They all deserve this award.....TC and Charities alike for the lies they deliberately promote......especially to "the children".
"In 2008, the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids' actions started with hypocrisy and ended with hypocrisy. There is no more deserving winner of the 2008 Anti-Smoking Hypocrisy Award."
You're probably right, doctor. I just hope you're not too jealous because they beat you out.
.
Did you decide that you, yourself would not be eligible for such a prestigious honor and mantlepiece trinket?
Maybe that's not fair, ...or accurate.
You would be more in the running for any one or more of the following awards;
The "Can't see the forest, for the trees" award.
The "Semantics champion of the year" award.
The "Negating Diversity at every chance" award
The "I hear what you're saying, but because you don't agree with me, I won't acknowledge a word of it" award.
The "What the hell does Liberty have to do with Smoking Bans?" award.
I'll nominate you for my own award;
The "Tobacco Control Medal of Valor"
For not so selflessly putting yourself in the line of fire of indisputable facts being flung directly at the marshmallow like substance of your Tobacco Control brainwashed grey-matter, and for routinely dodging the tough questions, deflecting stinging truths, and for unwavering steadfastness in ignoring all evidence that is clearly contrary to your established paternalistic moral code, no matter how overtly correct that evidence may be.
Your efforts to regulate the smoking propaganda business are commendable.
Sadly however, it's energy wasted if you still support the cause and disagree only on the content and severity of the propaganda employed.
Nevertheless, I salute you.
It can't be easy to ignore the truth for so long.
Mike forgot several other hypocrisies of CTFK, including:
- claiming a desire to reduce tobacco diseases and deaths, while lobbying for FDA legislation that protects cigarettes by banning new smokefree tobacco products from the market, misleads the public to believe that smokefree tobacco products are just as hazardous as cigarettes, and prohibits tobacco companies from truthfully informing smokers that smokefree tobacco products are less hazardous alternatives to cigtarettes,
- claiming a desire to stop tobacco marketing to teenagers, while lobbying for FDA legislation that specifically prohibits the FDA from banning the marketing of tobacco products to high school seniors,
- correctly claiming that all cigarettes are similarly hazardous, while lobbying for FDA legislation by claiming that it would require the removal of harmful constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke (which implies that safer cigarettes can be made).
- criticizing states for spending little MSA funds on tobacco prevention and cessation, while CTFK endorsed the MSA in 1998 and refused to support litigation by others to ensure that MSA funds would be spent on tobacco preventino/cessation programs.
Bill;
How long before you realize TC was never meant to reduce smoking? If they wanted to reduce smoking all they ever had to do was ban it.
It was always about locking in a taxation source while escaping any legal liability for any of the stakeholders.
You helped to pass the liability to those who choose to smoke. Reinvigorating the market is the real end game.
It was always about the money and you have been had, along with everyone else.
The 5th floor compared to the 8th floor is being escalated in press releases and chats globally.
Your out and the big money players are in.
Live with, it suck it up and move on to the rest of your life. One has to know when to cut their losses, so you don't throw too much good money or effort after bad.
You could always start a lobby and expose the Public health hypocrites.
There certainly is no lack of science to back up that proposal.
If your up to it.
Kevin is right Bill, it has always been about money. First because of a large baby boomer generation who would require more money for medicare, pensions, etc. Then there was Aids, a disease that scared everyone and they demanded answers and cures. This took money. Then we have golf courses, private jets, and whatever other benefit the Legislatures felt was owed them. We sent our jobs overseas, putting many Americans out of work and leaving them on welfare, a very expensive program. Next comes the illegal immigrants who needs health coverage. These people are very important to our economy as they are willing to do the work that you won't for low wages. Then comes the wars and soldiers who are injured and needs medical help. This all takes money, more than you can even dream of. The war on smokers is the biggest fraud ever perpetrated by our Governments and they used you to spread the fear, to garner support and to steal our money so to pay for all these programs. In reality, there is no more dangers in smoking a cigarette than there is in driving a car or a Prius. They know it and so do we. It is only you who has been brainwashed and it is people like you who the Governments used as pawns in their little game. Now all Governments, local, State and Federal is going broke and your house of cards are tumbling down. You might just want to rethink your New Years Resolutions.
The Hypocrisy award this year belongs to Public Health.
The whole gaggle of them.
The EPA comes clean finally.
More than 100 million Americans breathe sooty air, U.S. agency says
Seth Borenstein, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
22/12/2008 8:15:00 PM
WASHINGTON - More than 100 million people living in 46 metropolitan areas of the United States are breathing air that has become fouled with soot - and now those cities are being told to clean up their air.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency says it added 15 cities to the sooty air list, mostly in states not usually thought of as pollution-prone, such as Alaska, Utah, Idaho and Wisconsin.
That probably is because of the prevalence of wood stoves in western and northern regions, a top EPA official said.
But environmentalists say the EPA is doing only half its job on soot-laden areas, letting off the hook some southern cities with long-term soot problems, such as Houston, Texas.
The EPA notified elected officials in 211 counties in 25 states that their air violated newly tightened daily standards for fine particles of pollution from diesel-burning trucks, power plants, wood-burning stoves and other sources.
Those particles, often called soot, can cause breathing and heart problems.
These lists of what EPA calls "nonattainment areas" are important because regions that have air that is too sooty must develop plans by 2012 to show they plan to clean it, and then do so by 2014.
When old power plants and factories in these areas expand or do major refurbishing, they have to show EPA that it would not further pollute the air. It could mean also controls on vehicle emissions and regions having to take pollution into effect when they build new roads.
Fifty-four counties that didn't violate soot standards in 2004, the last time EPA put out a list, do now. They include areas around Fairbanks and Juneau, Alaska; Nogales, Arizona on the Mexican border; Logan and Pinehurst, Idaho; Davenport and Muscatine, Iowa; Klamath and Oakridge, Oregon; Provo and Salt Lake City, Utah; Seattle, Washington; and Green Bay, Madison and Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
The air is getting cleaner, but the daily soot standards were made nearly 50 per cent tougher in 2006, said Robert Meyers, the principal deputy assistant administrator for air and radiation at EPA.
Since 2006, EPA has had two sets of soot standards and this list looks only at one of them. There are daily air quality standards and long-term yearly standards. The Bush Administration tightened the daily standard, but not the long-term one, despite EPA's science advisers' recommendation to do so.
-
On the Net:
EPA on soot city designations:
http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignation...dards/
index.htm
http://healthandfitness.sympatic...c=abc&
date=True
Notice the health risks mentioned:
"The EPA notified elected officials in 211 counties in 25 states that their air violated newly tightened daily standards for fine particles of pollution from diesel-burning trucks, power plants, wood-burning stoves and other sources.
Those particles, often called soot, can cause breathing and heart problems."
The one big risk always left off the list? Diesel exhaust despite 50 years of pork barrel politics. Diesel exhaust is now finally classified as a class one carcinogen, meaning it causes cancers in particular:
LUNG CANCERS.
Much more potent and toxic than cigarette smoke ever was.
Funny no one knows how many die every year from exposures.
Focus requires adjustment and the band wagon needs to be prosecuted for willful neglect causing likely more preventable deaths than any other source in our environment.
And yes that would include primary cigarette smoke.
Bill Godshall wrote:
"- claiming a desire to stop tobacco marketing to teenagers, while lobbying for FDA legislation that specifically prohibits the FDA from banning the marketing of tobacco products to high school seniors..."
You're leaving something out, aren't you? Something like those high school seniors happen to be adults?
Bill blathers on without ever explaining the reasoning in his fantasies.
"- correctly claiming that all cigarettes are similarly hazardous, while lobbying for FDA legislation by claiming that it would require the removal of harmful constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke (which implies that safer cigarettes can be made)."
How can smokeless possibly be safer when it is impossible to make cigarettes safer?
Your trying to talk out of both sides of your face at the same time and it isn't pretty.
Pathetic is the word which immediately springs to mind. With the measured and identical toxins found in smokeless in thousands to hundreds of thousands of times higher quantities.
It would seem to make a lot more sense it is smokeless at the eightieth floor and smoking on the third.
From Put aside your principles all you need is love;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comme...ed-is-
love.html
My comment;
"The UN and in particular the World Health Organization is heavily invested in the Principled stakeholder profiteering by social marketing. HIA Health Interventions and disease management [treating people as the cause of all disease]as described and encouraged, are only a reinvention of what Mussolini correctly described as Industrial Socialism.
The grand paternalist crusades to battle the costs of an aging population, play out as violence against the uncooperative micro-managed individual as; fat pandemics, The second hand smoking bans and taxation, Sedentary lifestyles, Helmets on bicycles and drunk driving crusades demanding fines and tighter enforcement with guns and billy clubs.
We can see the same fear driven advertising campaigns which created billions in profiteering with the Y2K swindle being expanded to more perpetual ad infinity trusts, such as Global warming crusades and now the media sequestered global financial crisis. All of which, unbiased evaluation will show; have no basis beyond promoted fear.
We have indeed revisited 1930s Germany and again we have to learn the lesson of that day; You really do have nothing to fear but fear itself.
Dividing our communities by caste designation by race, physical condition or even the personal choices we make, only makes us all weaker. Racism was a part of a much larger problem left to solve itself over time. We can actually believe by electing a Black American president we are on the road to recovery from the damages wrought by Eugenics campaigns and best babies contests?
With Public health institutions world wide drawing new lines of division, have we really learned anything?
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images...82/
128291eo.pdf
http://www.robertfulford.com/PolPot.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Ant...in_Nazi_Germany
"
I know you can all describe people just like this guy.
Just how slippery is the slope?
http://www.independent.co.uk/new...ler-
605728.html
"Was he mad or just plain evil? What was going through the mind of Harold Shipman when he so ruthlessly played God with his patients?
Was he mad or just plain evil? What was going through the mind of Harold Shipman when he so ruthlessly played God with his patients?
Psychiatrists have expressed many opinions about the mental state of Britain's worst serial killer, but on one thing they are agreed: Shipman was a narcissistic control freak who enjoyed the power his profession gave him over life and death. His arrogance was ultimately his downfall when police used a psychological ploy to break his iron-like conceit during one of the taped interviews conducted after his arrest.
The senior policeman in charge of the case deliberately handed over the interview to two less experienced officers, one of whom was a young policewoman Shipman evidently held in contempt.
The tactic was meant to puncture his feeling of selfimportance, which he used to defend himself by answering questions in a pedantic manner to control the course of the interrogation. Throughout the interview, Shipman continued to stare at Marie Snitynksi with a condescending countenance. He thought he had an unassailable intellectual superiority over his interrogators until he was suddenly confronted with unequivocal evidence showing that he had forged computer records.
The interview ended abruptly with Shipman's solicitor asking for a private consultation. After the interviewers had left, Shipman broke down, falling to his knees, sobbing. This, though, was not the remorse of a guilty man but the bitter feelings of frustration from a supremely arrogant person who had been accustomed to being treated with unquestioning authority and respect by his patients.
Richard Badcock, the forensic psychiatrist who saw Shipman on behalf of the police, said that being a control freak in itself cannot be the explanation for his murderous nature.
"There are lots of control freaks out there and they don't all go around killing people. But you have to understand what's important to him, in essence, which is not just self-control but his perception of that control," Dr Badcock said."
Some College Professors enjoy tobacco and some bans can generate unfair-labor-practice complaints.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/
e...moking_ban.html
No good deed goes unpunished and that goes for Big Tobacco too.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/
w...d_research.html
Happy and healthful holidays to all and may you have a tax free New Year.
I know, but it would be nice.
Advocate for CASH
It's the smoke you can't smell that is the most dangerous.
From ES link:
“Chancellor John Cavanaugh has said state law left him no choice. He interprets the law to extend beyond the universities' indoor facilities and include all campus grounds, particularly because some classes are held outside.”
Gee, I wonder how many indoor “classes” have been held after 10pm on any Pa campus in the last 100 years, let alone classes held outdoors at this time.
John Cavanaugh strikes me as the type of person who would sit waiting for a stop sign to turn green.
And from Kevin's link.... Sounds just like TC!
"Gerard Bailes, a consultant psychologist at East Anglia Regional Forensic Science Services, said: 'Narcissism would probably be an important factor in his motivation. He considers himself important but everyone else is not. They can't see they have done anything wrong and the more you confront them with what they did, the more they blame you.'"
.
“Sounds just like TC!” Kayci |
Kayci, TC has many faces, but none of which will outlast narcissism.
So when do we get to the real answers?
Is there a known safe level of liquid smoke and how many will die for, Christmas ham?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-...iquid-
smoke.htm
Here is a Christmas present for Rose and others who have benefited from her research.
A well detailed description of the niacin Pellagra association.
There is a definite biologically and plausible proof, the banning of smoking in bars will lead to a huge and unacceptable risk elevation. A predictable increased incidence a long list of precursory diseases and symptoms of Pellagra particularly among the many people who suffer from alcoholism and Obesity.
http://emedicine.medscape.com/ar...985427-
overview
"Frequency
United States
In the early part of the 20th century, pellagra was a growing epidemic in the southeastern United States and caused public alarm. However, pellagra is no longer a concern. Although the current incidence of pellagra in the United States is unknown, it appears to be limited to sporadic cases. These occur among individuals with alcoholism, individuals who participate in "fad" diets, individuals with primary or secondary malabsorption states, and individuals with natural or iatrogenic compromise in the transformation of tryptophan to niacin."
More;
http://justmytruth.wordpress.com...niacin-origins/
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/
...3497700130.html
http://www.marthabarnette.com/
le...n_n.html#niacin
http://www.haloscan.com/comments...66480570853305/
http://www.oralchelation.com/ing...gred/
niacin.htm
"Niacin was first described by Hugo Weidel in 1873 in his studies of nicotine.[4] The original preparation remains useful: the oxidation of nicotine using nitric acid.[5] Niacin was extracted from livers by Conrad Elvehjem who later identified the active ingredient, then referred to as the "pellagra-preventing factor" and the "anti-blacktongue factor."[6] When the biological significance of nicotinic acid was realized, it was thought appropriate to choose a name to dissociate it from nicotine, in order to avoid the perception that vitamins or niacin-rich food contains nicotine. The resulting name 'niacin' was derived from nicotinic acid + vitamin.
