iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Your Nose Knows: The Invisible Threat of 'Thirdhand Smoke'

Cigarette

First Posted: 08/26/11 05:16 PM ET Updated: 10/26/11 06:12 AM ET

Before this week, employees at the Indiana University Health medical center were free to step off the nonsmoking campus and light up a cigarette. Sure, co-workers and patients would probably notice the telltale odor on the smoker's clothes, skin and breath -- especially if they happened to share an elevator -- but they could do little more than plug their nose in defense.

That all changed on Monday when the medical center upgraded its policy: Employees are now prohibited from smoking during the workday. Period.

The impetus for the new rule is the recently recognized dangers of "thirdhand smoke," the gases and particles that cling to clothing, hair, furniture, walls and other surfaces long after a cigarette is stubbed out.

Dr. Richard Graffis, executive vice president and chief medical officer at Indiana University Health, describes it as "the smoke you don't see, but that your nose tells you is there."

Over his more than 40 years in the health care business, Graffis has seen a dramatic evolution -- from widespread acceptance of doctors and patients smoking inside the hospital to increasingly stringent bans -- as evidence grew of the health risks posed by both direct and indirect exposure to cigarette smoke.

"Now we've come to realize that these particles or toxins can build up [in the environment] over time," said Graffis.

Typical indoor ventilation removes about half of the particulate matter released from the tip of a cigarette, said Suzaynn Schick of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco. The remaining sticky tar, oil and waxy compounds are left to accumulate, toxic layer upon toxic layer.

"You basically build up a giant reservoir of cancer-causing compounds on every surface," said Schick. "And it stays there."

According to a recent study led by Georg Matt of San Diego State University, nicotine will persist in a house previously occupied by smokers even if the rooms are given fresh layers of paint, new carpeting and standard cleaning.

"I get lots of stories of people with asthma who move into environments that are full of thirdhand smoke and report increased problems," Matt said.

"This is more than just a nuisance like the smell of dirty socks," added Matt, who called smokers "mobile tobacco contamination packages."

Research has suggested that the act of smoking doesn't even have to take place inside the home, hospital or other indoor space to leave a toxic deposit behind. In a study of used cars, Matt found contaminated dust on the dashboard and in the carpeting and upholstery of cars owned by smokers who refrained from lighting up inside their vehicles.

While people are less likely to be affected by these thirdhand toxins than by the more widely recognized first- and secondhand smoking, Timo Hammer of the Hohemstein Institute for Textile Innovation in Germany suggested that touching contaminated surfaces and ingesting dust can still be hazardous, especially if that exposure extends over a period of time. At particular risk are children and people with compromised heart, respiratory or immune systems.

Given their different interactions with the environment -- crawling on the floor and putting objects in their mouths -- children are typically exposed to twice as much contaminated dust as adults.

Young children are apt to suck on a parent's clothes as well. Hammer described the common scenario of a parent coming inside after a smoke break and picking up a child.

A number of thirdhand smoke's toxic components are also released by first- and secondhand smoking, including formaldehyde, benzene and arsenic. However, researchers have encountered more potent compounds in the thirdhand residue, not all of which are detectable by the human nose.

Nicotine, the main component of cigarette smoke, can react with gases such as ozone and nitrous oxide to form lung cancer-causing compounds called tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNAs). As the smoke ages, concentrations of these compounds have been found to increase.

Virander Rehan of the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center co-authored a study published earlier this year that found prenatal exposure to TSNAs and other toxins from thirdhand smoke disrupted lung development in rats.

Several previous studies, including one released this week, have made the link between cigarette smoke exposure during pregnancy and an increased risk of asthma for the child. Rehan concluded the same from his model and hopes to confirm that finding with humans.

Components of cigarette smoke, such as lead, are known to impede a child's brain development as well.

"Some of these effects that we have known for decades may be mediated through thirdhand smoke exposure," Rehan said.

"We now have reason to suspect that there are disease processes set in motion due to the carcinogens in this mixture," said Matt of San Diego State. "We know what they do to living cells and developing organ systems. Still, what exactly they do in real life and in infants that play and live and sleep in these environments will take years to find out."

In the meantime, Jonathan Winickoff of Massachusetts General Hospital for Children and Harvard Medical School and a member of the research team that originally coined the term "thirdhand smoke" in 2008, suggested taking a precautionary approach. "A lot of this stuff is not known," he said. "But the Surgeon General has said that there is no safe level of secondhand smoke, and a lot of the compounds of thirdhand smoke are the same."

Indiana University Health is just one of a growing number workplaces, restaurants and schools implementing new rules to protect public health, as well as save their pocketbooks from higher health insurance and cleanup costs. Those who smoke are not even being hired by some employers, such as Weyco, an insurance benefits company in Michigan that made headlines in 2005 over its controversial decision.

