today ever considered who are the largest promoters of political correctness or the large scale health care promotions, targeting individuals directly that smoke or are overweight.

    For the same reason I would not trust a tobacco company to provide health reliant information Neither should I be forced to rely on other conflicted industries for the information which forms the basis of my choices.

    At the moment the Tobacco industries from a high road perspective, are dispensing much more accurate and informative advice to the public than the total of the major medical institutions, which in retrospect is an entirely unsettling state of affairs. Scientific research should never be utilized directly to play an advocacy role, its very credibility is sustained in absolute unbiased non participation. Much as we should be able trust the news media groups to report the news as opposed to creating it. Those who do participate abandon the role of scientist to become politicians. A role which they can never reverse, at least not within the confines of credibility. A Government which is dedicated to protect its population from imposing harm on themselves, is the opposite of one which respects their rights of autonomy.

    Practitioners who utilize scientific information and take an active role in treating patients or protecting the public from environmental concerns can no longer be confident the information at their disposal is sound or scientific which places us all at increased risk.

    At the World Health Organization the process of HIA health intervention promotes exactly those twisted demands of political science in place of what is required. A process which teaches how to connect all human activity to health effects.

    The call to stakeholder partners, who will profit from a campaign of fear, is unconscionable and well below what we expect from Health care professionals. The promotions of Smoking alternatives, Charity Foundations and Big Pharma are obvious as are the deliberate actions obscuring the secondary supporting benefactors of fear promotions such as Insurance companies, Banks, Investment houses and Government taxation which causes large poverty increases and invokes directly an entirely preventable higher health risk to society, by its secondary effects such as smoking and obesity.

    Medicine and science is loosing credibility in an age of information where too much is laid bare for all to see. It is becoming common knowledge, little we hear from these so called unbiased sources, can be trusted, leaving us what to form our opinions?

    Back to the old superstitions and alternate sources of snake oils and potions which are rebounding as a direct result of that loss of faith.

    How much early mortality will result from medical grandstanding and paternalist politicians dispensing medical advice to their populace? Populations consisting entirely of protected children? Children in turn controlled by the fear death, as opposed to accepting its inevitability.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement