To:Board of Health

From:Councillor John Filion, Chair of the Board of Health

Date:April 28, 1999

Subject:Ventilation Option for the Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) By-law

Recommendations:

(1)That the Ontario Restaurant Association provide to the Medical Officer of Health, by May 31, 1999, specific details on the ventilation technology, which they believe to be an effective alternative to 100 percent smoke-free status for hospitality establishments, along with independent scientific evidence supporting the effectiveness of this technology; and

(2)That the Medical Officer of Health report to the Board of Health by June 28, 1999, regarding the appropriateness of including a ventilation option in the proposed ETS by-law.

Background:

In her report on April 6, 1999, the Medical Officer of Health clearly outlines the health risk that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) presents in the City of Toronto. ETS (often referred to as second hand-smoke) causes breathing problems for children, allergy sufferers, and people with heart or lung disease. ETS causes eye irritation and headaches, and it increases the long-term risk of heart attacks and lung cancer, especially in exposed workers. The report also explains how restaurant and bar employees are the most affected and yet have the least amount of legal protection compared with other workers. In order to address this serious health risk, the Medical Officer of Health recommends that smoking be prohibited in workplaces and public places.

As an alternative to prohibiting smoking, some members of the hospitality industry suggest that new ventilation systems are available that could remove the EST and thereby allow hospitality patrons to continue smoking. The Ontario Restaurant Association (ORA) has also claims that new ventilation technology can create the equivalent of smoke-free indoor air.

As the Medical Officer of Health reports, there are at least 43 chemicals in ETS that can cause cancer in human. These chemicals are in the form of tiny solid particles, gases, or both. Since there is no safe level of exposure to ETS, a ventilation system would have to remove all of these harmful chemicals from the air to provide the same level of protection as smoking ban. After investigating available ventilation technology, the Medical Officer of Health did not identify any ventilation system that is capable of achieving this objective.

In order for the Board to make informed decisions on the feasibility of including a ventilation option in the proposed ETS by-law, I am recommending that the ORA be requested to clearly identify these new technologies and provide detailed information to the Board, through the Medical Officer of Health, regarding where such systems are in use, their design and methods of operation, as well as independent scientific evaluation of their respective effectiveness.

Sincerely,

Councillor John Filion