Know The Facts

Health Statistics

Dangers of Secondhand Smoke:

• 21.9% of Michigan adults smoke.
• Secondhand smoke causes between 35,000 and 62,000 deaths from heart disease every year.¹
• 12,000 otherwise healthy nonsmokers will die of some form of cancer, 3,000 specifically to lung cancer, because of their exposure to secondhand smoke.²
• Secondhand smoke contains over 4,000 substances, more than 69 of which are known or suspected to cause cancer.^3,4
• The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified secondhand smoke as a Group A carcinogen, a substance which is known to cause human cancer.
• According to the American Cancer Society, secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States, killing 38,000 to 65,000 nonsmokers every year.
• Food service workers appear to be 50 percent more likely than the general population to develop lung cancer, largely because many of them are exposed to secondhand smoke on the job.^5,6

Kids and Smoking:

• 17% (101,400) of high school students smoke.
• 30,100 to 19,000 young people(under 18) in MI become new daily smokers each year.
• 20.7 million packs of cigarettes are bought or smoked by young people in MI each year.
• Studies show secondhand smoke may be a major factor in the development of asthma in children under five.
• Secondhand smoke is a serious trigger of asthma and can cause or worsen respiratory conditions. Studies have shown that children with asthma who are exposed to secondhand smoke require more asthma medicines, have more emergency room visits and lower lung function.

Deaths in Michigan From Smoking:

• 14,500 adults die each year from their own smoking.
• 298,000 young people under 18 and live in Michigan will ultimately die prematurely from smoking.
• 1,340 to 2,390 adults, children, and babies die each year from others' smoking (secondhand smoke and pregnancy smoking).

Smoking-Caused Monetary Costs in Michigan:

• $3.4 billion—Annual health care costs in Michigan directly caused by smoking.
• $1.1 billion—Portion covered by the state Medicaid program.
• $637—Per household resident's state and federal tax burden from smoking-caused government expenditures.
• $3.80 billion—Smoking-caused productivity losses in Michigan.

¹Steenland, K. (1992). Passive Smoking and the Risk of Heart Disease. Journal of the American Medical Association 267(1): 94-99.

²U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1992). Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders. Washington, D.C.: EPA.

³National Cancer Institute. Risks Associated with Smoking Cigarettes with Low Machine-Measured Yields of Tar and Nicotine. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 13. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, NIH Pub. No. 02-5074, October 2001. http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/tcrb/monographs/13/m13_5.pdf; personal communication, dated October 28, 2003, from Dietrich Hoffmann, Ph.D., Associate Director, Institute for Cancer Prevention, co-author of Chapter 5 of NCI Monograph 13, clarifying that Table 5.4 of the Monograph (that lists the 69 carcinogens) is missing a carcinogen, namely MeAaC (2-amino-3-methyl-9-Hpyrido[ 2,3-b]indole, and it should be inserted under “under “Miscellaneous Organic Compounds”.

⁴National Cancer Institute. Risks Associated with Smoking Cigarettes with Low Machine-Measured Yields of Tar and Nicotine. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph No. 13. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, NIH Pub. No. 02-5074, October 2001. http://dccps.nci.nih.gov/tcrb/monographs/13/m13_5.pdf

⁵Shopland, D.R.; Anderson, C.M.; Burns, D.M.; Gerlach, K.K., "Disparities in smoke-free workplace policies among food service workers," Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 46(4): 347-356, April 2004.

⁶Siegel, M. "Involuntary Smoking in Restaurant Workplace: A Review of Employee Exposure and Health Effects." JAMA, 270: 490-493, 1993.

Impact on Business

Smokefree Air Saves Businesses Money

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates the cost savings of eliminating secondhand smoke in the workplace to be between $35 and $66 billion a year. Eliminating secondhand smoke in the workplace will reduce premature deaths and tobacco-related illnesses.

Smokefree Air Laws Do Not Harm Bars

There has not yet been a study that has proven smokefree air laws negatively affect the bar industry. Research on smokefree communities in California, Massachusetts, Oregon, Texas, New York and Florida show that smokefree air ordinances had no negative effect on bar sales. Research shows the sale of alcoholic beverages are not effected by smokefree ordinances.

Smokefree Laws Do Not Increase Unemployment

After New York went smokefree in March 2003, a study was conducted by the New York City Department of Finance that reported 10,600 new jobs in its bars and restaurants between March 2003 and December 2003.