More multi-unit housing complexes are also declaring themselves 100 percent smoke-free. Earlier this month, Maine became the first state to adopt a nonsmoking policy for all its public housing buildings. Meanwhile, California lawmakers are contemplating allowing landlords to ban smoking on their properties.

Schick, who testified in support of a smoking ban for San Mateo (Calif.) County's multi-unit housing, noted another often unrecognized risk of thirdhand smoke. Even if prior tenants never smoked in a particular unit, rooms may still harbor remnants of tobacco smoke that traveled via ventilation systems, down hallways and through cracks in the walls.

To really clear the air, "you have to take out the wallboard," Schick said. "It's like cleaning up after Hurricane Katrina."

Matt offered some advice when renting an apartment, checking into a hotel room or shopping for a used car. "If you smell something, keep looking," he said. "Be careful, and trust your nose."

Hospitals should pay particular attention to the thirdhand smoke problem, said Matt, because the people who are typically the most sensitive to the health effects of tobacco smoke are often the same people who spend the most time in a hospital.

"You don't want these compounds to be around the perinatal ICU or children who have respiratory problems," he said. "Hospitals are full of people who desperately need clean air."

Graffis did note some pushback from Indiana University Health employees who smoke, but added that nonsmokers are "thrilled." He expects patients to be grateful for the new rule as well.

"We're in the business of protecting people's health," said Graffis. "It's ironic that a health care worker could be a vector of toxins."

The medical center has beefed up it tobacco cessation programs to help employees quit. As for enforcement of the stringent new policy, Graffis noted that smokers are basically "self-incriminating."

"We have no hidden cameras, no Gestapo," he said. "But if they go out and smoke, we'll know."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

Before this week, employees at the Indiana University Health medical center were free to step off the nonsmoking campus and light up a cigarette. Sure, co-workers and patients would probably notice th...
Before this week, employees at the Indiana University Health medical center were free to step off the nonsmoking campus and light up a cigarette. Sure, co-workers and patients would probably notice th...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,035
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (47 total)
09:51 PM on 08/31/2011
Genders, for your convenience, since it's about four pages back, here's the reference:

http://glo­balhealthl­aw.wordpre­ss.com/200­9/01/11/th­ird-hand-s­moke/#comm­ent-52

As you'll see: three trillion years, i.e. 30 billion centuries, of exposure would be required.

- MJM
09:46 PM on 08/31/2011
Genders, you ask for some measurement of third hand smoke, but if you read my postings down below you'll find that I did exactly that. If you go to the Global Health Law entry by Dr. Kabat that I referenced, you'll find the analysis in my comments there. If you licked ten square feet of flooring absolutely clean in a smokers home every single day it would take you close to 30 billion centuries to lick up the amount that was highlighted in the news stories.

Only people who were fundamentally crazy or seriously misguided as to reality would worry about such things. It's equivalent to worrying about dying of skin cancer because you went outside for a minute under a full moon (reflecting the carcinogenic rays of the sun). Yes, there's "no safe level" of sunshine, but most normal people can accept the concept that it's crazy to worry about such things.

Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
07:14 PM on 08/31/2011
Good, I don't care if people smoke, as long as they do it in a hermetically sealed bubble, so the toxic junks doesn't escape.

Hospitals already ban perfume, and lots of them ban smoking, or the smell of smoke on their workers.

Perfumes have been so toxic as to hospitalize people.

And someone, scrap up some third hand smoke and do mass spec on it. Give us the measurement we need to act wisely. Asking folks what they think, as this "study" did, is not science.
08:25 PM on 08/30/2011
This story and the reaction to legitimate flaws, by interlopers with an obvious agenda, has revealed the only thing that remains of the Church of Public Health is fear as a lifestyle choice.

A Public Health prophet can no longer tolerate discussion and a free expression of alternate opinions. Because even they, can't trust the validity of their essential, pessimism or negative predictions.

Fear is all that sustains their profits and the value of preventative medicine, and it is a promoted lifestyle, even their own prophets can't resist.

In all, there is not a glass half full amongst them.

Sad to watch.
10:43 AM on 08/30/2011
This is junk science!!! As Sheldon on the BBT would say, “it's pure hocome”. NO ONE can prove beyond s shadow of a doubt that “third hand” or even “second hand” smoke will kill you. These, “scientists” for lack of a better word, are using and living off grant money and they have to show some kind of results for their work. And stirring up controversy is an easy one. If smoking was so bad for you and there is so much proof that it kills people who use it and people who are around it, then why don't they ban it. I don't want to hear the argument that there's too much money in it. Then that just means that the government just wants to make a buck rather than care for it's people. There is NO real proof!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
turboe4truth
Out the GOP in 2014
09:51 AM on 08/30/2011
They are full of crap, they just don't like the smell, and this is the way to stop from having to smell it. we are still in a free country, until you outlaw tobacco, you cannot outlaw smoking.....
ruburnt
Live Free or Die....
08:00 AM on 08/30/2011
I think people have lost their minds on this issue........
03:11 AM on 08/30/2011
eskatyt wrote, "ever hugged a smoker and had your eyes start to water, your nose start burrning, or broken into a fit of coughing?"

