“To see what is right and not do it is cowardice.”
— Confucius
In the early 1960s, Black people were not allowed in Las Vegas Strip casinos. While this was unsettling to many, the industry proper was apparently fine with it.
The security guards at these facilities were instructed to escort Black people out of the building should they not understand the “rules.” The belief was that had Black people been allowed within the casinos, it would have made these environments less attractive for the white folks, and that could have cut into the casinos’ profits. Apparently, nothing soothes moral cowardice as well as the potential to make money.
In today’s casino industry, this moral cowardice is reflected by those in power subjecting the guests, employees, and regulators to a known and unequivocal health hazard — smoking — that they believe will result in increased profits. And they do this with distortions, avoidance, and denial. Once again, nothing soothes moral cowardice like the notion that there is profit in it.
While some people still believe the world is flat, the science is pretty unequivocal that this is untrue. Yet we find that the U.S. casino industry apparently wants to believe that when it comes to smoking in casinos, they can be flat-Earthers who avoid or ignore the material amount of science that explains the health risks of cigarette smoke in casinos.
The evidence is clear, yet 716a2h
Basically, the science surrounding secondhand smoke (SHS), in study after study, year after year, demonstrates that the levels of SHS found in casinos — even in those “non-smoking” areas of a casino that allow smoking as shown in the image above — contribute to heart disease and cancer in people who do not smoke. It also results in reduced birth weight for pregnant women and exacerbates asthma, allergies, and other respiratory issues.
The list of notable entities that believe secondhand smoke is a health bummer includes the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic, the National Institutes of Health, the American Cancer Society, and on and on.
The only people who couldn’t care less that guests, employees, and regulators are subject to unhealthy working conditions appear to be casino lobbyists, politicians, and industry leadership. What is interesting about this is that these three groups all work within smoke-free environments.
In 2020, air samples were taken from eight Las Vegas casinos. One of the casinos was smoke-free and the others offered smoking, often within designated non-smoking areas. The research used an aerosol monitor worn on the body that is typically used to measure SHS, and multiple samples were taken at the eight properties. Samples were taken in both the smoking and non-smoking areas of the seven casinos that allowed smoking.
The results were that the quality of the air in the non-smoking casino was materially better than the samples taken in both the smoking and non-smoking areas of the casinos that allowed smoking. The SHS data from the non-smoking areas of smoking casinos were 72% higher than from the non-smoking casino. They were 540% higher in the smoking areas compared to the non-smoking casino. Most importantly, the air in both the smoking and non-smoking areas of the casinos that allowed smoking presents a health risk to humans.
There is a potential perception that the non-smoking area of a casino that allows smoking elsewhere is a smoke-free area and therefore does not present a health risk. The scientific literature suggests this is not true. If the operators and regulators felt that they had a duty to warn about this, it would be noted within the casino — but it is not. They either do not understand the science or are comfortable allowing the individual in a non-smoking area to believe that he or she is in an area that does not threaten their health.
This is another suggestion that the industry captures many regulatory agencies that do not even bother to notify guests, employees, and regulators that they are in an unhealthy area. It is unusual in most cases that a government regulator will not bother to provide or order a health warning to consumers and employees, but some of our casino regulators apparently do not believe that their job involves warning people of casino health risks. And the operators and lobbyists are probably not upset that many people assume a non-smoking area is safe. As they say in poker, never wise up a dummy.
Compounding a problem b2f1z
It gets worse. problem gambling and smoking. A comorbidity is a medical condition that exists when a person has two medical issues in concert. Heart disease and high blood pressure are two conditions that have a high level of comorbidity. People with heart disease have a materially higher incidence of high blood pressure.
When researchers explore the comorbidity between problem gambling and tobacco dependence, they find that the comorbid population is generally greater than 50%. Moreover, of those problem gamblers who smoke, it has been found that the severity of the gambling disorder is greater for the smoking group. In other words, what science tells us is that if you find a problem gambler, you will always want to take an even-money bet that this individual smokes. Moreover, if he or she does smoke, it is likely that the depth of their problem gambling issue is on the severe side.
This is why the operators and lobbyists want to fight so hard to keep smoking in casinos. Sure, it damages the health of customers and employees, but it is one of the best marketing tools available to access the problem gambler. And problem gamblers gamble a lot. And the industry is distorting the reality of science to suggest that non-smoking areas are smoke-free and that their high-powered ventilation systems solve the problem.
All of this is Earth-is-flat stuff. This is why the American Gaming Association will not allow any discussions of smoking at its G2E conference, for the science is pretty unequivocal. They certainly do not want this as a topic of their educational agenda. And the operators will fight tooth and nail to ensure that their ability to cater to the problem gambler will not be impaired — even while the industry touts observance of Problem Gambling Month.
[Update: In an apparent departure from longstanding tradition, G2E will include a discussion on smoking at this year’s conference, according to the latest agenda. The discussion is expected to cover the state of smoking in casinos, including voices from advocates for smokefree casinos.]
Imagine if a casino company opted to secure its water from a provider who could save them money by supplying a new source of water to the casino. Also, imagine that the water contained some elements that could cause cancer, heart disease, and other health challenges to those who consumed it. To keep this real, let’s also suggest that the casino executives had a separate source they byed as an option for their water, free of any health dangers.
Would everyone be cool with this casino company’s behavior in pursuit of greater returns for the shareholders by reducing expenses and increasing profits? Sure, people would die earlier, suffer more illness, and not feel as well — but the casino and people in the pure water offices would make more money.
The cost of the status quo 75z2h
It would be great if one of our universities that studies gambling would develop a model to show the number of early deaths and diseases that result from the casino industry’s decision to put out the welcome mat for problem gamblers by offering smoking in casinos. It would be nice if the executives, lobbyists, and others could understand the calculus of the death and harm that results from their of smoking, and then see what decisions they make based on what they find to be acceptable death and disease rates, vis a vis profits.
It is often the case that casinos throw about the term “best practices.” It would be interesting to have a casino company, its lobbyists, or its regulators explain how creating an unsafe environment for guests and workers is a best practice. But again, casinos do not allow smoking because it is a best practice — they allow smoking for it accesses the problem gambler in an incredibly efficient way.
In the 1960s, the casino industry on the Las Vegas Strip shamed itself by practicing the most blatant form of racial discrimination — telling a whole group of people they were not good enough to enter a building. And they did this because they believed it enhanced profits. When we look back at that today, we wonder how people could be so insensitive and cruel.
Some 60 years later, the quest for profits is still so strong that the industry hides from the reality that it is damaging peoples’ health by seeking to provide a welcoming environment for those people suffering from gambling disorders — and this reality damages people’s lives. In the future, people will look back at today’s industry leaders and wonder how they could have been so insensitive and cruel.
