We must ban all smoking now!

That is the unambiguous, inescapable conclusion of the U.S. surgeon general’s report “The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke,” released today.

You can find that report — and a bunch of other information related to it — on the surgeon general’s website.

But, in case you’re not a total dork like us at Various Things & Stuff and don’t want to read the whole thing, let us regale you with a few of the things we noticed from reading the report’s executive summary, along with some supporting information. (If you don’t care about that, skip down to the part with the headline ” So what does it mean for us, here in Nevada?”)

• Smoking is bad, mmmmkay?

Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona, M.D. set the tone for the report with his opening remarks to reporters: “I am grateful to be here today and be able to say unequivocally that the debate is over. The science is clear. Secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance, but a serious health hazard that causes premature death and disease in children and nonsmoking adults.”

And with an intro like that, you know what’s coming: Doom and gloom for the cancer sticks and the toxic deadly gas that they emit!

– “There is NO risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure, with even brief exposure adversely affecting the cardiovascular and respiratory system,” Carmona said. (Those are his capitals, not ours, by the way.)

– “An important conclusion of this report is that smoke-free environments are the ONLY approach that effectively protects nonsmokers from the effects of secondhand smoke,” he added. (Again, his caps.) “Even sophisticated ventilation approaches cannot completely remove secondhand smoke from an indoor space. Because there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure, anything less cannot ensure that nonsmokers are fully protected from the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke.”

But wait, there’s more. If you act now, you’ll also get this:

– Secondhand smoke can cause lung cancer, even in nonsmoking adults. Effects are immediate.

– Secondhand smoke causes heart disease.

– Secondhand smoke causes respiratory infections, ear problems and increase symptoms of asthma.

– And, in a new finding, secondhand smoke is a cause of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).

Now, we know people who’ve smoked for a long time (and they get both first and secondhand smoke!) who are still alive, hale and hearty. But that’s anecdotal evidence, not proof that the surgeon general is full of it. We’re just saying.

• Tobacco companies are bad, too, mmmmkay?

“Through a variety of organized tactics, the industry has attempted to undermine the credibility of the scientific evidence on secondhand smoke,” the report says. “The industry has funded or carried out research that has been judged to be biased, supported scientists to generate letters to editors that criticized research publications, attempted to undermine the findings of key studies, assisted in establishing a scientific society with a journal, and attempted to sustain controversy even as the scientific community reached consensus.”

Those bastards. They started a journal? Those unspeakable bastards. What’s it’s title? The Journal of Lies?

• As a result of the foregoing, the government is trying for a total ban on indoor smoking, including homes where there are children.

Consider a few quotes from the report. “Despite the great progress that has been made, involuntary exposure to secondhand smoke remains a serious public health hazard that can be prevented by making homes, workplaces, and public places completely smoke free.” — Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael O. Leavitt, in a message included with the report.

“Research reviewed in this report indicates that smoke-free policies are the most economic and effective approach to providing protection from secondhand smoke. … Research indicates that the progressive restriction of smoking in the United States to protect nonsmokers has had the additional health impact of reducing active smoking.” — from the forward to the report.

See? Not only will smoking bans protect nonsmokers, they’ll also help smokers, since they’ll be left with virtually no place to smoke. (The only exception seems to be outside; the report only deals with enclosed spaces like offices, restaurants, bars, homes and cars. So you can still puff away on the golf course, until they get around to banning that, too.)

“Restrictions on smoking can control exposures effectively, but technical approaches involving air cleaning or a greater exchange of indoor with outdoor air cannot. Consequently, nonsmokers need protection through the restriction of smoking in public places and workplaces and by a voluntary adherence to policies at home, particularly to eliminate exposures to children.” — from the preface.

And there you go. Improved ventilation, air scrubbers, air exchangers, etc. are useless. Only a total ban will do. And we wonder how long the home-based restrictions will remain “voluntary”? If smoking is truly as deadly and dangerous as the report says, isn’t failing to act to save “the children” downright irresponsible?

• They want to go global.

“The findings and recommendations of this report can be extended to other countries and are supportive of international efforts to address the health effects of smoking and secondhand smoke exposure.”

That’s right, baby. Today, the U.S. Tomorrow, a smoke-free world! Let’s go all Louis Armstrong on you: “And I think to myself/ what a wonderful world/ or at least it would be/ if I had a goddamn cigarette!”

OK, we may have changed the lyrics around a bit.

• So what does it mean for us, here in Nevada?

Good question. A couple of observations:

First, there’s not much chance of a nationwide indoor smoking ban, at least not as long as Republicans control Congress. According to the Center for Responsive Politics’ website, the tobacco industry has given $56.3 million in political contributions since 1990. Of that, 75 percent has gone to Republicans, and just 25 percent to Democrats.

Oh, and just for some local flavor, did you know that U.S. Sen. John Ensign was the No. 6 recipient of tobacco dollars in this election cycle, with $28,500? (U.S. Sen. George Allen was No. 1, at $89,250.) Still, the industry ranks as only the 43rd biggest giver in the last 16 years.

Second, this report could only have come at a better time for the proponents of a near-total ban on smoking in Nevada if it had been released a couple days before early voting starts in November. The scientific contentions in the report — especially the one about there being no safe exposure to secondhand smoke and its effects on the children — are devastating to those who are arguing for a more moderate approach. (That, by the way, includes us at Various Things & Stuff. Although we enjoy a fine cigar on occasion, we don’t have any affiliation with or affinity for Big Tobacco.)

Whether you agree with the policy conclusions, dispute the scientific evidence or not, you will most definitely see this material again. Here’s how: The smoke banners in the Nevada Tobacco Prevention Coalition will tell you it’s not a matter of “choice,” as the moderates say, but a matter of public health. Secondhand smoke kills people, even with brief exposure, so why should it be allowed at all?

The only hope the moderates have is to argue that a total ban on tobacco in every enclosed public space (and in homes with kids) is going to hurt plenty of small business and is deleterious to basic property rights. (And you know when we at Various Things & Stuff are arguing for business that it’s a sign of the Apocalypse!)

We can also say the government can only really accomplish its goal by banning tobacco outright, which if you carry the arguments in this report to their logical conclusion (i.e. smoking is killing people, even those who chose not to smoke) seems to scream out for government intervention. And not just ban smoking in the future, but rip up tobacco crops, salt the fields, and travel to every city in the nation and rip the death sticks out of people’s pockets, purses and fingers!

But since Prohibition didn’t work and the drug war has totally failed to keep drugs out of America, adding cigarettes to the list of controlled substances will only lead to more problems. For people who just want to be left alone to smoke, in their home, in a bar, in their car, or in a restaurant, it’s a bad day.

We never thought we’d see a time in which a smoking ban was even a possibility, but we’re there. And you know, we should have known. After all, there’s no smoking on Star Trek, and that show totally is how the future’s going to be.