Friday, Dec 10, 2004
Radio Host Donates Smokes for Soldiers - Rebuttal
My letter to Fox News and Joel Africk, ALA.
To:
foxnewsonline@foxnews.com ;
topstories@foxnews.com ;
jafrick@alamc.org
Friday, December 10, 2004
Radio Host Donates Smokes for Soldiers - Rebuttal
Fox News.com
Attn: Mr. Jeff Goldblatt
cc: Mr. Joel J. Africk, American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago
Bravo for radio host, Mike North! He has revived the true meaning of supporting our military men and women overseas because he cares, not because he wants force unwanted "for-your-own-good" mandates on them.
Referencing your news report, perhaps Joel J. Africk, CEO of the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago, should leave his air-conditioned offices at the ALA and visit our troops in Iraq to tell them personally about his views on the evils of smoking cigarettes. I'm sure they will be very receptive. It's cowardly to attempt control over their right-to-choice in Iraq from Skokie, Illinois.
In the interest of unbiased reporting, if you want to call attention to the fact that Skokie has a restaurant/bar smoking ban, you should also include that Skokie is one of only two Chicago suburbs (Wilmette being the other) with this kind of ban.
I would also like to see a copy of the referenced memo from Donald Rumsfeld (and distributed by the ALA) published for the public to review. I have been unable to locate it. Perhaps our Defense Secretary prioritizes controlling our military's tobacco consumption over the armored vehicles they so desperately need to save their lives.
Lastly, please do not allow a know representative of an anti-smoking organization (such as the American Lung Association) to throw out the number of "400,000 annual deaths attributed to smoking" so casually. At least get a reference source, because that figure has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked by experts. In example, 'The 400,000-deaths figure is not a body count, but a 'COMPUTER-GENERATED estimate based on assumptions that are heavily biased'......"
http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/marim.htm by Robert A. Levy and Rosalind B. Marimont and published by the Cato Institute.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141155,00.html
Radio Host Donates Smokes for Soldiers
Friday, December 10, 2004
SKOKIE, ILL. —
Radio host Mike North took his show on the road for what he believed was a good cause: Collecting cigarettes for soldiers overseas.
North urged his listeners in Skokie, Ill., to donate cigarettes to be sent to the troops. He called the campaign “Smokes for Soldiers” and said he got the idea from the picture of James Miller, the 20-year-old Marine in combat in Iraq photographed with a lit cigarette dangling from his mouth.
“His picture was plastered all over the newspapers and I started reading … and he says, ‘I’m just doing what’s supposed to be done, but guess what? There’s a shortage of cigarettes out here,’” North said.
The
American Lung Association opposes the “Smokes for Soldiers” drive, saying troops should be sent care packages that don’t kill, and distributed a memo from Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in which he advised that tobacco should be avoided because it impacts troop readiness.
“Tobacco use presents an immediate and real danger for our soldiers who are on the lines today,” said Joel Africk of the American Lung Association. More than 400,000 Americans die each year from smoking-related illnesses.
Ironically, Skokie — where North is conducting his campaign — has a ban on smoking in restaurants because of health concerns.
North said he understands where the association is coming from and said the drive wasn't trying to encourage nonsmokers to start lighting up — but instead was designed to help soldiers who already are in the habit. The campaign has generated 100,000 cigarettes in all.
Tue Dec 14, 2004
Should we send smokes?
Follow-up to the Mike North, radio host story. The soldiers in Iraq will get their cigarettes.
-----------------------------------------------------
Source:
Chicago (IL) Daily Herald, 2004-12-11
Author: Tom O'Konowitz Daily Herald Staff Writer
Intro:
Steve Buchman, executive producer of the "Mike North Morning Show" on The Score, said that listeners have responded positively to the cigarette drive and that most of the complaints came from the lung association. He said The Score won't hold any more cigarette drives in the near future, but if more arrive he'll make sure they get to the troops.
"It's to support the troops -- that's the whole thing," Buchman said. "If one of them wants to light up and we can make that happen, it's the least we can do for them being in harm's way."
Tue Dec 14, 2004
Critics fired up over tobacco treaty delay
Article of interest on status of FCTC Treaty. Too bad it's not just about new pictures on cigarette packages... I don't think pictures are going to change many minds.
----------------------------------------------------
http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/2004/12/12ky/A1-tobacco1212-8140.html
Critics fired up over tobacco treaty delay U.S. hasn't sent pact to Senate yet
By James R. Carroll
jcarroll@courier-journal.com
The Courier-Journal
U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell said he thinks the treaty "is unnecessary and could negatively impact tobacco farm families in Kentucky."
WASHINGTON —
Seven months after signing a treaty requiring tougher restrictions on smoking and bigger health warnings on cigarette packs, the Bush administration hasn't submitted the pact to the Senate for approval.
Public health groups and their allies in Congress say it's time to take that step, but they're worried about how the pact might be received because top Senate leaders are from tobacco states.
Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., opposes approval and says any more regulation of tobacco should be decided by Congress, not by a treaty coming out of the United Nations' World Health Organization.
"I believe it is unnecessary and could negatively impact tobacco farm families in Kentucky," said McConnell, who is No. 2 behind Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn.
But proponents say it's time to put into effect the world's first public health treaty aimed at attacking smoking-related diseases that annually kill nearly 5million people.
"The treaty is going to dominate tobacco control worldwide for the next decade at a minimum, and the U.S. needs to be part of it," said Thomas Glynn, director of international tobacco programs at the American Cancer Society. He called the approval delay embarrassing.
For Americans, approval would mean an expansion of the small health warning on the side of cigarette packs. New warnings, possibly with pictures, would have to cover at least 30 percent of the front and back of packs.
The treaty also would ban the use of "light" and "low tar" designations on cigarettes and require protection of nonsmokers from smoke at work and in public places.
The treaty also says nations must take measures to reduce tobacco smuggling.
"Terrorists are using smuggling as a means of raising money, and drug cartels are using cigarette smuggling to launder drug money," said Judith Wilkenfeld, director of international programs for the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.
Forty countries approve
Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson signed the treaty in May.
"The United States has long been a world leader in anti-smoking efforts," Thompson said after the signing at the United Nations. He has since resigned his Cabinet position.
The United States was among 168 countries that signed the treaty. But only 40 countries have approved it, with Peru becoming the 40th last month.
The treaty will become law Feb. 28 in the countries that have approved it.
But in the United States, various federal agencies — including the departments of Justice, Commerce, Agriculture and Health and Human Services, the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission and the United States trade representative — are looking at possible legislation that might be needed to accompany the treaty.
For example, putting larger warnings on cigarette packs would require legislation.
Neither the White House, the State Department, nor the Health and Human Services Department would comment for the record on the treaty, which would first be discussed by a committee if it is sent to the Senate.
A multiyear effort
Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., wrote to President Bush on Nov. 30, urging him to send the treaty to the Senate "as soon as possible."
"The United States' participation in this treaty would be an important signal to the international community that the United States takes its responsibility as a leader in global public health seriously," Durbin wrote.
Wilkenfeld said she expects the approval path will be a "multiyear effort."
U.S. negotiators at one point proposed letting each nation opt out of any clause it did not like or found unconstitutional, but the idea failed to get support from other nations, according to a Washington Post story that said letters with the proposal were sent to WHO members.
The perception among public health groups was that the administration was trying to protect the tobacco industry during the negotiations, said Kathryn Mulvey, executive director of Corporate Accountability International, a Boston-based nonprofit advocacy group.
"The issue is, will the Bush administration have the political will to move this forward, especially in the climate we've had (in which the White House) has not been favorable to multilateral measures," she said.
Mulvey cited a global warming environmental treaty that was negotiated by the Clinton administration but opposed by the Bush administration.
She and others also pointed out that the United States has signed other treaties that have not been ratified.
`Like a bully'
Glynn, of the American Cancer Society, said the delay in approval "makes the U.S. continue to look like a bully" protecting tobacco companies.
But Philip Morris International, in a statement, said the treaty "provides an opportunity for countries around the world to adopt sensible tobacco regulation."
