| Author |
Message |
    
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 851
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, March 24, 2005 - 2:01 pm: | 
|
A somewhat recent article about secondhand smoke:
Philip Morris Hid Research on Tobacco Smoke
Parts extracted from Reuters, 11/11/04
LONDON (Reuters) - Philip Morris, the world's largest tobacco manufacturer, was involved in research into the health effects of tobacco smoke 30 years ago but did not reveal its findings, scientists said on Thursday.
Although the tobacco industry claimed for many years that it was not aware of the toxic effects of cigarettes, the researchers said material from internal industry documents revealed Philip Morris used a German research facility to study the health impact of smoking from the early 1970s.
"Arrangements were made to conceal the process," said Martin McKee, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in London, in research published online by The Lancet medical journal.
McKee told Reuters that although the company has said for a long time that the evidence on the harmful effect of passive smoking is debatable, they had been undertaking research that showed secondhand smoke is dangerous.
"In particular, the unpublished reports provided evidence that secondhand smoke is even more harmful than mainstream smoke, a finding of particular relevance given the industry's continuing denial of the harmful effects of passive smoking," McKee and Swiss colleagues said in the journal.
"Given the continuing debate about the way governments should respond to calls for smokefree workplace laws, we have published this work early online to inform that discussion as a matter of urgency," Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, said in an editorial.
New York-based Altria Group Inc, the parent company of Philip Morris, said the allegations in the journal were not new and had been made in many product-liability lawsuits filed against Philip Morris.
|
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 853
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 1:52 pm: |
|
Montana House Passes Smokefree Workplace Bill
Bars and casinos given four years to comply
Parts excerpted from the Associated Press, 3/30/05
HELENA, MT -- A bill that prohibits smoking in public places passed a final vote in the Montana State House today by a margin of 58-to-41.
House Bill 643, sponsored by Democratic Representative Tim Dowell of Kalispell, requires clean indoor air in all public places and workplaces, but allows bars and casinos four years to comply.
Dowell says the phase-in of bars and casinos is a compromise between health advocates, the Montana Tavern Association, and the Montana gaming industry.
Supporters say the bill will help reduce the harmful effects of second hand smoke, especially on those who work in smoky environments.
House Bill 643 will be referred to a Senate Committee where it will once again be heard. If the bill passes the Senate and is signed by the governor, the smokefree workplace law would take effect October 1. The exemption for bars and casinos would expire September 30, 2009. |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 860
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, April 3, 2005 - 6:02 pm: |
|
Mankato (MN) Passes Smokefree Workplace Law
Air pollution should be regulated by government, not big business
Parts excerpted from the Mankato Reporter, 3/3/05
Mankato, Minnesota-- The Mankato City Council approved a citywide smokefree workplace ordinance by a vote of 6-1. The ordinance eliminates smoking in bars, restaurants, and all other enclosed public places. It takes effect on July 1, 2006.
More than a dozen Mankato and North Mankato citizens, bar and restaurant owners and employees, and physicians voiced their opinions at the meeting.
Mankato physician Steve Penkhus explained how the city would benefit from clean indoor air. Since airlines, theaters, taxis, and other public places went smokefree, there hasn't been a decline in business. Penkhus added that 1,700 cities and 11 states have smokefree workplace laws, and about 300 studies have shown that there has been no economic loss.
Jeff Bukowski, a recent graduate of Bethany College, worked as a restaurant server in Mankato for four years. "Secondhand smoke, after a seven-hour shift, being constantly blown in my face with cancer-causing chemicals would make me sick for the whole next day," he said.
"I beg for you to have the courage to vote this into effect so the citizens of Mankato can breath clean air, especially the workers," the former Applebee's employee said.
Bukowski's speech was the only one to receive applause from the audience.
