|Click to enlarge|
Sheila Duffy expects to provide 'scientific evidence that secondary smoke is harmful', which rather seems to miss the point of the petition. The petition refutes the notion that secondary smoke needs to be isolated and banned, rather than treated as just one of many airborne toxins. If all toxins are dealt with by setting air quality standards and applying technology where it is needed, there is no need for additional evidence about the toxicity of smoke. If it is so dangerous it will exceed the air quality standards, and air cleaning/ventilation will be applied.
She also refers to improvements in heart attack rates (supporting the 'junk science of the year' study by Professor Jill Pell announced to the world in 2007 and published in 2008), and disputes that pubs have suffered since the smoking ban was implemented. I was fully expecting a retaliation from Sheila Duffy to the Scotsman piece on the petition published on Friday: that may yet come.