"The New York City Smoke-Free Air Act is of little or no consequence to the economic vitality of the hospitality industry in the Big Apple,"said John Seffrin, PhD, chief executive officer of the American Cancer Society. "Similarly, the various laws against smoking in public places in Massachusetts have not had any demonstrable effect on the restaurant industry in that state."

Mayor Rudolph Giuliani signed the Smoke-Free Air Act into law four years ago. The law banned smoking in nearly all public places, including restaurants with more than 35 indoor dining seats.

The researchers looked at a variety of indicators:

• Taxable Sales Receipts-Real taxable sales from eating and drinking establishments and hotels in NYC increased compared to levels two years before the smoke-free law took effect, therefore it has not had a significant effect on the city's restaurant or hotel industries.
• Compliance with Smoke-Free Air Act-Approximately 90 percent of restaurant owners and managers reported their indoor dining area to be smoke-free, thus complying with the law. Most owners and managers reported it has been easy to comply with the law.
• Employment Before and After the Act-The NYC Smoke-Free Air Act did not result in job losses for the city's restaurant industry. In fact, researchers found the number of new positions grew between April 1993 and April 1997, more than 19,000 new jobs in restaurants were added.
• Reports of Economic Impact of Act-There is no statistical evidence suggesting the smoke-free law has had a detrimental effect on the industry. Statistical analyses indicate the law is not associated with reported revenue decreases when controlling for other factors.
• Consumer Response to the Act-The overwhelming majority of consumers reported they were largely unaffected by the law or dined out more frequently since the law took effect. Two-thirds of the respondents would like to see the law expanded to include those restaurants with fewer than 35 seats.
• Who Avoids Smoky Bars and Why-Based on research in Massachusetts, 46 percent of non-smokers reported having refrained from going somewhere in order to avoid second-hand tobacco smoke. The main reasons for avoiding establishments that allow smoking was aversion to lingering smell in clothing and hair (34.8 percent); and concerns about health issues (31.9 percent) such as pregnancy or allergies.