"Our industry needs regulation that addresses society's concerns and that ensures that all tobacco companies follow the same rules," the company said.
he Burley Tobacco Growers Cooperative Association, which this year agreed to federal regulation of tobacco in exchange for a buyout of farmers who held government rights to grow the crop, probably would not support the treaty, said Danny McKinney, chief executive officer of the Lexington, Ky.-based group.
The $10.1billion buyout ultimately passed without federal regulation.
With bigger warnings on cigarette packs, "will we wake up tomorrow and say, `Oh, no, they put pictures on it, we're out of business?' I don't think so," McKinney said. "But it means less tobacco sold in the future."
Homer Best, a Glendale, Ky., farmer who grew about 900 pounds of tobacco this year, said he wasn't worried about the treaty.
"I don't know if it makes too much difference," he said. "Those who smoke are going to smoke."
Mon Dec 13, 2004
Smoking Ban Survey Results
I received this post from Thomas Laprade on what a smoking ban has done to the Canadian Thunder Bay area and wanted to share it with Illinois Smokers. What a shame! It may be in Canada right now, but we are all facing the same problems.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Laprade - Freedom Fighter for your Personal and Business Rights
http://thesnowbird.tripod.com/
http://www.tbtv.com/Localnews/index.asp?cid=71920
Smoking Ban Survey Results
Web Posted: 12/13/2004
Watch This Newscast
The Thunder Bay Chamber of Commerce has released details of a new survey on the impact of the City smoking ban and it shows several business bars in particular are being badly hurt.
The survey polled restaurants, coffee shops, bars, lounges, bingo halls and the Casino . Of those, 93-percent of the bars and lounges contacted say they have suffered losses since the ban was imposed. Of those who say business is down, average losses reportedly averaged 43-percent.
All of them say they have laid off or reduced staff and they also say reduced sales have forced them to cut back on the business they do with their suppliers.
Bingo Halls, meantime, say their losses are at 30-percent or more and the Thunder Bay Casino is also reporting losses, although specific numbers were not made available. Restaurants appear to be affected the least with 74-percent reporting no change in business.
The smoking ban has apparently been good news for bars outside of the city not subject to the ban. The Chamber survey says operators near Thunder Bay are enjoying significant increases especially on weekends. The Casino at Grand Portage, where smoking is also still allowed, is also reporting an increase in its numbers.
Mon Dec 13, 2004
Denormalization of smoking
Hi Tom,
Terrific letter. Also, the link you included is very informative--and frightening. These anti-smoking Fascists are everywhere. This sounds like "The Futures" from the CDC. It's really a massive conspiracy. Even "Mulder" would have been a bit overwhelmed.
Garnet
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Laprade
lettertoed@thestar.ca
Saturday, December 11, 2004
Denormalization of smoking
Dear Editor, Dec. 11/04
What is de-normalization?
According to documents created by participants in a Health Canada denormalization conference; "Denormalization, in the context of social behaviour, aims to change attitudes toward what is generally regarded as normal or acceptable behaviour, including through social marketing. When attitudes change, behaviour will also change because humans generally want to act in ways that are acceptable to others. " In other words, de-normalization is about turning previously acceptable behaviors into socially unacceptable behaviors. This is acheived by manipulating people's attitudes toward the behavior through "social marketing". What is "social marketing"? It is a polite way of saying that professional public relations and advertising companies will be (have been) hired, to manipulate people into "buying" new attitudes toward smoking, just as they create campaigns which manipulate people into buying new products. As we all know, this is not done by extolling the virtue of the product itself (or the real facts about the health dangers of second-hand smoke), but by associating the product with other desirable things in people's minds. Cars are sold by associating them with freedom, independence, sexual attractiveness, power, and other "values" that the target audience might hold. Public smoking bans are "sold" TO MUNICIPAL REPRESENTATIVES, in a similar manner - by associating them with "leadership", "saving lives", "preventing deaths", and other values held by the target audience of municipal representatives.
YES!
You were deliberately targeted by professional public relations campaigns in exactly this manner. If you don't believe this, follow this link; http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/tobacco/roundtable/appendices.html There, you will find the Health Canada conference on de-normalization of smoking, and within that discussion you will find this statement; "Target politicians (narrow casting)." TARGET POLITICIANS ! to receive a public relations campaign specially designed to manipulate them, based on professional research into what values are of greatest importance to public office holders!
Thomas Laprade
480 Rupert St.
Thunder Bay, Ont.
Ph. 807 3457258
_________________________________
Thomas Laprade
The Smoker's Rights Website: http://thesnowbird.tripod.com/
Visit my Blog for Current Letter Writings: http://thesnowbird.blogspot.com/
Friday, December 10, 2004
More Americans Getting Hooked on Hookahs
An article of interest. Here is a byproduct of college smoking bans that was not anticipated.
The health experts just can't get it through their heads that smoking is a social and physical activity, or that tobacco use is pleasurable to a great many. They also cannot understand why the real issue is not just about "getting nicotine into the system". Nicotine patches and gum don't work by themselves because they don't replace the pleasures lost by abstaining from smoking.
I also noticed a direct contradiction to recent studies stating that people do not smoke more after being forced to abstain from smoking for extended periods of time, such as smoke-free places of employment or flying. It seems the health experts' "truths" change, depending on their application.........
"We saw something similar with filtered cigarettes. Smoking is really all about getting nicotine into the system. So, with filtered cigarettes, people just dragged harder and longer on the cigarette to get the same amount of nicotine," he said.
Eissenberg agreed, adding that the time is now to nip the hookah craze in the bud.
"We don't want to get caught by surprise," he said. "I think we need to be vigilant when it comes to any new tobacco use method that comes into vogue."
These antis are crazed by their own self importance and obsession to control "demon" tobacco and other people's lives--for their own good, of course! LOL.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.healthday.com/view.cfm?id=522353
December 10, 2004
More Americans Getting Hooked on Hookahs - Smoking tobacco through water pipe is no safer, experts warn
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter
SATURDAY, Dec. 4, 2004 (HealthDayNews) --
The practice of smoking tobacco through elaborate water pipes called hookahs emerged centuries ago, in the palaces and harems of the Middle East. But experts say hookahs are now almost as popular in Denver as they are in Damascus, with the current fad for water-pipe use growing among U.S. college students.
Many young Americans may be attracted to hookahs because they believe smoke that passes through water is somehow filtered and safer, experts add.
Unfortunately, that's just not true.
"The data we have clearly shows that carbon monoxide is present in large amounts in smoke from water pipes, as is nicotine and the compounds we call 'tar,' " said Thomas Eissenberg, a researcher at the Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies at Virginia Commonwealth University.
"In fact, carcinogen exposure in hookah smoke is equal to, or more than, that found in cigarettes," said Eissenberg, who has published research on the health dangers of the hookah fad in numerous medical journals.
The hookah, also called nargile, is comprised of four parts -- the head, where burning charcoal heats a bed of tobacco; the body, through which inhaled smoke is drawn into the third section, a water-filled bowl at the hookah's base, and the hose, a flexible pipe through which the user inhales the smoke after it has bubbled through the water.
"What you get, then, is smoke that has been cooled by the water," Eissenberg said. Hookah use is, by its nature, a very social act, with groups of users often sharing the same pipe.
"Water pipes have been around for centuries, but it looks like they are making a real comeback," Eissenberg said. "They're making a new appearance in the U.S., but they're also coming back in the Middle East. They've also shown up in Germany and Brazil, and in Thailand -- where they were recently outlawed."
The exact number of water-pipe users in America remains unknown, he said, but new users typically discover hookahs in local Middle Eastern restaurants or bars, where they can be rented for short-term use.
"Then later they might say, 'Hey, this would be cool for me to have in my dorm,' and go to the Internet and buy one. They aren't expensive," Eissenberg said.
While traditional Middle Eastern hookah users tended to favor harsher, dryer tobacco, American users prefer maassel -- sweetened tobacco with tempting flavors like apple, watermelon, and licorice.
"The upsurge in use of water pipes, here and in the Middle East, is highly correlated with the mass-production of these sweetened and flavored tobaccos," Eissenberg said.
