elcantal, I don't believe you'd recognise a reasoned discussion if it jumped out and grabbed you by the short and curlies.
I think you have the same problem !
Fact: secondary smoking kills thousands of people every year.
Something kills these people & it's being attributed to passive smoking when the evidence can both prove & disapprove it. All the studies & research done in to this & other cancers is funded by companies , on both sides , with a vested interest in a result that allows them to peddle their products. Huge amounts of the 2nd hand / passive smoking studies have been funded by pharmecutical companies & they are / were the ones in the shadows pressing for bans to allow them to sell their 'stop- smoking ' products.
Fact: the Spanish government claims that one of its main motives in extending the smoking ban to bars and restauarants was to prevent customers killing staff there with their smoking - a danger pretty much unique to bar and restaurant workers as the 2005 law had banned smoking in virtually every other workplace and had been universally observed.
No problem with it , if it does that but they are still at risk if they are serving people in public spaces, although the problem will be diluted.
Fact: there are other pollutants and lead in petrol is a health hazard.
There hasn't been lead in petrol since the 70's.
Fact: governments take steps to counter or eliminate such hazards wherever it is practical to do so. Including smoking. So a consistent approach.
They'd be better employed in managing the economy which it's been proved they can't do. Then again they are not really able to make any decisions without 'expert' advice which is normally tainted & spun to suit whoever has a vested interest , & they don't have the abilityto see through it ! Just look at how 'condensing gas boilers' were sold to the fat boy to see that ; & he then introduced a law preventing the sale of any other type based on the 'expert' evidence & his knowledge as a ships steward !!
Fact: non-smokers do not inflict any harm on smokers.
Only by having to read & listen to the 'evidence' they've heard /read & spout like politicians, as though it was the absolute truth, whilst believing it because its a scientific study. But who paid ??
Yes, there is no doubt that smoking leads to health problems for smokers & secondary smoke can cause problems for non-smokers with underlying health problems but unless they frequented the bars & restaurants before they are more likely to to suffer damage on the street breathing in polluted air & will still be doing it now.
There was a programme on throat cancer last week on the BBc . I had always assumed that it must be due to the effects of smoking & was not caused by anything alse. Apparently a major cause of it is oral sex !