Business owner Dan Wagner presented a petition with about 2,300 signatures against the smokefree workplace proposal. "I believe personal issues should be left to individuals," Wagner said. "By voting [in favor of clean air] you are intruding on an owner's private property."
|
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 861
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - 7:53 am: |
|
More good smokefree news:
Restaurants, bars gain business under smokefree law
Clean indoor air is good for business and good for health
Parts excerpted from the Boston Globe, 4/4/05
Sales and employment at Massachusetts restaurants and bars grew during the first six months of a statewide smokefree workplace law, disproving predictions that the law would inflict serious damage on the hospitality industry, Harvard researchers are scheduled to report today.
As part of the study, analysts from the Harvard School of Public Health tested the air in 27 bars and restaurants both before and after the ban went into effect last July 5. The result: Cancer-causing toxins plummeted by 93 percent once cigarettes, cigars, and pipes were banished.
The findings arrive as the campaign to eliminate smoking from its last indoor public havens gains momentum not just nationally but globally, with European nations, led by Ireland, moving to extinguish the tradition of a Scotch and a smoke at pubs, nightclubs, and restaurants.
It is a movement hailed as a signal public health triumph and a sweeping social shift. But an increasing body of evidence also suggests that what's good for the health of workers and patrons may also boost the bottom line of businesses.
''Now, we can tell other states considering this kind of law: 'If you implement this law, you're not only going to have a better work environment -- you don't have to affect the economics of your hospitality industry,' " said Gregory Connolly, an author of the Harvard study and former chief of the tobacco control program at the Massachusetts Department of Public Health.
The Harvard researchers reviewed state tax records for all restaurants, bars, and nightclubs from July through December of last year -- the first six months of the statewide ban -- and compared them with receipts for the comparable period in previous years.
To make an apples-to-apples comparison, the researchers took into account inflation. Even after doing that, they found that tax collections on meals rose about 9 percent after the ban went into effect compared with the July through December average for 1999 through 2003. The researchers also found that alcoholic beverage excise tax collections remained essentially steady.
Similarly, the figures showed a slight rise in the number of people working in restaurants and bars.
''We had anticipated and projected that, but no one believed us," said Joyce Redford, director of the North Shore Tobacco Control Program, which covers nine cities and towns. ''Now look: Lo and behold, it's exactly what happened."
Even the business alliance that once stood determinedly in opposition to the ban, sending it to repeated defeats on Beacon Hill, concedes that the law has had no negative effects.
''It caused kind of a minor blip in business at first," said Gail Anastas, director of communications for the Massachusetts Restaurant Association. ''But then they did things to attract people back. Everybody just wanted a level playing field, and when it went statewide, it made it the same for everyone."
The statewide smokefree workplace law, approved overwhelmingly by legislators and signed into law last year by Governor Mitt Romney, ended a patchwork of tobacco prohibitions that had begun one evening in November 1993. That's when the people of Brookline, gathered in Town Meeting, enacted what was then the most comprehensive smokefree workplace laws in the commonwealth's history.
In the years that followed, dozens of cities and towns approved similar laws, including Boston and most of its suburbs.
Almost overnight, lawmakers who once stood in rigid opposition to a statewide smokefree workplace law became equally staunch proponents.
Their zeal was frequently more political than medical: phones on Beacon Hill rang with calls from constituent restaurant and tavern owners fearful that competitors in communities without bans would poach smoking customers. ''Level the playing field" became the rallying cry.
Brookline conducted some of the earliest studies evaluating the economic consequences of smoking bans and found that restaurants and bars overall in the town weren't hurt by the prohibition.
''It may happen that there are losses for some individual businesses that have staked their entire revenue stream on smokers," said Alan Balsam, Brookline's public health commissioner. ''But those establishments are few and far between."
Businesses that violate the statewide ban are subject to fines of up to $300, and smokers can be hit with penalties of up to $100. But cities and towns have found that once patrons and business owners have time to get used to the rule, compliance becomes uniform.
In Boston, where smoking was banned in May 2003, the Public Health Commission has recorded just a dozen violations since the start of this year, and none of them was for illegal smoking. Instead, they involved infractions such as failing to post the required no-smoking signs.