He stressed that the U.S. hookah fad isn't restricted to fringe populations in cities such as New York or San Francisco. "Washington state, Louisiana, Tennessee, here in Virginia -- it's popping up everywhere," he said.
While cigarette use has largely fallen out of favor with the college crowd, the exotic allure of hookahs -- and the misperception that hookah smoke is filtered and safer -- may be driving the trend.
"We really need to counter this idea that, just because there's water present, the smoke is safe," Eissenberg said. "We really need to get that across to people."
Legal restrictions might be in order, too, he said. "I suspect that we need to discourage the renting of water pipes, especially to underage individuals. They should be controlled in the same way that cigarettes are controlled."
The real danger, according to Eissenberg, is that hookahs may be getting many young, new users hooked on nicotine.
"Water pipes aren't convenient to use," Eissenberg pointed out. "So if somebody begins to find a water pipe and tobacco pleasurable, but they don't have a lot of time, what are they going to do? They're going to pick up cigarettes. So hookahs are, unfortunately, a potential gateway to smoking for young adults, and we certainly don't need a new gateway to tobacco use."
Dr. Norman H. Edelman, director of scientific affairs for the American Lung Association, said hookah users are taking a big chance if they think water pipes are safe.
"I've seen no data to support that. They're really rolling the dice when it comes to their health," he said.
Even if hookah smoke was somehow filtered, it probably wouldn't make any difference in terms of the actual amount of carcinogens inhaled per puff, Edelman said.
"We saw something similar with filtered cigarettes. Smoking is really all about getting nicotine into the system. So, with filtered cigarettes, people just dragged harder and longer on the cigarette to get the same amount of nicotine," he said.
Eissenberg agreed, adding that the time is now to nip the hookah craze in the bud.
"We don't want to get caught by surprise," he said. "I think we need to be vigilant when it comes to any new tobacco use method that comes into vogue."
More information
To learn more about the dangers of smoking, and for tips on quitting, go to the American Lung Association.
SOURCES: Thomas Eissenberg, Ph.D., associate professor, department of psychology, and Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond; Norman H. Edelman, M.D., director, scientific affairs, American Lung Association
Last Updated: Dec-04-2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To:
editors@healthday.com ;
teissenb@vcu.edu
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2004 3:52 PM
Subject: Fw: More Americans Getting Hooked on Hookahs
HealthDay
A Division of ScoutNews, LLC
83 East Avenue Suite 210
Norwalk, CT 06851
Dr. Thomas Eissenberg, Ph.D., Associate Professor
Department of Psychology and Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies,
Virginia Commonwealth University
Richmond, VA
Dear HealthDay Editors and Dr. Eissenberg:
I am forwarding my rebuttal to your story (below) on "More Americans Getting Hooked on Hookahs". Your responses will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Thomas Eissenberg" <
teissenb@vcu.edu>
To: "Garnet Dawn" <
garnetdawn@comcast.net>
Friday, December 10, 2004
Re: More Americans Getting Hooked on Hookahs
Dear Mr. Dawn:
I'm just heading out of the office for the weekend, so I must be brief.
I've attached the paper that justifies the statement about waterpipe smoke containing more carcinogens (see the second paragraph of the discussion) --
I'll note that when people compare waterpipe use with cigarette smoking,
they need to realize, as I do, that they are comparing a much longer smoking
period (for waterpipe) to a much shorter one (for cigarettes). This
difference is why I spoke about the SMOKE not the carcinogen exposure of
people. Smoke toxicant content does not always equal smoker exposure, and I
hope to address this issue with future research. To put the issue in clearer> terms, if a waterpipe was used for only 5 minutes (it isn't usually, but I'm
speaking hypothetically) the carcinogen content of the smoke may be equal to> or less than a cigarette (which is usually used for five minutes or less).
As Dr. Shihadeh notes in his paper, the different temperature of waterpipe
tobacco versus cigarette tobacco may lead to different carcinogen content of
the smoke.
As for the second point, I believe that the speaker (not me) was referring
to the changes in puffing behavior that are observed when a smoker of
regular (or full flavor) cigarettes switches to "light" or "ultra-light"
cigarettes. there are varying hypotheses for why this occurs, and I, like
you, am uncertain if those data are relevant to waterpipe use. In my lab I
too have seen that abstinent smokers often do not change their puff size or
number relative to when they have recently smoked. That result is an
interesting one.
Finally, for the record, I don't think that the solution to tobacco-related
death and disease is banning tobacco: a ban was not effective with alcohol,
isn't effective with cocaine, marijuana, and heroin, and I doubt it would be effective with tobacco.
I hope this message interests you.
Tom E.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Dr. Eisenberg:
Thank you for your sincere and thoughtful response. I will share the information you have supplied and appreciate your time and interest.
I truly believe that people (college students in particular) will always find ways to circumvent and fight unreasonable, government mandated, regulations on their personal choices.
Sincerely,
Garnet Dawn
Thursday, Dec 9, 2004
Bars plan smoking protest
The following is from our friends at Smokers Rights Canada.
http://ca.groups.yahoo.com/group/smokersrightscanada/. Our Canadian neighbors in New Brunswick are having the same problems with their smoking ban that the USA is currently having in smoking ban areas. It will be well worth following to learn the results from the Bar Owners' protest plan.
http://canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041208/TTEBRIEF/312080076/-1/FRONTPAGE
Times & Transcript / E-Brief
As published on page A1/A2 on December 8, 2004
Bars plan smoking protest
Owners say lack of enforcement has created uneven playing field as some bars still allow smoking
JAMES FOSTER
Times & Transcript Staff
Bar owners in New Brunswick are planning "something big" to show their displeasure with New Brunswick's anti-smoking legislation."It will be a big thing," is all bar owner and organizer André Doiron would say yesterday, although speculation is that many in the hospitality industry will ignore no-smoking laws this Friday.
Some pub operators, however, won't wait that long.
Some are reportedly already allowing smoking in contravention of the law while some others, upset over the lack of enforcement that has left them facing unfair competition, are taking matters into their own hands.
Doc Dylan's Grill and Ale House on Main Street in Moncton has asked for estimates on the cost of building an enclosed and ventilated smoking room."
Sometimes you have to make a business decision," co-owner Tracey Durling said yesterday. "But first we're waiting to see what happens with these other bars.
"Since Oct. 1, it's been illegal to light up anyplace in the province where people eat, drink or work. Those pubs that have followed the law are upset over the drop in business and are particularly angry over reports that some bars still allow patrons to smoke yet no one has ever been charged under the law.
Tracey and husband Tim have owned and operated Doc Dylan's for the past nine years, and they as well as most other bar owners have always believed non-smokers' concerns could be addressed through an enclosed, heavily ventilated smoking room that staff wouldn't have to enter if they didn't wish to.
They're ready to make that move if other bars continue to flout the law.
"It's just not a level playing field," Tim said.Doc's markets itself heavily and also attracts much of its clientele because of its food service. But bars without kitchens or that are not as well known are in terrible shape, the Durlings say.
Doiron and the Durlings both say revenues from video-lottery terminals and liquor sales have been hit the hardest, food service less so.
"We have a couple of bars that are ready to announce they will be closing after the holiday period," Doiron said.
In Doiron's view, allowing a place for smokers to puff indoors will salve the wounds created by the law.
"We just have to have a place where people don't have to step outside."
Besides that gripe, operators say the timing of the smoking ban could not have been worse. It came into effect at the same time as the post-tourism slow season, it discourages the hosting of Christmas and New Year's parties at pubs and bars and the cold-weather months are just arriving for their annual five-month visit, discouraging publicans who must go outside to smoke.
Implementing the law in the spring would have been the lesser evil, they complain.
What's happening now, at the most popular nightclubs, dozens of people congregate outside to smoke, at times, which is a recipe for trouble because door staff are busy inside and can't keep an eye on things.
At many bars, customers are going to their cars to smoke and having tailgate parties at the same time. Bartenders and door staff then can't keep track of how much a patron has had to drink.
Customers are being harassed by panhandlers when they step out for a puff.
And you can no longer run a tab and pay for your night on the town as you leave the premises, because miscreants could nip out for a butt - never to return.
