Question of the Day - 30 April 2020

Angel of The Winds had a separate non-smoking section.Now,the entire casino is non-smoking.

I am not a smoker, but two of our non-Las Vegas Casinos that we play at a lot lost a ton of players and money when they were forced to go non-smoking by their governments. As I recall the stat's, Caesar's Windsor revenue went down almost 50% over the two years following their change and more recently Harrah's New Orleans was reduced by 20 or 30%.  Windsor lost much more because there are smoking casino's only a few minutes away in downtown Detroit. Given the large reduction there will be over the next 12 months of people traveling to Vegas, I doubt owners will want to take a double hit. On the other hand, the Casino owners have over the past 10-15 years have moved most their revenue from gambling over to super high priced restaurants, shows, shops, etc. and made gambling more costly by reducing payouts of both table and slots so much, that maybe they don't care about loosing us gamblers anymore?

Just ask Mississippi. The Palace (not to be confused with Imperial Palace or IP as it's now known) went smoke free years ago and is always full. A second place went half smoke free when they reopened their adjoining property across the highway from their main location. The one on the bech side is smoke free and the one on land side is smoking. They are connected by an air conditioned walkway over the road.

have gone either half or full smoke free without loss of revenue.  However there are other opinions as stated in the QOD about casinos going belly up after gong smoke free.  Me, I say let them huff and puff their brains out for they won't be around much longer.  Smokers are just drug addicts committing suicide and if the smoke won't kill them covid-19 will if not this year then next year. I have absolutely no sympathy for weak people who resort to poisoning their bodies with drugs and even less sympathy for those whose drug habit harms others.  I say let them smoke and die off, they are nothing but a plague to society.

Silver City didn't go out of business because it went non-smoking.
I remember playing $ BJ there up until the end of it's existence, and the smoke would make your eyes water.
It bothered me some fierce, but I loved the place for some strange reason.
It may have tried no smoke before I started going to Vegas, though.

It’s hard to drink thru a mask, too. 

I'm sorry that the burdens to building management of cigarette smoking i.e. walls, draperies, carpets, bedding, etc. isn't taken seriously enough to make this (admittedly huge) change at this singular opportunity.

Harrah's Laughlin has a fairly large non-smoking "casino", not just a small corner of machines with a sign.  It is a pretty good haven from the smoke, especially at night, though still not comparable in number and variety of machines and tables in the smoking casino.  

For a no-smoking rule to have a chance of working in Las Vegas it has to be enforced totally, every casino has to comply. Everyone predicted dire consequences for restaurants if they ever dared to go no-smoking but look at what's happened, they survived and many customers say it is much better. Let's face it, the number of smokers is declining, non-smokers are now in the majority. Vegas casinos cling to old traditions but things do change. Also, gambling is a much smaller part of the resort's overall revenue compared to past years. So if some smokers stayed away what would the casinos really lose? You already can't smoke in most restaurants and shows, that hasn't affected attendance to "O" or any of the restaurants in town. The reason non-smoking at casinos didn't last in the past was because there were other places smokers could go to. The requirement to wear a face mask in every casino would be a good way to test the theory of what a no-smoking rule would do. Would be interesting.

Fewer than 20% of Americans smoke today. There is no reason to cater to their habit over the health and safety of the other 80%. Smoking should have been banned inside casinos long ago and if this is what it takes to finally make that happen, then I absolutely welcome it.

The number of people allowed into the casino is going to have to be lowered. Banning smoking will accomplish that goal.

Smoke-free casinos would be wonderful and I know that many of my friends and I who are non-smokers refuse to go into any casino that is either not ventilated thoroughly to the point that the smoke is not noticeable or completely smoke free. Sadly smokers are prime candidates for dying of complications from Covid-19 because of their damaged lungs.

One of the casinos near me, Hollywood Casino Toledo, is non-smoking.  They have 2 patios for smokers.  I love going there because of this and it is quite busy.  Not coming home smelling like smoke is fabulous.  Whether this would work in Vegas, though, is very questionable, but I would love to see it happen.

If the state mandates non-smoking then its a level playing field. Here in Canada we have been NS since they were legalized, and the casinos are not allowed to entice players to play with free drinks, comped meals, etc. You can buy drinks, and they can run promotions like come to the casino, and enter in for a free draw etc but can't tie it to play. They get around this a bit by giving a $5 coupon towards the restaurant if you get a blackjack and its Tuesday but nothing like a point system or pay for play is allowed. 

I am just very surprised that no casino worker past or present has launched a class action suit for forcing workers to work in a smokey environment. It might even be something they could go after the state for based on the number of casinos in Nevada. I am sure an argument could be made that if you refused to work in a smokey casino your employment opportunity is limited.

These are all very good comments. Unfortunately, casino owners aren't THAT smart and have NO compassion for their guests, OR their employees. Aren't the workers unionized? What are they doing? NOW is the time to act. Casinos with non-smoking rooms should switch them to smoking and give the rest of the casino to the majority (NON-smokers).I applaud the SMART owners that think of the people's health first.

A couple people here have commented about not being able to smoke through a mask. I think an earlier QOD addressed that patron masks would continue to be prohibited. 

Unless your in a different room with negative pressure, No-smoking sections of a casino is like a no-peeing section of a pool. It eventually circulates. 

