Passive Smoking: Beliefs, Attitudes,
and Exposures -- United States, 1986
In December 1986, the 18th Surgeon General's report on smoking
and
health was released (1). This report, "The Health Consequences of
Involuntary Smoking," described the health effects of exposure to
environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Its major conclusions were 1)
that
involuntary (or passive) smoking is a cause of disease, including
lung
cancer, in healthy nonsmokers, and 2) that children of parents who
smoke have a higher frequency of respiratory infections, such as
pneumonia and bronchitis, than do children of nonsmoking parents.
To evaluate beliefs, attitudes, and exposure related to
involuntary smoking among U.S. residents, questions about ETS were
included in the 1986 Adult Use of Tobacco Survey, which was
conducted
by the Office on Smoking and Health, Center for Health Promotion
and
Education, CDC. Data for this telephone survey were collected from
a
national probability sample of 13,031 adults (greater than or
equal
to17 years of age) representing the noninstitutionalized, civilian
U.S. population (2). Respondents were asked if they thought ETS
was
harmful to health in general and to their own health specifically
and
if they were annoyed by exposure to ETS. In addition, working
respondents (n=8,600) were asked about the extent of their
exposure to
ETS at work and about policies that restrict smoking at their
worksites. Finally, respondents were asked whether they would
choose
smoking or nonsmoking sections in planes, restaurants, and other
public places when a choice was available.
Eighty-eight percent of all respondents (93% of never smokers,
89%
of former smokers) considered ETS to be generally harmful to
health.
In addition, 79% of current smokers felt that ETS was generally
harmful; of these, 75% reported that ETS was "very harmful" or
"somewhat harmful," as opposed to "slightly harmful" or "not
harmful."
Sixty-nine percent of all respondents (62% of former smokers, 74%
of
never smokers) considered ETS to be harmful to their own health.*
Seventy-one percent of all respondents (43% of current smokers,
74% of
former smokers, and 85% of never smokers) were annoyed by the
cigarette smoke of others.
Among working respondents, 42% reported restrictions on
smoking in
their workplaces; 3% reported a total ban on smoking; and 55%
reported
no restrictions. Sixty-five percent of respondents who reported no
restrictions against smoking in their worksites are at least
somewhat
exposed to ETS. Of these, 14% reported a "very smoky" worksite.
Fifty-three percent of respondents who worked in environments with
restrictive smoking policies reported exposure to ETS. Of these,
11%
reported that their worksite is "very smoky." Even among the 2.5%
of
respondents reporting a total ban on smoking in the workplace, 21%
still reported being at least somewhat exposed to ETS at work.
If given a choice, 61% of all respondents choose nonsmoking
seating in airplanes, restaurants, and other public places. Most
former smokers (69%) and never smokers (82%) choose nonsmoking
sections, as do 14% of current smokers.
Reported by: Office on Smoking and Health, Center for Health
Promotion
and Education, CDC.
Editorial Note: These data indicate that a large percentage of
smokers and nonsmokers regard ETS as a health hazard. In addition,
a
majority of nonsmokers and almost half of current smokers are
annoyed
by ETS. These results represent substantial changes in beliefs and
attitudes since the 1970s. For example, a national opinion survey
conducted by the Roper Organization in 1978 for the Tobacco
Institute
(3) showed that 58% of respondents (40% of smokers, 69% of
nonsmokers)
considered passive smoking hazardous. The Roper survey also found
that
60% of nonsmokers and 5% of smokers were annoyed by being near a
person who was smoking.
In 1986, 36% of a random sample of the members of the American
Society for Personnel Administration (ASPA)** reported that their
worksites had restrictive smoking policies (4). A similar
percentage
of respondents to the Adult Use of Tobacco Survey reported such
policies. In a second survey of ASPA members in 1987, the
percentage
of members reporting a restrictive smoking policy had increased to
54%
(4). Data from the Adult Use of Tobacco Survey suggest that these
policies reduce, but do not eliminate, ETS exposure in the
workplace.
In fact, the 1986 Surgeon General's report concluded that simply
separating smokers and nonsmokers within the same airspace is not
sufficient to prevent exposure of nonsmokers to ETS (1).
These data also show that the majority of Americans would
choose
nonsmoking sections in airplanes, restaurants, and other public
places, if given a choice. In 1986, the Committee on Airliner
Cabin
Air Quality, which was appointed by the National Academy of
Sciences,
recommended a ban on smoking on all commercial domestic flights
for
the following reasons: 1) to lessen irritation and discomfort
among
passengers and crew, 2) to reduce potential health hazards for the
cabin crew, 3) to eliminate the possibility of fires caused by
cigarettes, and 4) to bring the cabin air quality into line with
established standards for other closed environments (5). On April
23,
1988, a new federal law that prohibits smoking on domestic flights
of
2 hours or less takes effect. This legislation is part of an
ongoing
national effort to protect nonsmokers from exposure to ETS.
Regulations issued by the General Services Administration (GSA) in
December 1986 now prohibit smoking in GSA-controlled facilities
except
in designated smoking areas (6). The 1990 Health Objectives for
the
Nation, which were adopted by the Public Health Service, recommend
that all 50 states have laws by 1990 that both prohibit smoking in
enclosed public places and require separate smoking areas in the
workplace and in dining establishments (7).
References
Office on Smoking and Health. The health consequences of
involuntary smoking: a report of the Surgeon General.
Rockville,
Maryland: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 1987:vii; DHHS
publication no. (CDC) 87-8398.
Waksberg J. Sampling methods for random digit dialing. J Am
Stat
Assoc 1978;73:40-6.
Roper Organization. A study of public attitudes toward
cigarette
smoking and the tobacco industry in 1978. New York: Roper
Organization, May 1978.
Bureau of National Affairs. Where there's smoke: problems and
policies concerning smoking in the workplace. A BNA special
report, 2nd ed. Rockville, Maryland: Bureau of National
Affairs,
1987.
National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Airliner Cabin Air
Quality, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology,
Commission
on Life Sciences, National Research Council. The airliner
cabin
environment: air quality and safety. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press, 1986.
General Services Administration. Smoking regulations. Federal
Register 1986;51:44258. (41 CFR Part 101-20).
Public Health Service. Promoting health/preventing disease:
objectives for the nation. Washington, DC: US Department of
Health
and Human Services, Public Health Service, 1980.
*Current smokers were not asked this question.
**ASPA is a society of personnel executives representing
manufacturing
and nonmanufacturing firms and nonbusiness organizations such as
hospitals, educational institutions, and government agencies.
Disclaimer
All MMWR HTML documents published before January 1993 are electronic conversions from ASCII text into HTML. This conversion may have resulted in character translation or format errors in the HTML version. Users should not rely on this HTML document, but are referred to the original MMWR paper copy for the official text, figures, and tables. An original paper copy of this issue can be obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402-9371; telephone: (202) 512-1800. Contact GPO for current prices.
**Questions or messages regarding errors in formatting should be addressed to mmwrq@cdc.gov.
