Source: Reason
by Geoffrey Kabat
“In 2003, UCLA epidemiologist James Enstrom and I published a study of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) — also called ‘secondhand smoke’ or ‘passive smoking’ — in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). Using data from the American Cancer Society’s prospective study of 1 million adults, we concluded that ETS exposure was not associated with increased mortality. Since that conclusion flew in the face of the conventional wisdom that had long driven state and local bans on smoking in public places, our study understandably sparked a controversy in the public health community. … A recent study by American Cancer Society (ACS) researchers underscores that point by showing that, contrary to what our critics asserted, the cancer risk posed by ETS is likely negligible. The authors present that striking result without remarking on it, which may reflect their reluctance to revisit a debate that anti-smoking activists and public health officials wrongly view as long settled.” (10/16/24)
https://reason.com/2024/10/16/we-were-wrong-to-panic-about-secondhand-smoke/