The result, bars say, is fewer customers overall, customers who arrive later and leave sooner, less revenue, less tip money, fewer hours of work for staff, fewer staff and fewer spinoff jobs - for example, less live entertainment and fewer supplies to be ordered.
The Durlings wonder what's the problem with the province allowing - or even licensing - smoking rooms in bars that choose to allow smoking.
"We'd still go with the smoking room. We don't want to promote smoking. We're not saying it's healthy," Tim Durling says."
All we're saying to government is, let's try it."
Thu Dec 9, 2004
Butane lighters banned from airliners
Article of interest. Does that mean that zippos are next? Matches are still allowed. I wonder if matches are supposed to make a different kind of fire than lighters make? Leave it to the genuises in D.C. to think of something like this.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/nation/2938400
--------------------------------------------------
Dec. 8, 2004
Butane lighters banned from airliners
Associated Press
WASHINGTON --
Passengers already are barred from smoking on commercial flights. Now they won't be allowed to bring their butane lighters on board either.
As part of the intelligence reform bill passed today, Congress added the lighters to the long list of banned items, including scissors, pen knives and box cutters.
Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota had pushed for the change for more than a year after learning the Transportation Security Administration allowed them on planes.
"When I found out that they had explicitly, in their rule, said you could take two butane lighters and four books of matches on board, I thought, 'What have they been drinking?'" Dorgan said. Matches still are allowed.
Dorgan cited FBI reports that would-be "shoe-bomber" Richard Reid would have been able to ignite his explosive and blow up a trans-Atlantic jetliner three years ago if he'd brought a butane lighter with him.
Wyden and Dorgan were so persistent in their campaign against the incendiary devices that Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., joked earlier this year that he never thought butane lighters would get so much attention.
"This is probably not the biggest thing in the world," Dorgan said. "But it's one of those areas where a big government agency couldn't develop a little bit of common sense about something so obvious."
The ban takes effect 60 days after President Bush signs the intelligence reform bill into law.
Thu Dec 9, 2004
A Hard Habit To Break
For those of you who may have missed this story in the Smokers Club Newsletter, I am posting a copy of it below. Enjoy.
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=704
Comedy
Posted on Thursday, December 09 @ by samantha
-------------------------------------------------------
It all started with the smokers.
Like all modern workplaces, Pollstar.com is proud of its smoke-free environment. And, like all modern workplaces, we have set aside an area outside our main entrance for the smokers on our staff to indulge in their nicotine cravings. A place where they may huff and puff while sucking in and spewing out their toxic fumes into the atmosphere that so clearly defines our hometown of Fresno, California.
But it didn't stop there. Even though our designated smoking area prevented the staffers who smoke from contaminating the ultra-clean environment where tour dates, such as the new ones for Norah Jones, are processed, we quickly learned that second hand smoke was only one of the dangers that threatened our operation. So it was just a matter of time before we allocated some more room outside our front entrance for those needing to sink their teeth into a quick chaw of Skoal in order to relieve tensions that often accumulate from running the world's largest third-party concert info database.
But while the smokers were smoking and the chawers were chewing, we soon came to learn that methane gas was also a threat to the pristine conditions where dates for Kreator, Donny Osmond and The Damnwells are prepared for public consumption. Therefore, we established a flatulence zone, and placed it directly between the smokers and the chewers.
Of course, we soon discovered that our workers had other personal habits that might ruin or otherwise hasten the decay of tour data, thus making us set aside even more space outside our front door, such as the tooth-flossing area and the nostril-evacuation area. But it was well worth it, for it allowed our employees to calm their collective nerves after assembling a new routing, say for Zao or Don Carlos, as well as keep the Pollstar.com hallways completely free of smoke, spit, gas and tartar.
You can probably guess the rest. No sooner had we established these "zones" for our workers that the nail biters on the staff wanted their own area. As did the chronic toe-tappers, the obsessive finger-drummers and the compulsive wipers. In fact, we eventually ended up declaring various areas outside our front door for every conceivable habit, quirk and idiosyncrasy practiced by members of the Pollstar.com staff.
Which brings us to our problem. Although we're used to seeing our workers take five from slamming dates for Riddlin Kids or Big Bad Voodoo Daddy into our system, so that they may smoke, chew, belch, pass gas, floss, wipe, drum and bite, we didn't foresee the dilemma that would face us come quitting time. And that appears to be the sticking point. For while we took steps to ensure that every employee's need was satisfied by declaring the appropriate zone outside our front door, there was one factor that was completely overlooked. A situation that needed to be resolved before that final whistle blew at the end of the day.
That's right. Come 5 pm there's no one left inside our building to turn out the lights. Oh, well. Maybe it's time to invest in the Clapper.
http://www.pollstar.com/news/viewfarce.pl?TDFID=1711
http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/10334420.htm
Belleville News Democrat
Proposal makes it illegal for minors to have tobacco in Mount Carmel
Posted on Friday, Dec. 03, 2004
MOUNT CARMEL, Ill. Mount Carmel is considering a new ordinance that would make it illegal for minors to possess or use tobacco products within city limits.
The mayor of the southern Illinois community, Tom Meeks, says the ordinance would impose fines of up to 500 dollars for anyone under 18 caught with tobacco.
Meeks says he expects the City Council to approve the measure Monday.
Although state law prohibits the sale of tobacco products to minors, Meeks says municipalities must determine what is and isn't allowed when it comes to tobacco use.
Mount Carmel is following in the footsteps of nearby Olney, which drafted a similar ordinance in 1997.
Copyright 2004 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Friday, Nov 26, 2004
Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack
I thought I would share my letter to the Associated Press, regarding their latest article (copied below) on "Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack". The media just won't leave this one alone. You will also enjoy my next post containing editorials from our friend, Robert A. Levy (Chicago Sun Times) "Smokers pay a heavy price".
-------------------------------------------------------------------
To:
info@ap.org ;
kcarroll@ap.org ;
fsbaker@ap.org ;
opinion@thewire.ap.org ;
cfeldman@ap.org ;
alevin@ap.org
Sent: Friday, November 26, 2004 3:05 PM
Subject: Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack
The Associated Press
450 W. 33rd Street
New York, NY 10001
50 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10020
Attn:
Kathleen Carroll, Executive Editor
Frank Baker, General Assignment Editor
Kim Clarke, News Editor
Carole Feldman, News Editor
Ann Levin, National News Editor
Michael Silverman, National News Editor
Dear Editor and Decision Makers at Associated Press:
RE: Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack ,
Nov 26, 2004
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SMOKING_COSTS?SITE=CAWOO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Please print a correction to your referenced news article (copy below), correcting the funding source and motivation behind this book/study.
When the Chicago Sun Times first published the story on "Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack", October 21, 2004 about the new study and soon-to-be released book by Frank Sloan at Duke University, I sent a rebuttal letter to them. They published an editorial with a different perspective on November 13, 2004, "Smokers already are paying a high cost for their habit,"
http://www.suntimes.com/output/otherviews/cst-edt-ref13.html. I am now sending my same letter and documentation to your attention at the Associated Press.
I strongly believe that AP and their reporters should validate facts before submitting a story for publication. This "study" was, in fact, funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation... friends of the Nicotine Patch and Nicotine Gum industry, validated by Frank Sloan in writing (see below).
Please get your facts straight before you publish an nationally released article. In the interest of "truth" and "honesty", a second story/editorial clarifying the real funding for this book would be in order to preserve AP's current image of reporting facts.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional DirectorThe United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, October 21, 2004
Subject: Rebuttal to "Actual costs of smoking estimated at nearly $40 a pack"
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
350 N. Orleans
Chicago, Illinois 60654
letters@suntimes.com
Dear Editor,
Jim Ritters' Oct. 19th book review about how cigarettes should cost $40 a pack left out one VERY important piece of information. Not really his fault: the authors of the study don't seem to have been very "up front" with it.
The book exposing the "horrendous cost of smoking" had background funding from guess who? The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation... friends of the Nicotine Patch and Nicotine Gum industry.
It's similar to the "Hershey Chocolate Childrens' Foundation" funding a study, saying that M&M's prevent cavities.