The state Department of Public Health as well as local health boards recorded a total of 498 complaints about improper puffing during the first six months of the regulation. It turned out that about two-thirds of those calls came from restaurant and bar workers complaining that their own employers weren't doing enough to prevent smoking, said Eileen Sullivan, director of tobacco control policy at the state public health agency.
The Harvard researchers found vastly different situations before and after the ban at the bars and restaurants they monitored in five cities, Lynn, Malden, Quincy, Waltham, and Worcester. Before the ban, smoke got in their eyes.
''When we went back after the ban," said Carrie Carpenter, one of the Harvard research analysts, ''it was much more enjoyable to go in there. It was more like a restaurant and less like a dirty bar."
George Harrington has run a restaurant and bar in downtown Salem for 15 years, and on Friday night, his Lyceum Bar & Grill was electric with activity. There was a time when his bar was a haven for inveterate smokers, so he greeted a tobacco ban with trepidation.
But, then, something unexpected happened.
''We're serving a lot more food at the bar," Harrington said, over the clink of glasses and clatter of plates. ''People like sitting at the bar, chatting and eating. They didn't do it before because there might be somebody sitting next to them smoking. That's been a major plus for our bar business.
''And now I can wear a shirt two days in a row."
|
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 4062
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 5, 2005 - 8:55 am: |
|
Go Jamie. I dont often read the whole posts but good for you for keeping it current. |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 865
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 12:15 am: |
|
Thanks Duncan, I'm trying to keep things current.
I was in NYC last night - bars are packed - I don't think the ban has deterred people from frequenting these establishments. It's so nice not smelling like an ashtray afterwards.
Kathy, do you know when the vote comes up in the State Senate? |
Kathy Leventhal
Citizen
Username: Kml
Post Number: 41
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 8:18 am: |
|
I'm on the legislature's alert list on this bill and haven't heard anything about the Senate date. They've been working on the budget. Word is that it will be addressed before the summer break, but that could change.
When I spoke with Senator Adler last month he was very hopeful for passage. I'll keep you posted as I hear more.
Kathy Leventhal
Maplewood Township Committee |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 4094
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, April 11, 2005 - 3:38 pm: |
|
Jamie, I am sure you heard about the British study that stated that second hand smoke has been linked to generations beyond. That it gets into your biochemistry and can be passed from smoking parent, to their child and, even if that child doesn't smoke, from that child to his/her child. I don't have time to find the link right now, but it shouldn't be hard to find.
DIsturbing science in any event. |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 880
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - 11:19 pm: |
|
Montana Becomes Nation's 8th Smokefree Workplace State
Montana joins CA, DE, NY, CT, ME, MA, and RI
Parts excerpted from the Associated Press, 4/19/05
Yesterday, Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer signed smokefree workplace legislation into
law. Montana becomes the nation's 8th smokefree workplace state, joining
California, Delaware, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island.
The law takes effect Oct. 1 for all restaurants, buildings, and offices, but it will
not apply to Montana's bars for another four years, a concession opposed by major
health groups.
"This is classic example of what can happen in Montana with commonsense people
finding Montana common ground," Schweitzer, a Democrat, said during a signing
ceremony at the Capitol. "This will protect children for generations to come."
"Montana has taken a major step in the right direction," says Joe Cherner, Founder
of BREATHE (Bar and Restaurant Employees Advocating Together for a Healthy
Environment). "We are happy that most workers will be breathing clean indoor air
shortly. We only wish the health of bar/casino workers was treated with the same
amount of respect and caring."
Over the years, Madison Avenue has used Montana as a backdrop in some of the
Marlboro Man cigarette ads depicting rugged cowboys puffing on cigarettes while
riding horseback.
