On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 00:10:58 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 18:39:29 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:24:03 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:36:39 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:44:15 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:08:47 -0700, wrote:

Really? Show us the research to support the claim that second hand
smoke is safe.


"Safe" is not the issue, the issue is the danger at very low
concentrations and that has never been proven.

Define low concentrations? You can't. Feel free to claim that a
certain number of parts per million of carcinogens are safe.

OSHA does it with virtually every chemical there is. That is what a
TLV is.
It is also why nobody has ever gone to OSHA to establish a case for
second hand smoke. They would not like the answer.

This is your opinion, of course, and it's flawed.

http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...MONIES&p_id=92

I didn't see anything in that letter this disputes anything I said,
BTW this was written in 1997 and they still do not have a standard.

"Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) or secondhand smoke can
pose a serious health risk to workers."

And, as I said, OSHA has never said there were beneficial effects or
that second hand smoke is safe.

snip