San Diego Bans Smoking At All Beaches, Parks

[Mr. P]

CDC, EPA, AMA, NCI, ACS, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, American Academy of Otolarlyngology, California Air Resources Board, Children's National Medical Center,

Phillip Morris USA is "generally willing to accept public-health advocates' conclusions."

That was just from a quick search on Google.

So POOF, now something is different?

Thirty-three studies on secondhand smoke had been completed by 1993. More than 80 percent of the studies reported no association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer, including the largest of the studies. The EPA reviewed 31 studies - inexplicably omitting two studies reporting no association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer - and estimated secondhand smoke caused 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually.
Under the stewardship of the anti-tobacco Clinton administration, secondhand smoke hysteria caught fire.....Later in 1998, the WHO published the largest study ever done on secondhand smoke and lung cancer. The study reported no statistically significant association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer. Oops.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,26109,00.html

 

[GotZoom]

So POOF, now something is different?

Later in 1998, the WHO published the largest study ever done on secondhand smoke and lung cancer. The study reported no statistically significant association between secondhand smoke and lung cancer. Oops.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,26109,00.html

POOF. A lot has changed since 1998.

WASHINGTON : Some 56 percent of teens between 13 and 15 are exposed to second-hand smoke in the developing world, a study conducted in 131 countries since 2000 said on Thursday.

The World Health Organisation study, compiled with the help of US and Canadian public health groups, sought to highlight the level of teens' exposure to nicotine and lobby for stronger policies against public smoking.

Western Europe, Canada, Japan and Australia already had their own statistics and did not take part in the WHO study.

Central and Eastern European youth were reported to be most exposed to second-hand smoke, with 85 percent of them facing it in public and 78 percent at home.

The rates were even higher in Russia, with 81 percent and 90 percent, respectively. In Serbia, they went up to 90 percent in public and 98 percent at home, the study said.

The numbers were reported lower in Africa, with 46 exposed to passive smoke in public and 44 percent at home.

"It is still almost half the kids, and it is still far too much," said Wick Warren of the US Centre for Disease Control, in presenting the figures.

The study showed that 76 percent of all teenagers said they favoured bans on public smoking - with more than 80 percent responding favourably in the Americas, Arab nations and Eastern Europe.

Some 60 percent came out in favour in Africa.

Armando Peruga, of the World Health Organisation office in Geneva, urged nations to pass legislation banning smoking at work and in all public indoor places, and to "launch strong education campaigns to protect their children at home."

"There is high public support for a smoke-free environment," Warren said. "Nothing prevents governments to go ahead." - AFP/de

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/health/view/219092/1/.html
-----
The report won't surprise doctors. It isn't a new study but a compilation of the best research on secondhand smoke done since the last surgeon general's report on the topic in 1986, which declared secondhand smoke a cause of lung cancer that kills 3,000 nonsmokers a year.

Since then, scientists have proved that even more illnesses are triggered or worsened by secondhand smoke. Topping that list: More than 35,000 nonsmokers a year die from heart disease caused by secondhand smoke.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/06/27/involuntary.smoking.ap/index.html

----

No oops. Just more research and studies.

 

[mattskramer]

Good! We never should have allowed that filthy behavior. It is beyond being abnormal. It is downright unhealthy. Imagine all of that toxic smoke. Also, think of the impressionable kids that see people smoke. They may be talked into participating in that disgusting act. At the very least, show a little bit of common decency. If you are going to smoke, do in inside your own home with the blinds down. Don’t do it out in public and certainly don’t come around my family with your cigarettes in sight.

 

[Mr. P]

"There is high public support for a smoke-free environment,"

That is what it's about in a nutshell. All politics, and IMO politics gone wild.

 

[GotZoom]

That is what it's about in a nutshell. All politics, and IMO politics gone wild.

I suppose the health statistics have nothing to do with that high public support.

 

[dmp]

I suppose the health statistics have nothing to do with that high public support.

Some stats show speeding is 'dangerous'. Personally, I'm on the fence when it comes to the "dangers" of 2nd hand smoke; I think some danger is present - but the way the PC crowd paints it, 2nd hand smoke will be the end of civilization.

 

[Mr. P]

I suppose the health statistics have nothing to do with that high public support.

You mean reports, I haven't seen any statistic that prove anything yet, just claims they're out there.

*BTW I think second hand smoke probably is a risk, just not as big of one as it's being made out to be.

