On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 20:08:55 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:45:53 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 12:04:11 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 23:15:19 -0700, wrote:


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

Nice snip. You left out the next line.
Unlike methylene chloride or ammonia, chemicals for which OSHA has set
permissible exposure limits, ETS is not a necessary component of any
manufacturing process or job.

If you actually read what the thrust of the letter is, they are saying
they have nothing to go on, using their existing standards and they
want congress to write a law simply banning smoking if that is what
they want to do.

Using the existing standards for TLVs for the chemicals in tobacco
smoke, simply opening a window and putting a fan in there would get
most places under the threshold.

This what OSHA says in your letter.

"Therefore, on April 5, 1994, OSHA published a proposal to require
employers to restrict smoking to designated smoking areas that are
either outdoors or in separate, enclosed rooms that are exhausted
directly to the outside of the building"

Unfortunately "smoking areas" were not enough to make the crusaders
happy.

Yet they do have "smoking areas" in airports. So, it looks like I was
right.

We were talking about bars and restaurants.
Do they have smoking areas in restaurants, using the same technology?
Why not?

The same technology? You want to mandate restaurants to have a glassed
in section with it's own air system??


Since it's not "a necessary component" there's no action that OSHA can
take. Try again.

What?
The letter basically said OSHA does not have a standard for cigarette
smoke.

Yes, they don't have a standard. They just say there are tons of
carcinogens in it, but it's not part of manufacturing processes.

They imply that if they use the same standard they use for
manufacturing it would not achieve the result desired by the
administration and they should just deal with this with legislation.
If they use the same standard for the listed pollutants that they use
for manufacturing facilities you probably would not be able to get
enough smokers in a room to exceed it and still be within the
occupancy code.

According to you. Nothing in the report claims the smoke is without
risk.