Assessing the effects of environmental tobacco smoke : hearing before the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, One Hundred Third Congress, second session on S. 262 ... and

612 Pages·1994·17.9 MB·English

by  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Environment and Public Works. Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation

S. Hrg. 103-747
ASSESSING THE EFTECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IQBAHO SMOKE
«^
Y4,P 96/10: S. HRG. 103-747
iING
Assessing the Effects of Environnen..
THE
subcommittee on
jEan air and nuclear regulation
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 262
A BILL TO REQUIRE THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY TO PROMULGATE GUIDELINES FOR INSTITUT-
ING A NONSMOKING POLICY IN BUILDINGS OWNED OR LEASED BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AND
S. 1680
A BILL TO AMEND THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT TO PRO-
TECT THE PUBLIC FROM HEALTH HAZARDS CAUSED BY EXPOSURE
TO ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
MAY 11, 1994
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
-'^^ricor:

S. Hrg. 103-747
ASSESSING THE EFPECTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
TOBACCO SMOKE
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
CLEAN AIR AND NUCLEAR REGULATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 262
A BILL TO REQUIRE THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY TO PROMULGATE GUIDELINES FOR INSTITUT-
ING A NONSMOKING POLICY IN BUILDINGS OWNED OR LEASED BY
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
AND
S. 1680
A BILL TO AMEND THE TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT TO PRO-
TECT THE PUBLIC FROM HEALTH HAZARDS CAUSED BY EXPOSURE
TO ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
MAY
11, 1994
Printed for the use ofthe Committee on Environment and Public Works
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
80-075cc WASHINGTON : 1994
ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice
SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice.Washington,DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-045940-0
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
MAX BAUCUS, Montana, Chairman
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, NewYork JOHN H. CHAFEE, Rhode Island
GEORGE J. MITCHELL, Maine ALAN K. SIMPSON, Wyoming
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, NewJersey DAVE DURENBERGER, Minnesota
HARRY REID, Nevada JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
BOB GRAHAM, Florida ROBERT SMITH, New Hampshire
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut LAUCH FAIRCLOTH, North Carolina
HOWARD M. METZENBAUM, Ohio DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho
HARRIS WOFFORD, Pennsylvania
BARBARA BOXER, California
Peter L. Scher, StaffDirector
Steven J. Shimberg, Minority StaffDirector and ChiefCounsel
Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
DANIEL PATRICK MOYNIHAN, New York ALAN K. SIMPSON, Wyoming
BOB GRAHAM, Florida LAUCH FAIRCLOTH, North Caroline
HOWARD METZENBAUM, Ohio DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Idaho
(II)
CONTENTS
Page
OPENING STATEMENTS
Chafee, Hon. John H., U.S. Senatorfrom the State ofRhode Island 6
Faircloth, Hon. Lauch, U.S. Senatorfrom the StateofNorth Carolina 5
Lautenberg, Hon. FrankR., U.S. Senatorfrom the StateofNewJersey 3
Lieberman, Hon. Joseph I., U.S Senatorfromthe StateofConnecticut 1
WITNESSES
Blot, William, Chief, Biostatistics Branch, National CancerInstitute 50
Prepared statement 132
Responsesto additional questions 133
Browner, Hon. Carol,Administrator, Environmental ProtectionAgency 8
Prepared statement 62
Responses to additional questions 173
Coggins, Christopher, principal research and development toxicologist, R.J.
ReynoldsTobacco Co 29
Prepared statement 74
Responses to additional questions 82
Elders, Hon. M. Joyceljm, Surgeon General, Public Health Service 10
Prepared statement 66
Letterto SenatorLieberman 67
Responsesto additional questions 71
Gravelle, Jane, Senior Specialist in Economic Policy, Congressional Research
Service 48
Prepared statement 120
Responsesto additional questions 126
Taylor, Aubrey, chairman. Department ofPhysiology, University ofSouthern
Alabama, onbehalfoftheAmerican LungAssociation 34
Prepared statement 95
Responses to additional questions 109
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
BUls:
S. 262 153
S. 1680 166
NewYorkTimes, articlefrom 60
Statements:
Institute ofEnvironmental Medicine, NewYorkUniversity 141
Pow'rCoalition 144
Tollison, Robert D., Duncan Black Professor ofEconomics, George Mason
University 146
(III)

