Las toxinas del humo de tercera mano son peligrosas

Humo de tercera mano: ¿quién lo sabía?

Recently, several news outlets have reported a new health danger from cigarettes—third-hand smoke. Third-hand smoke is the residual noxious brew of gases and particles clinging to hair, clothing, furniture and floors long after visible secondhand smoke has cleared a room. Reading like a who’s–who list of bad guys, the toxins include hydrogen cyanide (used in chemical weapons), carbon monoxide (found in car exhaust), butane (used in lighter fluid), ammonia (used in household cleaners), toluene (found in paint thinners), arsenic (used in pesticides), lead (formerly found in paint), chromium (used to make steel), cadmium (used to make batteries), and polonium–210 (a highly radioactive carcinogen).

Small children are especially susceptible to third-hand smoke exposure. Low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, similar to low–level exposure to lead. Findings include evidence that the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score, underscoring the possibility that even extremely low levels of these compounds may be neurotoxic.

Primer golpe: Respuestas de la industria tabacalera a los estudios que destacan el vínculo del tabaquismo con el cáncer de pulmón

Missing from these news reports are responses from the tobacco industry. If history is any indication, the tobacco industry will not readily agree to the dangers posed by third hand smoke. For instance, when studies from medical research began to leak into popular press noting the link between smoking and lung cancer in the 1950s, the tobacco industry “launched a massive public relations campaign—to discredit and distort the truth about smoking and cancer, to deny any link between smoking and serious illness, and to persuade the public that ‘there is no proof that cigarette smoking is a cause of lung cancer’—the underlying purpose of which was ‘reassurance of the public.’” (Whiteley v. Philip Morris, Inc. (2004)117 Cal.App.4th 635, 679-682)

By 1964, the first U.S. Surgeon General report on the link between smoking and cancer was published, followed by additional reports and supplements in the decades following. Nevertheless, decade after decade, the tobacco industry disputed it had been proved that smoking caused lung cancer. Still, as knowledge of the dangers of smoking (and later, secondhand smoke) grew, public policy shifts led to advertising restrictions and public smoking bans. In return, the overall number of American men and women who smoke has declined. [Tobacco Timeline: U.S. Smoking Rates Since 1965] This is good news.

Segundo golpe: las respuestas de la industria tabacalera a los estudios que vinculan el tabaquismo con un mayor riesgo de enfermedad

La mala noticia es que las mismas tácticas utilizadas para refutar los peligros de fumar se han repetido en respuesta a los hallazgos científicos sobre los peligros del humo de segunda mano. El humo de segunda mano, también conocido como “humo de tabaco ambiental” (HTA) o “tabaquismo pasivo”, es una mezcla de dos formas de humo proveniente de la quema de productos de tabaco: “humo secundario” y “humo principal”. El humo secundario es el humo que sale de la punta de un cigarrillo encendido. El humo convencional es una combinación de humo inhalado y exhalado por un fumador. El alquitrán derivado del humo de segunda mano es tres veces más tóxico por gramo y de dos a seis veces más tumorigénico por gramo que el alquitrán producido por el humo convencional cuando se aplica sobre la piel.

Babies exposed to secondhand smoke are two times more likely to die of SIDS. Secondhand smoke is associated with 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations of infants and toddlers annually, leads to 136 to 212 deaths in children 18 months of age or younger, and contributes to 8,000 to 26,000 new cases of asthma in children each year. Not only harmful to children, but the California Environmental Protection Agency also estimates that secondhand smoke exposure causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 22,700–69,600 heart disease deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in the United States.

Dadas las asombrosas implicaciones para la salud asociadas con el humo de segunda mano, las restricciones al tabaquismo en público han ido ganando terreno en las últimas dos décadas, y California ha estado a la cabeza. Por ejemplo, Berkeley, CA, fue la primera ciudad del país en legislar secciones para fumadores en los restaurantes, y California fue el primer estado en prohibir fumar en los bares. Ambas políticas, si bien controvertidas al principio, establecieron un plan que se adoptó tanto a nivel nacional como internacional. Recientemente, San Francisco abrió nuevos caminos al prohibir la venta de productos de tabaco en las farmacias corporativas. No sorprende que Walgreens y Philip Morris impugnaran esta ordenanza por temor a la adopción de prohibiciones similares en todo el país.

As with the initial reports linking smoking with lung cancer, the tobacco industry launched various initiatives to stymie the impact of research linking secondhand smoke to disease. For instance, in 1993, Philip Morris initiated “Project Brass” in response to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s classification of secondhand tobacco smoke as a Group A Human Carcinogen. Project Brass strategies included 1) broadening the secondhand smoke issue to encompass total indoor air quality (i.e., deflecting attention away from secondhand smoke); 2) using “credible third parties” to fight public health measures, and 3) manufacturing doubt about the EPA secondhand smoke report.

Also noteworthy is the Whitecoat Project, the Philip Morris–led global effort to “resist and roll back smoking restrictions” by creating and maintaining controversy about the health effects of secondhand smoke by generating a body of scientific literature supporting the industry’s view that secondhand smoke is not harmful. Philip Morris also started the Accommodation Program which advocated the use of separate smoking and non–smoking sections in public venues as a “reasonable” alternative to legislated smoking restrictions. The Accommodation Program also provided Philip Morris with access to a pool of hospitality business owners and associations to act as credible third party allies in fighting smoking restrictions.

Tercer strike: El giro de Philip Morris: los peligros para la salud del humo de tercera mano son sólo un 'rumor'

Over ten years ago, Philip Morris executives recognized a potential health problem with third hand smoke. A 1998 email from Liz Culley, senior director of corporate affairs for Philip Morris, to a marketing consultant regarding suitable, legally–protected language for the Chairman’s Annual Shareholder Briefing Book offers insight into the tobacco manufacturer’s profits over public health priorities. In a question and answer format, this five-page document sets forth Philip Morris’ treatment of third-hand smoke risks as merely “rumor” while touting the virtues of the Accommodation Program and blaming smoking restrictions for cigarette butt litter.

Qué vergüenza. Esperábamos que finalmente hubieran adquirido conciencia.

Otros informes del Cirujano General: