Bold, to Say the Least

At this moment, I have scheduled seven residency interviews. I'm hoping for another five in order to feel as though I've given this the ol' college try. Ideally, I'd like to see offers from Austin, Albuquerque, Phoenix, Savannah and either Portland or any of the three in California.

The process of getting an interview has gone as follows:

1. Submit master application
2. Get email from residency site saying, "Schedule an interview on one of the following days."
3. Email said site to schedule.
4. Show up on said day.

The one exception to this process has been a site in MI, who emailed to say that they wanted to interview me, but no interview could be scheduled until I returned a "Nicotine-Free Statement."

They provided an affadavit-like form for me to sign if I agree that

A) I do not currently smoke or use any other nicotine containing products including gum, patch, e-cigarette or losenge  (this surprises me)
B) I will submit to nicotine testing as a contingency of my employment
C) I will never smoke during the duration of my employment and
D) if my testing should ever indicate presence of nicotine or its byproducts, my record will show a "significant breach of professionalism" and will be reflected to any institution to which I apply for licensing, certification or fellowship.

Of course I signed it, but it was not lost on me that that's a bold statement!

In recent years we have really been hitting smokers from all sides. First we said you can't smoke in the workplace (WIN). Then we said no smoking in bars/restaurants (WIN). Then we said no smoking 25-75 feet from the entrance to a building (WIN). Now we're saying no smoking, or else no job (Wow!). It's becoming a ridiculous hassle to be a smoker these days. And that's OK. We have to win that war somehow, because there is not a single cell in the body that is free from the deleterious effects of smoking.

From a physician standpoint, I think it's great. I hate taking care of emphysema and end stage COPD--I hate watching them suffocate to death (which ultimately always means I have to take care of heart failure, which I also super hate to do). I hate having to discuss treatment for lung cancer and watch someone's face as it dawns on them "I brought this on myself." I hate discussing treatment for lung cancer that was caused by a spouse's second hand smoke in the home.

But is it right to eliminate the possibility of employment because of this habit? I don't think so. Of course it all comes down to money--the insurance premiums are higher for smokers than non. And private businesses reserve the right to run their companies as they see fit so they can stay in the black. But if they're going to start denying employment based on smoking, and I foresee this becoming the norm, how far off is obesity-related unemployment? (Not far, I think)