Passive Smoking: 30 Minutes Is Enough To Cause Observable Changes In The Arteries
Main Category: Smoking / Quit SmokingAlso Included In: Respiratory / Asthma
Article Date: 19 May 2008 - 15:00 PST
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
1.33 (12 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
3 (4 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 23 posts |
Those who are habitually exposed to passive smoke run a cardiovascular risk almost as high as those who smoke; people who do not smoke but inhale second hand smoke suffer a 30% increased risk of cardiovascular disease. But the most alarming factor is the speed with which passive smoking damages the cardiovascular apparatus. Trials which will be discussed at the XVI World Congress of Cardiology have shown that 30 minutes' exposure to tobacco smoke is enough for changes to occur in the arteries of the non-smokers which increase cardiac risk.
"We know that just 30 minutes' exposure to second hand tobacco smoke is enough to produce an observable change in the arterial function of non-smokers," states Dr. Joaquín Barnoya, Research Director of the Cardiovascular Surgery Unit of Guatemala and Professor at the Washington University of St. Louis, U.S.A. "Passive tobacco smoke directly damages the endothelium, which is the internal wall of the arteries, responsible for their dilation and contraction."
The prevention of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors is the central subject of the XVI World Congress of Cardiology to be held in Buenos Aires from the 18th - 21st May 2008 and will be attended by around 15,000 professionals from more than 100 countries. The adverse effects of smoking and public policies to control it are a central topic of the most important scientific events in world cardiology.
Another significant advance in the understanding of the adverse effects of passive smoking is the finding that tobacco smoke contains substances whose pernicious effect on the arteries of non-smokers is not known. "These are mainly heavy metals like benzene or acroleine which cause oxidative damage to arterial endothelium and the mitochondria which is the cell breathing organ," Dr. Barnoya explains and warns that: "the longer the arteries of non-smokers are exposed to tobacco smoke, the more they will behave like the arteries of smokers."
Various trials have shown that passive smoking causes cardiovascular damage equal to 80% to 90% of the damage suffered by smokers. In the United States alone, 35,000 people die every year as a result of passive smoking. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that by 2025, the deaths associated to tobacco will have tripled; 70% will have occurred in undeveloped countries.
Environments Free From Smoke
"New evidence confirms what is already known and helps to understand the rapid decrease of heart disease after the implementation of smoke free environments. In Italy, California (United States) and other parts of the world which have implemented smoke free environments, mortality and the incidence of heart infarcts has decreased rapidly," says Dr. Joaquin Barnoya, Advisor on Tobacco Control at the Inter-American Heart Foundation.
Trials carried out in Italy and the United States have shown that already after 6 months' prohibition of smoking in closed areas, there is a reduction of 11% to 13% in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction. "Now, with the new evidence we have on passive smoking, we can explain why there is such a marked reduction: it is because second hand tobacco smoke rapidly damages the arteries of non-smokers," states Dr Barnoya.
"This was verified by measuring the presence of particles smaller than 2.5 by m3 (PM2.5) which are the most dangerous air pollutants because they are inhaled deeply and reach the alveoli and enter the circulation and the rest of the body," Dr Eduardo Bianco, Director of the Tobacco Control Program of the Inter-American Heart Foundation and President of the Tobacco Epidemic Research Center (CIET) in Uruguay. "In 2005, average levels were 210PM2.5, whilst in bars levels reached a mean of 314PM2.5."
The implementation in Uruguay of the measures of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which has already been ratified by another 153 states, reduced air pollution in indoor areas and small particles to 24PM2.5, well below the 65PM2.5 which are the maximum level advised by international norms. "This makes Uruguay one of the countries with the best quality of air in indoor areas," Dr Bianco concludes.
Learnings From The Rayuela Project
The need to implement public policies capable of confronting the problems of smoking was reflected in the results of the Rayuela Project (word in Spanish that means "hopscotch") which will be discussed during the XVI World Congress of Cardiology. This initiative of the Argentine Foundation of Cardiology and the Argentine Federation of Cardiology implemented in public and private schools in the cities of Buenos Aires and La Plata in Argentina assessed the results of a program aimed at reducing the incidence of new smokers among 10 to 13 year old pupils.
Prior to starting the project which was based on games activities designed to enhance protection factors and reduce vulnerability to different risk situations for the health of teenagers, a survey of 1,676 initial participants showed that more than 60% of the pupils who had smoked or who were smoking could obtain tobacco without any restrictions in their usual sale points.
"Although the Rayuela Project failed in its attempt to reduce the incidence of new smokers, the analysis of results showed interesting aspects for the development of future intervention programs for teenagers," Dr Maria Inés Sosa Liprandi, Co-Director of the Rayuela Project and the ARCONTA (Argentina against Tobacco Program) states.
"In the Argentine context, where cigarettes are very cheap, the advertising aimed at teenagers very aggressive and smoke free schools very few, we may conclude that making the implementation of school programs the starting point is not the most effective one for an integral tobacco control program," she concludes.
The investigators of the Rayuela Project were also able to observe that the children most receptive to tobacco advertising were also the most susceptible to start smoking. "There is sufficient evidence on the factors that have an influence when smokers begin to smoke: product accessibility, family attitudes, group pressure, personal and educational factors and advertising" Dr. Sosa Liprandi says. "Among them the last seems to be directly responsible for recruiting the population (for tobacco consumption)."
The conclusions of this study provide new scientific evidence on the importance of the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (FCTC) which points to key aspects to prevent teenagers starting smoking, observed in the Rayuela Project such as the prohibition of advertising tobacco products to which teenagers are particularly vulnerable.
About the World Heart Federation
The World Heart Federation is a nongovernmental organization based in Geneva, Switzerland dedicated to the prevention and control of heart disease and stroke, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries. It comprises 196 member societies of cardiology and heart foundations from over 100 countries covering the regions of Asia-Pacific, Europe, East Mediterranean, the Americas and Africa. http://www.worldheart.org and http://www.worldcardiocongress.org
The Argentine Society of Cardiology
The Argentine Society of Cardiology (SAC) was founded in 1937 and it is one of the world's oldest cardiological societies. Its members include many prestigious historical figures internationally recognized for their contributions to science including one Nobel Prize winner. SAC has more than 6,500 members in various categories including doctors, nurses and technicians. It has 36 Regional Districts spread over the entire national territory and 20 scientific councils representing all the subspecialties of cardiology. It conducts continuous and intensive teaching with courses in all subspecialties, grants the certification of "Universitary Cardiologist" and conducts a programme of recertification training.
Other important areas of its role include research, with epidemiological surveys, clinical research studies and the "Consensus" which sets standards for diagnosis and treatment of major cardiovascular diseases. The society acts as advisor to both legislative chambers of the national parliament and it has established a community focused institution, the Argentine Foundation of Cardiology, to educate and prevent cardiovascular disease as well as running and dictating courses on cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
http://www.sac.org.ar
The Argentine Federation of Cardiology
The Argentine Federation of Cardiology (FAC) is a scientific institution comprised of 37 cardiology organizations and 11 delegations from the Republic of Argentina. Its mission is to promote the harmonious and integrated development of Argentine cardiology to promote cardiovascular health. The Federation has 22 scientific committees with subspecialties devoted to research and scientific output. FAC publishes a hierarchical Scientific Magazine and through its Educational Programmes, develops regular activity focusing on immediate post-graduate education. It also works closely with the CARDIO Foundation dealing with subjects related to the prevention of cardiovascular diseases and health education in the community.
Argentine Federation of Cardiology
Visit our smoking / quit smoking section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
11 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/107923.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/107923.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (23)
No Smoking In Public Places
posted by Pete on 19 May 2008 at 6:36 pmThis is just another bit of ammunition to justify public smoking bans. Mind you the evidence was already overwhelmingly in favor of bans before this study was released.
Another Fabrication Of Fact
posted by John Channel Isles on 20 May 2008 at 8:14 amAnother gross fabrication of truth. There is no health impacts to passive smoking. Study after study after study demonstrates this. As a smoker of 30 years I have never seen any smokers dropping dead whilst clubbing and pubbing for 30 years (and that's direct smoke inhalation!!). I've never seen non-smokers keeling over in clubs or pubs in 30 years either. This disturbingly untruthful and lame article needs to be filed in "bin" along with all the other trash junk science about passive smoking.
This Is More Anti-smoking Propaganda!
posted by Kin Free on 20 May 2008 at 9:24 am"Various trials have shown that passive smoking causes cardiovascular damage equal to 80% to 90% of the damage suffered by smokers." -
This is just NOT true - just about every long-term study on this subject has proved that passive smoking has little or no effect.
What does "30 minutes exposure makes arteries react like smokers arteries" mean - If I run up a hill, my lungs will react the same as a maraton runner, I will breathe heavier - but will that cause me to get some deadly disease? NO.
All the scientific studies carried out thus far, over many years, cannot even prove that smoking causes lung cancer, or any other cancers for that matter,(Check the research, legal cases etc)- so how on earth can anyone say that passive smoking causes cancer? (I assume that the implication is that passive smoking is harmful to health!)
I ask the question - who is sponsoring these scientists to produce results such as in this article? This tells more about the research and researchers than anything they produce! (a big clue is usually found in their title - 'Tobacco control' -because that is all it is - it has little to do with health)
If any scientists in this field, not aligned with 'tobacco control' or pharmaceutical industries, are reading this - please try to look beyond the 'tobacco kills' mantra and look at the real evidence! You may have to dig deep to find it as anything that goes against this mantra is usually suppressed, but it is there!
Look at why in the heaviest smoking countries, you will usually find that there are LESS cancers than in countries where smoking rates are less.
Ask the question - Why is there not more research in cancer causation that does not begin with 'apart from smoking...'
