A New Bogeyman ...Thirdhand Smoke

Smack dab in the middle of my MSN home page appears this headline:


Now as an ex-smoker who puffed on and inhaled two and a half packs of Merits every day for nigh on to 30 years, I cannot begin to understand why inconsiderate smokers, including my wife, choose to blow foul-smelling smoke on me to make my life miserable. I made myself an expert on the harmful effects of smoking and quit, but at the same time I found out that the nanny state we live in has exaggerated the effect of smoke on non-smokers. In reading about second-hand smoke, I found no significant correlation between second-hand smoke and lung cancer, heart disease or death. Further, I have asked to be shown empirical evidence in the form of death certificates listing cause of death as "second-hand smoke".

So I chased the MSNBC article about "Thirdhand Smoke" displayed on my browser to "Pediatrics - The Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics." There I found the Study entitled "Beliefs About the Health Effects of 'Thirdhand' Smoke and Home Smoking Bans."

I read the abstract below and found out that the title of the study was accurate. The researchers appear to have reached out to tell the participants in the study that there was a "gorilla in the room" and that they suffered from inattentional blindness causing them to not notice the obvious. Invisible smoke lingered in an area after smokers finished smoking and this smoke could harm babies. Researchers then asked study participants to complete a questionnaire about their perception of this newly defined danger. Guess what ...most thought "Thirdhand Smoke" was the reenactment of dropping the bomb on Hiroshima. Here is the abstract for the study:

OBJECTIVE. There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke. Thirdhand smoke is residual tobacco smoke contamination that remains after the cigarette is extinguished. Children are uniquely susceptible to thirdhand smoke exposure. The objective of this study was to assess health beliefs of adults regarding thirdhand smoke exposure of children and whether smokers and nonsmokers differ in those beliefs. We hypothesized that beliefs about thirdhand smoke would be associated with household smoking bans.

METHODS. Data were collected by a national random-digit-dial telephone survey from September to November 2005. The sample was weighted by race and gender within Census region on the basis of US Census data. The study questions assessed the level of agreement with statements that breathing air in a room today where people smoked yesterday can harm the health of children.

RESULTS. Of 2000 eligible respondents contacted, 1510 (87%) completed surveys, 1478 (97.9%) answered all questions pertinent to this analysis, and 273 (18.9%) were smokers. Overall, 95.4% of nonsmokers versus 84.1% of smokers agreed that secondhand smoke harms the health of children, and 65.2% of nonsmokers versus 43.3% of smokers agreed that thirdhand smoke harms children. Strict rules prohibiting smoking in the home were more prevalent among nonsmokers: 88.4% vs 26.7%. In multivariate logistic regression, after controlling for certain variables, belief that thirdhand smoke harms the health of children remained independently associated with rules prohibiting smoking in the home. Belief that secondhand smoke harms the health of children was not independently associated with rules prohibiting smoking in the home and car.

CONCLUSIONS. This study demonstrates that beliefs about the health effects of thirdhand smoke are independently associated with home smoking bans. Emphasizing that thirdhand smoke harms the health of children may be an important element in encouraging home smoking bans.

Metaphorically, the "gorilla in the room" refers to a problem that is immense and yet “so common that no one talks about or discusses it.” In this case, "Thirdhand Smoke" is most assuredly not a Gorilla but a Bogeyman.

Miriam Cherry at Concurring Opinions has these observations about the Bogeyman:

The Bogeyman is a symbol or a rhetorical strategy that is an exaggeration of a perceived threat or possible risk, usually raised in response to proposed change...

So perhaps change and an exaggerated tendency to be risk averse is in itself the Bogeyman. Its enemy? Logic. Empiricism. Bogeymen, I think, hate statistics, because it is in their nature to be irrational and play upon one’s fears.

I could not have said it better myself.