Vince Harden wrote on Aug 23, 2008 4:55 AM:
" Reply to "to Vince"
(Why don't you put a name up?)
This particular comment is pretty lame and,as usual,100% wrong.Also,as usual,you have absolutely no evidence to back up your statement.I am a member of the group that has the most against tobacco companies for I am a smoker.You probably do not even know what "the lies of the tobacco industry" were.You have profited from their existence though.Is this why you promote their products,especially to the young people,by calling attention to them and by making it "cool" to take up their use again? I suppose that you are not aware that even "tobacco control" orgs. refer people to the tobacco cos. for research? (Physicians for a Smoke Free Canada for one)I also suppose that,given your myopic point of view,you have never considered that if we were to ban or vilify products or industries that have ever caused harm to people,that we would have to do so for all of them. eg) Why don't you vilify the EPA for raising acceptable mercury levels,allowing the use of coal,not allowing states to lower vehicle emissions or the FDA for allowing harmful drugs to be marketed? I'm also sure that the auto industry knew that their products are also killing people,etc.,etc.These are all "proven killers" yet tobacco use has never credibly been shown to harm anyone except smokers.According to the USSG (for one),this cannot even be done using epidemiology.I suppose you did not know this either.Are you going to cast aspersions on the U.S. Supreme Court for ruling that "a private business does not become public just because the public is invited in" or the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank for stating that smoking ban costs are far greater than stated? "
History Buff wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:34 AM:
" The new American motto:
No Smoke = No Go = I'll keep my own dough!
It's also time to look at the kick backs the politicians are getting for putting in smoking bans. "
To Vince wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:48 AM:
" The average guy and gal on the street won't fall for the lies of the tobacco industry any longer, Vince. And we can see right through someone who has the financial backing of those who got rich off of the addiction of countless now-deceased tobacco users. Drug pushers, including tobacco executives and their patsies,will all one day get their just rewards. I would not want to be among that crew on Judgment Day. "
Vince Harden wrote on Aug 20, 2008 8:42 PM:
" Reply to "To Smokers"
So who is denying any addiction?
Smokers,as a group,are aware of any risk to themselves.This is why they had been quitting in great enough numbers that the smoking rate is now about a third of what it once was.Now,thanks to the efforts of so called "tobacco control",the smoking rate decline has stalled and is actually probably increasing again.There is also the huge amount of money that these smoking bans have cost to consider.In short,because of these efforts,you people have really just made things very much worse.Congratulations!
For most of the content of the rest of your post-Why let the facts get in the way of a good story? It appears that you should become better informed,both in the history of tobacco control and credible research. "
To Smokers wrote on Aug 20, 2008 10:20 AM:
" Give it up. Give your family members and friends a gift they will appreciate for years to come. Stop denying your addiction. Stop intellectualizing that your smoking does no harm to you or your spouses or your children or grandchildren. Don't waste any more time writing letters to the editor about the nastiness of smoking bans. Just give it up. Get help if needed from your doctor or those who have already quit the habit. "
Vince Harden wrote on Aug 19, 2008 6:01 AM:
" The main group exhibiting "denial" symptoms are the comparatively few anti-smokers.This is somewhat understandable as,by and large,these people are simply bigots.
To put things in perspective,what do we really have here? We have a dubious effect,the supposed,unexplained,tobacco like symptoms that would effect hardly anyone-if anyone at all.This is especially so if one allows that ETS is the supposed cause .You do not get a supposedly increasing number of deaths (effect)from greatly declining exposure to secondhand smoke (ETS) (the supposed cause).This is an axiom of medicine.Also there is a wealth of research that states that ETS could not be the cause in the first place.Much,if not all,of the research to the contrary seems to stem from attempts to make the cause fit the effect. Eg.,the disgraced EPA study.This is hardly the scientific method.One is supposed to find the most likely cause,not to presuppose one.The most likely cause of these deaths is still air pollution.This is further borne out by new research.See here;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080817223432.htm "
Isnt it surprising wrote on Aug 18, 2008 7:07 PM:
" Despite what is now known about the health risks of smoking (to both smokers and non-smokers) we still see letters like this to newspaper editors. It's almost unbelievable, isn't it? Denial is not a river in Egypt, is it? "
Virgilk wrote on Aug 17, 2008 11:22 AM:
" This is just what Anti-smokers deserve. The problem is, there are few Anti's in the Bars and just the few smokers who must step outside to have a smoke. What few Anti's there are in bars are stinking the Bars up with their smell.