Dealers will be fortunate if they don't end up with COPD from years of exposure to cig smoke from across the table.  I was told by a dealer who smokes that it is a different kind of discomfort, having to breathe smoke that smoke.

So unfortunate that casino magnates do not see this golden opportunity to improve the health of their employees and their non-smoking customers.  

Good idea to make smoking the small section of casinos.  Non-smoking hasn't kept anyone away from the airport, or on flights for that matter.

Also from Seattle and my entire family (our kids are grown)  is very happy with the decision made by Angel of the Winds Casino.  Would LOVE Las Vegas to as well and truly believe it would work. And thanks LVA, the email I look forward to daily!

I've read that there are studies that show that smokers are less likely to contract the virus than non-smokers, although they don't seem to know why.  So even if the casinos wanted to make the case for non-smoking post COVID, the science seems to be against them

I am a non-smoker and frequent the non-smoking areas of the casino whenever I can.  As unpleasant and unhealthy as smoke is it doesn't have a lot to do with COVID. I was shocked when I read this study. Based on an Italian study, the comorbidities that were present in many of the serious or deadly individuals were in this order: ischemic heart disease, atrial fibrillation, stroke, hypertension, diabetes, dementia,COPD, active cancer in the past 5 years, chronic liver disease, chronic renal failure. Of course, a combo of any of these is even worse.  Then as we all know increasing age.  

A Pentagon study showed if you get the annual Flu vaccine you have a 36% increased risk of getting it!  I hope I got that statistic right.  I know the Flu vaccine increases your risk of get any respiratory illness.  I don't take the FLU vaccine!!!  

So smoking was listed but was much further down on the list. Where do we fit in these comorbidities??? 

I think that nonsmoking casinos would be not only viable but immensely popular. The smoking population is dwindling. Many people, myself included, would visit casinos more often if they didn't have to breathe pigarette smoke. A casino is an unhealthier place than a coal mine, and that will be weighing on people's minds when they reopen.

Vegas has always been a) unhealthy b) associated with a creed of self-indulgence and irresponsibility c) anachronistic. Maybe some of that will change now. But I doubt it.

Smoking is a known cause for most of the conditions you listed. Actually, I think for all of them except dementia.

Jeff,  I would say simple carbs and sugar cause most of those conditions except COPD!  

The commenter who wrote that fewer than 20% of Americans smoke today was correct, but according to the latest data for 2017, only 14% smoke which was down from 15.5% in 2016, so this year it will be (or will be very soon) only 10%.

The main argument -- the one that held-up after lawsuits by smoking advocates --  for banning smoking in restaurants was that it constituted a health hazard for restaurant workers. Are the dealers and CWs and others who work in the casinos unionized as the housekeepers etc. are by the activist and powerful Culinary Union? If so, I wonder why they haven't pushed to ban smoking from the workplace to protect the health of its members (and keep down the cost of health plans).

I remember when Silver City became smoke-free. It received wide publicity and was touted as a sort of pilot program which if successful would have expanded to other Strip casinos. It didn't succeed and reverted to smoking allowed after only a few months, iirc.

Jay, I hear ya about the smoke will circulate but the only time it effects myself and wife is when someone is right next to us, we usually will get up from a table if there are smokers but we never say anything, I wonder if the casino loses revenue for that reason?

Bantam 32, sorry but you are misinformed about the flu vaccine.  Talk to your doctor about it.  It is almost never 100% perfect as far as the figuring of the specific flu virus that will hit the US in any year and the recipe needed to combat it, but it is the best we have.  One year there were supposed difficulties, I think I heard the H1N1 year, but we take the shot every year and haven't had complications ever.  If you reject the vaccine you put the rest of us at risk as well as your own life.  Talk with (or listen to/read) true experts on the subject, not just anti-vaxers which I would guess you have gotten your viewpoint from.

Candy, respectfully I am very well informed about the flu vaccine, if that is what you want to call it.  Yes, you are right, they never get the right strain.  So, why would I or anyone inject themselves with foreign toxic substances if they can't even get that right?  I have interviewed numerous patients in the Emergency Dept and many that are being seen with the flu have had the flu shot.  It doesn't work!  Many others I have asked re: their flu experiences have had the flu shot and they still get the flu.  

I have talked to my doctor and they do not get the flu shot either.  

Just because you don't have any problems at this time doesn't mean there are not consequences from getting this annual injection.  I know personally of 3 people in the last 10 years that have had guillain-barre syndrome 2 completely recovered (one of those had to have rehab) the other will never have a normal life or work again. He was a family man. 2 of those described above worked in our small hospital. 

"I have interviewed numerous patients in the Emergency Dept and many that are being seen with the flu have had the flu shot.  It doesn't work!"

"So, why would I or anyone inject themselves with foreign toxic substances if they can't even get that  [the flu vaccine] right?"

----------

The flu shot is known to lessen the occurrence and severity of flu, not prevent it entirely, and its effectiveness varies from year to year. Its partial
effectiveness, nevertheless, has value.

Your experience in the ER proves nothing.

Your evidence is all anecdotal, and therefore worthless. It's even worse than anecdotal,. It's terminally flawed as your conclusions rely on a small sample of ER patients composed entirely of flu shot failures. Those who benefited from the vaccine did not go to the ER, and are therefore not included in your study. They would need to be included for your analysis to have any value.