Carpenter found in 1951 that niacin in corn is biologically unavailable and can only be released in very alkali lime water of pH 11.[7] This process is known as nixtamalization.[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niacin
"Niacin is referred to as Vitamin B3 because it was the third of the B vitamins to be discovered. It has historically been referred to as "vitamin PP."
http://www.etymonline.com/index....php?
term=niacin
http://www.etymonline.com/index....dex.php?l=n&
p=4
http://www.vitamin-basics.com/in...index.php?
id=49
"Niacin is specific in the treatment of glossitis, dermatitis and the mental symptoms seen in pellagra.
High doses of nicotinic acid (1.5-4 g/day) can reduce total and low-densitiy lipoprotein cholesterol and triacylglycerols and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease. There is a flush reaction to high doses of nicotinic acid, which is seen primarily with a rising blood level and may wear off once a plateau level has been reached.
Nicotinic acid has also been used in doses of 100 mg as a vasodilator in patients suffering from diseases causing vasoconstriction. "
http://www.naturalnews.com/002694.html
"As a nation we have managed to force a handful of minerals and vitamins into the food supply that prevent only the most grotesque and physically obvious disorders and diseases caused by nutritional deficiencies. And by the way, those are the only ones that really get addressed through the food supply.
If there is an obvious and immediate link between nutrition and a particular disease such as birth defects caused by a lack of folic acid, then of course this gets recognized and addressed very quickly. But other metabolic disorders such as cancer and diabetes are more complex and so the cause/effect relationship is not so easy to see from the point of view of scientists, the FDA, and even the public. So these don't get addressed.
And that, frankly, is why the public is still not being taught the correlation between nutrition and chronic diseases like cancer, diabetes, heart disease, osteoporosis and even mental disorders like clinical depression. "
One can only imagine the level of book burning and propaganda that had to have been created to almost eliminate the reality Niacin [NAD] was originally derived from tobacco and is well a known benefit of smoking.
Most people when informed, will deny it is even possible smoking could have any benefit despite the science.
Glanz has made a lot of traction from his endothelial dysfunction nonsense While not a single "medical expert" has risen to tell the whole truth.
ETS mortality estimates rose in just a few short years of theoretical EPI gossip columns, from 3000 in 320 million to a recent claim published in MedLine [The National Library of Medicine] of 130,000 from heart diseases alone.
That is evidence enough for anyone to see clearly; modern medicine is much more focused on egos and moral dictatorship, than informed consensual treatments or science.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
medlinepl...tory_72931.html
"Based on the assumption that passive smoke exposure boosts heart disease risk by 26 percent to 65 percent, for 1999-2004 Lightwood and his colleagues peg the number of heart disease deaths a year due to passive smoking at 21,800 to 75,100, and estimate that second-hand smoke causes 38,100 to 128,900 heart attacks."
BTW I wrote a letter asking if the Medline Plus "Trusted Health information" really meant anything;
Here was the reply; MedLine simply copies and pastes news releases from Reuters, who are primarily paid to distribute ad agency articles unrelated to factual news.
Trust the source? Or follow the money, BACK TO IT'S REAL SOURCE?
"Reply from the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM):
Our news items come from two news sources, and NLM staff add items to MedlinePlus based on content. NLM does not write the news stories; your editorial comments can be directed to the news service from which they originated. Here is the contact information for the news services:
Reuters:
http://www.reutershealth.com/
HealthDay:
http://www.healthday.com/aboutus...us/
aboutus1.htm
L. Bowes
Customer Service
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20894
custserv@nlm.nih.gov
1-888-346-3656 (within US)
301-594-5983 (international)"
cont...
Outstanding! A source of trusted health information disavowing responsibility for the content.
That garners a lot of trust in my mind. A trust that they are all full of crap.
Original link;
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
medlinepl...tory_72931.html
My letter;
I am writing in response to the article published;
Drop in second-hand smoke deaths predicted,
Reuters Health, Thursday, December 18, 2008.
The heading immediately above the article clearly states Medline Plus "Trusted Health information"
Does it fall to any of your editors intelligence, when promoting fear mongering, such as this article can be best described, that the readers trust is breached? Statistical gymnastics presentations in regard to health reliant information, has to carry at least a suggestion of biological plausibility or it looses all hope of legitimacy. This is not research this is another of many presentations I refer to as Lobooing as opposed to lobbying or the sales and exchange of fear for profit. The numbers presented have; the casual exposure of second hand smoke, exceeding the risk of smoking or pretty much any other dangerous toxin in our environment. Can you honestly state the numbers represent anything more than political promotion, with a preordained goal almost dripping from every sentence.
The sheer gaul of the conflicts and protections of toxin load industries, involved in these controversial studies does not bode well for the health of the public, as they do for public health as an organization.
A mother who would be frightened to push her baby carriage past a person smoking, would sit for hours in a bus or train station heavily burdened with diesel exhaust or dose her home with air fresheners and scented candle smoke confident her baby is safe. People who smoke are being encouraged to use smokeless products containing thousands to hundreds of thousands of times the volume of the very toxins said to make smoking and second hand smoke dangerous.
Have you all gone so insane you have lost all perspective of common sense and integrity.
Trust? Sorry your starting to sound more like a programed cult much more than professionals. It is not the public being duped by the myths of second hand smoke, nearly as much as those who should know better.
Regards;
No conflicts, just disgusted.
My final word to MedLine Plus "Trusted Health information";
Greetings and the best of the season to you and yours;
There was a Christmas message delivered this week created specifically, for your organization and other medical institutions and charities, dispensing hateful messages of caste designation.
Industrial processed fear and violence is being promoted against individuals by the news wire services. Individuals are being punished deliberately, for the sin of seeking a little comfort in a cigarette. Even if you would prefer to blame others for the content in your articles, cited on your pages as news we can "trust".
"Helping someone to quit" regardless if that help has been requested, in real terms is more accurately; a quelling of a guilty conscience, for acts of degradation, segregation and opportunistic taxation of addiction. Acts we all know as simply wrong.
Your scold and designation is included in the Christmas eulogy from the Archbishop of Canterbury.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comme...ed-is-
love.html
"Karl Barth was, by any standards, one of the most deeply principled intellectuals of the age, someone who was quite ready to pay the price of conscience in an insane and tyrannical state. It was probably only his Swiss citizenship that saved his life. So it's all the more surprising to read some of his words in a Christmas sermon preached in 1931, where he says that the real good news of Christmas is that we are given permission to be free from our principles. We need, he says, "to be able to live with principles, but we must also be able to live without them".
Why is this good news – and what has it got to do with Christmas, with this Christmas in particular and our current anxieties and hopes?
What Barth saw beginning to take its grip on Germany in 1931 was a system of "principle" that worked quite consistently once you accepted that quite a lot of people that you might have thought mattered as human beings actually didn't. "
Regards;
No conflicts yet still Disgusted
Thank you Kevin 
I was fascinated by the explanation of "red necks", I had no idea.
"In America, the term 'redneck' actually comes from a vitamin B deficiency that caused heightened susceptibility to sunburns. Interestingly, most Americans are, today, deficient in B vitamins as well, making them technically rednecks. It also explains why many people are so easily sunburned."
"The first stage of this condition is extreme redness and sensitivity of those exposed areas, and it was from this symptom that the term "redneck," describing the bright red necks of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century niacin-deficient fieldworkers, came into being"
https://www.healthy.net/scr/Artic...Id=2125&
xcntr=3
Sadly, the nicotine addiction theory is so heavily promoted and so widely believed, that I don't think that the public will ever get to see the nutritional science.
After all, you can't run an antismoking campaign on the basis of people using Vitamin B3 in a traditional manner, any normal person would say - so what?
Thanks, Kevin & Rose. We are obviously in the middle of an era involving fabricated public opinion about many, many things; drugs (legal and illegal), money, philosophies, sciences, health-risks.... It's easy to see that the medical/disease industries, including pHarma, government, etc., are all exploring the manipulation of mass opinion and actions.
I have seen an ad this morning for HPV vaccine, which the US Food and Drug Administration is recommending. As you know, the HPV so-called problem and the vaccine introduction was helped by a massive public relations campaign by the drug maker. At the present time [and for about the past 10-12 years] we have been observing the fabrication of public opinion and the suggestibility of people.
Medical "authority" is one aspect of
this. It will be relatively soon that people generally shall become more aware of their suggestibility. How the medical and public disease industries operate will then change. At present they ("innocently" or not) are influencing a type of mob-mentality based on fear, similar to the ones in 1930's Germany and in the U.S. with regard to the black race. These persons who claim to be authorities over other members of the human race produce the same kind of junk-science whether attempting to implicate Jews, Native Americans, Blacks, or Persons Who Buy Tobacco as the lowest from of species, and place blame other than on self.
Perceived tobacco dangers are simply part of this era of suggestibility. In this, smoking bans will actually be lifted in many places, just like alcohol prohibition ceased. Those in the medical profession and drug companies and other so-called authorities will come under much greater scrutiny regarding recommended vaccines, statistical studies, health recommendations, and public-opinion methods.
These changes are already being made by individuals, not organizations. The organizations, including the U.N & the WHO, shall adjust or cease to exist. The current financial situation and funding dilemmas will help.
Watch for it! Already many cities are voting against bans and seeing through the ban ideas to the fanatic beliefs at the source. Trust me, I'm a nurse
Happy New Year!
.
The normal people are learning more and more everyday, thanks to the care they get from their own Doctors. I have a never-smoker friend who is learning the hard way now too. During the past year, she just has not felt right and has been going to various Doctors. Each one will diagnosis something else and write her a different prescription. She has been taking 14 different drugs a day. Everytime she visits another Doctor, she has to convince them that she is a never smoker. During this past year, she has been told she is diabetic and she has a heart condition. The last round of medicine came in the form of coumaden treatments. Every week she would have to go to the blood bank and get more blood drawn and depending on the levels her medication would be adjusted. Last Sunday, she began to have some spotting which really concerned her, seeing she had gone through her change 13 years ago. She couldn't get in to see her Doctor and the nurse suggested she get in with her gyn. I googled this coumaden treatment and found where hemmoraging is a side effect and I told her to get to the emergency room if this persisted. On Tuesday, she began throwing blood up and was treated in emergency and sent home. On Wednesday evening, she passed out and couldn't be revived. She is now in the hospital where finally a Doctor examined her and found that she has ovarian cancer. He said that she has a tumor the size of a babies head! More tests were run and all the things that were said to be wrong with her in untrue. She is not diabetic, no heart condition no all the other 12 things she takes medicine for. Now though, due to the loss of so much blood she is anemic. Once all the coumaden is out of her system, they will operate and remove the tumor and we will see then what else will need to be done. She now wishes she had listened to me, taken just one aspirin a day and maybe light up a cigarette when the spirit moved her to. I would never encourage her to do that though, but if that is her wishes after what she has been through thanks to the medical community, then so be it. She has been nothing more than a guinea pig!
Kayci;
"It's easy to see that the medical/disease industries, including pHARMa, government, etc., are all exploring the manipulation of mass opinion and actions."
In the good news category; Someone at FORCES sent me an e-mail, describing the conviction and sentencing of the Italian Health Minister for accepting bribes from drug company interests WHILE HAWKING CIGARETTE ALTERNATIVES.
Lets hope Italy inspires others to start checking the bank accounts of other so entrusted civil servants.
There has to be some logical explanation, to understand how many Health industry "professionals" became so inspired, co-incidentally around the globe.
It had to be something more than "helping smokers" [while treating them like trash] to draw such interest. Payola could explain a lot.
Interpol should be harassed until they start the investigation.
Something stinks big time and it isn't the smell of tobacco inducing the stench in the air.
Anyone interested in starting a petition?
The evidence and suspicion mounts;
Who says the number of those who die in the USA every year due to ETS is elevated from 3000 total, to 130,000 by heart attacks alone?
Not exactly a person you could describe as unbiased.
http://clinicalpharmacy.ucsf.edu...5-9D6FA926A4E2}
As for Michael's recent study link, describing an inverse relationship between cigarette toxins. From a CDC report no less; as a last gasp from an outgoing administration, with definite opinions on how people and smoking should be managed.
This cries for investigation and the implications of payola could dwarf the controversies of Watergate and McCarthyism combined.
Is The USA being administered by the dictates of industrial socialists [AKA NAZIs?]
How embarrassing for them, and for the world image they try to sell.
Are the Lobooists buying their way to the front pages? All indications say directly and indirectly through third parties, that is exactly what is happening.
The general public is definitely not aware of what is really happening, otherwise the Lobooists would already be cooling their heels behind bars.
http://www.straightdope.com/colu...al-of-the-
1950s
"Disc jockeys took thousands of dollars in payola in exchange for airtime. Airplay decisions were based not on whether a record was any good but on the wad of cash that came with it. Even if you accept the idea that it's OK for radio stations to sell spots on their playlists, keeping the public in the dark about the practice was deceptive."
Diane, that's a sad and disturbing story about your friend. I sent her some Magic Aqua, my favorite color. I wish I had not heard this kind of story so many times before, but I trust she will recover and be a wiser person for it. I'd like to know what happens, if you feel like posting about it in the future.
Is The USA being administered by the dictates of industrial socialists [AKA NAZIs?]
Kevin, it may be so, but it won't matter, and it won't be much longer now. At first everything went in one direction - toward Fascism as fast as it could. But now we are hearing bad news tempered by good news.
We should educate Obama to get a national law that preempts all smoking bans by allowing business owners to install all the smoking freedoms they want.
Look at this:
"In Pulaski County [Kentucky], a coalition asked magistrates to bar smoking in public places and workplaces, but the fiscal court has never voted on the measure, said Dr. Al Perkins, a pathologist active in Smoke-Free Pulaski County.
"What we found is the fiscal court is a complete roadblock," Perkins said.
