Passive Smoking at Work

Our plain-English summary of Passive Smoking at Work, by A. Weber, T. Fischer (1980).

The study

• Authors: A. Weber, T. Fischer
• Published: International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, Volume 47. Accepted October 21st 1980
• Type of article: Journal article
• Our copy: from Johns-Manville's own medical library. The article is still under copyright, so we describe it here rather than post it.

In plain English

This article is about passive smoking at work, not asbestos. The authors measured air pollution from tobacco smoke in 44 workrooms and interviewed 472 employees about annoyance and irritation. They measured carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides, nicotine and particulate matter. Mean values included CO of 1.1 ppm, NO of 32 ppb and NO2 of 24 ppb. The authors reported that nearly one third of the measured CO values from tobacco smoke exceeded a critical value of 2 ppm. Measured against German workplace limit values (MAK), all concentrations were considered tolerable, but the authors judged those limits an inadequate standard for tobacco smoke. One quarter of employees reported eye irritation at work, 40% were disturbed by smoke, and one third rated air quality as bad. Most favored separate smoking and nonsmoking rooms. Concentrations were lower in fully air-conditioned rooms. Room-by-room, pollutant levels correlated very poorly with complaints. The authors concluded that passive smoking at work cannot be neglected. They noted the companies were not chosen randomly.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Field study combining indoor air measurements in workrooms with interviews of employees
• Who was studied: 472 employees working in 44 workrooms (offices, design rooms, rooms for VDU operators, conference rooms and others) belonging to several companies
• Exposure: Tobacco smoke at the workplace (passive smoking), measured as carbon monoxide (CO), nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), nicotine and particulate matter. No asbestos exposure was studied.
• Main results:
  • Mean concentrations of the components attributed to tobacco smoke: CO 1.1 ppm, NO 32 ppb, NO2 24 ppb (the nicotine and particulate matter values are not reliably legible in the scanned text)
  • Nearly one third of the measured CO values attributed to tobacco smoke exceeded the critical value of 2 ppm
  • Compared with German workplace threshold limit values (MAK), all measured pollutant concentrations were considered tolerable
  • One quarter of the employees reported eye irritations at work
  • 40% of the interviewed employees were disturbed by smoke
  • One third of employees rated the air with regard to smoke at the workplace as bad
  • A majority of employees favored separating smoking and nonsmoking rooms, and half supported a general or partial prohibition of smoking at work
  • Nonsmokers were more often disturbed by passive smoking than smokers
  • Concentrations of all measured pollutants were lower in fully air-conditioned rooms than in rooms with window ventilation
  • Mean pollutant concentrations in each room correlated very poorly with the effects reported in interviews
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that passive smoking at work cannot be neglected and that preventive measures to protect nonsmokers should be considered. They described separation into smoking and nonsmoking rooms as seeming the most appropriate measure, and they called air-conditioning very questionable as a preventive measure because of its energy use.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The companies and rooms were not chosen randomly
  • One-hour mean measurements masked short concentration peaks near smokers, so they represented individual exposure only in a limited way
  • Individual psychological factors (relationship with coworkers, work satisfaction, attitude toward smoking) influenced how people rated disturbance and irritation
  • Whether passive smoking is associated with a risk of the classic smoker diseases remained an open question

Browse return to medical research.