tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post6089342546618221811..comments2024-03-28T09:22:36.967+13:00Comments on Offsetting Behaviour: Second-hand smokeEric Cramptonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-73005084637999064442010-11-26T13:22:34.280+13:002010-11-26T13:22:34.280+13:00@Keith: check the metastudy analysis LemmusLemmus ...@Keith: check the metastudy analysis LemmusLemmus links above. <br /><br />Tobacco smoke is carcinogenic. It could be the case that second hand smoke exposure provides sufficient dose to raise the relative risk of cancer. One nice thing in the method above is that it separates never smokers from former smokers: it's harder to disentangle the effects of second hand smoke when nonsmokers and former smokers are lumped together. On the other hand, it's a design protocol with which I'm less familiar: they basically match a bunch of cancer patients with non-cancer folks on a bunch of factors other than smoking.<br /><br />My very cursory review of the second hand smoke lit has me worried about a lot of the same kinds of things that worried the J-curve skeptics in the early 1990s: confounding of the comparison sample by mixing never and former smokers; failure to adjust for other health-related behaviours that correlate with smoking status. Those things have been sorted out in the alcohol literature, but I can't see that they have been in the second hand smoke literature. And that makes me less confident in the results of metastudies in that area than I am in the J-curve.<br /><br />I've no ideological or other commitments to that there's no effect of second hand smoke, if that's the question. As far as optimal policy goes, I reckon it's invariant to whether second hand smoke is mildly carcinogenic or not: property rights allowing bar, restaurant, or workplace owners to make the decision is sufficient. I'm confident that there isn't a positive effect of second hand smoke; I'm not confident about whether there's zero or a mild negative effect.Eric Cramptonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-92138819560577981212010-11-26T12:59:19.529+13:002010-11-26T12:59:19.529+13:00Sure, this study chalks one against ETS being a si...Sure, this study chalks one against ETS being a significant cancer risk, but a) it doesn't mean this study is any *more* conclusive than any of the other studies that came before it, and b) the policy consequences isn't based on health risks alone.<br /><br />For example, the number of workers in hospitality vs the number of workers in environments involving these industrial processes/chemicals, the viability and cost of eliminating these harmful substances (no smoking vs no welding), etc.<br /><br />Out of interest, would your position change at all if the next study comes out claiming that ETS is a significant risk factor? Can you imagine what it would take to change your mind?<br /><br />I've been pondering that a lot lately - how, if at all, statistical evidence can change someone's firmly-held position.Keith Ngnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-91636194735998077792010-11-26T12:14:06.956+13:002010-11-26T12:14:06.956+13:00No doubt the MOH will dismiss this as some tobacco...No doubt the MOH will dismiss this as some tobacco industry plot and completely ignore the facts because it doesn't support their efforts. <br /><br />God leaving public health up to the officials in the MOH leaves me cold and feeling ill.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-77656870044828121472010-11-24T10:31:09.193+13:002010-11-24T10:31:09.193+13:00I have a follow-up here.I have a follow-up <a href="http://churchofrationality.blogspot.com/2010/11/so-thats-state-of-epidemology.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.LemmusLemmushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00917054221547240969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-48827376187741854042010-11-23T17:23:20.585+13:002010-11-23T17:23:20.585+13:00Once a lobby group gets a foothold, it is pretty h...Once a lobby group gets a foothold, it is pretty hard to argue against even in the face of solid evidence. <br /><br />Great blog by the wayCameron Murrayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08737859133901303110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-68634283421513096982010-11-23T09:16:04.729+13:002010-11-23T09:16:04.729+13:00"Not that I regret having played with the wel..."Not that I regret having played with the welder. Few things are more worthwhile for a boy than messing about with welders"<br /><br />Oooh, matron. ;)Dick Puddlecotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01481866882188932892noreply@blogger.com