And at a meeting last June that turned contentious, the board of the 10-county Lake Cumberland District Health Department voted down a resolution in support of initiatives to eliminate smoking in public places in the area.
*****Then the board approved a motion limiting the ability of smoke-free advocates to bring up the measure again."
HA!
http://www.kentucky.com/263/stor...ory/
638425.html
.
And another thing; The more fanatical TC, the media, government, public disease professionals, disease organizations, etc. become, and the more they are exposed, the faster individuals will begin to wake up to the fallacies and say no to being manipulated. We all need to begin to trust ourselves and what rings true within us and leave the rest, and I see it happening.
My method is more low-key, but others are more forceful. I reach some people and the forceful ones reach others. In a forum where I chat, there is a slow (very slow at the moment) awareness happening among people who were for the bans. They didn't know it was a global movement of fanatics, but now they begin to see. And who knows how many people read these posts...?
And one more thing...
Since the energy is stretched so far in one direction, when it starts to rebound, it will be rather speedy
On Site Energy Co. benefits from bans:
http://www.prweb.com/releases/
20...rweb1789684.htm
-----
In Texas, a form of what’s called “stealth creationism” is trying to nose its way into public school science textbooks. For example, a representative of the San Antonio Bible Based Sciences Association offered to provide "scientific evidence of weaknesses in evolution and for
creation," including "the fact that evolution violates the 1st and 2nd Laws
of Thermodynamics, as well as the Law of Biogenesis," as well as "creation
evidence in the fields of microbiology, genetics, probability,
biochemistry, biology, geology and physics which support creation and
undermine evolution."
Now, I know it’s a stretch to make a comparison between that particular idiocy and the determined idiocy of Dr. Siegel claiming a health risk to waiters and waitresses working on outdoor patios, but one can’t help but wonder about the confluence of brain-dead religious and crypto-religious fanaticisms.
Violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics? Health danger to waiters outdoors? Or castrated science for a holy cause?
.
Kayci
What gives me hope is that if an amateur gardener can find all this stuff, so can everyone else.
In my searches I pick up letters from others who have spotted the flaw, and long before I did, but until I got the set of studies and experiments that confirmed the theory I couldn't be sure.
Tobacco: conspiracy or treason?
"For more than 100 years, the government has concealed the fact that all niacin used to fortify cereals, bread ... and other baked goods is made form tobacco.
Niacin, like vitamin C, is a necessary nutrient that human beings get sick and die without. The nutritional disease involved is called pellagra and was identified in the South after the War Between the States.
The shortages of fresh meat and leafy vegetables like spinach caused thousands of Southerners to try to live on diets consisting mainly of corn meal and lard. Corn meal and lard contained no niacin, a critical B vitamin now called B-3, niacinamide or nicotinic acid.
People, mainly children, had been dying for more than 20 years from an ailment that started with lethargy, loss of appetite and dementia, then progressed on to aggressiveness, irritability and disphorea, ending with fever, skin eruptions and large red rashes covering most of the body.
One doctor observed that patients literally scratched themselves to death. Another doctor, Dr. Goldberger, observed that people who used tobacco seemed to be immune from this disease"
http://www.mountainx.com/
opinion...0307letters.php
Could anyone from the South confirm that last bit?
Public Health might start "helping" coffee drinkers soon
"Caffeine" withdrawal
Withdrawal effects vary considerably from one person to another and can include headaches, drowsiness, lethargy, irritability, trembling, restlessness, and reduced concentration
http://www.pe2000.com/caffeine.htm
"Nicotine" withdrawal involves irritability, headache, and craving. These symptoms happen with the sudden stopping or reduction of smoking (or other tobacco use) by a nicotine-dependent individual
http://pennhealth.com/ency/artic...icle/
000953.htm
Both contain nicotinic acid produced by burning or roasting, an essential vitamin, those "withdrawal symptoms" are also a sign of niacin deficiency
"Sub-clinical deficiency symptoms include lassitude, mild skin rash, irritability, headache, .."
http://www.enerex.ca/products/
es..._vitamin_B3.htm
"The term "passive smoking" (Passivrauchen) was coined by the Nazi Anti-Tobacco League. Its author, Fritz Lickint, offered no supporting evidence to claim that smokers poisoned everyone around them, while also stating that drinking coffee caused cancer"
"Lickint identified tobacco as a powerful drug: tobacco addiction he characterized as Nikotinismus (or, more properly, Tabakismus), and tobacco addicts as Nikotinisten"
http://www.environmentaloncology...7%
20proctor.pdf
I wonder if he came up with the caffeine theory too?
Perhaps it makes some people feel a little better about themselves if they can dismiss all those around them as just a bunch of drug addicts.
Before we had tobacco and coffee, it was still alright because the principle drink was beer.
"Historically beer was seen as beneficial and rightly so because it was often more sanitary than local water supplies. The water used to make beer was boiled early on in the brewing process which killed any pathogens. The alcohol produced during fermentation and the addition of hops helped to preserve it. Until modern civic water treatment plants became common beer was often the only source of sanitary hydration"
http://beer.about.com/od/
beernut...ernutrition.htm
Children drank light beer
http://www.headlinehistory.co.uk...od/
story743.htm
Beer is an excellent source of vitamins which are essential for life. In particular beer is rich in the B vitamins for example niacin, riboflavin, pyridoxine (B6) and folate.
Recent research suggests that vitamin B6 in beer gives beer drinkers additional protection against cardiovascular disease compared to drinkers of wine or spirits.
Folate has been shown to be protective against cardiovascular disease and some cancers"
http://www.drinkingandyou.com/si...health/
beer.htm
Beer sales slump to Great Depression levels: survey
"A pint of beer may be an official "Icon of England", but sales have sunk to the lowest level in Britain since the Great Depression of the 1930s, according to figures released on Monday."
http://www.breitbart.com/article...&
show_article=1
So I suppose you could also say that the No1 preventable cause of unsuspected niacin deficiency is well meaning prohibitionists.
Rose;
"Perhaps it makes some people feel a little better about themselves if they can dismiss all those around them as just a bunch of drug addicts."
The question has to be; would they feel as confident as they do, in categorizing and discriminating against others, had the Government and the medical institutions not given their blessing and deliberately promoted an encouragement to divide us?
When Industry through their lobooists advertising, dictates the rules of morality, in turn industry rules over governments by moralist coercions and the medical community dictates morality issues over their patients, we are in real trouble, both as a community and as a civilization.
Of late it is harder to dismiss, than to believe, that all three relationships do not exist.
Church over state.
Just as the moralist crusades of Industrialists work to their advantage, they can also be made into their worst nightmare when the tables turn. It really wouldn't take a large number of people to accomplish chamge with such a heavy burden focused on moralities today.
If Politicians grow to realize they are threatened with carrying the tittle of bigot and Nazi they will be forced by process "best practices" to act quickly and start shifting the blame.
The convictions will come fast and furious by those who can not take the risk of paying the political price should they delay. Y2K for the masses.
Leadership in a democracy does not fit well with the designation of promoting hatred violence and bigotry. It does make you a fine target, for any opposition parties, who denounce such actions and ask for the people's forgiveness.
Placing democracy back on track, as a buyers market.
Well now, Harry! You reminded me of something that I've been waiting for an opportunity to say. One of my interests (erm... "obsessions") is Quantum Physics, M-Theory. I see clearly that the double slit experiment is a lesson in CHOICE of electrons, photons, protons.. whatever effects of which nano wave/particle is being observed. And the study of probabilities.
In M-Theory, if you ask the question, "What happens next?", the answer is, "EVERYTHING HAPPENS NEXT."!
A lot of ideas happen in in my brain here, and...>
The next question is, "HOW do my choices set my directions?", and HOW do I CHANGE directions?".
I leave the rest up to you. I have answered the questions to my satisfaction. I have created them and now they evolve
I does seem more and more true, that the nationalization of all Charity foundation assets, would be the most charitable act a government could ever support.
Taking tax exempted funds and the power they enlist, out of the political arena. Diverting them instead to legitimate acts of charity.
This would solve both a tremendous charity need and a financial crisis in one grand act of kindness.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comme...ed-is-
love.html
Rose, I garden, too! I share every one of your "benefits of smoking" links with my sister in New Mexico and she sends them to her son in Texas.... We are so pleased!
I thought of something funny when I read your latest posts:
Food withdrawal:
"Withdrawal effects vary considerably from one person to another and can include headaches, drowsiness, lethargy, irritability, trembling, restlessness, and reduced concentration"
http://www.pe2000.com/caffeine.htm
Water and/or Salt "withdrawal involves irritability, headache, and craving. These symptoms happen with the sudden stopping or reduction of" salt and/or water intake by a water/salt-dependent individual
The term "passive ignorance" (Passivlunachen) was coined by the Freedom Pro-Choices League. Its author, Kayci, offered no supporting evidence to claim that fanatics deplete the intelligence of (almost) everyone around them, while also stating that inhaling tobacco creates the opening of new neurological pathways...
Kayci identified tobacco as a powerful drug: tobacco smokers, and chewers she characterized as Tabako-Geniouses, and tobacco growers as Nikotin-Alohas
Long live Freedom! LOL!
.
You know how the lies have been repeated until so many people believe them? Well repeat this, or your version of it, everywhere you go!
All the bans shall be lifted!
(I use "shall" instead of "will" for a reason. The connotation is different.)
OH! I forgot to say; The taxes and the MSA extortion - all banned forever!
"...it makes some people feel better about themselves if they can dismiss those around them as a bunch of drug addicts." ~Rose
"would they feel as confident as they do, in categorizing and discriminating, had the Government and the medical institutions not given their blessing and deliberately promoted an encouragement to divide us?" ~Kevin
In a letter to the fiscal courts of the three counties here, I used a quote from a bible, "By their fruits you shall know them". And I called for a cease-and-desist order to be issued ordering them to stop their attempts to divide and conquer our peaceful community. I think its working on the commissioners' attitudes towards the anti's.
Kayci
Do you perhaps sense a pattern?
Commentary: Possible role of salt intake in the development of essential hypertension
"Salt is one of the cornerstones on which the mammalian biochemical structure is built. Total exclusion of salt from the diet leads to disaster, namely death."
"Still, salt is considered by some authorities, to be toxic on a level comparable with alcohol and tobacco"
"The modern salt saga started in 1904 with a paper by Ambard and Brochard3 who showed an association between salt intake and blood pressure in six patients. On the basis of these observations they created a salt–blood pressure hypothesis.
Subsequently in 1907 the results were opposed by Lôwenstein,4 and from then on the salt–blood pressure hypothesis has been the basis for a dispute between supporters of the hypothesis and sceptics.
What we can learn from this is that the salt–blood pressure hypothesis and the controversy dates back to the first decade of the previous century, initially based on a few case histories"
"In the following years Allan's positive results were both confirmed and disproved by several authors, but during the late 1930s the use of salt restriction faded."
"In the introduction of his 1960 paper Dahl defines his position, namely that salt is deleterious. Salt is compared with fall-out, carcinogens and atherogenic factors, and later in the paper with tobacco, alcohol, and fat"
http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cg...t/full/34/5/
972
SALT AND BLOOD PRESSURE:CONVENTIONAL WISDOM RECONSIDERED
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
One segment of the public health community—funded by the the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and endorsed by many journals in the field has decided that salt is a public health menace.
Therefore, salt consumption must be drastically curtailed. The force with which this conclusion is presented to the public is not in any reasonable balance with the strength of the evidence.
Programs, once in place, develop a life of their own; the possibility of health benefits becomes probability, and probability becomes certainty. After all, the public is easily confused by complications,
only professionals can weigh the evidence, and where is the harm in salt reduction?
The harm is to public discourse. The appearance of scientific unanimity is a powerful political tool, especially when the evidence is weak.
Dissent becomes a threat, which must be marginalized. If funding agencies and
journals are unwilling to brook opposition, rational discussion is curtailed.
There soon comes about the pretense of national policy based on scientific
inquiry without the substance. In our view, salt is only one example of this phenomenon
http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~ce...~census/
573.pdf
Reverse Engineering
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Rev...rse_engineering
Kayci,
Goodness, you're way beyond me!
My understanding of string theory is on the same level as my understanding of what lies on the other side of the Big Bang; and my understanding of Einstein and Planck are on the same level as a child having mastered the spellings of cat and dog. So I defer. But I do believe that you can’t take things like double-slit experiments and inject them into synapses (which seem pretty clear-cut) and the human world of choice. Or am I reading you wrong?
Interesting, though.
But as we’re in a holiday mood here and anything goes, with your “choice,” are you saying there’s such a thing as free will?
And, "All the bans shall be lifted!" What -- even on outdoor patios?
.
Rose;
""Still, salt is considered by some authorities, to be toxic on a level comparable with alcohol and tobacco"
"
You don't even want to look at what they are saying about sugar.
Check out CSPI [Center for science in the public interest]the anti soda pop crusaders.
Kayci
Its not so much "benefits of smoking" that I am looking for as the correct nutrients so that no one gets sick if they are a self treater and forced against their will to quit.
Either that or so that we could all go on strike.
Just imagine the chaos ...
When you are so full of yourself that you can view entire populations around you as your personal experimental playgrounds, you develop perspectives such as we see in the following.
Non informed communities without consent are expossed in the experimenting with humans in a totally focused population view, which deliberately by process obscures the reality of the individuals you effect or commit human rights crimes against.
This allows you to do pretty much as you please, with a State and medical institutional blessing of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre...ntion_(medical)
Prevention (medical)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
In medicine, prevention is any activity which reduces the burden of mortality or morbidity from disease. This takes place at primary, secondary and tertiary prevention levels.
1. Primary prevention avoids the development of a disease. Most population-based health promotion activities are primary preventive measures.
2. Secondary prevention activities are aimed at early disease detection, thereby increasing opportunities for interventions to prevent progression of the disease and emergence of symptoms.
3. Tertiary prevention reduces the negative impact of an already established disease by restoring function and reducing disease-related complications.