Dr. Richard Sargent of Helena, a longtime advocate of smokefree workplace
legislation, said other states were stunned to learn that "Marlboro Country" decided
to go smokefree. The development in Montana may spur similar laws elsewhere, he
said. "In the end, this is a health issue and we're going to protect the health of
the people of Montana," Sargent said. "We finally got it done and a lot sooner than
we thought."
|
SO Refugee
Citizen
Username: So_refugee
Post Number: 228
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 7:56 pm: |
|
I'm sure smoke-free thing is all just a fad and, before you know it, it will be cool to walk around smelling like an ashtray with brown teeth and yellow fingers. Then, the laws will revert back to allow all of us to enjoy the stench on our clothes and coughing brown chunks of lung on our pillows at night. |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 4187
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 - 8:01 pm: |
|
or more specifically the alveoli  |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 891
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Monday, May 9, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Columbus (Ohio) and Austin (Texas) Vote Smokefree
Smokefree workplace legislation is a matter of respect and dignity for workers.
May 8, 2005... Voters in Columbus (OH) and Austin (TX) approved ballot measures requiring clean indoor air in all workplaces, including restaurants and bars. Columbus is the nation's 15th largest city. Austin is the nation's 16th largest city.
Columbus and Austin join New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Boston, and hundreds of other U.S. cities in providing clean indoor air in the workplace.
"Smokefree workplace legislation is a matter of respect and dignity for workers," says Joe Cherner, founder of BREATHE (Bar and Restaurant Employees Advocating Together for a Healthy Environment). "All workers deserve clean, healthy, smokefree air to breathe where they work." |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 915
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 2:50 pm: |
|
Welcome to Smoke-Free Sweden
Sweden joins Ireland, Norway, Italy, and Malta in leading Europe smokefree
Parts excerpted from the Swedish Institute, 5/27/05
On June 1, restaurants, cafes, bars and nightclubs throughout Sweden open their doors to a breath of fresh air. A smokefree workplace law is the latest step in the country’s long-term efforts to combat the problems of tobacco addiction.
There was a time when the cigarette was a stylish appendage to sophistication. In the early 1960s smoking was perceived as tasteful as the fashions and the perils of nicotine were hardly a burning issue in Sweden, as in many other parts of the world.
In 1963, 49 per cent of Swedish men and 23 per cent of Swedish women were active smokers. The startlingly high figures sent a shudder through the country’s health campaigners and initiated the move to kick out the habit
Sweden spearheaded tobacco control programmes and became one of the first countries in the world to pump money into public information and education services.
With a proactive track record in preventative measures, Sweden now joins a number of European countries to introduce legislation requiring clean air in bars, restaurants, cafes and nightclubs following the initiatives of Ireland, Norway, Italy and most recently Malta.
Tobacco is the single biggest health risk in Sweden which houses 1.2 million smokers. Around 6,400 people here die prematurely every year as a result of smoking and a further 500 die from exposure to second hand smoke. Twenty years ago those figure were double.
Nowadays, Sweden has one of the lowest smoking rates within Europe. In 1998, Sweden became first country to reach the World Health Organisation’s goal of reducing smoking prevalence to less than 20 per cent of the population. That figure now stands between 17 and 18 per cent.
The significant reduction in smoking rates in Sweden has been achieved by a combination of political means and educational methods dating back over 40 years.
In the 1960s Sweden became one of the first countries to open clinics offering support to smokers desperate to quit. And in the 1970s Sweden premiered nicotine replacement therapy when researchers developed nicotine chewing gum.
In the same decade, a clampdown on tobacco advertising was implemented and smoking rates first saw a significant drop in Sweden. Cinemas and theatres were banned from promoting tobacco products and outdoor adverts were also prohibited.
Meanwhile, cigarette packets were legally required to advertise the hazards of smoking when health warnings became standard.
Guidelines restricting smoking in public places such as schools, hospitals and public transport were adopted in the 1980s and in 1993 the Tobacco Act came into effect, the first one-stop law housing all previous legislation under one banner.