"CHICAGO, July 26 (UPI) -- A scent scientist says as communities
require smoke-free public places, that funny smell that lingers after
the smoke clears, or "bar funk," is smelly people.
Through a series of scientific tests at a popular Chicago
bar/restaurant, Dr. Alan Hirsch, founder of the Smell & Taste
Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago, discovered that while
the odor of cigarette smoke is gone, equally offensive odors that
were previously hidden have surfaced.
The tests showed that bar patrons were a major cause of the stink.
Sweat was one of the top odor contributors to the "bar funk" and in
addition to armpit odor, smells from patrons' backs, heads and
abdomens were also potent.
Using scientific odor-gauging instruments, Hirsch performed
an "ambient odor concentration" test to quantify how bad the smoke-
free bar smelled.
Based on ambient odor intensity levels -- 60 being most smelly and
zero being least smelly -- a smoke-free bar was found to have a 50,
compared to a swine production site at 60, an animal rescue facility
at 30, a men's room at 15, or industrial site at seven."
UPI.com "
dave crowley wrote on Aug 17, 2008 12:52 AM:
" ryan is right...lawmakers who jump on board the anti smoking express are lazy...it is also important to note that lawmakers pass unjust laws for one simple reason...THEY DO NOT FEAR A PARTICULAR VOTING BLOCK...this will change, as a new and powerful voting block will slowly but surely emerge across the nation, The American Smoker Voting Block. Smokers are finally waking up...The Sleeping Smoking Giant is rising. november alas. aloha, dave crowley "
kybriar wrote on Aug 16, 2008 7:53 PM:
" Lawmakers should question the false health claims before they enact destructive smoking bans, guess they are too lazy. Claims are made of death by smoking without one single death certificate or even proof they they would have lived had they not smoked.
I assume if the claims were true, none of us would be here to argue about it. Lawmakers should get off their lazy butts and question why the funder of smoking bans also profits from them. What a scam on society "
Virgilk wrote on Aug 16, 2008 3:32 PM:
" 1. If those of you who are so worried about your right to breath clean air I wouldnt mind a little of it myself. I have yet to find anyone who can find it.
It wont be in your homes because of the materials it is built from.
It wont be in your own Kitchen with the cleaning products.
It wont be in your yard because of the insecticides you spray.
It wont be in your car because of the materials used in the upholstery and the fumes that come into your car while driving.
It wont be anywhere outside because of the pollution.
Look up Burning Issues and see the chart. Be sure to notice the least harmful item on the list.
Be sure to ignore the fact that the EPA Report was vacated as fraudulent.
Be sure to ignore over 150+ studies that show no harm from SHS.
They dont tell us that living close to major traffic hi-ways or large Urban areas increases the incidence of Cancer or Heart Disease by 50% or more.
Quite frankly all the Antis have are Fraudulent Studies and biased opinions. Provided by those who profit from Smoking Bans.
What we do have is, people and agencies that want to control others for profit not health. "
Virgilk wrote on Aug 16, 2008 3:30 PM:
" It might be better to focus on a real problem. Our Health industry is the Number 1 killer, and Hospitals are part of the problem. Doctors are rated #3. Wake up to the real Health Threat
http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/content/aug2008/id20080813_845797.htm?chan=innovation_architecture_top+stories
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/08/02/hpv-vaccine-blamed-for-teen-s-paralysis.aspx?source=nl
http://www.pipes.org/Articles/Bliley.html
Toxic Chemicals Found In Common Household Products
http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1492200/toxic_chemicals_found_in_common_household_products/index.html
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25817110
Of course Doctors and Hospitals will blame everything on Smoke.
By the way. Pay no attention to some ex-smokers. They are just mad because they miss smoking. "
Nice try Mr. Brown wrote on Aug 16, 2008 3:13 PM:
" It's funny how you're trying to make smokers into heroic non-conformists. That seems just like something the tobacco companies would do. They're not heroes. They're losers who inflict their filthy habits on everybody around them.
Signed a former smoker "
kybriar wrote on Aug 16, 2008 2:39 PM:
" Lets not forget gullible and lazy who allows smoking bans for profit. The RWJF is a JnJ pharma foundation and markets smoking cessation products
By: Gerlach KK and Larkin MA
This chapter describes SmokeLess States�: National Tobacco Policy Initiative, one of the largest investments made by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, with $99 million authorized in grants since 1992. Primarily, grants were awarded to non-governmental organizations, with the intention that they would educate the public and policy-makers about the tobacco problem. Two features about the program are significant: (1) the Foundation encouraged its grantees to be activists; (2) advocacy was emphasized to bring about policy change. The program relied heavily on three major health voluntary organizations: the American Cancer Society; the American Heart Association and the American Lung Association. They provided financial support and, in particular, funds to help lobbying efforts which the Foundation could not support directly. In addition to insight on the effects of advocacy, this chapter offers a window into the role of coalitions in bringing about social change. The program ended in 2004 and its lasting impact has yet to be determined. "
Bill Brown wrote on Aug 16, 2008 1:59 PM:
" Smoking Bans are not about the health of Non-smokers. They are a ham-fisted attempt at social engineering through legalized discrimination against an all inclusive group of non-conformist citizens. Citizens that prefer to make their own decisions. Government intrusion into that decision for their own good is a misnomer. Heaven forbid an elected representative would denounce the manufactured science of SHS and risk being perceived as pro-tobacco, or of holding to the antiquated notion of defending the obviously outdated and completely useless US constitution. After-all, thats not likely to get you re-elected.
Smoking bans are a clear and obvious violation of private property rights, though at this late date in the rush to achieve the ultimate politically correct public persona, no one really seems to care about a rights issue as long as the Anti-smoker trying to catch a ride on the new morality bandwagon is perceived as being on the right side of the issue.
Private property rights protect individual liberty.
Politicians that claim otherwise merely prove their lack of principle and integrity, as well as their colossal lack of knowledge on the subject of Second Hand Smoke. But more disturbing still, is the demonstrated superficial but expedient faith in the other SHS, the Second Hand Science manufactured on demand to justify their newly defined progressive actions, formerly and more widely known as socialism. "
Pam P. wrote on Aug 16, 2008 12:11 PM:
" GOOD politicians listen to their constituents. GOOD politicians empathize with the people whom he/she serves. Let me introduce you to 13 of them in Ohio. Senators Schuler, Seitz, Cafaro, Niehaus, Smith, Buehrer, Cates, Grendell, Mumper, Padgett, Roberts, Schaffer, Spada have listened to their constituents. They have introduced a bill to exempt private clubs and family owned businesses who have been financially devastated by Ohio's smoking ban. Liquor permit holders lost 67.44 million dollars in potential sales (while home consumption rose by 1.4 MILLION BOTTLES) the first year of the ban. 5,400 lost their jobs in the hospitality and leisure industry. These senators didn't ride the anti-smoking gravy train. They listened with their hearts to the people who are losing what they've spent a lifetime and even generations building. To me, they're the real politicians, the real heros. They took the unpopular stand to help their constituents. To them we owe our undying gratitude. To those who rode the popular wave of anti-tobacco, we will work to make sure this is your last ride. We own businesses and we vote! "
Virgilk wrote on Aug 16, 2008 11:37 AM:
" I know for a fact they are lazy. I personally provide them with verifiable information about SHS studies and they don't even take the time to read them. They would rather rely on biased testimony of local people who do nothing by state their opinions with no verification of the statements they make. "
Thomas Laprade wrote on Aug 15, 2008 7:42 PM:
" Politicians as do the anti-smoking cartel knows that approx. 80 per cent of the adults are non-smokers and that is where the votes are.
As one Politician told me."I could care less about the smokers or the hospitality industry, I'm too busy looking after the business of the city.
People should realize that I was elected to run the business of the city, not the city's businesses.
Council is not in the health business and it shouldn't be.
The same politician said to me that my being re-elected is a little shaky, so I am going to hang on the tail of the Smoke-Free people.
That way I 'know' I will get elected.
All politicians put their fingers in the air to find out which way the wind is blowing.
The 'flavour of the month' so to speak. "
Advertisement 
Advertisement 
