Passive smoking: Study was flawed from outset

doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7413.501

BMJ 2003;327:501 (30 August), doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7413.501

Letter

Passive smoking

Study was flawed from outset

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Editor—The study by Enstrom and Kabat has a major flaw,¹and I urge the editors of the BMJ to consider a retraction.The study assumes a considerable difference in the exposureto environmental tobacco smoke of never smokers' spouses comparedto ever smokers' spouses. This is obviously wrong.

Most never smokers' spouses would have been exposed to considerable environmental tobacco smoke before the late 1990s when Californianpublic places became smoke-free. Thus for most of the studyperiod, assuming the spouses are together for two to four wakinghours a day, the comparison is eight to10 hours' exposure totobacco smoke among spouses of never smokers and 12 hours'exposure to tobacco smoke among spouses of ever smokers. Assuming passive smoking increases mortality by 30%, the demonstrabledifference between the groups would be about 5% ((12 –10)/12)x30). This would be further reduced because of quittersamong ever . . . [Full text of this article]

Jayant Sharad Vaidya, specialist registrar

Department of Surgery, Whittington and Middlesex Hospitals, University College London, London W1W 7EJ j.vaidya@ucl.ac.uk

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

Gruning, T., Gilmore, A. B., McKee, M. (2006). Tobacco Industry Influence on Science and Scientists in Germany. AJPH 96: 20-32 [Abstract] [Full text]