The news media need to show a little more responsibility when it comes to showing the dirty side of the Antismoking industry.
Sincerely,
Garnet Dawn
Lake Bluff, IL
----------------------------------------------------------
P.S. Please reference documentation from emails below:
My mail to Dr. Sloan:
Thursday, October 21, 2004
garnetdawn@comcast.net wrote:> >>>>
Frank A. Sloan, PhD, Director
J. Alexander McMahon Professor of Health Policy, Law and Management
Professor of Economics
Box 90253
Duke University
Durham, NC 27708
Dear Dr. Sloan:
Referencing the recent Chicago Sun Times story (attached as a document), I would like to learn where I can find more information about your study prior to the release of your book. I am an Illinois resident. Also, I am curious as to the other sources of funding for your study, because the newspaper only said that it was "Funded in part by the National Institute on Aging". This information could be very helpful to me in the future for additional projects.
Thank you in advance for your time and cooperation.
Sincerely,
Garnet Dawn
Lake Bluff, IL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
His response to me:
From: <
fsloan@duke.edu>
To: "Garnet Dawn" <
garnetdawn@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004
Subject:
Re: Actual costs of smoking estimated at nearly $40 a pack
The book will be published in early December. I do not have a copy of the
book either. I have a galleyproof, but I am reluctant to distribute this in
advance of publication.
We were funded by the National Institute on Aging which is part of NIH for > this particular book. Our other funding on smoking has come from the Robert > Wood Johnson Foundation. The Foundation has a specific program on substance > abuse. You can find them by going to the Foundation's web site. Frank Sloan
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SMOKING_COSTS?SITE=CAWOO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Nov 26, 2004
Study: Cigarettes Cost Society $40 a Pack
DURHAM, N.C. (AP) -- Cigarettes may cost smokers more then they believe. A study by a team of health economists finds the combined price paid by their families and society is about $40 per pack of cigarettes.
The figure is based on lifetime costs for a 24-year-old smoker over 60 years for cigarettes, taxes, life and property insurance, medical care and lost earnings because of smoking-related disabilities, researchers said.
"It will be necessary for persons aged 24 and younger to face the fact that the decision to smoke is a very costly one - one of the most costly decisions they make," the study's authors concluded.
Smokers pay about $33 of the cost, their families absorb $5.44 and others pay $1.44, according to health economists from Duke University and a professor from the University of South Florida. The study drew on data including Social Security earnings histories dating to 1951.
Incidental costs such as higher cleaning bills and lower resale values for smokers' cars were not included.
Most smoking studies rely on a snapshot of annual costs, said co-author Frank Sloan, an economics professor and the director of the Center for Health, Policy, Law and Management at Duke's Terry Sanford Institute of Public Policy.
Despite the finding that smoking is a costly habit for individuals, society carries less of a burden than generally believed, the study's authors determined.
"The reason the number is low is that for private pensions, Social Security, and Medicare - the biggest factors in calculating costs to society - smoking actually saves money," Sloan said. "Smokers die at a younger age and don't draw on the funds they've paid into those systems."
Given the high costs, it is "remarkable," the authors conclude, that money from the 1998 settlement involving 46 state attorneys general and major tobacco manufacturers largely are not being spent on smoking-cessation or related programs.
But even after taking into account the cost savings from early deaths, smoking still costs society $2.20 a pack for such things as sick leave, life insurance outlays and medical care not paid by smokers. The researchers concluded that after subtracting the 76 cents a pack smokers pay in state and federal taxes, society's net cost is $1.44 a pack.
Many states use the money to cover budget deficits or, as in North Carolina, on economic development in tobacco communities.
The study's other co-authors are Jan Ostermann, Christopher Conover and Donald H. Taylor Jr. of Duke, along with Gabriel Picone of the University of South Florida. Their research was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute on Aging.
© 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our
Privacy Policy.
Wed Nov 24, 2004
No child left unmedicated
I posted an article on this topic once before, entitled "IL launches compulsory mental health screening for children and pregnant women", dated September 30, 2004 (Message #400). The following article gives a few details of the enforcement procedures being instituted for this new "social engineering" Illinois government mandate.
The entire idea is horrifying.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20041123.shtml
No child left unmedicated
Phyllis Schlafly (
archive)
November 23, 2004
Big Brother is on the march. A plan to subject all children to mental health screening is under way, and pharmaceutical companies are gearing up for bigger sales of psychotropic drugs.
Like most liberal big-spending ideas, this one was slipped into the law under cover of soft semantics. Its genesis was the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health created by President George W. Bush in 2002.
The commission recommends "routine and comprehensive" testing and mental health screening for every child in the United States, including preschoolers. The president has instructed 25 federal agencies to develop a plan to implement the commission's recommendations.
The commission proposes using electronic medical records for mental health interrogation of both children and adults for mental illnesses in school and during routine physical exams. The commission also recommends integrating electronic health records and personal health information systems.
It recommends "linkage" of these mental examinations with "state-of-the-art treatments" using "specific medications for specific conditions." That means prescribing more expensive patented antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs.
Illinois became the first state to jump on board. By near-unanimous votes in 2003, the General Assembly passed the $10 million Illinois Children's Mental Health Act creating a Children's Mental Health Partnership, which is expected to become a model for other states. The partnership's plan, released July 16, calls for periodic social and emotional developmental examinations to be administered to all children, and for all women to be interrogated for depression during pregnancy and up to a year postpartum. When the partnership showcased this plan with five public hearings stacked with bureaucrats and social service workers, a political tempest erupted, with state legislators saying they had no idea this was what they had voted for.
Illinois legislators were shocked to hear the details. The plan includes periodic developmental exams for children ages 0-18 years, a statewide data-reporting system to track information on each child, social-emotional development screens with all mandated school exams in kindergarten, fourth grade and ninth grade, and report cards on children's social-emotional development.
The plan is to add mental health assessment to the state's physical examination certificate, along with mandatory immunization records. All children in Illinois, unless religiously exempt, are required to have up-to-date health examinations and immunizations for school entry.
The partnership requires the Illinois State Board of Education to develop and implement a plan that incorporates social and emotional standards as part of the mandated Illinois Learning Standards, which are due on Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich's desk by Dec. 31. This inevitably opens up screening for politically incorrect attitudes and nonconformity with liberal attitudes of tolerance.
Mental health diagnoses are inherently subjective and social constructions, as even the diagnostic manuals admit. Many thousands, if not millions, of children would receive stigmatizing diagnoses that would follow them for the rest of their lives.
"State-of-the-art treatments" will result in many thousands of children being medicated by expensive, ineffective, and dangerous drugs. The long-term safety and effectiveness of psychiatric medications on children have never been proven.
The side effects of suggested medications in children are severe. They include suicide, violence, psychosis, cardiac toxicity, and growth suppression. Several school shooters, such as Eric Harris (Columbine) and Kip Kinkel (Oregon) had been on antidepressants or stimulants when they committed their crimes.
The validity of much scientific research has lost its credibility because the Food and Drug Administration has allowed the pharmaceutical industry to withhold data not favorable to their products and because people in the pay of the pharmaceutical companies are the ones recommending medications.
The current controversy about links between suicide and antidepressant drugs that have not been adequately tested has contributed to the uproar. The FDA posted an analysis in August that some antidepressants pose a risk of suicide in children.
Parental rights are unclear or nonexistent under these mental screening programs. What are the rights of youth and parents to refuse or opt out of mental screening?
Will they face coercion and threats of removal from school, or child neglect charges, if they refuse privacy-invading interrogations or unproved medications? How will a child remove a stigmatizing label from his records?
A Columbia University pilot project of screening students called TeenScreen resulted in one-third being flagged as "positive" for mental health problems, and half of those being turned over for mental health treatment. If this is preview of what would happen when 52 million public school students are screened, it would mean hanging a libelous label on 17 million American children and putting 8 million children into the hands of the psychiatric/pharmaceutical industry.
