This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Michael W. Ogden, PhD
RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company Winston-Salem, NC

JAMA. 1996;276(8):603-604.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Dr Pirkle and colleagues¹ appear to have overlooked the impact that some of their findings have on recent attempts to regulate smoking in the workplace² while overstating the potential impact on other risk assessments.³ For example, in proposing workplace regulations, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has assumed that ETS exposure in the workplace (due to working with smokers) is equivalent to or greater than ETS exposure in the home (due to living with smokers). However, as the data of Pirkle et al show (Table 4), living with smokers results in at least a 2-fold increased exposure (as measured by cotinine) compared with working with smokers, which is similar to findings that have been reported by us⁴ and others.⁵

Furthermore, in discussing their public health implications, Pirkle et al interpret their data as suggesting that there may be considerable ETS exposure within the control groups . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?