Because as we know, children spend a lot of time in pubs

Some totally bizarre statistics rehashed by the BBC:

There was a sharp fall in the number of children admitted to hospital with severe asthma after smoke-free legislation was introduced in England, say researchers. A study showed a 12% drop in the first year after the law to stop smoking in enclosed public places came into force...

The reliability of this estimate is somewhat cast into doubt by this bit:

Presenting their findings in the journal Paediatrics, they said the number of children admitted to hospital with severe asthma attacks was rising by more than 2% a year before the restrictions were introduced in July 2007.

Taking that into account, they calculated the fall in admissions in the next 12 months was 12%, and a further 3% in each of the following two years. They say over the three-year period, this was equivalent of about 6,800 admissions.

The fall was seen among boys and girls of all ages, across wealthy and deprived neighbourhoods, in cities and in rural areas.

So what they appear to be doing is comparing current admissions with an imaginary rising trendline, rather than current admissions with pre-2007 admissions. Velvet Glove Iron Fist is the expert debunking all these statistical and epidemiological sleights of hand, so hopefully he'll have a crack.

But what strikes me is that the whole thing overlooks the important fact that by the time of the smoking ban in 2007, nearly ever public building except pubs and restaurants already had a smoking ban in place, and you hardly see children in pubs. Targetted children's restaurants like McDonald's or Pizza Hut banned smoking donkey's years ago anyway.

So the actual, official 2007 smoking ban will have made bugger all difference to the amount of "second hand smoke" to which children were "exposed".