Letter:Second-hand smoke

Walter Holland
Wednesday 19 May 1999 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Letter:Second-hand smoke

Sir: Bill Bryson is one of my favourite authors, but he cannot get away with his piece on passive smoking (Bryson's America, 17 May). It is always difficult to communicate risks, and the number of deaths caused by different exposures are always difficult to estimate. However, exposure to second- hand smoke is far more hazardous than he states. Amongst common conditions it causes are premature births, cot deaths, respiratory illnesses in children, pneumonia and bronchitis in adults, and angina.

Health educators, politicians and journalists choose emotive markers when trying to convey a message about health hazards. Causing cancer of the lung sounds far better than chest illnesses in children or adults - even though the risk and damage to health is far greater.

Comparing the hazards of passive smoking to eating a pork chop or carrots, drinking orange juice or having a pet budgie is also ludicrous - rather like comparing apples and lemons; both fruits , but completely different. Also, the reports of these hazards are based on perhaps one or two studies, some of dubious quality. By contrast, the inhalation of second-hand smoke has been shown by innumerable studies world-wide to be hazardous.

WALTER HOLLAND

Emeritus Professor of Public Health Medicine, United Medical and Dental Schools of Guy's and St Thomas' Hospitals

Richmond, Surrey

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in