[edit] Difference between preventions, treatments, and cures
A prevention or preventive measure is a way to avoid an injury, sickness, or disease in the first place, and generally it will not help someone who is already ill (though there are exceptions). For instance, many American babies are given a polio vaccination soon after they are born, which prevents them from contracting polio. But the vaccination does not work on patients who already have polio. A treatment or cure is applied after a medical problem has already started.
A treatment treats a problem, and may lead to its cure, but treatments more often ameliorate a problem only for as long as the treatment is continued. For example, there is no cure for AIDS, but treatments are available to slow down the harm done by HIV and delay the fatality of the disease. Treatments don't always work. For example, chemotherapy is a treatment for cancer which may cure the disease sometimes - it does not have a 100% cure rate. Therefore, chemotherapy isn't considered a bonafide cure for cancer.
Cures are a subset of treatments that reverse illnesses completely or end medical problems permanently.
In the area of substance-related harms, a number of prevention typologies have been proposed.
Gordon (1987) in the area of disease prevention, and later Kumpfer and Baxley (1997) in the area of substance use proposed a three-tiered preventive intervention classification system: universal, selective and indicated prevention. Amongst others, this typology has gained favour and is used by the US Institute of Medicine, the NIDA and the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
1. Universal prevention addresses the entire population (national, local community, school, district) and aim to prevent or delay the abuse of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs. All individuals, without screening, are provided with information and skills necessary to prevent the problem.
2. Selective prevention focuses on groups whose risk of developing problems of alcohol abuse or dependence is above average. The subgroups may be distinguished by characteristics such as age, gender, family history, or economic status. For example, drug campaigns in recreational settings.
3. Indicated prevention involves a screening process, and aims to identify individuals who exhibit early signs of substance abuse and other problem behaviours. Identifiers may include falling grades among students, known problem consumption or conduct disorders, alienation from parents, school, and positive peer groups etc.
Outside the scope of this three-tier model is Environmental prevention. Environmental prevention approaches are typically managed at the regulatory or community level, and focus on interventions to deter drug consumption. Prohibition and bans (e.g. smoking workplace bans, alcohol advertising bans) may be viewed as the ultimate environmental restriction. However, in practice environmental preventions programmes embrace various initiatives at the macro and micro level, from government monopolies for alcohol sales, through roadside sobriety or drug tests, worker/pupil/student drug testing, increased policing in sensitive settings (near schools, at rock festivals), and legislative guidelines aimed at precipitating punishments (warnings, penalties, fines).
The defining of people as human capitol has moved well beyond the confines of figurative speak.
We are all being processed like cattle for maximized profits, and surprisingly with little resistance.
Kevin
I'm still struggling with this one.
Obesity is contageous both socially and by infection.
I didn't see that one coming
Obesity Is 'Socially Contagious'
"Are your friends making you fat? Or keeping you slender? According to new research from Harvard and the University of California, San Diego, the short answer on both counts is "yes."
"Surprisingly, the greatest effect is seen not among people sharing the same genes or the same household but among friends." http://www.sciencedaily.com/
rele...70725175419.htm
Obesity 'caused by infectious virus which turns cells into fatty tissue'
"After a week of growth in the laboratory, most of the virus-infected adult stem cells developed into fat cells but the non-infected stem cells did not, Dr Pasarica told the American Chemical Society. "A common virus appears to target stem cells in humans to generate more and bigger fat cells."
"The results are clear. Ad-36 prompts adult, fat-derived stem cells to convert to pre-fat cells, rather than other cell types," she said. "Furthermore, these fat cells accumulate lipids - fats - at an increased rate."
"We conclude that human adenovirus Ad-36 increases the number of fat cells and increases their fat content in humans, which might contribute to the development of obesity," she told the meeting.
http://www.independent.co.uk/lif...sue-
462397.html
A Christopher Buckley tongue-in-cheek prediction:
" The 2003 public-area smoking ban will be lifted in order to promote early urban mortality.
"This sure-to-be-controversial move, which sources say will be announced early in the new year by the City Council, is expected to bring about “significant” savings to the city budget in the area of extended elderly care. Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who reportedly clashed with Mr. Bloomberg over his intention to serve as mayor until 2048, is said to be exerting “fierce” pressure upon the mayor to personally launch a “Light Up, New York!” campaign."
.
Rose I would expect your studies have everything to do with the way they are fleecing people who use cigarettes;
http://www.foxnews.com/story/
0,2...,468245,00.html
CSPI strikes again
"Milk, juice, diet soda and bottled water would not be subjected to the tax. The governor’s plan is on par with the so-called fat tax movement that has been touted by some health experts, but has failed to gain favor with political officials thus far.
Much like the cigarette taxes that have taken shape in some states in recent years, a fat tax would capitalize on — some would say punish — people’s unhealthy lifestyle choices."
What a brilliant way to stimulate the economy, by killing off a large portion of it.
A year of myths about smoking and obesity
"Two of the most cherished claims of the health lobby during 2008 have been that public smoking bans reduce smoking and that we are in the midst of an unending epidemic of overweight and obesity, particularly in children. We’re told that endless intervention by public authorities is required to save us from ourselves"
"But the claims about smoking and obesity took a decisive and perhaps even fatal hit last week with the publication of the latest Health Survey for England"
http://www.spiked-online.com/ind...e/article/6066/
It seems that there exists an inverse association, between Public health risk and public confidence in the spin doctors of The Public Health authority.
Of course common sense would have told us that ages ago.
Ban Lobooing, arrest the sneak thieves and bigots. Why did they ever do away with the stocks? Incarceration alone will illicit no useful education strategy. Obviously these Public Health people, in the majority are sadly lacking a proper education.
Kevin
Now be fair, if the plan had worked there WOULD have been a rise in obesity.
"Severe lack of niacin causes the deficiency disease pellagra, ...
whereas a mild deficiency slows down the metabolism, which in turn decreases cold tolerance and is a potential contributing factor towards obesity"
http://www.justbespoke.com/www/p...pics/
niacin.htm
"About 80 per cent of smokers put on weight when they quit. However most ex-smokers only gain a modest amount of weight. Women typically gain between 3 kilograms and 5.5 kilograms in the first year due to stopping smoking, while men tend to gain less."
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov....d_quitting?
open
From Rose's link (and the link within the link):
"This validates research by Adda and Cornaglia of UCL (’The Effects of Taxes and Bans on Passive Smoking’, 2006) which found that the public smoking ban increased children’s exposure to secondhand smoke."
“The level of cotinine [a nicotine marker] in small children considerably increases as a result of bans in recreational public places.”
I love that one, since cotinine in children is one of the most frequently used arrows in the Antis’ quiver.
Happily none of the above touches Dr. Siegel’s position, for he’s told us that there’s no long-term danger to the health of children at home whose parents smoke. Unlike the long-term health effects of those unfortunate souls who have to wait tables on outdoor patios where smoking is permitted.
“An increased level of smoking at home is not the only perverse consequence of a public smoking ban. Adda and Cornaglia also show that while such bans might reduce the second-hand smoke exposure of wealthier individuals, they in fact increase the exposure of poorer individuals – something that reinforces existing health disparities and works against the government’s policy of reducing health inequality.”
“What this means, according to Adda and Cornaglia, is that complete public smoking bans are not smart tobacco control policy. Rather, they reflect the ‘simplistic’ and doctrinaire approach of the anti-tobacco lobby and its refusal to ‘take into account how public policies can generate perverse incentives and effects’. A much better policy, they suggest, would be one that allows for ‘alternative places to which smokers can turn to’ to avoid increased smoking at home.”
Can’t have that. Remember the 220.
And more unintended consequences for the Dr. Siegel profit-and-loss ledger:
“A recent report by the insurer, Direct Line, notes that house fires will increase because of the public smoking ban.”
“A similar increase in smoking at home, and in the consequent number of residential fires, took place in New York after the city’s public smoking ban in 2003.”
A world ruled by interfering madmen and nincompoops. Abetted by those legislators muscled into going along in order to get along.
.
Disease management was always a poorly reasoned con job.
If it is successful the costs of healthcare will rise substantially in lock step with the lowered health risks.
http://lieberaldictators.blogspo...s-and-
cons.html
Comments?
Terrific piece, Kevin, but I think you make a big mistake for our cause by continually bringing into it the subject of global warming. The science may be false, as you believe, but at least it's not based on iffy conclusions from iffy epidemiological studies. Do not highly qualified top scientists -- and a hell of a lot of them -- believe they have the science to back them up? So if you want to remain skeptical -- which is your right and even your duty -- that's one thing. In fact I’ll ride along with you. But to dismiss out of hand the whole idea of global warming caused in part or in the main by human activity as a fiction, is not, I believe being intellectually rigorous.
Moreover, we all know very well the various reasons that act as motives -- and motors -- for people demanding smoking bans, from the brainwashed ignorant to the purely mercenary, to the born-in-the-bone haters of tobacco smoke and smokers, to the careerists, to the thickheaded and to the simply delusional. No question about all that. But unless you can come up with compelling motives for those world-class scientists who believe that man-caused global warming is a fact – unless you can indict their sincerity and their honesty – I fail to see that you have a strenuous argument. Besides which, how many people looking in here conclude that we’re a crackpot group when they read that one of the posters not only does not believe in the dangers in secondhand smoke, but global warming as well? It’s counterproductive to our cause! As is (might I add) the continual diatribes by people – people I have a lot of respect for and like tremendously – continually voicing far-right political sentiments. It’s counterproductive to what we’re trying to accomplish (if we're trying to accomplish anything). I suppose I’ve been guilty along with the rest at times, but it’s absolutely wrong if our aim is to convince. Readers will just say, Oh, another right-wing nut! And dismiss our argument about ETS without further consideration.
MJM argues that there is no danger to patrons or staff in restaurants or bars WITH effective air-cleaning equipment in operation. I disagree with that approach; I believe that he should not even bring in the subject of air-cleaning equipment. I believe that it’s not only a distraction, but it suggests that there actually IS a danger to staff WITHOUT such equipment (and I think Brian would agree with me in this). And it isn’t that I KNOW POSITIVELY there exists no long-term danger from secondhand smoke; what I do know is that IF such a danger exists, the evidence is weak and, anyway, the danger has never been proven. Never. And you don’t dictate public policy on unproven, weak and iffy evidence, especially when the absolute great and widespread evils such policies produce are clear to anybody who doesn’t wear blinkers.
Besides which there’s that Oak Ridge study, which, I believe, concluded that wait staff inhaled the equivalent of six cigarettes per year! (Give us a break, Dr. Siegel!)
There are madmen and swine loose in the world, and I don’t think we should give those who look in here the slightest opportunity to conclude that we’re all just a bunch of right-wing crackpots. Counterproductive!
With all due respect.
.
Lighter note:
"Not letting the French smoke where they want, however, is an unsought change, more "a total and utter catastrophe," hissed Parisian café owner Chantal Boucher when a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants took effect on Jan. 1. Relax, Madame, and use your imagination, like the Minnesotans. Their new law exempted theatres, so several bars duly became "theatres," with staff and customers as cast and ashtrays as props. Asked why the "cast" was just sitting around smokin' and drinkin', one barkeep explained: "They're playing themselves before the smoking law. We call the production Before the Ban."
.
Harry;
Thanks for your critique however my reasoning is not selective and from what I have seen there is a linkage which needs to be discussed.
The point I was trying to expose is the process of driving people around reasoning, by irresponsible fear mongering, [Chicken little technologies] which gains power commensurate with the level of fear created.
The potential audience I hope to target, If I can find someone to publish it, is not the scientific crowd directly [although I may inspire some of the ego addicts, to find a reason to fear, by the though that others might be drawing the link as legitimate] It is a wake up call to the general population who may be falling victim to the drama queens. Global warming fits the bill as another motivation of fear before science media campaign.
If we inspire hope and ingenuity there is nothing we can not achieve. Controlling the weather is a stretch, but someday we might even accomplish that, however before we do, all the consequences should be understood and reasoned, without the political bandwagon and media spin promotions, interfering with real science and real benefit.
Benefits we gain should never be made at the cost of others, who are all important too. Otherwise the next time we utilize our prejudices, any thin excuse will become easier to accept. As we create a culture of barbarians, who no longer have any patience for science or diversity.
If science supports Global warming, I would welcome the evidence which proves me wrong. So far all the science consists of theoretical postulation, exactly the same as ETS studies. I have no confidence in either conclusion, because I can see that the process which created them is so highly flawed and politically convenient.
Again, tobacco smoke is the only chemical in the world that there is no safe level of exposure to.
Smoking rampant among preganant women
http://www.canada.com/calgaryher...b7-
98a755b38993
The blood was tested for 170 synthetic and organic chemicals;in general, concentrations were found to be within acceptable levels compared to similar studies--except for the cotinine concentration.The 143-report notes that bio-monitoring findings could serve as a" benchmark" for current and future smoking laws and awareness campaigns.Hasan said researchers have been trying to red flag smoking as a serious addiction, but it's often treated as a lifestyle issue.That notion hampers efforts to address smoking concerns, which is especially troubling when considering the "toxic" effects of lighting up while pregnant, Hasan said.
Of all the chemicals they tested for it would appear that only cotinine concentrations in blood serum was flagged as unacceptable. This is how they reported the results of some of the other chemicals tested:
http://www.health.alberta.ca/doc...toring-
2008.pdf
* Tobacco smoke, both direct and second-hand smoke, has significant adverse effects on health. The main health risks from tobacco smoke are related to diseases of the cardiovascular system, diseases of the respiratory tract, and cancers; particularly lung,larynx, and mouth [21,22]. In addition to adverse effects on the mother, smoking duringpregnancy has negative effects on the fetus, newborn infant, and young child [2,4].Smoking during pregnancy significantly increases risks of stillbirth, spontaneousabortion, premature delivery, neonatal death and subnormal birth weight [23,24]. It is also linked to higher rates of sudden infant death and increased incidence of childhoodrespiratory illness [24,25]. Overall, mean cotinine concentrations in blood serum of pregnant Albertan women ranged from 5.1 ng/mL to 55 ng/mL.
