Simon Chapman’s praise for airport smoking rooms comes with a troubling qualification. He values them as visible displays of how miserable smoking looks, reassuring passing adults and discouraging children. That deserves scrutiny. People managing nicotine dependence while travelling deserve consideration as people, rather than being valued for the cautionary spectacle they supposedly provide. Chapman is entitled to describe his impressions. But watching passengers through glass does not establish their emotional state, explain their circumstances or measure the effect on anyone walking past. His confidence that children would find the scene repellent remains an assumption. He presents no research demonstrating that viewing airport smoking rooms prevents smoking. The research he does cite answers a different question. The Australian study followed 1,348 adult smokers over approximately one week. It found associations between perceived social norms, embarrassment and quitting-related behaviours, including quit attempts. Those findings deserve acknowledgement. But an observational association cannot establish that deliberately increasing embarrassment causes successful quitting. Nor did this study demonstrate that airport smoking rooms produce sustained abstinence. Making an attempt and remaining smoke-free are different outcomes. Likewise, the finding that around 90% of smokers regretted starting came from a four-country survey using data collected in 2002. It establishes widespread regret; it does not establish that displaying people’s dependence to passing strangers helps them overcome it. Indeed, that finding raises a question Chapman leaves unanswered: if regret is already so widespread, what exactly is missing—more embarrassment, or more effective help? His article devotes considerable attention to how smokers appear to observers and remarkably little to what would help those smokers stop inhaling smoke. That omission matters when cessation research offers something more concrete than impressions through airport glass. Cochrane finds high-certainty evidence that nicotine e-cigarettes improve smoking quit rates compared with nicotine replacement therapy. Vaping carries risks, and longer-term safety requires further research, but its effectiveness in helping adults stop smoking deserves serious attention. An airport could offer clear information about managing nicotine withdrawal during travel, access to appropriate cessation support and practical help for passengers who want it. Those are constructive responses to dependence. Protecting other passengers and workers from smoke is a legitimate objective. Whether an indoor smoking room adequately achieves that requires evidence about exposure and ventilation. Whether it helps people quit requires evidence about quitting. Neither question is answered by deciding that its occupants look sufficiently miserable. Chapman deserves credit for rejecting colleagues’ blanket opposition to smoking rooms. But his rationale turns an accommodation for people into an opportunity to make an example of them. Public health should measure its success by how many people escape smoking, rather than how effectively the people still smoking remind everyone else to feel grateful. simonchapman6.com/2026/10/26…