One more study has been added to the ventilation section of our scientific portal.

This time we comment on the abstract of the study, conducted in the Netherlands, because it caters to the false information that it is “established” that passive smoking is a “risk” for human health (thus it must be removed), while not even the existence of the risk itself has ever been established, never mind the causality of the diseases "attributed" to ETS. All is still in the realm of sheer speculation and wishful prohibitionist thinking.

Nevertheless, the usefulness of the ventilation of enclosed areas for general health is glaring – but the health “authorities” firmly oppose ventilation as an alternative to prohibition for obvious political reasons, thus once again they defeat their claimed mandate to protect the health of the public.

“Smoke-free” air, in fact, is not clean air like the antismoking propaganda wants us to believe. Since the bans, in fact, interior air has become much worse, as confirmed by the explosion of respiratory diseases in many countries, which coincides with the “clean” air that smoking bans have imposed. Commersial building operators, in fact – very much like airline operators – have decreases the levels of air exchange to save on energy bills or, because of the lack of visual tobacco smoke, do not open windows as often, thus allowing the accumulation of all kind of pollutants – from kitchen fumes to pollens, dusts, viruses and bacteria and CO2, in itself not a pollutant or a poison, but certainly an oxygen displacer.

Those antismoking fanatics who recite the “right to clean air” line should indeed demand ventilation if they really cared about public health; but, in reality, they do not care about that at all: all they want is air without the scent of tobacco, as their puny brains have been trained by the “public health” propaganda to hate it.

Also see "Ventilation: what Prohibition fears the most I"



Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder