Wednesday, July 07, 2010

OSHA air quality is the proper standard to compare indoor air quality test methods, EPA PM 2.5 or vague RSP testing applies only to outdoor air

As I've stated many times, indoor air quality is always worse than outdoor air quality.....so for smoking ban activists to impose EPA air quality standards (PM 2.5 or RSP (respirable suspended particles)) which only apply to outdoor air is not only unattainable, but fraudulent.

We need to insist that OSHA permissible exposure limits, which regulates indoor workplace air quality, is the standard by which any indoor air quality testing is compared......it's how we conduct air quality testing in any other workplace setting. As an indoor air quality engineer, no customer has ever come to me saying the EPA measured their interior plant air, and they're in violation of PM 2.5, or exceeds recommended RSP's......OSHA is the governing authority on indoor air quality, not the EPA.

Air quality test results of secondhand smoke by Johns Hopkins University, the American Cancer Society, a Minnesota Environmental Health Department, and various researchers whose testing and report was peer reviewed and published in the esteemed British Medical Journal......prove that secondhand smoke is 2.6 - 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations:

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-st-louis-aq-study-published-by.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/11/johns-hopkins-air-quality-testing-of.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/04/bmj-published-air-quality-test-results.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/04/american-cancer-society-test-results.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2006/02/air-quality-testing-and-secondhand.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2008/03/british-medical-journal-who-conclude.html

All nullify the argument that secondhand smoke is a workplace "health hazard".

Conversely, the effects of unnecessary, pharmaceutical nicotine funded, smoking ban laws have been profoundly detrimental:

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2009/03/worldwide-economic-meltdown-and.html

Additionally, a World Health Organization (WHO) study, and analysis of former Surgeon General Carmona's "report" indicate that exaggerations and lies about secondhand smoke was the real pandemic of SHS.

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/03/who-report-passive-smoking-doesnt-cause.html

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage
  • Why a Non-Smoker Fights the Pro-Smoking Ban Lies
  • Is RWJF, a 501(c)3, violating IRS rules by funding pro-smoking ban lobbyists?
  • RWJF funds and promotes universal healthcare policies which are the basis for and primary objective of Obamacare
  • Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs
  • Is the smoking ban movement fueled by pharmaceutical nicotine interests?
  • Now that smoking bans have been implemented, what can be done?
  • How do smoking ban lobbyists profit from smoking bans?
  • Pharmaceutical interests project the alternative nicotine marketplace to be $4.6 billion +
  • WHO report secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? NO
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? Part 2
  • Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?
  • OSHA standards prove SHS is not a health hazard
  • Tired of the nanny-state, big, socialized, corrupt, government legislation coming out of our state and federal capitols these days? Vote Republican in November 2010 & 2012
  • NRA.org

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

    SILVER BULLET GUN OIL CONTAINS 13% USDA LIQUEFIED PIG
FAT

    "Though we may not be able to protect your business property rights, we certainly support your Second Amendment Rights"

    Shop for Aircleaners

    Combustion Engine Emissions Eliminator (CE3)