what are the dangers of secondhand smoking if you're pregnant?

------------- The Largest study on Second Hand Smoke ever done by Enstrom

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057

“No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.”

“Enstrom has defended the accuracy of his study against what he terms ‘illegitimate criticism by those who have attempted to suppress and discredit it.’". (Wikipedia)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC216493...

------ Court rules that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is NOT a Class A carcinogen

http://www.tobacco.org/Documents/980717osteen.html

“There is evidence in the record supporting the accusation that EPA ‘cherry picked’ its data” … “EPA's excluding nearly half of the available studies directly conflicts with EPA's purported purpose for analyzing the epidemiological studies and conflicts with EPA's Risk Assessment Guidelines” (p. 72)

-------- OSHA will NOT regulate something that’s NOT hazardous

http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_docum...

“Air contaminants, limits employee exposure to several of the main chemical components found in tobacco smoke. In normal situations, exposures would not exceed these permissible exposure limits (PELs), and, as a matter of prosecutorial discretion, OSHA will not apply the General Duty Clause to ETS.”

Study about health & Smoking Bans – The National Bureau of Economic Research

http://www.nber.org/papers/w14790

“Workplace bans are not associated with statistically significant short-term declines in mortality or hospital admissions for myocardial infarction or other diseases.”

http://www.cigarmony.com/downloads/smoking%201440....

“Conclusions: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS(environmental tobacco smoke) and lung cancer risk.”

Showtime television, "How the EPA, CDC, Lung Association, and etc." support their claims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGApkbcaZK4

Then the US Surgeon General went over all the studies to date in 2006 again and even though he went on public TV and announced "No safe level", the report itself showed exactly the opposite.

---The evidence is … not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke and an increased risk of stroke. (p. 13)

---The evidence is … not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between secondhand smoke exposure from parental smoking and the onset of childhood asthma.(p. 13)

---The evidence is inadequate to infer the presence or absence of a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke during infancy and childhood cancer.(p. 11)

*** Notice how the wording is "suggestive but NOT SUFFICIENT". "Suggestive" is completely a hypocritical word for "I'd like to think". Yet none of the studies can even make a "CASUAL" relationship which isn't even close to a SIGNIFICANT relationship!!!