The Smoker's Club
Please Help - Home - Events - Forum - Video & Audio Index - Newsletter - Encyclopedia - Comedy


David W. Kuneman

"It does not take a tornado to make fireplace smoke go up your chimney,
and it does not take a tornado to keep secondhand smoke out of the nonsmoking section of a restaurant"
- David W. Kuneman




Economic Losses Due To Smoking Bans

Hospital Admissions

St Louis County Council

Urban Residency Confounds Most Secondhand Smoke Studies

2007 National Gallup Poll Finds 71% opposed to Smoking Bans in Bars

"Where's all the smoke the antis are complaining about?"

Open Letter to the Distinguished Members of the 110th Congress concerning the proposed federal cigarette tax increase

Do excise tax hikes cause adult smoking rates to drop?

Do Cigarette Excise Tax Hikes Cut Teen Smoking?

Time Trends On Smoking And Health And The Value Of The War On Tobacco

The Surgeon General's Report: selective science at it again

Antismoking Terrorists

Environmental Tobacco Smoke Does Not Cause Genetic Damage In Casino Workers

ASHRAE - Repace Study Notes

David W. Kuneman Articles From The Smoker's Club, Inc.

International Smokers Rights Conference Recap


I do not work for Big Tobacco, nor any other interest that pays me any compensation otherwise. I'm a retired pharmaceutical chemist, and became familiar with epidemiology as part of my work. I have had access to the medical literature for years, and have noticed many studies which find no harm from secondhand smoke that never get media attention. We should not legislate based on bad science!
Please visit this link, I am being accused of being connected to, and possibly on the payroll of Big tobacco.
Also visit this exonoration by Dr. Michael Siegel, The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Another Misleading Public Claim: This Time, a TobaccoScam Attempt to Discredit an Individual Who Opposes the Anti-Smoking View.
- David W. Kuneman





Other Resources:

CA: Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians,1960-98. By James E Enstrom,Geoffrey C Kabat
CA: Enstrom responds to critics of his study
CA: Report on Heart Attack Outcomes in California,1994-96.
CA: Report on Heart Attack Outcomes in California,1996-98.
CA: The California Smoke-Free Workplace Act ... paid for by smokers
OH: The Ohio Smoke Free Workplace Act
TX: The Dallas Smoking Ordinance One Year Later (March 2004)
WA: Who paid for the Washington State Ban?
More: And Missouri smokers are paying for bans too
Norway: Cancer Cheat Scandal
That Terrible Randomness
Number Watch. By John Brignell
The Mercury Amalgam Scam: How Anti-Amalgamists Swindle People. By Stephen Barrett, M.D.
Concepts and Applications of Inferential Statistics
Probability Theory
Epidemiology for the Uninitiated
Silencing science: partisanship and the career of a publication disputing the dangers of secondhand smoke
Law Professor Lambert's Argument Against Smoking Bans
CRS Report for Congress: Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer Risk. 11/14/95

Yet another world renowned tobacco researcher says we don't know if secondhand smoke causes heart disease. Dr. Sir Richard Peto, who along with Drs. Doll and Hill, first identified the link between smoking and lung cancer, gave testimony to the House of Lords that there are too many causes of heart disease in nonsmokers to measure how much, if any, impact secondhand smoke exposure has on heart disease in nonsmokers. His testimony starts about halfway down in the document at the link.




Secondhand Smoke Studies which find no risk:

No Clear Link Between Passive Smoking and Lung Cancer - Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Passive smoking not associated with breast cancer
Stranges, et.al. 2006 no risk from ordinary exposure
Enstrom/Kabat 2006 when all published studies reviewed, no risk
Petro, 2005 testimony to the House of Lords..we don't know if secondhand smoke causes heart disease ( must scroll half way down)
Enstrom/Kabat 2003 35,000 Californians, no risk
Smith 2003, Passive smoking controversy still exists
Lee, 2002 after proper adjustment, the risk appears to be near zero
Kreuzer 2001 nonstatistically significant effects
Nilsson 2001, published studies are unreliable
Adlkofer 2001, the question if secondhand smoke causes cancer is still open
Wang, cooking fumes do cause lung cancer in nonsmokers and Taiwan Study
Bailar 1999 problems with smoke studies
Gori, 1999 Passive smoke: the EPA's betrayal of science and policy
Lee, 1998 workplace exposure not related to lung cancer
LeVois, 1998 scientists argue about whether smoke causes heart disease in nonsmokers
Givens, 1997 mathamatical analysis shows many null secondhand smoke studies are unpublished.
Ko 1997 cooking fumes, yes, secondhand smoke no
Wang 1997 OR= 0.91
Wang 1996 not significant
Kabat 1996 little risk
Du, 1996, Environmental tobacco smoke not associated in females. (cooking is)
Library of Congress, 1995 Secondhand Smoke Science too weak to be conclusive
Kabat 1995 little association
LeVois 1995 ETS and CHD not related (publication bias study)
Layard, 1995 little association ETS and isochemic heart disease
LaVois 1994 workplace ETS exposure does not cause Lung cancer
Fleiss 1991 in our opinion smoke studies too unreliable
Liu, 1991 not associated with passive smoking
Sobue, 1990 no elevated risk
Zhongua 1990 female lung cancer not associated with passive smoking
Burch, 1989, no risk of bladder cancer
Lee, 1986 very low, or nonexistent
Koo 1987 very low
Pershagen 1986 association cannot be regarded as causal
Garfinkel 1984, no risk
Kabat 1984, no risk
Buffler, 1983 a link has not been demonstrated
Garfinkel 1981 very little risk
Zeeb, 2003 no excess mortality of airline crews in Europe from occupational exposures
Blettner, 2003,flight crews had lung cancer SMR=.53 1960-1997
Paridau 2003 very low lung cancer deaths among Greek cabin crews
Blettner, 2002, occupational exposure of german flight crews not associated with risk of cancer.
Crawford, 1991 Flight attendants exposed to less than one cigarette equivalent/year.
Reynolds, 58,000 flight attendants, RR= .37 to .42 for lung cancer 1988 to 1995
Article in Nature Magazine highlights debate over secondhand smoke