The Tobacco Act has been revised numerous times; the 1997 amendment comprised a ban on tobacco sales to minors (under the age of 18) and tighter advertising controls in the media have since been included to bring legislation further in line with the EU directive on tobacco.
When Swedish Parliament passed verdict on the government proposed smokefree workplace law in May 2004, a majority approved by 245 votes to 45. The need to protect the health of personnel was the driving force behind the motion.
“I don't think anyone believes that the right of smokers to smoke is more important than the right for everyone to breath fresh air,” says Margaretha Haglund, head of tobacco control programmes at the Swedish National Institute of Public Health.
Local opinion also seems to swings in favour of the law. “I think it’s great because I will definitely go to bars and restaurants more often than I do now.” says Ingmarie Magnusson (38) from Stockholm.
“It’s definitely a positive step for Sweden,” says Daniel Franzén (23) originally from Karlstad. “There’s so much emphasis here on creating healthy conditions in the workplace, why should bars and cafes and restaurants be any different?”
The law initially sparked criticism from the Swedish Hotel and Restaurant Association although proprietors have been appeased by the general public’s support. In a study conducted by SHR in April 2005, 98 per cent of those asked said the law will have no bearing on the frequency they visit restaurants, bars, cafes or clubs.
Setting out future goals a 2004 Swedish Public Health Objective states that no-one should be unwillingly exposed to environmental tobacco smoke and aims to half the numbers of smokers in heaviest smoking groups by 2014.
This week, Belgium announced that it will be the next European country to move toward clean indoor air.
|
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 684
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
sweden- a nation so over run with government safeguards and socialist systems that it has the largest suicide rate in the world. killing themselves to escape the boredom. |
Grrrrrrrrrrr
Citizen
Username: Oldsctls67
Post Number: 27
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, May 29, 2005 - 1:03 pm: |
|
I've found that when I go out to bars in NYC, I actually meet and talk to more people outside the bar smoking a cigarette, than when I'm inside the bar trying to fight through a throng to get a beer...I used to hate the smoking ban, but I can at least deal with it now....It's called making chicken salad out of chicken sh*t...Which there sure seems to be a lot of these days... |
The Libertarian
Citizen
Username: Local_1_crew
Post Number: 690
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 31, 2005 - 8:54 pm: |
|
another example of how the lawyers are in charge of policy making in this country. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 2357
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 1, 2005 - 4:58 pm: |
|
Lib,
How is banning smoking in privately-owned restaurants different from, say, making it illegal for those same restaurants to operate if there is radon being emitted on their property?
I must reiterate that the purpose of legislation that bans cigarettes in public places is not to deny smokers of their right to smoke, but, rather, to protect the health of people who don't smoke. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 7204
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 1, 2005 - 5:24 pm: |
|
Libertarian, how can we tell if the cause of the Swedish suicide rate is the socialism and not some other factor?
At any rate, the suicide rate does not make the country unlivable for those who do not commit suicide. |
AlleyGater
Citizen
Username: Alleygater
Post Number: 422
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, June 2, 2005 - 10:15 am: |
|
Everytime I see the Subject Line for this thread, I immediately crave a cigarette. I have been a non-smoker for nearly 3 years now. I'm sure everyone has really good intentions (on both sides) but I beg of you all to please let this thread die. I have NOT read a single post in this entire thread, nor will I. So don't bother reply to my post for I won't be coming back to read it. Thanks. |
jamie
Moderator
Username: Jamie
Post Number: 932
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 9, 2005 - 3:37 pm: |
|
Sorry Alley - I hope the subject also reminds you of how much healthier you are:
Ontario (Canada) Passes Smokefree Workplace Law
Seventh Canadian province/territory to go smokefree
Ontario, June 9, 2005... Yesterday, Ontario (Canada) became the seventh Canadian province/territory (joining Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut) to require clean, smokefree air in all restaurants and bars, with no allowance for smoking rooms. In addition, Nova Scotia announced that it will bring forward 100% smoke-free workplace legislation this autumn. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page