©2004 Copley News Service
Tue Nov 23, 2004
State smoking ban better, backers say, evens economic playing field
Hi,
When will people like Glantz stop lying? It is obvious that many people do not like smoking bans, or local bans would not hurt businesses. These Antis need to press for statewide smoking bans to satisfy their greed for power and new grants. They contradict themselves with distorted statistics on states with smoking bans already in effect, and are ignoring the backlash activities resulting from these smoking bans in other states and countries.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/1123dpsdirector23.html
State smoking ban better, backers say
Evens economic playing field
Kerry Fehr-Snyder and Robbie Sherwood
The Arizona Republic
Nov. 23, 2004
Snuffing out smoking in public places hasn't been a drag on bar tabs and restaurant bills in communities with statewide smoking bans.
Tough local laws, on the other hand, hurt businesses because customers can easily go elsewhere to drink, eat and light up.
Expect arguments along those lines as health advocates in Arizona push to get a statewide smoking ban before voters in 2006.
Nationwide, seven states have enacted statewide bans. Four others ban smoking in restaurants and bars that serve food, making an exception for bars that sell alcohol only. In some states, bar and restaurant receipts have actually increased by attracting more non-smokers, backers of smoking bans say.
"These claims of economic chaos and people changing where they go to eat is just baloney," said Stanton Glantz, a professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco and director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.
"There's not a shred of evidence to support that."
In Arizona, several cities have restrictions on smoking. Supporters of a statewide ban hope to make the restrictions consistent from city to city. It would overrule less comprehensive ordinances but would allow cities or counties to adopt more stringent codes if local leaders wish.
The state's liquor distributors and the hospitality industry are so concerned about the proposed statewide ban that they are contemplating a less stringent competing ballot proposition of their own.
he tourism industry in Arizona has been split on the issue of a statewide ban and is taking a wait-and-see approach."
Part of the split is because of concerns about foreign visitors, and part of it is disagreement over whether a ban should be statewide or city by city," said Barry Aarons, lobbyist for the Arizona Tourism Alliance.
"We're looking to see if some consensus develops there."
In states with statewide bans, communities generally agree that the bans are better than city-by-city bans:
• "If anything, now that it's a level playing field, it's been more fair," said Gail Anastas, spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Restaurant Association. Massachusetts instituted a statewide ban in July after years of bans in some cities.
A study by Glantz found that smoke-free laws did not reduce profits for charitable bingo parlors in Massachusetts. The study was paid for by the National Cancer Institute.
• The California Restaurant Association, meanwhile, took a pass on studying the smoking ban impact there because "it became law with such an overwhelming majority and we couldn't do anything about it anyway," said Jordan Rasmussen, spokeswoman for the California Restaurant Association.
• New York officials attempted to gauge the impact by looking at employment and slot-machine sales in bars and restaurants.
Employment increased by 5,000 jobs, to 455,000, and revenue from Quickdraw slot machines grew 3 percent in the year after that smoking ban, according to an analysis by the American Cancer Association of New York.
"What's critical here and sort of proven by the New York experience, by both New York City and the state, is you have to include bars in the ban," said Michael Bopp, director of advocacy for the New York association. "In New York City, there was a bit of shift from restaurants with bars (that had to ban smoking) and bars that serve food that didn't."
The statewide ban fixed the disparity by including all bars that serve food. But stricter city ordinances had to be adjusted to meet the state law since, in New York, state law can create a floor but not a ceiling."
If you have the opportunity to get a strong statewide law, you should do that," Bopp said.
Some states with smoking bans have exceptions for private clubs, and bars tried to skirt the law by claiming they should be exempted."
What some of the bars did was put out a pad and had people sign up and said, 'Oh, we're a private club,' " said Allison Levine, spokeswoman for Delaware's health department.
She called the 2-year-old law "the most protective smoking ban in the country."
California restaurant owners tried to bypass its law by building restaurants with three walls, but the courts saw through that, according to Paul Macintyre, former government relations adviser to the California Restaurant Association and founder of Kids Involuntarily Inhaling Secondhand Smoke.
Initially, the association fought smoking-ban ordinances city by city until it realized a statewide ban was inevitable and wouldn't hurt restaurants sales, he said.
Tuesday, Nov 23, 2004
Subject:
Accepting Responsibility for Damage Caused by Smoking Bans
Anthony D. Romero Executive Director American Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004-2400
http://www.aclu.org/
Dear Mr. Romero,
I have signed the ACLU's Refuse to Surrender Pledge and taken another step to defend our liberty by referring 10 friends to sign it also. I am a card carrying member of the ACLU and believe in defending our Constitution and Bill of Rights against the Patriot Act and other legislation designed to invade citizens' liberties.
Now, I hope you will listen to my request. Perhaps the American Civil Liberties Union should begin addressing the rights of smokers by supporting the rights of everyday Americans who choose to use a legal product in a legal fashion! Please take a few minutes to read the following editorial.
This article is published in The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter and was referenced on the Smoker Club Forum at
smokersclubforum@yahoogroups.com. I have forwarded it to the ACLU, Illinois Smokers and Smokers Fighting Discrimination at
SFD-USA@yahoogroups.com.
Please be sure to click on the link at the bottom of this editorial to lean about some of the victims of smoking bans to date.
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=597
In order for these people to strike back it will be necessary for them to seek help from the "bottom-feeders" of our society.
A Commentary on Accepting Responsibility for Damage Caused by Smoking Ban
By Robert Hayes Halfpenny
November 20, 2004
I realize in some corners, expecting groups or individuals to accept responsibility for their actions may not be Politically Correct. However, it is long past due for the concept of P.C. to be thrown onto the trash heap where it has belonged for quite some time. Because of political correctness we have allowed ourselves to be brainwashed, bullied, and berated into thinking our values, our ideals and our principles are either unworthy or outdated. One of the biggest P.C. issues we have today concerns the “life threatening dangers” of Second Hand Smoke. Organizations such as the American lung Association, National Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, and several special interest groups have for the past several years squandered over 1 and ½ billion dollars in converting 155 cities and municipalities to non-smoking venues. Grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, along with funds extorted from major tobacco corporations have funded these activities. “Their Reign of Scare” has been based primarily on junk science, half truths, and lies. They have been aided and abetted by the World Health Organization, A.S.H (Action on Smoking and Health), John Banzhaf (founder of A.S.H. and “Sue America First” proponent), Stanton Glantz (Professor of Medicine U.C.S.F.), C.S.P.I. (Center for Science in the Public Interest), and Dr. James Repace, a former employee of the E.P.A. and “self anointed” Guru of the evils of Second Hand Smoke.
Their efforts have brought about the passage of smoking bans so Draconian in nature one might think we were living during the time of Nazi Germany. In fact, it was that unholy trinity of Adolph Hitler, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, and Nazi Germany that first designed the anti-smoking campaign techniques we see being so successfully used today. For all the efforts of these “Minions of the Minority”, one point stands out, immutably above all others. They can not name one single individual whose death can be directly attributed to Second Hand Smoke. Nor, for that matter, can they name one single individual whose death from cancer can be attributed directly to smoking. In fact no one even knows for certain what causes cancer. Through such catch phrases as, “we are doing this for the children”, “we need to protect the safety of bar and restaurant workers”, “most people really want smoking bans”, and the most ridiculous one of all, “it will be good for business,” these self righteous do-gooders have bullied cajoled and intimidated numerous governmental agencies into passing these hated smoking bans. However, the bans have created an effect that no one might have suspected. THE BANS THEMSELVES, ARE INJURING AND KILLING PEOPLE!
These injuries and deaths are not some computer generated profile or statistical report. They are real live flesh and blood people with real names and real addresses. To date, there are over 25 people who have been raped, beaten, or killed as a direct result of the smoking bans.
Perhaps it is now time for those who have been injured and the relatives whose loved ones have been killed or committed suicide because of the effects of these bans to strike back. It is an irrefutable fact that the A.S.H., W.H.O., E.P.A., Heart, Cancer, and Lung organizations along with people like Banzhaf, Repace, and Glantz are directly responsible for pushing the smoking bans. City, County, State, and even Federal governments are no less responsible and in fact perhaps even more culpable for these ill-conceived smoking bans.
