Tuesday, Dec. 5, 2006 | 11:56 a.m.
RENO, Nev. - A new study challenges casino industry claims about the number of gamblers who smoke, and suggests the economic impact of smoking bans across the country may not be as great as thought.
Chris Pritsos, chairman of the University of Nevada, Reno's nutrition department, said his study funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found the number of Nevada gamblers who smoke is similar to the rate for the overall population - about 20.9 percent.
The study found the number of gamblers who smoked was 21.5 percent in Las Vegas, 22.6 percent in Reno, 17 percent at Lake Tahoe and 36.5 percent in rural counties.
The study undercuts industry claims that smoking bans would hurt casinos because as many as 70 percent of gamblers were thought to be smokers, Pritsos said.
"I think it dispels the myth out there that gamblers and smoking go hand and hand," he said. "I think the whole economic argument against smoking bans is going out the window as a result."
But Judy Patterson, senior vice president and executive director of the American Gaming Association based in Washington, D.C., questioned Pritsos' conclusions.
She noted casinos in places where smoking has been banned have suffered major revenue losses.
Patterson cited as an example the Canadian province of Ontario, where casinos have suffered a revenue drop of 10 percent to 20 percent since smoking was banned in public places in May.
"This is a relatively recent change, but clearly it's not something you can ignore," she said. "Like any business, if you lose 20 percent of the customer base, that's a big number."
The casino industry generally has opposed anti-smoking measures and instead favors improving air filtering technology.
Regina Carlson, executive director of the New Jersey Group Against Smoking Pollution, acknowledged some casinos could suffer short-term losses, but said they would rebound because smokers have shown they adjust to no-smoking rules.
Visitation at Ontario casinos also was hurt by high gas prices, a strong Canadian dollar and tougher border security, she noted.
"It behooves them (casinos) to do active marketing and to embrace this and recognize the realities," she said. "It's not a matter of if, but when smoking will be banned in casinos."
Carlson said the new study was the first scientific evidence to challenge the industry's contention that smoking bans hurt casinos because a disproportionate number of gamblers smoke.
"Why aren't they (casinos) concerned that 80 percent of gamblers aren't smokers?" she asked. "I'd be more worried about offending the 80 percent of gamblers who aren't smokers rather than the 20 percent who are."
In New Jersey, GASP is fighting to extend a statewide ban on smoking in indoor, public places to Atlantic City casinos.
In Nevada, voters in November passed Question 5, which will prohibit smoking in restaurants, most bars and in the gambling areas of grocery and convenience stores starting on Friday. A group of business owners filed a lawsuit Tuesday in an attempt to block the ban. The new law does not prohibit smoking in gambling areas of casinos.
Pritsos said Nevada Resort Association lobbyists have testified at legislative hearings that up to 70 percent of gamblers smoke.
Bill Bible, executive director of the association, was not immediately available for comment.
Pritsos said his study's findings make it easier for casinos to voluntarily impose smoking bans, as some Nevada casinos have done in poker rooms.
"By banning smoking, it will help (casinos) attract new customers who in the past would not have come because of the health implications of breathing smoke," he said.
The study involved counting more than 17,000 gamblers from August to October.
In May, Pritsos released a study that concluded there's a direct link between exposure to secondhand smoke in casinos and damage to employees' DNA, increasing the risk of heart disease and cancer.
--
archive
