"Where's all the smoke the antis are complaining about?"
Kuneman's comments : Indeed, much like the work of OakRidge National Labs, (Read) personal monitoring devices used to measure smoke exposure in nonsmokers find such exposure is much lower than estimates made from analyzing nicotine and continine content of saliva or urine, as was done by the EPA. Even the 1992 EPA Report estimates were that the average nonsmoker gets about 1/2 of a cigarette/day. I believe the difference between personal monitor estimates, and salavory or urinary estimates is due to the underestimation of nicotine content in the diet from food sources.
Read: The Nicotine Content of Common Vegetables.
This study in the Scandavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health found nonsmokers in Stockholm during 1996 were exposed to even less smoke than the EPA estimates:
Quote from the abstract:
When the median values for nicotine and ETS particles are converted to cigarette equivalents, Stockholm housewives and househusbands living with smokers would receive 6-9 cigarette equivalents per year, working nonsmokers living with smokers would receive 0.6-0.7 cigarette equivalents at home, and nonsmokers working with smokers would be exposed to 0.1-0.2 cigarette equivalent at work.Read: Assessment of air quality in Stockholm by personal monitoring of nonsmokers for respirable suspended particles and environmental tobacco smoke.
(Pubmed copy of article.)