In order for these people to strike back it will be necessary for them to seek help from the “bottom-feeders” of our society. I refer of course to the attorneys, lawyers, ambulance chasers, shysters, and Shylocks whose extortion of the major tobacco corporations helped to fund the very bans we have today. I would urge every person who has been violently touched as a direct result of these unconstitutional smoking bans initiate both civil and criminal lawsuits against any and all official supporters of the smoking bans. It is high time these offensive groups be held accountable for the misery and deaths that have occurred because of their rapacious and Fascistic desire to control the lives of other people. Perhaps the American Civil Liberties Union (A.C.L.U.) might like a change of pace from supporting the rights of Ku Klux Klan members and Neo Nazis by supporting the rights of everyday Americans who choose to use a legal product in a legal fashion! The names and/or incidents are as follows:
Ban Damage: Deaths, Injuries, Rape, and more!
Return to free choice
11/22/04
Below is an excellent editorial from Thomas Laprade, one of our IL Group members. Well worth reading.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas wins again.
Morris
The Toronto Star
Nov. 22, 2004. 01:00 AM
Return to free choice
Business owners should be able to post sign saying whether or not they offer smoke-free environment
Freedom of choice
The issue of smoking in public areas has been on the table for years. The idea of having designated smoking areas seemed to be a logical and workable solution. So, without a lot of fuss, people became accustomed to having to locate themselves in the area of their choice.
"Quit-smoking" aids were introduced and a great deal of educational media was released to inform all of the possible dangers of smoking. The results were positive, since the percentage of people who now smoke has greatly declined. Once again it was these individuals' choices to quit or at least attempt to quit. Good for them.
It sounded like smokers and anti-smokers were willing to work on this together and it appeared to have been effective. Well, apparently, not in the eyes of the anti-smokers. Now it's to a point of we've been given an inch, let's take a mile and ban smoking altogether.
We all need to be educated on the possible negative economical impacts of a smoking ban. We are already facing a rapidly shrinking rural economy. Please be open minded; what works for some does not work for all. Many small bars and restaurants will not only suffer but will, in fact, close. Many businesses cannot afford even the slightest decline in their consumer base. Many youth, sport and charitable organizations will lose huge amounts of revenue from fund raisers such as bingo.
Why don't we stop wasting taxpayers' dollars and allow choice to be the ultimate dictator, not the government at any level?
Business owners could simply be required to post a very inexpensive sign indicating: We do not offer a smoke-free environment or we do offer a smoke-free environment or we offer designated smoking areas. How much simpler can it be. As a bonus, business owners would then be relieved of the responsibility of enforcing a law they may not necessarily agree with.
Whether you are for or against smoking, as a consumer the locations you patronize become your choice. As a business, the consumer base you wish to attract becomes your choice, not that of government.
Thomas Laprade, Thunder Bay, Ont.
Mon Nov 22, 2004
I just had to share this article. I found it on
smokersclubforum@yahoogroups.com and really enjoyed it.
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/mugger111804.asp
Jewish World Review Nov. 18, 2004/ 5 Kislev 5765
MUGGER
Tobacco Finally Gets a Win: It's a Moral Matter
http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com Executives at Philip Morris USA probably had to furtively step outside last week —gloating is forbidden at this pariah company —but you know the high-fives and revival of the catch-phrase "You've Come a Long Way, Baby!" resounded within the tobacco industry.
Talk about early Christmas presents. At a time when smokers are considered barely more tolerable than convicted child molesters, a Los Angeles Times photographer snapped a young Marine in Fallujah with a cigarette dangling from his battle-scarred mug, and instantly we're back in Marlboro Country again. The picture was printed, according to the Times, in over 100 newspapers, and subsequently the 20-year-old Kentucky native, James Blake Miller, is the object of female adoration and gung-ho partisans of the war in Iraq.
"If you want to write something," Miller told Times reporter Patrick J. McDonnell, "tell Marlboro I'm down to four packs and I'm here in Falloujah till who knows when. Maybe they can send some more. And they can bring the price down a bit." Effin' A, dude! The article appeared on Nov. 13, and it's a safe bet that Philip Morris has already sent a plane filled with cigs for Miller and his buddies.
The photographer, Luis Sinco, certainly deserves a Pulitzer for the iconic image, but I suspect that the Chateau Margaux-sniffers who pick the winners each spring won't go near it. It's probably a quandary as well for the Times editors: On the one hand, what daily doesn't want another Pulitzer for its lobby trophy case; on the other, such an award would probably be viewed as tainted goods since the stench of tobacco would envelop the honor.
But who knows, if Maureen Dowd is correct in predicting that the United States is making a return to the 1950s cultural ethos —all because of George W. Bush, Karl Rove and Dick Cheney (but not, of course, the lame-duck Colin Powell) —maybe even Michael Bloomberg will rescind his ban on smoking in New York City bars.
And, if this longshot and regrettably whimsical theory has any merit, it's even possible that Time magazine will not only ditch its stupid "Person of the Year" headline for its last issue of the year —"man" or "woman" or "idea" remains more accurate —and submit to the obvious choice of Bush for its cover. Until young Miller became not only a symbol of the Marines, but embattled smokers as well, I was convinced Time's editors would snub the President and settle on a choice more palatable to its editorial point of view. Say a split cover of Michael Moore and Mel Gibson. Or "The Rising Evangelicals." More likely, "A Polarized Nation."
Oh, wait, this just in: a mole at the mag has forwarded the front-running selection. It'll be "The American Voter," with the cover image of a brain clogged by competing thoughts like stem cell research, gay weddings, abortion, Freedom Fries, Swift Boat vets, George Soros and Teresa Heinz Kerry.
Locally, the New York Post wasted no time in appropriating Sinco's photo, devoting its Nov. 11 front page to Miller, with the headline "Smokin': Marlboro men kick butt in Fallujah." Say what you will about the inside contents of the Post —slipping, I'd say, as long as Dick Morris remains as an op-ed columnist, a monumental lapse in judgment that's just barely compensated by Deborah Orrin's excellent political coverage —but the Marlboro cover was just the first in three straight knockout Post front pages.
The next day featured a dead terrorist, with the magnificently truthful words "Arafat Dead: And he won't be missed" accompanying a photo of the tyrant who French president Jacques Chirac (and citizen of the world Jimmy Carter) praised upon his passing. As an encore, the Post's Nov. 12 edition was another punch to the gut, with this headline: "The Arafat Lady Sings: Rich widow's farewell to Yasser."
JWR contributor "Mugger" -- aka Russ Smith -- is the editor-in-chief and CEO of New York Press (www.nypress.com). Send your comments to him by clicking here.
MUGGER Archives
An editorial well worth reading.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/219-11182004-402571.html
Quit nagging the smokers, will ya?
J.D. Mullane
jmullane@phillyburbs.com
Fri Nov 19, 2004
Bucks County Courier Times
Today is the day we set aside each year to badger, harass and pester that marginalized subculture of Americans, the Doorway People.
You know the Doorway People. They stand in doorways at work or at the mall smoking cigarettes because lighting up in mixed company has become as distasteful as nose-picking.
Yes, today marks the 27th anniversary of the Great American Smokeout, sponsored by the American Cancer Society, where modern incarnates of pinch-mouthed prohibitionists attempt to further ghettoize smokers.
Now, it's not that I think smoking is good. I have friends who smoke. I wish they didn't. On average, they will trade 10 years of their lives to enjoy their habit. But we're all grownups. Smoking is their demon and I have enough of my own demons to wrestle with.
But, unlike anti-smoking zealots, I sympathize with smokers.
That's because I was a smoker. When I quit for good in 1996, I was burning through 2 1/2 packs a day. I ditched the habit because each time I coughed, my lungs rattled as if someone had backed into metal trash cans.
Still, I loved every puff. I still miss it. In fact, I still have nicotine cravings.
So I'm sympathetic to smokers and believe they should be free to enjoy their addiction, which, last I checked, remains legal. Which is why I dislike the anti-smoking scolds. They are trying to criminalize smoking.
From New York City to Dallas, from Toledo, Ohio, to Eugene, Ore., anti-smoking zealots have racked up successful campaigns to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, the last bastion of peace and acceptance for smokers.