Ask the question - How much would it cost governments in litigation if the real cause of cancers are more to do with substances such as:- Asbestos, known to be cancerous since the 1930's with a time lag from exposure to effect of 10 - 60yrs. It's use and exposure to the public was widespread up to the 1990's, not just to workers but those who resided near (nationalised) industries using it; Diesel smoke - known to contain far more cancerous substances than cigarettes, yet it's use is increasing daily; PM2.5's - more associated with any combustion. eg incinerators, petrochemical industries etc).(general pollution)
Ask why, when the incidence of smoking is roughly the same throughout Britain, is lung cancer mortality significantly greater in just a few small geographical areas, and significantly less in others.
These questions need to be looked at more closely with an open mind - are there any scientists out there who can still do this? The answer is probably very few - scientists have to feed their children and pay a mortgage like the rest of us. Without a sponsor who truly wants to find the truth (and I dont know of any that are)the public will continue to be deceived and science will continue to become more and more discredited as they produce more and more ridiculous claims such as "20% reduction in heart attacks in 6 months since smoking bans" (or similar) - think about that one, smoking allegedly takes up to 30 years to have any adverse effect, according to some research!
ps. No doubt this will be 'screened out' as unsuitable - it does not agree with the so called 'consensus' but beware, more people ARE questioning the alleged 'consensus' and my ultimate faith in truth and justice will I am sure, prevail.
Parental Smoking And Illness
posted by Maria Parquez on 21 May 2008 at 5:45 amMy parents both smoke. I am 16. I have recently left home to college where smoking is not allowed indoors. For the first time in my life my life-time respiratory problems have all gone. My parents are just like John from Channel Islands. Their attitude was that if I did not drop dead I was fine.
Passive Smoking Is A Scam:
posted by Carlos Lopez on 21 May 2008 at 7:12 amwell you are fine- the baby boomers grew up in a very smoky period and guess what- they are fine now!! This article is complete garbage and clearly funded by special interest pharmaceutical firms.
Here's some real facts on SHS:
Not one single death has ever been scientifically proven to have been caused by tobacco
Not one single death anywhere, ever, has been caused by second hand smoke
There is a higher risk of lung cancer from milk, cheese, and coffee than there is from SHS
There is no scientific justification for any smoking ban, anywhere
Smoking bans bring economic devastation and destroy communities
Smoking bans INCREASE the number of smokers (see Ireland as an example)
Modern Air Management systems make the indoor air clean for ALL patrons
The public did NOT want a blanket ban and said so for three years running
The debate is over: the science on SHS is a FRAUD
Strange, Though
posted by Claus H on 21 May 2008 at 1:07 pmAccording to science, children of smokers are likely to develop a better defence against passive smoking, than children of non-smoking parents.
Children of smokers are not so likely to develop astma, food allergy and even lung cancer.
Maybe you were just very unlucky? Having respiratory problems?
The Usual Old Names
posted by Alan Parkinson on 21 May 2008 at 3:08 pmThe usual old names of Carlos, Channel Island Man, and about six others appear throughout the internet saying the tobacco industry is victim of big business, and that there is a conspiracy against them by the pharma industry with Nazi propaganda. Look out for those same names. If you voice an opinion against them they will call you Nazi, or an evil person who is out to victimize the poor old tobacco industry.
The fact is, quite simply, passive smoking is the last straw for this dying breed of tobacco industry lobbyist. They are cornered and really do not know what to say. So, the language becomes very similar to that used by the President of Zimbabwe or Sadam Hussein when he was alive - we are all against them and there is a giant conspiracy and they are the victims.
Pediatric Respiratory Problems
posted by Dr. Yamura Shimura on 21 May 2008 at 3:12 pmI am a pediatrician and specialize in respiratory problems (among children). The majority of children I treat live in households where one or both parents smoke indoors while the children are in the house. A very small minority of my patients live in households where nobody smokes in the house. The majority of people in my country (Japan) do not smoke.
I rest my case.
And before some of the paranoids above accuse me of being part of a conspiracy - I have no links with any big business, pro or anti tobacco. I am just a doctor who treats children for respiratory disease.
Claus Lives In Cloud Cuckoo Land
posted by Dr. Juan Rodriguez on 21 May 2008 at 3:19 pmClaus is talking a bunch of horse manure. I am a respiratory specialist and know for certain that all evidence points in the opposite direction. To say children of smokers have less asthma is like saying people who cross the road with their eyes closed develop an immunity to being hit by cars.
Dr Juan, Get Reading
posted by Dave Atherton on 21 May 2008 at 3:49 pmI am afraid you need to do more reading Juan, here is the result of a peer reviewed study in New Zealand reported on this same website. "MedWire News: Parental smoking during childhood and personal cigarette smoking in teenage and early adult life lowers the risk for allergic sensitization in those with a family history of atopy, according to the results of a study from New Zealand."
"The team found that the children of atopic parents were less likely to have positive SPTs at 13 years if either parent smoked (odds ratio [OR]= 0.55." Yes if your parents smoke about a 50% reduction in sensitisation to allergies.
First 10 opinions shown. For all opinions, click through to the full thread.
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.