ASSESSING THE EFFECTS OF
ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE
WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 1994
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:39 a.m. in room 216,
Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman [chairman
ofthe subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Senators Lieberman, Lautenberg, Faircloth, and Chafee.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Senator Lieberman. The hearing will come to order.
I would like to welcome the witnesses and everyone else to this
hearing of the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Regulation
ofthe Committee on Environment and Public Works.
We are here today to discuss the possible effects on nonsmokers
of environmental tobacco smoke, ETS, also known as secondhand
smoke. Tobacco smoke directly inhaled is dangerous to the health
of those who directly inhale it, to smokers. In this hearing, we are
going to turn to a related public health problem, and that is the
health effects on those who do not smoke but inhale environmental
or secondhand tobacco smoke that is emitted by the burning end
of a cigarette, pipe, or cigar, or exhaled from the lungs of smokers
into the environment.
We approach this subject as part of this subcommittee's interest
in the quality of our indoor air, Americans spend 90 percent of our
time indoors. EPA and its Science Advisory Board have consist-
ently ranked indoor air pollution as one of the top four environ-
mental risks to the health of the American people. Secondhand
smoke is clearly a significant component ofthat threat. The Senate
has passed a comprehensive indoor air quality bill, and this com-
mittee has also reported our legislation that addresses the particu-
lar risks ofindoor radon.
The committee now has pending before it two bills introduced by
Senator Lautenberg of New Jersey to restrict indoor smoking. The
first bill, S. 262, would require the EPA Administrator to promul-
gate guidelines for instituting a non-smoking policy in Federal
buildings. The second bill, S. 1680, would require all public facili-
ties to implement policies restricting smoking. That would include
some private facilities, such as restaurants.
(1)
—
The purpose of the hearing this morning is to provide the sub-
committee with evidence to enable us to make informed judgments
on these two bills that have been introduced by Senator Lauten-
berg.
According to the EPA, secondhand smoke consists ofnot only nic-
otine and tar, but also about 4,000 other substances, approximately
43 of which are known or suspected carcinogens, and any of which
are strong respiratory irritan—ts. According to EPA, the basic compo-
nents of mainstream smoke i.e., smoke inhaled by the smoker
and secondhand smoke are similar. In some cases, in fact, second-
hand smoke may even be more harmful.
Secondhand smoke is in the air in homes, work places, schools,
restaurants, theaters, and public buildings. The Center for Disease
Control tells us that 8 out of 10 nonsmokers report that they are
annoyed by the smoking ofothers.
But there question we are considering here today goes beyond
whether secondhand smoke is an annoyance to nonsmokers. We
focus this morning on the level ofhealth risks posed by secondhand
smoke. We are going to examine the nature and degree of these
risks as well as the assertions of some groups about scientific un-
certainties or inaccuracies associated with EPA's calculation of
these risks.
We will begin the hearing this morning with testimony from the
Administrator of EPA, Carol Browner, and Surgeon General, Dr.
Elders. I am particularly pleased to welcome the Surgeon General
to her first hearing before this committee. While the words "public
health" do not appear in the title of our committee, the laws we
enact are designed first and foremost to protect the public health
of the American people. I think this committee needs to hear more
frequently from the Surgeon General. I hope this is the first of
many appearances in which we will benefit from your testimony.
The Surgeons General of this country have been leaders in iden-
tifying the health risks of smoking. In 1965, the Surgeon General's
Office issued its first warning about the health hazards ofcigarette
smoking and required a label to appear on every cigarette package.
In 1972, the Surgeon General reviewed the health effects ofsecond-
hand smoke, and in 1986, a Surgeon's Report concluded that sec-
ondhand smoke can cause lung cancer in adult nonsmokers and
respiratory infections in children ofparents who smoke.
On March 21, 1994, just a couple ofmonths ago, five former Sur-
geons General wrote:
An overwhelming body of scientific evidence proves that environmental tobacco
smoke poses a significant health risk for adults, children, and even the unborn.
Many studies have shownthatETS is deadly.
The Environmental Protection Agency has also played a leading
role in examining the health effects of secondhand smoke. In Janu-
ary of 1993, EPA issued a report on the respiratory health effects
of secondhand smoke, which classified secondhand smoke as a
known human or Group A carcinogen, a classification used only
when there is strong evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship in
humans between the substance examined and cancer. Only 16
other substances have been classified in this category.
The EPA report estimates that secondhand smoke is responsible
for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually in non-
smokers in the United States and finds that infants and young
children whose parents smoke are the most seriously affected by
exposure. EPA estimates that passive smoking causes between
150,000 and 300,000 cases of bronchitis and pneumonia in infants
and young children under 18 years of age each year, resulting in
between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year.
According to EPA, passive smoking can lead to a buildup offluid