Eventually, the anti-smoking "movement" will have won enough smoking bans in enough cities in enough states to introduce national no-smoking legislation, said Zoe Mitchell, co-founder of Ban the Ban, which recently defeated efforts to enact similar no-smoking legislation in Washington, D.C.
"Ultimately, their goal is to make it a national issue based on their success at the local level," she said.
Anti-smokers say they're acting in the best interest of public health.
They say all those smokers burden the healthcare system with their cigarette-related maladies. It costs all of us more in healthcare premiums, they say.
Nonsense. Smokers die sooner than most of us nonsmokers, never collecting a cent from Social Security, which they've paid for decades.
Also, smokers pay outrageous cigarette taxes on each pack of smokes, which pours billions of dollars annually into government coffers.
At best, the money argument is a wash.
When an anti-smoking nut steps into a place like the Puss N' Boots Tavern in Fairless Hills, all they see is the blue-gray cloud of smoke hovering over the patrons crowded around the bar.
When I walk into the Boot, I see it differently.
I see a local cop who's seen more than his fair share of tragedy.
Or an emergency room nurse who was up to her elbows in blood just a few hours before.
Or a construction guy who's sacrificed years of Saturdays to work overtime so he could save for his kid's college tuition.
Or a middle-aged father worried about his son, who's fighting the war.
These are the good people the anti-smoking zealots want to stigmatize as public health leeches.
And if they accomplish their goal, they won't go away.
They will persecute the overweight, stigmatize SUV drivers and haul into court those who don't recycle.
They've got the money and the time and the lawyers.
They're coming for you.
Mullane's opinion column appears Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday.
November 18, 2004
Wed Nov 17, 2004
Madison County, IL
Philip Morris target of another ‘light’ suit ; James and Debra Mills v. Hucks Convenience Stores, Brown & Williamson Tobacco, RJ Reynolds
Hi,
Below is information from the latest anti-tobacco law suits entered into our court system in Southern Illinois. I have included the headline article on the Tobacco.org website today (below), along with the Madison Record's two articles on the subject, and a few responses from readers of the Telegraph.
In case most of you don't know where Madison County is located (I wasn't sure either), I found a map showing it's location. The already infamous law firm of Korein-Tillery are once again pursuing a new tobacco extortion law suit on behalf of greedy clients through Judge Nicholas G. Byron, the Madison County Circuit Judge, who
"awarded the $10.1 billion class action whopper against Philip Morris".
This is the real atrocity: James and Debra Mills and Barbara Sandrowski, represented by Korein-Tillery, are ganging up against a small convenience store chain also, for selling cigarettes to the plaintiffs. (I was only able to locate three locations for Huck's Convenience Stores in southern Illinois.)
When will our court system draw a line on frivolous law suits and begin to question our judges' ethics? What must small businesses do to protect themselves against biased judges, greedy law firms and irresponsible individuals?
______________________________
Garnet Dawn - The Smoker's Club, Inc. - Midwest Regional Director
The United Pro Choice Smokers Rights Newsletter - http://www.smokersclubinc.com
Illinois Smokers Group - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/illinoissmokers/
mailto:garnetdawn@comcast.net - Respect Freedom of Choice!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris target of another ‘light’ suit
SANFORD J. SCHMIDT, The Telegraph
11/16/2004
EDWARDSVILLE -- The law firm that caused a nationwide stir with a class action suit against cigarette maker Philip Morris is again taking the corporate giant to court, this time claiming an individual client suffered lung cancer.
The firm of Korein-Tillery filed suit in Madison County Circuit Court late last week claiming the company violated the state’s consumer fraud act, which lead to the lung cancer, suffered by its client, Barbara Sandrowski of Collinsville.
Many of the claims made in the Sandrowski suit are the same as those in the class action suit in that they claim the company sold "light" cigarettes, claiming they would be lower in tar and nicotine, while knowing they would actually be higher.
"Among other things, the plaintiff was without knowledge that she received higher levels of tar and nicotine than defendants represented, or that the smoke produced by Marlboro Lights cigarettes is more mutagenic (potential for causing cancer) than regular cigarettes," the suit claims.
Company officials could not be reached.
The famous class action suit made similar claims. Madison County Circuit Judge Nicholas G. Byron awarded all Illinois smokers of light cigarettes more than $10 billion in damages after a bench trial in 2003.
The Illinois Supreme Court last week heard arguments on the company’s appeal. The company is claiming there are too many differences among the members of the class for the case to have been certified as a class action.
The suit claims Sandrowski began smoking as a teen-ager and was diagnosed with lung cancer in July 28, 2000. She bought and smoked, on average, 40 Marlboro Lights per day for 17 years. She did not know of the company’s deceptive acts until 2003, the suit claims.
The suit claims Philip Morris represented Lights as low tar and nicotine and concealed the fact that Lights "actually increases the mutagenicity of the tar delivered to the consumer and increases the levels of most of the harmful toxins delivered to the consumer."
The suit is asking for an unspecified amount of damages for the plaintiff’s injuries, past and future medical expenses, past and future loss of wages, past and future pain and suffering, disability and lost of life expectancy.
sanfordjschmidt@hotmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
©The Telegraph 2004
http://www.madisonrecord.com/news/newsview.asp?c=132011
New Lawsuits: Monday, Nov. 15
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
By
Steve Gonzalez - Edwardsville Bureau
James and Debra Mills v. Hucks Convenience Stores, Brown & Williamson Tobacco, RJ Reynolds
J-Moran; PA-Stephen M. Tillery
· Debra claims she was diagnosed with cancer in November 2002 after smoking around 40 light cigarettes a day for 24 years. She is seeking at least $1,150,000 in damages.04 L 1270
------------------------------------------------
Barbara Sandrowski v. Huck’s Convenience Stores
J-Matoesian; PA- Stephen M. Tillery
· Sandrowski of Collinsville alleges she was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2000 after smoking an average of 40 Marlboro Light cigarettes a day for 17 years. She is seeking at least $250,000 in damages.04 L 1271
Barbara Sandrowski v. Philip Morris USA
J-Kardis; PA-Stephen M. Tillery
· li> Sandrowski of Collinsville alleges she was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2000 after smoking an average of 40 Marlboro Light cigarettes a day for 17 years. She is seeking at least $250,000 in damages.04 L 1272
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Telegraph:
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?ewsid=13370784&BRD=1719&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;PAG=461&dept_id=25271&rfi=6
Present Smoker
Nov, 16 2004
Are you kidding me? Is there ever going to be an end to this ridiculous crap? We ALL know what cigarettes can do to us right?....enough said!
-------------------------------------------------------
Fellow Smoker
Nov, 16 2004
I sincerely hope that the higher courts are capable of seeing through the "smoke". Eventually someone is going to hold people responsible for their own actions. I smoke and I'm 20 lbs. over weight. Hey can I sue Schnuck's or Shop and Save for that?
--------------------------------------------------------
Former Area Resident
Nov, 16 2004
Whatever happened to "be responsible for your own actions and words"? It seems that a lot of people are trying to avoid taking responsibility for their actions which were made at some point in their life and blame others who can possibly afford to pay for their irresponsibility. Both of my grandfathers died in the mid-1960's from cancer years after they quit smoking. They didn't blame anyone else for their health problems when they learned about their cancers. It seems that when someone needs money they decide to blame someone and file a lawsuit. It's these people who cause the higher cost of all items and in turn may cause many to lose their jobs. Maybe those who lose their jobs as a result of the costly lawsuits against their employers should file a lawsuit against those who filed the lawsuit against the businesses. And in turn maybe the "money" and "greedy" lawyers will think twice before taking on any lawsuit in which personal responsibility should be looked at first. In this story it mentions that the plaintiff didn't know about certains things about smoking. Where did she go to school? Did they have a reading program? You'd think she would have learned to read first before using anything. I hope that the jurors on this case do like the ones in Florida did a few weeks ago and go in favor of the tobacco industry.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Reader Poll
Do you think the Illinois Supreme Court should overturn Judge Byron’s Phillip Morris verdict?
Yes: (70.45%) No: (29.55%)