* The human health effects of lead are diverse, and can depend on the dose, the length of exposure, and the timing of the exposure.
* The human health effects of silver depend on the dose, the form of silver to which we are exposed, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors.
* Dioxins and furans can cause several adverse health effects in humans. These depend on the dose, the length of exposure, and the timing of exposure. Due to their ubiquity in the environment and our food, all people have a certain concentration of dioxins and furans in their body. Such background concentrations of dioxins and furans usually do not affect human health
* The human health effects of PCBs depend on the dose, the length and timing ofexposure, and other factors. It has long been recognized that background humanpopulations are exposed to very low concentrations of PCBs in foods and theenvironment. At these low levels, PCBs are not known to cause any adverse health effect.
* The human health effects of DDE depend on the dose, the length and timing of exposure, and other factors. Background concentrations of DDE in humans usually arenot known to cause any adverse health effect.
* Human studies relating to possible health effects of PFC exposure are very limited. A few studies suggested negative associations between PFOS or PFOA concentrations in pregnant women or cord blood and the infant’s birth weight or size
* Due to the high-volume production and wide-spread use of BPA, there is an increasing interest in investigating the effects of BPA exposure on human health. However, human studies are currently very limited, and most available data are from animal studies.
* Human studies of possible health effects of AP or APE exposure are very limited, and most available data are from animal studies.
* The human health effects of mercury are diverse and can depend on the dose, the form of mercury present in our bodies, the length of exposure, and the timing of the exposure
* The human health effects of aluminum depend on the dose, the form of aluminum present in the environment, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors. Background concentrations of aluminum in humans are not known to cause any adverse health effects
* The human health effects of antimony depend on the dose, the form of antimony present in the environment, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors.
* The human health effects of barium depend on the dose, the form of barium present in the environment, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors.
* The human health effects of cesium depend on the dose, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors.
* The human health effects of chromium depend on the dose, the form of chromium present in the environment, the length and timing of exposure, and other physiological factors. Chromium (III) is an essential micro-nutrient, whereas chromium (VI) is considerably more toxic.
* The human health effects of vanadium depend on the dose, the form of vanadium present in the environment, the length and timing of exposure, and other hysiological factors.
Harry;
Consider the power of promoting the term "Lobooist" to focus the populace on the wide difference between grass roots lobbying and cash grabbing chicken little zealots.
Lobooist is a powerful weapon in exposing and redefining the media darlings as con artists. Because many more people would find a motivation to examine the past activities of anyone standing in front of a camera. Reforming public opinions [denormalization] with all the facts at hand.
The new fad you could help to create, would suit your cause and all of us, to a much larger degree than any opinion we could ever express or the effect produced by any number of zealots we could ever find the time to expose alone.
Sometimes turning the tide is simply a matter of focusing on the simple things, which have the most potential.
Ann W.
I can dig up the links I have posted a couple of times, which demonstrate a bio marker has to be consistent in order to be useful. Cotinine is not a legitimate bio-marker of either toxins or any effect.
Even Bill would likely agree with this one, because the cotinine levels produced by chew, would be astronomically higher than the levels resulting from smoking or ETS. He and many others in TC tell us chew is safer than smoking or ETS. Cotinine level; if considered legitimate as a bio marker, could easily prove them all wrong.
Kevin, I would appreciate those links.
I found it interesting that they didn't caution that NRT's would also show up in the blood as cotinine.
Harry wrote:
"Besides which there’s that Oak Ridge study, which, I believe, concluded that wait staff inhaled the equivalent of six cigarettes per year!"
I don't recall if ORNL ever broke it down into cigarette equivalents, but a number of other studies did and they all fell within 6-10 cigarettes/year.
Roswell Park, ACS, and another anti-tobacco group conducted their own study which, if you extrapolate from their data, showed full-time workers in the smokiest venues required almost 5 years to passively smoke 1 cigarette.
I no longer know the the link to the ACS press release, but the Roswell Park Cancer Institute still has the findings. The smokiest venue: 940 nanogram/8 hours exposed in bingo halls.
http://
roswell.tobaccodocuments.....htm#conclusion
940 billionths of a gram in 8 hours. A smoker inhales 1000x that much from one cigarette.
"A grieving son has blasted hospice bosses after his cancer-stricken father was made to smoke outdoors in freezing conditions during his final days of life"
"It was inhuman, he had to be wheeled outside in his pyjamas and dressing gown to this summer house they had put up," said Darren. "It was making him extremely angry and upset - he just couldn't understand why they wouldn't let him use a smoking room"
"This thing they put up was just a shed, really. There was no heating or anything, and because it was just a flimsy summer house the wind was really whipping in. It was cold and unpleasant, not how dad should have had to spend his time."
"Neil Wright, chief executive of Willowbrook Hospice, said he and his senior management team were correct to waive their right to an exemption.
He said: "As a charity we receive one third of our funds from the Government and two third from charitable donations. We did have a dedicated smoking room but while space is at a premium, like it is now, then we had to decide whether to keep it open or not.
"If we kept the smoking room inside, then someone had to clean it and we have a responsibility to our staff to provide a safe working environment for them."
http://
www.sthelensreporter.co.u...king.4827348.jp
Words fail me
Ann W.
I will post the links as soon as I remember where to find them in the mean time;
Here is how you measure toxin levels in the real scientific world;
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/tob...r/benzo-
eng.php
Your examples define how to measure them by political means.
Kevin,
Thanks for your reply. I'm certainly for anything that will drive these animals back into their cages.
James,
The smokiest venue: "940 billionths of a gram in 8 hours. A smoker inhales 1000x that much from one cigarette."
Unfortunately, Dr. Siegel has found a clever way around that -- by saying that bartenders are exposed to the equivalent of 1-1/2 packs of cigarettes a day for a couple of chemicals found in secondhand smoke. (We're still waiting for his answer to the question: even at the elevated doses for those two chemicals (if true), do the doses even then break the PEL limits? No reply so far from the good doctor on that, although it's been several months now.)
.
Harry:
"Unfortunately, Dr. Siegel has found a clever way around that."
Yeah, he's a pretty good magician. He can also pull a kid with cystic fibrosis out of his hat.
OSHA has about 10,000 regulations just on ladders, but never banned smoking in the workplace. Dr. Siegel is clever indeed.
Well looky here....
"Lung cancer is by far the most common cancer killer around the world, killing 1.2 million people a year. Smoking is the most common cause but a majority of smokers do not develop lung cancer, so scientists are looking for other factors that may help tumors develop and spread".
Processed food may fuel lung tumors - Korean study
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/...k/
N29286770.htm
How interesting
"Swiss biotech company Lonza has announced a worldwide price hike of up to 12 per cent for vitamin B3 in a bid to pass-on increasing production costs.
The firm blamed the increases for vitamin-B3 (niacin) and niacinamide on rising costs of raw material, energy and transportation. The main raw material for vitamin B3 and niacinamide, a substance derived from niacin, are petrochemicals"
http://www.nutraingredients.com/...-for-vitamin-
B3
Commercially, niacin is obtained from beta -picoline or from quinoline, which are both obtainable from coal tar
http://www.chemicalland21.com/li...foco/
NIACIN.htm
Quinoline
"An aromatic organic base, C9H7N, having a pungent tarlike odor, synthesized or obtained from coal tar, and used as a food preservative and in making antiseptics and dyes."
http://www.answers.com/topic/quinoline
BETA-PICOLINE
Health Hazard
"HARMFUL if swallowed, inhaled or absorbed through skin. Material is extremely destructive to tissue of the mucous membranes and upper respiratory tract, eyes and skin. Inhalation may be fatal as a result of spasm, inflammation of larynx and bronchi, chemical pneumonitis and pulmonary edema. Symptoms of exposure may include burning sensation, coughing, wheezing, laryngitis, shortness of breath, headache, nausea and vomiting." (USCG, 1999)
http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/c...v/chemical/
7466
"List of 25 substances to be monitored by Toronto"
http://www.thestar.com/GTA/artic.../article/
548463
Many of these "industrial" chemicals are also found in tobacco smoke, at least according to the list.
"Acrolein: A highly flammable liquid used as a chemical intermediate in making plastics or colloidal forms of metals. It has been used as an additive for perfumes and a herbicide in water. In the past, it was used in tear gas."
"You can be exposed to acrolein in tobacco smoke or vehicle exhaust, living near industries where it's used or made, or by inhaling vapours from overheated cooking oil."
Here is a Wikipedia link for acrolein.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acrolein
"no studies have been conducted on the carcinogenic effects of acrolein on humans, but studies on rats have shown an increase in cancerous tumors from ingestion, but not from inhalation. [5] In October 2006, researchers found connections between acrolein in the smoke from tobacco cigarettes and the risk of lung cancer.[6]"
Fantastic! All in the same paragraph, too!
Advocate for CASH
It's the smoke you can't smell that is the most dangerous.
"Many of these "industrial" chemicals are also found in tobacco smoke, at least according to the list."
When you look at the list realizing most of the toxins listed, are man made and additives in Canadian cigarettes have been banned for decades. You have to conclude, as I have suspected all along, tobacco smoke as a description includes the air it mixes with and the toxins are actually not from the burning of tobacco but are listed primarily for emotional appeal.
The actual volume of the listed chemicals found in cigarette smoke, again although exposures occur in millions to trillions of times by volume from other common sources, only the trace amounts in cigarette smoke are important.
I was reading a mortality causes list the other day and although it listed cigarettes as causing hundreds of thousands of mortalities, toxins by other sources were listed in barely trace recognition far less than 1% of all mortalities combined.
Somehow scientific logic of late doesn't quite match, with what they should be more able to understand.
James,
Yeah, well I don't think "magician" is quite the right word -- not for a guy who pulls dead rabbits out of a hat. Try "shyster."
Lookee here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/2...%20obama&
st=cse
Now Obama, according to the article, smokes typically 3 cigarettes a day, and his heaviest smoking is 7 or 8 cigarettes a day. Bad, bad! With 3 cigs a day, he'll never survive to a hundred-and-five, and with 7 or 8, he might keel over before he takes the oath of office.
Sorry, fellow citizens, but "Moderation in all things" is OUT! (Even moderation may kill you -- think Vienna fingers.)
.
Catching up from an absence, some random shots:
You do have to love the clinical precision of the "scientific" prediction of "38,100 to 128,900 heart attacks."
Kayci--
I hope this link is still good as it might be ammo to send to your council. Article on how a ban, engineered by outsiders and a big $ investment, irreparably split a town.
http://www.startribune.com/stori...659/
826412.html
And talk about gov't and engineering, I found this interesting lede in a George Will column:
In 1966, the price of eggs rose to a level that President Lyndon Johnson judged, God knows how, was too high. There were two culprits-- supply and demand-- and Johnson's agriculture secretary told him there was not much that could be done. LBJ, however, was a can-do fellow who directed the US Surgeon General to dampen demand by warning the nation about the hazards of cholesterol in eggs.
We may have gotten out of manufacturing most useful things in America, but we sure have a good history of manufacturing scares.
Finally, whatever optimist is hoping Obama will declare a national ban on...well, bans...forgets that, in a Democratic primary debate, both he and Biden said they favored a national smoke ban in all "public places." Hillary (she of the original White House ban) was the only debater who didn't.
:
"Many of these "industrial" chemicals are also found in tobacco smoke, at least according to the list"
Tobacco smoke always strikes me as a dumping ground for petrochemical substances they don't want to take responsibility for.
My favourite one being a fungicide found allegedly in American tobacco smoke in the 50's,that was only ever used in Germany.
If you want good sense look at potatoes with the same plant chemicals but in different amounts.
I am informed that acrolein only appears in potatoes fried in oil or fat where the smoking point is too low.
Traditional cooking fats will take a much higher temperature without forming it.
The general public when confronted with these statements has no way of proving them true or false.
"The general population may also be exposed to high concentrations from
vehicle exhaust (for example, parking garages and/or heavy traffic). Acrolein is also present in certain foods
such as raw cocoa beans, chocolate liquor, fried potatoes and onions, raw and
cooked turkey, heated animal fats and vegetable oils, and roasted coffee" http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxguid...oxguide-
124.pdf
A recent update;
Walt;
"You do have to love the clinical precision of the "scientific" prediction of "38,100 to 128,900 heart attacks."
They explained the new numbers as derived by "the Casino method."
I sent the following in response to the explanation that the stories originate from Reuters and PubMed has no involvement in the content. asked and answered;
"To: custserv@nlm.nih.gov
Subject: Second hand smoke research
Pardon me, Passing the buck???
Well now that I understand who you are, and what I was reading, those trust issues seem to be eliminated entirely.
Thanks for you honesty, Such a rare commodity of late as we are {{{both}}} now aware.
Regards;"
Reply from the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM):
Kevin Mulvina:
In response to your follow up message: Thank you for your comments on news selection, I will forward them to the MedlinePlus developers.
Although the news item is from Reuters Health, if you disagree with the study or research methodologies, you may wish to contact the author:
the citation, abstract and contact information is provided below:
cont...
1: Am J Prev Med. 2009 Jan;36(1):13-20.
Coronary heart disease attributable to passive smoking: CHD Policy Model.
Lightwood JM, Coxson PG, Bibbins-Domingo K, Williams LW, Goldman L.
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of California San Francisco, San
Francisco, California, USA. lightwoodj@pharmacy.ucsf.edu
BACKGROUND: Passive smoking is a major risk factor for coronary heart disease
(CHD), and existing estimates are out of date due to recent and substantial
changes in the level of exposure. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the annual clinical
burden and cost of CHD treatment attributable to passive smoking. OUTCOME
MEASURES: Annual attributable CHD deaths, myocardial infarctions (MI), total CHD
events, and the direct cost of CHD treatment. METHODS: A Monte Carlo simulation
estimated the CHD events and costs as a function of the prevalence of CHD risk
factors, including passive-smoking prevalence and a low (1.26) and high (1.65)
relative risk of CHD due to passive smoking. Estimates were calculated using the
CHD Policy Model, calibrated to reproduce key CHD outcomes in the baseline Year
2000 in the U.S. RESULTS: At 1999-2004 levels, passive smoking caused 21,800
(SE=2400) to 75,100 (SE=8000) CHD deaths and 38,100 (SE=4300) to 128,900
(SE=14,000) MIs annually, with a yearly CHD treatment cost of $1.8 (SE=$0.2) to
$6.0 (SE=$0.7) billion. If recent trends in the reduction in the prevalence of
passive smoking continue from 2000 to 2008, the burden would be reduced by
approximately 25%-30%. CONCLUSIONS: Passive smoking remains a substantial
clinical and economic burden in the U.S.