in the middle ear, the single most common cause of surgery in chil-
dren. EPA also estimates that between 200,000 and 1 million asth-
matic children have their condition worsened each year by passive
smoking, and that passive smoking can contribute to the develop-
ment ofthousands ofnew asthma cases in children each year.
While the EPA report only deals with the respiratory effects as-
sociated with secondhand smoke, both the American Heart Associa-
tion and the American Medical Association have concluded that
secondhand smoke causes thousands of deaths from heart disease
each year. In short, according to these studies, hundreds of thou-
sands of nonsmoking Americans are being denied their ability to
protect their health and the health of their children because they
happen to be, work, live, eat, or shop where others are smoking.
We will hear criticisms today about the scientific and statistical
bases of EPA's conclusions. I intend to listen closely to these com-
ments. The public has a right to expect the best scientific founda-
tions for EPA's policies and actions. It is in that spirit that I look
forward to the witnesses' testimony this morning.
I would yield now to my colleague from New Jersey, Senator
Frank Lautenberg, for an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, U.S.
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Senator Lautenberg. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I very much appreciate your holding this hearing on the health
effects of environmental tobacco smoke. The two bills I have intro-
duced—S. 262 would prohibit smoking in Fede—ral buildings and S.
1680 addresses prohibition in public facilities seek to protect the
American public against the dangers ofsecondhand smoke.
I introduced this legislation to continue progress already made
toward a smoke-free environment, which started in 1987 when I
wrote the law to ban smoking on airlines. Along with Congressman
Durbin in the House, we authored the smoking ban that has since
made virtually all domestic flights smoke-free.
Some detractors have sought to minimize this first step forward,
but the airline ban introduced the segment ofthe public to the ben-
efits and the comfort of a smoke-free environment. SinceNothwen,
many localities have restricted smoking in various settings. it
is time for the Federal Government to extend this protection to the
non-smoking public in all public buildings.
Last weekend the New York Times sketched out in fascinating
detail the unyielding posture of an industry which has continued
to withhold research findings from the Government and to market
products most people believe are responsible for the deaths of
400,000 Americans each and every year. Ignoring undisputed evi-
dence, it is an industry that continues to insist publicly that ciga-
rettes are neither hazardous nor addictive.
One w—onders, what kind of evidence d—o they need? All kinds of
smokers and I used to be one of them have told me about the
number of times they wanted to quit. Some of them brag that they
quit 50 times, but they started 51 times. That continues to persist.
I don't know what it is going to take, but we listen to them as we
hold this hearing.
As elected representatives of the people, the Congress has a re-
sponsibility to call the industry to task to perhaps regulate its
products in the public interest and to protect the non-smoking pub-
lic from involuntary exposure to a Group A carcinogen.
The Congress has moved toward this goal. This year, the legisla-
tion I sponsored called Pro-Kids, was finally enacted. It was en-
acted as part of an education objective. It requires virtually all fed-
erally funded children's programs to be smoke-free, including
schools, day care centers, and community health centers. However,
we have more work to do. We should make all public buildings
smoke-free.
That is why I introduced the Smoke Free Environment Act with
Congressman Waxman. This legislation would make all public
buildings visited by 10 or more persons one day a week smoke-free.
To the detractors of this legislation I say that if McDonald's and
the Pentagon can go smoke-free, so can the Nation.
Mr. Chairman, each success in moving toward a smoke-free envi-
ronment has faced the obstacles set up by a well-funded, tough,
stubborn tobacco lobby at each step. The tobacco industry has con-
sistently distorted the scientific research on environmental tobacco
smoke and the purpose of my legislation. This morning I hope we
will be able to set straight the record on environmental tobacco
smoke.
Mr. Chairman, for those who can see this chart, a recent New
York Times poll showed that 67 percent of all Americans favor a
ban in smoking in all public places, which would be accomplished
by enacting the Smoke-Free Environment Act. I have those results
here. It is pretty dramatic. That is up, by the way, from 61 percent
in 1991.
The American people want to breathe cleaner air. That is what
this legislation would give them.
It is hard to figure out why people want to continue to ingest a
substance which is a known carcinogen. And many smokers, as I
said, will volunteer that they wished they had never started smok-
ing and look for help in beating the addiction, an addiction that
has been compared with the heroin addiction.
Later this morning we are going to hear from Mr. Christopher
Coggins, a research scientist from R.J. Reynolds. He will be speak-
ing for the tobacco industry and I look forward to hearing his testi-
mony. He has a tough job ahead of him if he denies the evidence,
as his industry has in the past, that demonstrates that tobacco
smoke is addictive and dangerous to others.
Some of our most prominent scientists have found that smoking
kills 400,000 persons per year. Our best scientists have found that
environmental tobacco smoke is a Group A carcinogen, which
causes 3,000 lung cancer deaths a year. The Congress and the
country have an empirical basis for moving to establish a smoke-
free environment for the American people.