1. SECONDHAND SMOKE AND SMOKE-FREE LAWS

2. Nothing Kills Like Tobacco Cigarettes Alcohol 2 nd Hand Smoke Car Accidents Suicide AIDS Homicides 430,000 105,095 53,000 46,300 30,906 29,939 24,932 Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

3. Secondhand tobacco smoke contains more than 4,000 chemicals 5 regulated hazardous air pollutants 47 regulated hazardous wastes 60 known or suspected cancer-causing agents More than 100 chemical poisons

4. Toxic Poisons in Secondhand Tobacco Smoke Methanol Carbon Monoxide Hydrogen Cyanide Acetone Tar DDT Naphthalene Vinyl Chloride Benzene There is no safe level of exposure to firsthand tobacco smoke or secondhand tobacco smoke Formaldehyde Mercury Lead Arsenic Toluene Cadmium Ammonia Butane Ethanol

5. Heart disease Lung cancer Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) Low birth weight Asthma Otitis Media (ear infections) in children Bronchitis and pneumonia Breast cancer in pre-menopausal women. Increased risk of cervical cancer. Cognitive deficits among children even at extremely low levels of exposure. Health Consequences of Secondhand Smoke

6. Short-Term Heart Effects of Secondhand Smoke Exposure 5 minutes of exposure stiffens the aorta as much as smoking a cigarette. 20 minutes of exposure causes excess blood clotting, increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke. 30 minutes of exposure increases the build up of fat deposits in blood vessels, increasing the risk of heart attack and stroke. 2-hours of exposure increases the chance of irregular heart beat that can be fatal or trigger a heart attack. In April 2004, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a warning that all patients with heart disease should avoid exposure to secondhand smoke.

7. Effects on Workers’ Health Levels of secondhand tobacco smoke in restaurants and bars is 1.6 to 6 times higher than in office workplaces Servers have the greatest risk of developing lung cancer and heart disease compared to other occupations

8. Median hair nicotine level After Lexington’s Smoke-free Law, Hair Nicotine Dropped by 56%

9. The Average Decrease in Hair Nicotine Was Greater in Bar Workers *adjusted for cigarettes smoked per day Median hair nicotine level

10. “I worked as a cocktail waitress in smoky restaurants and bars for 14 years. I have onset emphysema. My doctor says my constant exposure to tobacco smoke contributed significantly to my emphysema. No one should have to breathe tobacco smoke to hold a job.” Suzanne H

12. Air Pollution Before and After Lexington’s Smoke-free Law Indoor air pollution in restaurants, bars, and other entertainment venues was 3 times the outdoor air pollution standard, but dropped 91% after Lexington’s smoke-free law took effect.

13. Ventilation Standards Technical experts have concluded that “source” control (smoke-free) is the only feasible way to protect the public from secondhand tobacco smoke No feasible ventilation system can reduce secondhand smoke exposure to safe levels The current ASHRAE indoor standard (62- 1999) assumes no smoking American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)

14. Percent of Workers Covered by Smoke-free Workplace Policies, 1993-1999

15. Public Health Benefits of Smoke-Free Laws Nonsmokers protected Fewer children start to smoke Smokers consume fewer cigarettes More smokers quit

16. The Economics of Smoke-free Laws A large number of studies using objective measures show no negative economic impact. Smoke-free measures have been shown to improve business. A few studies using subjective measures show negative economic impact.

17. Economic Benefits of Smoke-free Laws Smoke-free restaurants and bars are profitable Smoke-free policies contribute to employee productivity Facility maintenance costs are lower Most people prefer smoke-free policies

18. Economic Impact of Lexington’s Law on Fayette County Restaurants and Bars 3% increase in restaurant employment Bar employment remained stable No change in payroll withholding taxes in restaurants or bars No change in business openings or closures in alcohol-serving establishments or at non- alcohol serving establishments

19. Why the Thalheimer Report is Flawed Analyzed only on-premise wholesale alcohol sales and found a 9.8%-13.3% drop post-law Significant effect found in only 2 of the 9 distributors in Fayette County (only examined data from 3 of the 9) No information on types of alcoholic beverages sold Report does not account for change in alcohol price over time No audit of data provided by distributors (traditionally close allies of the tobacco industry) Report not peer-reviewed or independently evaluated

20. Lexington’s Public Support and Knowledge of Health Risks Before and After the Law Public support for the law increased significantly.

21. Why the Tobacco Industry Opposes Smoke-free Laws “Financial impact of smoking bans will be tremendous – 3 to 5 fewer cigarettes per day per smoker will reduce annual manufacturer profits a billion dollars plus per year.” (A Smoker’s Alliance, Phillip Morris, 8/1/93) “Smoking bans are the biggest challenge we have ever faced. Quit rate goes from 5% to 21% when smokers work in non-smoking environments.” (Bates # 2054893642/3656; Legacy Tobacco Documents Library; 1994. http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nyg12a00)ttp://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/n

22. Tobacco Industry Continues to Reject the Scientific Consensus and Suggest Unhealthy Alternatives to Smoke-free Laws “ It is our view that, the scientific evidence is not sufficient to establish that environmental tobacco smoke is a cause of lung cancer, heart disease or other chronic diseases.” Brown & Williamson Tobacco, 2003 “Business owners should have some flexibility in deciding how best to address the preferences of non-smokers and smokers through separation, separate rooms and/or high quality ventilation.” Philip Morris, 2002

23. Kentucky Supreme Court Decision, April 2004 “Among the police powers of the government, the power to promote and safeguard public health ranks at the top…….. The real issue is whether the public health regulation [Lexington’s smoke-free law] is reasonable….. In this case we must conclude that it is.”

24. “Not since the polio vaccine has this nation had a better opportunity to make a significant impact in public health.” David Satcher, MD, PhD, Former U.S. Surgeon General