Publication Types:
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Grant Support:
AR30582/AR/NIAMS NIH HHS/United States
R01 HL 59205/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS/United States
PMID: 19095162 [PubMed - in process]
I hope this will be helpful.
R. Gordner
Reference and Customer Service
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, MD 20894
custserv@nlm.nih.gov
1-888-346-3656 (within US)
301-594-5983 (international)
The National Library of Medicine (NLM) is the largest medical library in the world. The goal of the NLM is to collect, organize and make available biomedical literature to advance medical science and improve public health. The NLM does not do research for individuals or send materials. The NLM makes available a variety of health information sources and offers assistance to find and use them. Links to products and services are at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
Notice in the explanation they called their research process the "Monte Carlo method", and "A Monte Carlo simulation" while in the news release, it is referred to only as "the Coronary Heart Disease Policy Model" and "a computer simulation."
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
medlinepl...tory_72931.html
In retrospect This study is an indictment of what Michael referred to as a possible worst case, developing 220, all cause smoking related mortalities. Seen in evaluating a bartenders lifetime risk. In evaluation of the highest exposure levels imaginable, compared to casual exposure risk in the totality of the general public. Seen now as being well off the mark.
By these numbers all bartenders should have been consistently keeling over in their early twenties from heart attacks, well before cancers or other effects could ever be seen.
How could Michael have been so wrong?
"When men who bottled liquid lead as a gasoline additive in the 1920s started to drop like flies, General Motors blamed the workers and called lead a “natural contaminant"
http://trentolson.wordpress.com/...ok-of-the-year/
Firms 'knew of leaded petrol dangers in 20s'
"Three of the world's largest companies were accused this week of deliberately introducing lead into petrol in the 1920s knowing it would poison millions of people and manipulating the science for more than 50 years to avoid censure and loss of lucrative sales"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/enviro...0/jul/13/
uknews
"In 1983, in support of U.S. and U.K. petrochemical companies, Doll claimed that lead in petroleum vehicle exhaust was not correlated with increased blood lead levels and learning disabilities in children. Doll's research had been generously funded by General Motors"
http://www.injurywatch.co.uk/new...anies-
231161138
"Studies have shown that lead 210 and polonium 210 deposits accumulate in the bodies of people exposed to cigarette smoke. Data collected in the late 1970's shows that smokers have three times as much of these elements in their lower lungs as non smokers"
It seems if anyone wishes to see their children receive a high quality education; the University of California San Francisco would be close to the bottom of the list . Does this University sell mail order degrees, or offer discount coupons on the back of comic books to promote enrollment?
Priority Substances List Assessment Report for Acrolein - 2000
ISBN: 0-662-28575-1 Cat. No.: En 40-215/48E
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/..._2-
eng.php#2322
There was a general trend of increasing concentrations of acrolein in the indoor air of these homes with increasing concentrations of acetaldehyde and/or formaldehyde. The average concentrations of acrolein in the indoor air of Windsor and Hamilton homes with and without environmental tobacco smoke - i.e., 3.0 µg/m3 and 2.2 µg/m3, respectively - provide some support for the hypothesis that cigarette smoking is a source of acrolein in indoor air. However, the difference in average concentrations in indoor air (i.e., for "smoking" versus "non-smoking" homes) is not statistically significant, as a result of the small sample sizes (n = 29 and n = 11) and high variances of the data sets.
Divided society:
“Less than two percent of smokers would now contemplate living with non-smokers, suggesting that most smokers are looking for havens away from judgment, and calls to kick the habit have made persistent smokers more ardent.”
Off Topic, unless it's all about the lunacy anyway,....
Tobacco Control has lost it's collective mind.
From "Boston.com", your backyard Doc.
'Thirdhand' smoke beliefs linked to home smoking bans http://tinyurl.com/9zlzxu
The usual nasty and uninformed comments section follows the article.
Gotta love this one from the comments section of LB's link: "Wow. What a bunch of hothouse orchids human beings are turning out to be. Perhaps it's best the evolution wheel spin once again -- maybe an asteroid strike -- and creatures less fearful and delicate than us once again dominate the Earth."
Until recent years, I never heard such wussy whining about how disgusting and annoying secondhand smoke is – and I’ve lived a fair number of years. It looks like the great TC campaigners have succeeded beyond their wildest imaginings in enlisting for The Great Cause every prissy foible and selfish urge of mankind.
Bring on the asteroid strike!
.
OMG LB...........what a bunch of pansies commenting there!
I wonder how they explain all us baby-boomers surviving and in still in good health about to bankrupt the nation via Social Security..........I truly hope stupidity and idiocy are not contagious.
Interesting
"In fact the first observations on an appreciable rise in the frequency of lung cancer were reported from the highly industrialized cities of densely populated Saxony during the first two decades of this century.
Some years later it was found that high lung cancer rates existed for the population of the industrialized territory of the Ruhr valley, while they were below average for the agricultural region of the Main valley."
http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/...eprint/30/2/
141
China Grabs West’s Smoke-Spewing Factories
"When residents of this northern Chinese city hang their clothes out to dry, the black fallout from nearby Handan Iron and Steel often sends them back to the wash.
Half a world away, neighbors of ThyssenKrupp’s former steel mill in the Ruhr Valley of Germany once had a similar problem. The white shirts men wore to church on Sundays turned gray by the time they got home."
"These two steel towns have an unusual kinship, spanning 5,000 miles and a decade of economic upheaval. They have shared the same hulking blast furnace, dismantled and shipped piece by piece from Germany’s old industrial heartland to Hebei Province, China’s new Ruhr Valley."
"Belching and thundering 24 hours a day, the coking, iron and steel works at Hangang cover four square miles and resemble a working museum of the industrial age."
"Residents on the west side of Handan live in a miasma of dust and smoke that environmental authorities acknowledge contains numerous carcinogens. After public protests, the company agreed to pay an annual “pollution fee” to compensate some neighbors"
"Shimmering yellow and raging red, Hangang’s flare stacks burn off waste gases and inflame the night sky. A fleet of diesel locomotives hauling coal shakes the farmhouses and apartment buildings that hug the plant’s outer walls. For Handan’s 8.5 million residents, and especially the tens of thousands who live in the plant’s immediate shadow, the complex is a noisome, noxious, money-spinning, job-creating leviathan."
"Ms. Tian said she and other villagers learned to cope with Hangang’s emissions. People do not eat outdoors, she said, to avoid having black briquettes flake their rice. If her children cannot fall asleep at night, she stuffs their ears with cotton.
Some people in Mengwu have died young, she said, often of heart disease or cancer. She has no evidence to connect their deaths to the steel mill, but says she has few doubts herself."
http://www.climateark.org/shared...px?
linkid=90553
Steel Company denies cancer link suggestion
"Each year, the steel company emits 600 kilograms of chromium, a heavy metal that can cause lung cancer. A toxicologist told the programme that concentrations could be compared to those prevalent in the German Ruhr district and said more research should be done."
"At the end of last year, a health study revealed that the frequency of skin and lung cancer in the vicinity of IJmuiden is higher than in the rest of the Netherlands"
"The steel company admits that a higher than average number of women in the region develop cancer, but puts this down to their smoking habits."
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/c...us-cancer-
steel
"Coke oven emissions are known to be human carcinogens based on
sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans that indicates a causal
relationship between exposure and cancer in humans. Prior to 1950,
there were numerous case reports that linked employment in coke
production with cancers of the skin, bladder, and respiratory tract. Since
then, several cohort studies conducted in the United States, United
Kingdom, Japan, and Sweden have reported an increased risk of lung
cancer in humans exposed to coke oven emissions. Smoking was
accounted for in some of these studies and was not found to be a
significant confounding factor"
Exposure
"The primary routes of potential human exposure to coke oven emissions
are inhalation and dermal contact. Occupational exposure may occur
during the production of coke from coal or while using coke to extract
metals from their ores, to synthesize calcium carbide, or to manufacture
graphite and electrodes.
Workers at coking plants and coal tar production plants, as well as the residents surrounding these plants, have a high risk of possible exposure to coke oven emissions"
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc...es/
s049coke.pdf
Lynda,
It isn't just us baby boomers surviving, but our parents, the ones who first smoked in front of us, the people who gave birth to us, who are also still alive!
Which brings me to something I was thinking about the other day when I was so busy with houseguests throughout Christmas and the closes I could get to a cigarette at times was through secondhand smoke. Bear with me and follow the train of thought. Christopher Columbus sailed to the new world and discovered the tobacco plant which he took back to Spain. On that voyage was also Ponce DeLeon who was searching for the fountain of youth. Instead, they discovered Florida. Good old Ponce didn't realize that the answers he was seeking was right under his nose! Had he told Christopher that he had an evil plant on board that would one day kill people and the smoke that would come from it when they burned it would kill thousands more everyday, he would have realized that he really did indeed discover the fountain of youth. Hell, he might still be alive today! Instead, we had to keep that evil plant around and watch the population explode from a few thousand to 300,000 in just the USA alone, and he never even knew it! That was what? Something like 600 years ago?
Rose;
Here is another excellent example of the protected gospel.
A significant indicator of a very likely cause of Lung cancers, should be welcomed news for anyone searching for a cure.
Take a look at how this discovery was met, not by encouragement or optimism, but with out of hand disbelief and oposition.
http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-sec...r-ri-2008-12-
30
"But Stephen Spiro, deputy chairman of the British Lung Foundation, is skeptical there's a human link. "Whilst this may be a relevant observation, it has never been assessed in man," he told BBC News, "and any recent increase in high phosphate ingestion due to excessive phosphates in processed foodstuffs would be likely to take many years before they could affect tumor development in humans.""
Strange how quickly the Public health charities grasp at any theoretical straw to enhance a constant exaggeration if ETS is involved.
Protecting PM's other gravy train, as one of the largest producers of processed food, is obviously a major priority of the Public Health stakeholders.
Reference Guide on Epidemiology, Michael D. Green, D. Mical Freedman & Leon Gordis
http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.ns...le/
sciman06.pdf
Page 384
When the relative risk reaches 2.0, the agent is responsible for an equal number of cases of disease as all other background causes.
Thus, a relative risk of 2.0 implies a 50% likelihood that an exposed individual’s disease was caused by the agent.
....................................
An RR of 1.5 implies that there is a 66.7% chance a disease was caused by other background causes and only a 33.3% chance it was caused by the agent.(1 is 2/3rds of 1.5)
SG's 2006 Report states that the RR for heart disease/lung cancer due to SHS exposure is 1.2 to 1.3(average RR= 1.25).
Thus, if a nonsmoker is exposed to SHS and gets heart disease/lung cancer there is only a 20% chance the heart disease/lung cancer can be attributed to SHS and an 80% chance the heart disease/lung cancer was caused by other risk factors!!!
( 1 is 80% of 1.25)
Smoking bans would do very darn little to prevent those diseases from happening to non-smoking hospitality workers!!
Are these numbers important?
Consider this, most antis claim that there are about 50,000 deaths(mostly heart disease and lung cancer) caused by exposure to SHS.
When the antis make that claim,you can tell them that there is an 80% chance those deaths were caused by something other than SHS!!!!
You can tell the antis that the odds are 4 to 1 AGAINST any of those deaths having been caused by SHS!!!!
Happy New Year Folks!!
Per Kevins link, "and any recent increase in high phosphate ingestion due to excessive phosphates in processed foodstuffs would be likely to take many years before they could affect tumor development in humans."
This fits very well with Ernst Wynders observations in 1950.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/mo...rticle&
sid=4223
"In regard to smoking habits, we considered it particularly essential to learn how much a patient had smoked formerly, even though he might not smoke at all or smoke little at the time of the interview. The reason for this is the well known existence of a time lag between the exposure to a carcinogenic substance and the appearance of cancer. Many patients coming onto the hospital with chronic disease of the lungs had stopped smoking months or even years, previously. We therefore asked the patients to estimate the average use of tobacco during the last twenty years of their smoking period. The control patients were questioned in an identical manner; thus any possible error lying in this method of estimating smoking habits was balanced."
"Lag Period – If smoking is to be regarded as an important etiologic factor in the development of cancer of the lungs, apparently a time lag exists for this disease as well as for carcinoma of the bladder, known to occur years after cessation of exposure to aniline. We have now seen 3 cases in which clinical signs of cancer of the lung appeared ten years or more after the patient stopped smoking. The 3 patients had smoked for thirty years or more, and none gave a history of occupational or other irritative exposures. Two of them had stopped because of a bothersome chronic cough and 1 because of concomitant heart disease. In 1 of the patients, a 67 year old warehouse clerk, clinical symptom of cancer developed thirteen years after the cessation of smoking. The phenomenon of the lag period is of course well known in cancer research."
"Nearly all (98.7 percent) the cigarette smokers of the cancer group ... stated that they inhaled consciously."
30% of the tobacco consumers in Dolls study said that they did not inhale.
I'm a little confused about third hand smoke. Is the smoke that you can't smell third hand smoke or fourth hand smoke? Does just thinking about smoke cause anything?
Advocate for CASH
It's the smoke you can't smell that is the most dangerous.
Per Gary K.s great link to the "Reference Guide on Epidemiology"
A quick word search of the document found absolutely no mention of the phrase "margin of error". There was only one use of the word "marginally".
Estimating RR based on a sample of 100 yields a margin of error of plus or minus 10%. A sample size of 200 improves that to plus or minus 7%.
