Quick, without thinking about it, which of the following is a hoax?

- Choice A: In Detroit, it has just been made illegal -- punishable by a fine and jail time -- to smoke in your car.

- Choice B: In B.C., from Jan. 1, under new Workers' Compensation Board regulations, health-care workers must refuse to treat clients who are smoking in their own homes; and cleaning staff and food-servers are not allowed to enter smokers' hotel rooms.

It's a tough one. Both seem equally absurd -- and equally credible since the anti-smoking bureaucracies in this country and the U.S. are equally fanatical. But we'll come clean: Last week, after a Michigan radio station broadcast the fake "news" about smoking in cars, police dispatch lines were deluged with commuters worried about being arrested on their way to work.

Sadly, the WCB diktat is anything but a joke. Claiming it wants to eliminate any risk of exposure by workers to second-hand smoke, the WCB cites dubious facts about the link between second-hand smoke and cancer. For instance, basing its figure on a Health Canada estimate, the WCB claims "more than 4,000 Canadians" die each year from inhaling second-hand smoke.

These statistics are so inflated as to be nonsensical. They are extrapolations from a 1993 report by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on passive smoking. What is never mentioned is that the report has been invalidated in the courts because scientists cherry-picked data in order to reach a preconceived conclusion.

While smoke that accumulates in an enclosed room for a prolonged period is unhealthy, especially to asthma sufferers, the risk posed to health-care workers, busboys and cleaners who briefly enter a room in which a smoker is present is infinitesimal -- equivalent, say, to catching AIDS through casual social contact. But no risk is too small for the bureaucratic appointees on the WCB -- even if this means throwing away the livelihoods of the very people they are supposed to be protecting.

When smoking bans are put in place, people are in danger of losing jobs. Even the B.C. government concedes this risk: Friday, B.C. Premier Dan Miller hinted that he might back off from the ban. He announced, "If, in my view, there is an unintended consequence, in other words, a negative impact where jobs are at stake, then I may see if there are alternative mechanisms available."

But it's hard to see how the regulations could not have a negative impact. Since the WCB now wants to forbid these people from lighting up even at home or in a hotel room, many health workers, forbidden to assist them, will presumably become redundant. Or will they be paid to do nothing?