Eskatyt, no, I have never even *KNOWN* anyone who did, and I've known a LOT of people, and given my known interests I'm sure it would been mentioned. On the other hand I *have* known people who reacted that strongly when hugging cat lovers. Should cat owners be banned from jobs or charged with child abuse?

Given the current social atmosphere created by antismoking advocates, I'd say there's a very good chance that the great majority of any such instances aren't evidence of actual "allergies" but are evidence that the person is suffering from something called ASDS, "AntiSmoking Dysfunction Syndrome." See http://wispofsmoke.net/recovery.html for more information on the problem and how to deal with it.

In a perfect world far fewer would create driving pollution, choosing to live closer to work etc, and that could be encouraged in the same way quitting smoking has been: raise taxes to 400% of base product price: $20/gallon would greatly reduce unnecessary driving and the general 24/hour/day inescapable air pollution.

Meanwhile businesses allowing smoking would have door signs warning those concerned while also inviting smokers off the streets where they might be bothering those sensitive to smoke. You might want to join some of the Free Choice groups out there to help.

What do you think?

:?
MJM
04:36 PM on 08/31/2011
I don't hug smokers. Their breath makes me gag. It smells worse than a dirty ashtray.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PatWard
model for Rodin
06:51 PM on 08/29/2011
Machine rolled cigarettes came into being circa 1900. The popularity of smoking increased substatially. The average age at that time was 46.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Linus521
In wildness is the salvation of mankind
06:22 PM on 08/29/2011
An asthmatic, I believe all smokers should confine their habit to the privacy of their own homes and leave all doors and windows locked down. It matters not, the smoker is polluting the indoors or the outdoors because, if I breathe one tiny puff outdoors or indoors, it feels like the individual poured gasoline into my lungs and then punched me in the chest with their fist. Assault and battery are unlawful.

They say, an asthmatic is the canary in the coal mine. If something attacks my lungs even if you aren't asthmatic, the pollutant will give someone else cancer or another disease, including heart disease. Smoking also attacks the human heart.

Please, do not smoke around others; you cannot imagine the amount of suffering you are causing. Confine your smoking in your home -- away from hurting others.
12:57 AM on 08/30/2011
Wow sounds drastic and nothing but tobacco smoke brings forth any of these symptoms? Have you ever considered you may be suffering from a psychosomatic reaction and discussed possible mental health issues with your local Public Health advocate? It seems many who cheer this kind of junk science, seem to be having identical issues. One has to wonder if their may be a connection and if the drug companies might have a solution. From personal experience, perhaps you should simply have a smoke and stop resisting what your body is craving.

What happens when someone tells you to pull their finger?

Does even that impending threat make you fell like running away?

It seems those who are uncomfortable by tobacco smoke aroma, should have been protected from the start in the traditional and most effective manner, with a sign on the door. Which would have eliminated the need for smoking bans where they are neither needed or wanted. Allowing everyone the power of choices and decisions, acting as they should, like adults in place of the whines of immature people, who will never have to grow up in a industrial socialist environment.
08:26 AM on 08/30/2011
De.nial is power.ful. Is so telling of your defense.

Arrant. dis.respect breeds my con.tempt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Linus521
In wildness is the salvation of mankind
12:54 PM on 08/30/2011
Regardless, it all comes down to this. We live in a world of folks who have no compulsion in killing other people, molesting children and causing harm to another. Shrinks have labels for folks like this. If you are comfortable with your reasoning, fine. We all have to live with ourselves. Personally, I don't like hurting anyone or anything. I can't even hurt a spider. Fortunately, I was blessed with a gifted mind, more intelligent than almost everyone on the Earth. Thus, I have a little tad more sensitivity than the average poor souls that would even think of something like pulling fingers.

If you are comfortable with the skin you're in, that's your problem. When I find myself amongst cancer sticks, I shut my mouth, take a deep breath and hold it. It helps; if you're a smoker, you're the one with the problem.
08:34 AM on 08/30/2011
People (some) are clueless and insensitive if they cannot reason beyond their own immediate needs. My sense of breathing (over time) is compromised when exposed to wafting smoke from and innocent passerby. I experience tightening of the chest, hinting to asthma attack, long term exposer for me feels like a bad cold - severely compromises my breathing (too).

People with diseased lungs (hard core smokers) cannot understand the plight they pose on others and have no way of understanding the destruction they pose on us, in ways they may have already? done to themselves.