The RR of lung cancer from tobacco would be greatly reduced if lung cancer patients who quit smoking a year or more ago were counted as non-smokers the same way that the insurance industry counts them.
Why does Epidemiology exist in a mathematical vacuum where there is never a "margin of error"?
Advocate for CASH
It's the smoke you can't smell that is the most dangerous.
Happy New Year Gary
From 2004
"Shock horror – potatoes cause heart attacks
The BMA today called for the banning of potatoes after new research revealed that the effects of eating them and other vegetables such as aubergines have been underestimated.
That should have been the headline and story , but the actual one was Passive smoking risks greater. Well, there’s a surprise. After their Orwellian rewrite of Sir Austin Bradford Hill’s criteria for a well conducted epidemiological study (see the Big Liars), it was clear that the anti-smoking zealots at the BMA would stop at nothing in their campaign to ban smoking in public places. This time they resorted to the cotinine scam. Cotinine is a substance formed in the metabolisation of nicotine. Nicotine is a natural constituent of plants of the family solonaceae (aubergines, potatoes, capsicum, tomatoes, tobacco, deadly nightshade etc.) The story, as it was designed to, made headlines in virtually every British newspaper. Not only was it the usual epidemiological rubbish (relative risk 1.5) but it relied on the fatuous claim that the tiny amounts of nicotine absorbed by passive smoking could compare what comes with the normal diet"
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/200...2004%
20July.htm
Third hand smoke is traffic fumes drawn through the lit cigarette of a smoker made to stand outside a pub with no beer garden, next to a main road, and then exhaled.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=hn...h?
v=hnzHtm1jhL4
EinsteinSmoked wrote: "I'm a little confused about third hand smoke. Is the smoke that you can't smell third hand smoke or fourth hand smoke? Does just thinking about smoke cause anything?"
not really sure where this one fits in...
- Third hand smoke is considered the off gassing of second hand smoke.
- Fourth hand smoke is seeing someone else smoke.
an interesting stat I can across:
http://www.smokefreecalgary.com/...c.asp?
rdc_id=23
Bartenders have rates of lung cancer higher than firefighters, miners, cooks, ductworkers and dry cleaners as measured by the California Department of Health Services.
Now what are bartenders exposed too that all the other occupants aren't? could it be alcohol?
FWIW, I know-- from closely to barely-- 4 people who've had lung cancer, one of whom is alive 20+ years after surgery. But all were heavy drinkers.
:
Gary K.
"SG's 2006 Report states that the RR for heart disease/lung cancer due to SHS exposure is 1.2 to 1.3(average RR= 1.25)."
From the roulette wheel study;
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/
medlinepl...tory_72931.html
"CHD events and costs as a function of the prevalence of CHD risk
factors, including passive-smoking prevalence and a low (1.26) and high (1.65)"
Wouldn't it be great if the Public Health Community could police themselves and live by the same levels of "principle" they hope to impose by dividing communities?
When you look at the levels of exaggeration built upon exaggeration, they only demonstrate their own hypocrisy, paired with the "all about me" bigotry, dominating the substance in everything they preach.
"Bartenders have rates of lung cancer higher than firefighters, miners, cooks, ductworkers and dry cleaners as measured by the California Department of Health Services."
This is contradicted by factual evidence from Germany:
... the occupational health researchers from Mannheim scrutinized alleged risk elevation for lung cancer among exposed hospitality employees. Once again, they did own empirical work, using data by health insurance providers about millions of employees in Germany, comparing the hospitality worker to peoples working in other branches of trade . Their conclusion:
“In contrast to the estimated data in the “calculated” models, this analysis of real patients’ data
showed results that prove a lot less lung cancers, and heart and bronchial diseases of employees in this sector, compared to other sectors. There was no distinction between smokers and non-smokers.“
If reality does not support epidemiologist charlatanry, then reality must be wrong.
http://forces-germany.blogspot.c...th-
experts.html
Farmers benefit from planting tobacco
"Over the past four years, China's State Tobacco Monopoly Administration has invested 20 billion yuan building irrigation facilities, water reservoirs and other infrastructure in a number of starving villages across the country.
The administration's only request is that the villagers grow tobacco, among other crops"
"The move echoes calls from the central government that the tobacco administration makes efforts to lift farmers out of poverty, considering most tobacco fields are located in remote and poor regions.
Out of the country's 592 poverty-stricken counties, 185 now grow tobacco." http://english.people.com.cn/900...01/
6565034.html
Bayer to make medicines from tobacco
""Medicinal products from plants or even tobacco for health could soon become reality"
"In the future, the active substances produced in the tobacco plants could be used to develop new approaches to the therapy and prevention of diseases for which the current medical options are not satisfactory"
http://www.domain-b.com/
companie...16_tobacco.html
Of course the problem for all these tobacco based medicines is that the antismoking organizations have been so busy demonizing tobacco that very few people will dare use them.
82% think nicotine causes cancer - Getting the facts right about NRT
http://www.responsesource.com/re...php?
relid=QXEAi
Medical Uses of Tobacco, Past and Present
"Though tobacco is no longer an official drug, it still is, as judged from the case reports of thera- peutic overdosage which appear from time to time in the literature, not infrequently used as a folk medicine as indeed, are virtually all herbs and plants.
It_is a curious fact in the history of therapeutics that plants (or plant products) which have once had a place in orthodox medicine, and which then, after having been discarded by "scientific medicine" of a later day, have continued to be used in folk-medicine, still later when their active ingredient has been discovered and pharmacologically investigated, become once more respectable members of the therapeutic family"
http://tobaccodocuments.org/ness...ed&
start_page=1
Should be interesting to watch.
Ban on battery-powered smokes
"Health Minister Daniel Andrews today said it would be illegal to sell the nicotine cartridges necessary to use the device"
"The new regulation, which comes into effect tomorrow, outlaws the manufacture, sale, supply, purchase, possession or use of unregulated nicotine delivery systems.
The decision will have no effect on the sale of nicotine replacement therapies, which are used to assist people stop smoking."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/
lifea...0399252080.html
Happy New Year everyone!
Special wishes just for Bill........just don't ruin your celebrations tonight...wait until tomorrow to start your hate campaign again:
December 30
With more smoking room, casinos roll on
Mohegan Sun could get news today on more space based on machine use by smokers.
By Andrew M. Seder aseder@timesleader.com
Staff Writer
PLAINS TWP. -- The same law designed to curtail smoking in public places will allow casinos, including Mohegan Sun at Pocono Downs, to increase the smoking section of their gaming area.
Mohegan Sun could have state permission, as early as today, to double the size of its slot parlor smoking area. The casino would join four other Pennsylvania gambling sites, including Mount Airy Casino Resort in Paradise Township, Monroe County, that meet criteria under the Clean Indoor Air Act and have received approval.
Based on average machine revenue, when compared between the smoking and non-smoking sections, all seven casinos have met the requirements to expand smoking areas from the law’s initial maximum of 25 percent of the slot machine floor to the maximum of 50 percent.
http://www.timesleader.com/news/...12-30-
2008.html
Found that over at the Smokers' Club this morning.
So sad the State doesn't give the small mom & pop businesses the same considerations.
So Bill, after reading Lynda's post of extending the floor space in the smoking sections of casino's, maybe you might come forward and admit that this was the reason the State Legislators of PA insisted that casino's be exempted from the Statewide ban that you insisted on. Seems that they knew where the smokers would go and seeing that a fraction of that gambling money goes to the State, their hands were extended even further than they were before. You call it health, the rest of us calls it money and this article proves us right!
Investigation of the evidence at hand demonstrates conclusively, there was never a moral or physiological benefit found or expressed by the implementation of smoking bans or cigarette taxes.
The bully approach by the me first cabal, simply illuminates the hateful nature and lack of integrity of all who promoted these strategies.
Promotion of smoking bans are a violent act, which seek comfort for the supporters at the expense and indignity of others. To simply claim they are an effort to "help someone quit" while ignoring the fact many are not seeking to quit, is a childish attempt to quell inner guilt, or to make excuses for a failure or refusal, to look at ones self to understand why support was given.
There was always another option as we have seen with other hazardous warnings, placing a sign on the door allows choices, both of employment and of potential clientele in a free market society, which will allow comfort for all with not loss of dignity or cohesive communities. The same communities when left to their own devices have always found the means to get along.
When the State stoops so low as to dictate personal behaviors and dole out assessments of personal worth, by means of a presumption of guilt. That government defiles their office, the tenets of personal freedom and democracy but most significantly they defile all of people they serve.
As the year progressed we saw new innovations in physical treatments put on the back burner, for possible implementation only after stringent investigation. While the antagonists sat on the edge of their seats all to eager to immediately accept; any theory, method or statement which endorsed their comfort.
The lack of principles by those who earn a living enforcing and restricting the principles of others, has grown beyond all reasonable proportion and the time for their regulation is well past due.
It is time to beat them with their own stick of morality.
Antis claim that smoking bans are absolutely necessary to preserve the health of hospitality workers because SG Carmona said in a press conference that "there is no safe level of exposure to SHS."
However, that is not exactly what his 2006 report said!
The report said:"evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke".
So,just what level of risk is there from exposure to SHS?
The level of risk runs from SLIM(20%) to NONE(almost non-existent)!!!!
The chances that a smoking ban will make a difference in preserving the health of hospitality workers or patrons are SLIM TO NONE!!!!!
With an RR of 1.25 for coronary heart disease/lung cancer,there is an 80% chance that a nonsmoker's having these diseases was caused by other risk factors and only a 20% chance they were caused by SHS exposure.
That is a SLIM chance or level of risk.
This is what the SG's Report has to say about stroke,asthma,asthma attack,atherosclerosis(hardening of the arteries),nasal irritation,acute respiratory symptoms including cough, wheeze, chest tightness, and difficulty breathing among persons with asthma,chronic respiratory symptoms,a small decrement in lung function in the general population,Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease(Emphysema and other stuff):
"The evidence is suggestive but not sufficient to infer a causal relationship between secondhand smoke exposure and the above dieases".
The chances that they are caused by SHS is almost non-existent or the level of risk is about ZERO(NONE)!!!
The nonsmoker's level of risk for these diseases from SHS exposure runs all the way from SLIM(20%) to NONE(almost non-existent)!!!!
Public walkways again:
http://www.nhregister.com/articl...1-
nosmoking.txt
Excerpt:
“Al Gloer, an engineer in information systems, said he likes the idea of smoke-free sidewalks. A non-smoker whose mother died of lung disease, he said he approved of a smoking ban.
“‘If you make it hard enough, people might be induced to quit,’ he said.”
Reminds me of another citizen jackbooter and his proposal to substantially increase cigarette taxes in order to ‘induce’ smokers to quit, but called there an “intervention.”
Happy New Year all.
.
Good news for New Year, as all US federal government buildings will soon become smokefree, and the smokefree policy will be extended to outdoor courtyards and within 25 feet of building entrances.
Stricter Smoking Ban Set for Federal Offices
New Regulation Eliminates Exceptions
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp...d=moreheadlines
I agree with Lynda that there is no legitimate rationale for treating large casinos differently than smaller mom and pop restaurants and bars when it comes to secondhand smoke regulation. I also think that Diane is right when she suggests that these policy makers are all about the money, and not about protecting people's health.
Happy New Year everyone!
That is good news Bill, now the paternalists, will have to live by their own demands.
That should invoke a pressure to change from the absolutes, among many legislators who's egos like to be stroked but never mothered.
The really good news is that although the perversion of science is not limited to the zealots in Public Health agencies such as TC, some in the field still care if it retains a sense of integrity and credibility beyond the cultist fads and frauds.
Eventually things change and sanity rises back to the top;
http://epw.senate.gov/public/ind...5d-
6e2d71db52d9
"Skeptical scientists are gaining recognition despite what many say is a bias against them in
parts of the scientific community and are facing significant funding disadvantages. Dr.
William M. Briggs, a climate statistician who serves on the American Meteorological
Society's Probability and Statistics Committee, explained that his colleagues described
“absolute horror stories of what happened to them when they tried getting papers published
that explored non-‘consensus’ views.” In a March 4, 2008, report Briggs described the
behavior as “really outrageous and unethical … on the parts of some editors. I was
shocked.” (LINK) [Note: An August 2007 report detailed how proponents of man-made
global warming fears enjoy a monumental funding advantage over skeptical scientists.
LINK A July 2007 Senate report details how skeptical scientists have faced threats and
intimidation - LINK & LINK ]"
The article Harry links to mentions a push for smoke-free sidewalks in the area around Yale New-Haven Hospital. As someone who lived in that area for 4 years (during medical school), I can testify that smoking on the sidewalks is the least of the threats to the public's health in that area. The greatest threat is lack of pedestrian safety -- in fact, a medical student was recently killed crossing the intersection after a hospital shift. Crime is also a major problem. I was mugged on a sidewalk in that area in broad daylight. While I was assaulted by a person, I was never assaulted by smoke, as I could easily avoid smoke exposure if I wanted to and it was minimal walking down the sidewalk anyway. I'm not sure why this is such a priority, especially given these other pressing concerns - where people are actually dropping dead before our eyes. If I were a parent of the woman who was killed at the intersection, I would be livid that officials are doing more to protect people from a few whiffs of smoke than to make the area safe for residents to cross the streets without being struck by a car or physically assaulted.
The Nanny State progresses, intervention by intervention:
http://www.democratandchronicle....00326/1002/
NEWS
The interventionist Dr. Cook thinks that an 18 percent obesity tax on soft drinks and other sugary beverages is not the “tipping point” that would “change behavior,” and that daily physical education classes in public schools should be mandatory. Maybe at the expense of English and science?
And the author of the article, Mark Hare:
“I'm not opposed to using taxes to discourage (sic) particularly unhealthy behavior, such as smoking. And in fact, a hefty tax on cigarettes ($2.75 per pack in New York state, with an additional $.39 per pack federal excise tax) has helped to curb smoking, especially among adolescents.
“But the tax is just one part of the effort to curtail tobacco use — along with laws that ban smoking in most public places and growing public disapproval of smoking.”