Smokefree Laws Do Not Harm Restaurant Sales

In fact, more people are demanding smokefree establishments. Data from the New York City Department of Finance shows that tax receipts increased by 8.7 percent, or approximately $1.4 million. Similar results were found in the state of Florida, where retail receipts for taverns and bars that served food remain unaffected by the state's smokefree law.

The facts are that smokefree laws are good for businesses—they're good for the people who frequent them and they're good for the people who work in them. Research published in leading, scientific journals has consistently and conclusively shown that smokefree laws have no adverse effects on the hospitality industry^1,2 and, in fact, can actually be good for business.

Smokefree Air Benefits Workplaces

By creating a smokefree work environment, business owners eliminate a variety of associated costs, including higher health, life, and fire insurance premiums, higher worker absenteeism, lower work productivity, and higher workers' compensation payments.^3,4,5 The EPA estimates the cost savings of eliminating secondhand smoke in the workplace to be between $35 and $66 billion a year.⁶

Increased housekeeping and maintenance costs are also associated with smoking in the workplace. The EPA found that businesses that implemented smoking restrictions could save between four and eight billion dollars a year in operating and maintenance costs.⁷

¹National Cancer Institute. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke: The Report of the California Environmental Protection Agency. Smoking and Tobacco Control Monograph no. 10. Bethesda, MD. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, NIH Pub. No. 99-4645, 1999, www.cancercontrol.cancer.gov/tcrb/nci_monographs/MONO10/MONO10.HTM

²Scollo, Michelle and Anita Lal (2004). Summary of Studies Assessing the Economic Impact of Smoke-free Policies in the Hospitality Industry. Melbourne: VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control. http://www.vctc.org.au/tc-res/Hospitalitysummary.pdf.

³Kristein, M.M. (1983). How Much Can Business Expect to Profit from Smoking Cessation? Preventive Medicine. 12:358-381.

⁴Marion Merrell Dow, Inc. (1991). The Economic Impact of Smoking: In the Workplace; On Cardiovascular Health; On Wound Health and Recovery from Surgery; On Infants and Children; On Pulmonary Health; On Dental and Oral Health. Medical Information Services, Inc.

⁵U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, et al. (1996).

⁶United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1994). The Costs and Benefits of Smoking Restrictions: An Assessment of the Smoke-Free Environmental Act of 1993 (H.R. 3434). Office of Air and Radiation. Washington, D.C.: U.S. EPA.

⁷EPA (April 1994).

Key Messages

Smokefree air is good for Michigan’s health.

The 2006 U.S. Surgeon General’s report stated the only way to protect consumers and employees from deadly exposure to secondhand smoke is through comprehensive smokefree workplace policies.

Our 2006 Air Quality Tour showed that nonsmoking sections do not adequately protect Michigan consumers and employees from deadly secondhand smoke.

12,000 otherwise healthy nonsmokers will die each year from some form of cancer – 3,000 specifically because of secondhand smoke exposure.

Secondhand smoke is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States, killing about 50,000 nonsmokers every year, according to the California Environmental Protection Agency.

Smokefree air is good for business.

During a poll of 400 registered Michigan voters, 79% said they would go to restaurants "more often" or "just as often" if they become smokefree; and 70% of respondents indicated the same about bars, clubs and bowling alleys.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates the cost savings of eliminating secondhand smoke in the workplace to be between $35 billion and $66 billion a year.

Studies across the country prove that smokefree laws benefit business.

After New York City went smokefree in March 2003, the Department of Finance reported 10,600 new jobs in the city’s bars and restaurants between March and December 2003; and tax receipts increased by 8.7% , or approximately $1.4 million.

Similarly in Florida, receipts for taverns and bars that served food remained unaffected by the state's smokefree law.

There are 21 well-designed studies that show no negative economic impact from smokefree policies in restaurants and bars (www.vctc.org.au/tc-res/Hospitalitysummary.pdf)

Michigan’s government already regulates several areas of workplace and restaurant policies in the name of public health. Employees should not be forced to sacrifice their health because they need to earn a paycheck.

  Food service workers are 50% more likely to develop lung cancer, due largely to the fact that they are exposed to secondhand smoke while on the job.

A Michigan smokefree workplaces law is supported by more than 70 organizations, including the Michigan Health and Hospital Association, Michigan State Medical Society, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, and American Lung Association AND is strongly supported by Michigan voters.

In a statewide poll conducted in 2005, 63% of Michigan voters support a smokefree workplaces law, while only 23% oppose. Fourteen percent are neutral.

A MIRS poll conducted in February 2007 showed 61% of Michigan voters support smokefree buildings, including restaurants and bars.