HEALTH: New York Smoking Ban Connected to Decrease in Heart Attacks

This week I came across an article in the Ithaca Journal, my hometown newspaper in Ithaca, N.Y., about the purported link between a decrease in heart attacks and the New York State law banning smoking in all workplaces, including bars, taverns and restaurants.

New York, which was passed the Clean Indoor Air Act on March 26, 2003, was the first of at least 22 states and the District of Columbia to enact measures to eliminate smoking in workplaces. The law was created to protect people from unwanted second-hand smoke.

According to a report issued by the state Health Department on September 27, hospitals admitted 3,813 fewer patients for heart attacks in the year following the enactment of the law. This, in monetary terms, resulted in a $56 million savings for the state in the year of 2004.

A related article on the website for WBZ-TV, a station in Boston, Mass. , contrasted the views of Harlan Juster, who led the study and works for the state Health Department, and Michael Seigel, a professor at Boston University’s Social and Behavioral Sciences Department.

Harlan argued that the study was unbiased. “Clearly, I’m a researcher, but I’m also probably a tobacco control advocate,” he said. “But I’m a researcher first. If the [clean air] law was not effective I would be reporting that, but the law is effective.”

Seigel, who I agree with, countered that, “You can’t conclude that the decline was due to the smoking ban. Because it’s possible that decline was happening everywhere, and without assessing data from every state, there’s no way to know.”

Both have valid points, but on the whole – the entire report leaves me with what question: how can you prove that the two are directly connected. Just because trends coincide, it does not mean that they are causal. This does not mean that I do not think that the law does not advocate better health – I’m just saying that there doesn’t seem to be a direct connection to a decrease in heart attacks.

The Ithaca Journal, however took a different slant and looked at the effect that the law has had on the bar and restaurant industry. For instance, they took a statement from the Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association on how the group has accepted the band but has been hurt in the long run. “A lot of people stopped coming into bars when they couldn’t have a cigarette,” he said.

Juster countered these notions, however, by saying that the law was created to protect New York citizens, not to hurt the restaurant and bar industry.

This different perspective was extended into the comments that were posted on the Ithaca Journal’s website. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that Ithaca is not the typical audience – I’d probably best describe the inhabitants as those who got lost on their way back from a Woodstock concert in the ‘60s and ‘70s – however they do have some interesting comments that show that the ban has created a sticky situation when it comes to civil liberties and the freedom to do business.

One person commented:

“I am so glad that New York State is here to protect me and everybody else.”

This comment was followed with a frowning/scared smiley face, evidencing the writers sarcasm.

Another person wrote:

“A couple of years ago I went to America on my vacation. I drove through 4 states on 5 interstates and NEVER paid a toll. Gasoline was a quarter of a gallon cheaper. When I went to a restaurant they asked me if I wanted smoking or non. I was shocked. I rarely ever sit in the smoking section of restaurants because I prefer not to be around it while I’m eating. BUT I had the choice, and I saw people on both sides enjoying their freedom.”

These comments only can lead me towards my final conclusion. The smoking ban, though great for people like me who hate smoke and despise coming home reeking of cigarettes, has yet to be proven as a measure worthy of denying people their civil liberties. Further, the lack of evidence that this law is directly linked to an improvement in people’s health is trounced by the substantial data showing the negative impact that this law has had on local, small-scale business.

-Erika Eckstrom, Issues of Health