How easily these fascist baby steps are taken once the new paradigm sets in! Notice that Hare doesn’t try to justify interfering in the lives of free citizens; he no longer needs to. Already, we’ve reached, as to tobacco, the bright new stage of groupthink (with fatty foods fast closing in); so that all an intervener need do now is reinforce it by repetition. And more and more, the soul (and behavior) of the individual belongs to the collective.
I do like the brilliance of levies on hair cuts, though. Barbers must be avid for its introduction.
.
"If I were a parent of the woman who was killed at the intersection, I would be livid that officials are doing more to protect people from a few whiffs of smoke than to make the area safe for residents to cross the streets without being struck by a car or physically assaulted."
Michael;
You really need to experience the reaction I get, when telling a police officer half my age they are sounding a lot like my mother when I was six.
Try it next time you get one of those patented policy lectures and watch what happens. The rage and stammering loss of words is hysterical to watch when you know what inspires it.
Denial...
Public Health is painting the same picture and it seeds a lot of things, respect will never be on the list.
Harry;
"I do like the brilliance of levies on hair cuts, though. Barbers must be avid for its introduction."
Never forget the red stripe on a barbers poll stands as the last reminder. Surgeons primary training was at one time, focused on learning how to cut your hair.
Some things never change, although the price has risen considerably. The initial mindset of finding your intelligence by gossip and group think, is still very much a large part of the medical process.
Kevin, - "Some things never change"...
"Public Health" claims to know the costs of everything, yet they routinely demonstrate they know the value of nothing.
Harry,
I have been talking to and reading many remarks from people about all the new taxes Paterson wants for New York so to balance Albany's out of control spending. I love the ones from the non or anti smokers when they hear that their pepsi is about to cost them another 18 cents! They are planning trips to Vermont to buy their sodas! First the Indian reservations and now Vermont! I am sure that it won't be long when we will be seeing border crossing guards on the highways between States and they will be there to inspect our purchases!
Also heard on the news today that while retail sales were down during the Christmas season, retailers are expecting a sharp increase of liquor sold today for New Years Eve. The anchor lady said "For some reason, people seem to be staying home now and don't go to bars anymore". Duh! Guess she doesn't remember reporting on smoking bans but then again, memory is not a prerequisite for being a news anchor. Just try to read the teleprompter as we have your lines written out for you! A non thinking job!
LB;
"Kevin, - "Some things never change"...
"Public Health" claims to know the costs of everything, yet they routinely demonstrate they know the value of nothing."
Barbers initially calling themselves surgeons and now they add to the resume by claiming to be Bar and Hotel managers, Parenting experts, Sooth Sayers, Economists Police officers, Structural engineers and air quality experts, along with a host of other professions combined.
With all the on the job training being claimed, jack of all and master of none, seems much more likely.
"Good news for New Year, as all US federal government buildings will soon become smokefree"
Good for you Bill, now you can walk the hallways of the White House without beeing molested by smoke.
What's in it for you, Bill, really. How would smoke in a federal building 8or any building he never visits) be a nuisance for a long-time smoker?
It's now the New Year, and I believe it should be started on a note of sympathy for all those women (and perhaps a few men) who find that after a night spent boozing in a smokey bar they have to wash their hair to cleanse it of the stink of secondhand smoke. Surely, they're the most put-upon of all those (and the numbers are legion) who are grievously assaulted by smokers, and who, it seems, can't live a decent, quiet social life without being thrown in with a bunch of vile and inconsiderate bastards.
Also, my condolences -- and admiration -- go to Dr. Siegel, who seemingly turned the lesson of a mugging on the streets of New Haven into a positive by advocating, in turn, the mugging of smokers -- with the sincerest of movives and for their own good, of course -- by his recent advocacy of substantial cigarette tax increases in order to correct the errant behavior of those who are mugged by their own addiction. Great advocacy, Dr. Siegel! All thefts are not created equal.
Finally, being a smoker myself, I apologize for the stinky clothes and dry-cleaning bills. In a way, that's perhaps the most grievous thing of all, since it both assaults the nostrils and lightens the purse. Or, as the old philosopher said: Who assaults my nose is a meany; but who assaults my purse is a thief. Lesson learned, I hope; and all you ratbag smokers should take notice.
.
Latest; Pueblo revisited:
http://health.yahoo.com/news/ap/
..._ban_heart.html
.
“If I were a parent of the woman who was killed at the intersection, I would be livid that officials are doing more to protect people from a few whiffs of smoke than to make the area safe for residents to cross the streets without being struck by a car or physically assaulted.” Michael Siegel
Yep. Now imagine a parent having to live with the fact that their child’s short life was plagued with harassment by and through government endorsed fraud, and denied a proper and well deserving place in society ,simply because he or she smoked. (I refuse to be specific because anti- smokers sights seem to be unlimited).
Apologies to Godshall, who beat me to reporting the new study on the latest string.
This should be meat for independent analysis.
.
Harry: "All thefts are not created equal."
... but some are government "sponsored" and are therefore considered legal.
It seems to me that I have read that Pueblo study before and for some reason I am picturing different dates and different city names. Just the study itself sounds so familiar. Does it ring a bell to you Doctor? Has anyone else read such a study? They wouldn't take an old study and just change dates and zip codes now would they? Not the honorable TC movement.
Happy New Years to all!
Was it this one, http://www.co.jefferson.co.us/
ne...tem_T3_R100.htm
The study evaluated the number of heart attacks in Pueblo, Colo., during a three-year period from January of 2002 to December of 2004. This time frame covered the year and a half before the Smoke-Free Air Act went into effect on July 1, 2003, as well as a year and a half afterward.
Findings of the Pueblo study were presented at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions 2005 conference in Dallas on Nov. 14.
Key Findings:
The study showed that heart attack rates in Pueblo decreased by 27 percent after implementation of the city’s smoke-free ordinance.
In the year and a half before Pueblo’s smoke-free ordinance went into effect, 399 heart attack patients were admitted to Pueblo’s two primary hospitals. In the year and a half following enactment of the ordinance, the number of heart attack admissions dropped to 291, representing 108 fewer heart attack patients or a decrease of 27 percent.
Pueblo, Colo., is the second U.S. community to examine data on hospital admissions for heart attacks following the institution of a comprehensive indoor smoke-free ordinance.
The Pueblo study’s findings are similar to a study done in Helena, Mont., which noted a 40 percent drop in hospital admissions for heart attacks during a six-month period when Helena first implemented its smoking ordinance. Pueblo’s study reinforces the Helena findings based on similar but improved methodology, including a sample size that was three times the one used in Helena.
The Pueblo study didn’t distinguish between smokers and non-smokers; it represented the entire population. These numbers represent a combination of both smokers and those impacted by secondhand smoke.
http://tobaccofree.mt.gov/
public...lofactsheet.pdf
benpal,
There's an old folk song line you may be familiar with. It goes something like:
"As through this life I wander
And as through this life I roam
I've met lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen ...
Might be that Dr. Siegel got robbed with a six gun. So he turns around and robs us with a fountain pen. It's much more genteel.
.
New Pueblo study, I believe, as: "Hot off the press!" This is a 3-year job. What continues to flummox me is why none of these marvelous results showed up in California, which has a longer and broader history of smoke-free laws. A special place, I guess.
.
The song Harry refers to is Pretty Boy Floyd, a Woody Guthrie song. The exact lyrics are:
"Yes, as through this world I've wandered
I've seen lots of funny men;
Some will rob you with a six-gun,
And some with a fountain pen.
And as through your life you travel,
Yes, as through your life you roam,
You won't never see an outlaw
Drive a family from their home."
Interestingly, I see this as a confirmation of the sanctity of the home - even an outlaw wouldn't dare drive a family from its home. Unfortunately, many anti-smoking groups do not seem to have an appreciation for the sanctity of the home, as they want to control non-life-threatening, lawful health behaviors inside the home.
I think we should all be grateful, doctor, that Guthrie managed to teach you even half a lesson.
.
Unless, of course, your "home" is in an apartment building and someone with a rare tropical disease decides to move next door, or even 17 floors away. And except, of course, if your "home" is a nursing home or asylum...
"What continues to flummox me is why none of these marvelous results showed up in California, which has a longer and broader history of smoke-free laws. A special place, I guess."
.................
Here is what happened in California.
http://www.nycclash.com/
tripleri...sk.html#Montana
As it turns out, California data are readily available on the web. I thought that if the result were true, economists would have already written papers on the subject and if not then I should probably do so. So I took a quick look and found that there was no noticeable change in California's rate of heart attacks after the smoking ban started:
Year- Hospital Discharges for
"Heart Failure and Shock"
(DRG 127),as a percent of total discharges
1997 =2.33%
1998 =2.44%
1999 =2.36%
The ban in California took effect on January 1, 1998, so if the results from Montana are credible then there should surely be an effect in California in 1998, but there were actually a bit over 5,000 more hospital admissions for heart attacks in 1998 than 1997.
Is some of that population growth? Perhaps, but heart attacks as a percentage of hospital admissions also increased in 1998 (note: a death counts as a "discharge", so discharges are essentially equivalent to admissions).
California heart attacks fell from 1998 to 1999, but not back to their 1997 (pre-ban) levels--measured either in the number of attacks or attacks as a percentage of discharges.
Are the Pueblo results probable?
As posted here on 12.30.08 - 5:46 pm:
SG's 2006 Report states that the RR for heart disease/lung cancer due to SHS exposure is 1.2 to 1.3(average RR= 1.25).
Thus, if a nonsmoker is exposed to SHS and gets heart disease/lung cancer there is only a 20% chance the heart disease/lung cancer can be attributed to SHS and an 80% chance the heart disease/lung cancer was caused by other risk factors!!!
( 1 is 80% of 1.25)
http://www.lungusa.org/site/
c.dv..._Fact_Sheet.htm
The risk of dying from a heart attack is 60 percent higher for smokers than nonsmokers 65 or older.
(NOTE: That is an RR=1.6,meaning a 63% chance a smoker's death from heart disease was NOT caused by smoking.)
When there is an 80% chance a non-smoker's heart disease was caused by something other than SHS and a 63% chance a smoker's heart disease was caused by something other than smoking,it is a stunning lie to claim that a smoking ban leads to a drop heart disease hospital admissions!
Doc, they all deserve the award!
All Anti-Smoking is Hypocrisey!
Doc, they all deserve the award!
All Anti-Smoking is Hypocrisey!
How about a mutual denunciation society? Not as denunciatory as towards smokers, of course.
You see, every entity could have one issue they actually aren't hypocritical on, and they can denounce everyone else for being hypocritical, but the majority generally agrees, and so the movement can head forward with a semblance of rigorous discussion and everyone said "well, I tried to keep the worst bits in check."
But as we’re in a holiday mood here and anything goes, with your “choice,” are you saying there’s such a thing as free will?
And, "All the bans shall be lifted!" What -- even on outdoor patios?
. ~Harry
LOL, Harry! YES & YES! Sounds good!
.
Kevin, I agree with Harry on the ventilation thing (although I love ventilation ), but I'm with you on global warming. Did you see this?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/
0,2...,468084,00.html
Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria'
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
.
Darn it, Walt. The link is no longer working. Pooh! Thanks!
Kayci--
That article is so good, and so useful for your purpose, it's worth trying to get it-- even buy it-- from their archives. In fact, I might do the same for my "files." Couldn't find a link to their archives on the website, www.startribune.com, but got their phone number: (612) 673-4000 where you can try to talk to their Library. Or Morgue. The original headline was something like "Ban Splits Town" . I sent the link to myself in July 2005 tho the article itself may have an earlier date. If it's helpful in your search, if you feel like searching, the original URL was
startribune.com/stories/1659/826412.html
IIRC, it tells how outsiders and ALA (etc) lobbyists came in pushing for a ban which they got, and how the result was that a close-knit community was suddenly riven into ugly factions involving neighbor against neighbor, former friend against former friend, how businesses closed, and some of the councilfolks who sponsored the ban were turned on bitterly. I believe that one of them became so hated that she actually left town.
:
Walt, I will call them. Conflicts in once peaceful communities seem to be the most apparent results of smoking bans. I can barely believe the venom in the local paper from the non-smokers. It looks like the bans are releasing the inner bigot. It's very disturbing.
Kayci & Walt.
I didn't get a chance to read the startrib article, but I believe I found another link to the article:
December 28, 2008
Return of the Great Society?
http://
www.realclearpolitics.com...sons_czars.html
or
http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x16...-in-style-
again
Lynda D--
Nope, the article I'm talking about was c. 2005 and about a town in Minnesota.
However, I did earlier quote the first paragraph of that George Will piece on account of its illustrating how scares are manufactured.
;
Kayci,
Whether or not global warming is hysteria, I think anyone with an ounce of self-preservation instincts knows it's probably not a good idea to be pushed around by the latest scare that might be that arises from it.
Unfortunately global warming has emerged as a socially conscious way to talk about the weather and even something to blame if things go wrong in general.
Sort of like second hand smoke with various diseases. It's the sort of annoying gossip that can snowball even if it's properly assessed and checked.
It's always a dangerous situation where uninformed people see a way to fast track themselves to look informed, and that is what happens with any media blitz regardless of how well intentioned.
Walt, thanks for the reminder about George Will. I forget how interesting he is even if I often disagree with him.
Andrew, I'm fascinated with the world's fears about diseases, money, fuel shortages, taxes, alcohol, salt, sugar, BMI's, peanuts, allergies... (etc., ad nauseum), and how a few (with money) can influence the general public, and how easily we sometimes follow right along.
Determining the degree of value of a person dependent on how many papers and coins they have amassed needs to become obsolete.
I think most people with a lot of money presume they have a right to dictate to the rest of us. America has done nothing more than set up a Royalty-by-Finances system to Lord & Lady it over the rest of us. The sooner money goes, the better off we will all be. The exchange system must change and I believe that is what we are viewing in our (very exciting) times.
That will take care of the rest of the manipulation and fabrication of public opinion. I think.
We cannot live in fear much longer. Well, I don't know - that might be relative 
.
2 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
