An experimental investigation of tobacco smoke pollution in cars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Tobacco smoke pollution (TSP) has been identified as a serious public health threat. Although the number of jurisdictions that prohibit smoking in public places has increased rapidly, just a few successful attempts have been made to pass similar laws prohibiting smoking in cars, where the cabin space may contribute to concentrated exposure. In particular, TSP constitutes a potentially serious health hazard to children because of prolonged exposure and their small size. METHODS: The present study investigated the levels of TSP in 18 cars via the measurement of fine respirable particles (<2.5 microns in diameter or PM(2.5)) under a variety of in vivo conditions. Car owners smoked a single cigarette in their cars in each of five controlled air-sampling conditions. Each condition varied on movement of the car, presence of air conditioning, open windows, and combinations of these airflow influences. RESULTS: Smoking just a single cigarette in a car generated extremely high average levels of PM(2.5): more than 3,800 microg/m3 in the condition with the least airflow (motionless car, windows closed). In moderate ventilation conditions (air conditioning or having the smoking driver hold the cigarette next to a half-open window), the average levels of PM(2.5) were reduced but still at significantly high levels (air conditioning = 844 microg/m3; holding cigarette next to a half-open window = 223 microg/m3). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that TSP in cars reaches unhealthy levels, even under realistic ventilation conditions, lending support to efforts occurring across a growing number of jurisdictions to educate people and prohibit smoking in cars in the presence of children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".