Denial is a powerful obstacle for some... I do not want to pay a price for others exceedingly poor and unhealthy choices... It is not right!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
turboe4truth
Out the GOP in 2014
09:56 AM on 08/30/2011
Your breathing is compromised over time, by breathing.... Have you taken a look outside, do you have any idea what comes out of your car..... Tobacco is a legal product, you don't like it change the law, until then tough!!!
01:02 PM on 08/29/2011
If this second and "third" hand smoke so readily gets in to your system with such disastrous results - why can't folks that fail drug tests simply say there were at a rock concert over the weekend next to a bunch of hippies or maybe that they took in a Giants game while visiting San Francisco?
12:18 PM on 08/29/2011
With a father as a pathologist, I saw first hand tobacco
legacy & destruction at the tip of a scalpel, through
high powered microscope and my unbelieving
naked eyes.

Certain & absolute (first hand witnessed) damage is a FACT.

1) Carbon Monoxides affinity for binding with hemoglobin,
knocking life giving oxygen off, leading to vast reduction
in circulating oxygen lends to premature death of
every cell in the body. scary...

2) Vasoconstriction is another huge consideration
considerable >20% reduction in circulating oxygen
exacerbated by these 2 factors alone.

Unknown reactive chemical reactions
abound over time, as referenced
by by research in this article.

Denial for some is understandable.
11:44 AM on 08/29/2011
Great article!!! More people should read and be aware of this...

This is not meant to be an attack to any smokers... The (topic) article is profound to me, I have struggled profoundly to be around any smoking environments or active smokers as my system simply cannot take the exposure. I get sick being around smoke, it bothers my sinuses, my lungs and my eyes. I cannot stand most bars or night clubs (even after them going non smoking)...

I grew up with sinus, asthma and recurrent respiratory tract issues until I decidedly got further away from (avoid) ALL tobacco smoke. Smoking in the workplace, co-workers or roommates, a heavy smoking parent influenced and added to my chronic exposure, leading to bronchitis recurrent respiratory tract infections.

"The system knows that it is doing harm to me..." Hmmm?! I KNOW THIS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roundels
10:50 AM on 08/29/2011
Again, the article is not about Darwin, or homosexuality, or taxes, or philosophy, or political correctness, or anything other than the harm caused by the carcinogens in cigarette smoke, but if you really want to comparison shop, we might as well go back to the good old 1950s, when Uncle Sam used to tell the impossibly naive public that nuclear testing was no more harmful than getting a tan. Out our way, the saying was "A is for atom, B is for bomb." It wasn't until people started dying in record numbers from cancers never seen before that the survivors added "C is for cancer, D is for death." The public was sold a bill of goods then, and they are being sold one now by those who maintain that everything else is more dangerous than smoking which, to reiterate, is not and never has been a right. The farther one gets from the actual argument, the bigger the hole they are digging themselves into. For everyone's sake, please put down your shovels. As for those of us who are trying to be the voice of reality in all this, maybe it's time to stop trying. Trying to educate those who resist knowledge at all costs seems to be a fool's errand at best.
01:19 AM on 08/30/2011
Uh? Something about your prose doesn't flow quite the way you intended. "The Government" sold a lie in the 50s and they are not selling lies again today? It would be anyone else but the Government, who are doing the big con this time?

Consider the source and follow the money. We are being sold a number of whoppers of late. Second hand smoke following the reefer madness ideologies and Global warming following the anti-smoker campaign. Only one truth is allowed and this is science? Personal attacks against anyone who questions the rhetoric in any way, in spite of the huge holes of integrity and credibility, or the direct financial conflicts attached at the hip, and this is science?

Like it says under your bottle cap; sorry try again.

There is such a level of corruption and misinformation in the entire Tobacco Control lobby and among their employers in Public Health, one has to wonder if smoking is really harmful at all. Considering the source there is every justification in excluding everything as credible, that originated from this gang of arrogant leeches and hate mongers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roundels
06:28 PM on 08/30/2011
"One has to wonder if smoking is really harmful at all." Wow. So the government is lying by telling us that carcinogens will kill us in order to get grant money? That proven links to cancer are just myths designed to fund meaningless studies? Seriously, if anything proves the last sentence in my previous post, this comment would have to be it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gneep
if it wasn't always the same, it'd be different
12:44 PM on 08/30/2011
huh?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:13 PM on 08/28/2011
I think they should also ban Fourth hand smoke, which is talking to a person who smoked during that day. Of course, there's also fifth hand smoke which includes people who saw someone smoking in a passing car with an open window.

If we are to have any real change we would also address 6th hand smoke in which someone thinks very hard about having a smoke when they get home, but some how manages to avoid it for fear of the tobacco-police looming in their silent chopters above their partment.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gneep
if it wasn't always the same, it'd be different
12:46 PM on 08/30/2011
in the year 5150 the Galactic Counsel unanimously voted to change the name of Earth To URALLNUTZ.