 

[5stringJeff]

Good! We never should have allowed that filthy behavior. It is beyond being abnormal. It is downright unhealthy. Imagine all of that toxic smoke. Also, think of the impressionable kids that see people smoke. They may be talked into participating in that disgusting act. At the very least, show a little bit of common decency. If you are going to smoke, do in inside your own home with the blinds down. Don’t do it out in public and certainly don’t come around my family with your cigarettes in sight.

How libertarian of you...

 

[GotZoom]

Some stats show speeding is 'dangerous'. Personally, I'm on the fence when it comes to the "dangers" of 2nd hand smoke; I think some danger is present - but the way the PC crowd paints it, 2nd hand smoke will be the end of civilization.

Speeding is dangerous. So is parachuting, bungee-jumping, and running with scissors.

If that person doing that activity is careful, the danger is minimized.

I know exactly what you and Mr. P are saying. The facts/stories/statistics are jumped on by many people who are over-enthusiastic. But even so, the facts/stories/statistics are there. Even if they are a bit skewed, they are still there.

Bottom line is this. I don't need to see a list of names of the 35,000 people who die a year from heart disease to want to stay away from second hand smoke. I also don't want my chance of heart disease or lung cancer to increase by 30 percent either.

Why do people take vitamins? Why do people watch their weight and exercise? Why do people eat the right foods? Go to the doctor for regular checkups?

It is to stay healthy and stay alive.

I choose to stay away from second hand smoke for the same reason. If there is the smallest chance that these statistics are right...I don't want to risk it.

I'm sure there are smokers on the board. Here is a question.

Do you smoke in the house? In the car when your kids are in the car?

If not, why?

 

[GotZoom]

Good! We never should have allowed that filthy behavior. It is beyond being abnormal. It is downright unhealthy. Imagine all of that toxic smoke. Also, think of the impressionable kids that see people smoke. They may be talked into participating in that disgusting act. At the very least, show a little bit of common decency. If you are going to smoke, do in inside your own home with the blinds down. Don’t do it out in public and certainly don’t come around my family with your cigarettes in sight.

For a minute there, I thought you were finally coming around about the whole homosexuality thing.

Then you got to the sentence about toxic smoke.

So close too.

You'll come around.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

For a minute there, I thought you were finally coming around about the whole homosexuality thing.

Then you got to the sentence about toxic smoke.

So close too.

You'll come around.

LOL

Libs focus on the stupidest things.
However never let them tell you that liberalism does not try to limit your freedom and control your behavior.
Conservativism does the same but it focusses on truly aberrant behavior - gay marriage, pornography, prostitution, drugs, pedophilia, abortion, etc. - not silly things like smoking in the park.

 

[MtnBiker]

My personal favorite are people who complain about smoking in bars and cocktail lounges. If you are in a bar drinking alcohol, you have no business bitching about smoking.

I oppose these bans, especially on businesses. Restuarants and Bars should be able to decide for themselves whether to allow smoking. Government should not be regulating legal activity on private property. It should be up to the property owner. There is already a move afoot to consider smoking in a home with children as child abuse and prosecute people for it. The anti-smoking zealots are getting widly out of control.

acludem

P.S. I am a non-smoker

Well said.

 

[mattskramer]

How libertarian of you...

http://politicalcompass.jpagel.net/questionnaire.php

I ended up in the lower right quadrant but very close to the middle. I guess that I'm a moderate if the questions are valid.

 

[mattskramer]

LOL

Libs focus on the stupidest things.
However never let them tell you that liberalism does not try to limit your freedom and control your behavior.
Conservativism does the same but it focusses on truly aberrant behavior - gay marriage, pornography, prostitution, drugs, pedophilia, abortion, etc. - not silly things like smoking in the park.

Eh. One man’s honey is another man’s vinegar. One man’s prison is another man’s paradise. Some people think that “A” is worse than “B” and some people think that “B” is worse than “A”.

 

[Bonnie]

My personal favorite are people who complain about smoking in bars and cocktail lounges. If you are in a bar drinking alcohol, you have no business bitching about smoking.

I oppose these bans, especially on businesses. Restuarants and Bars should be able to decide for themselves whether to allow smoking. Government should not be regulating legal activity on private property. It should be up to the property owner. There is already a move afoot to consider smoking in a home with children as child abuse and prosecute people for it. The anti-smoking zealots are getting widly out of control.

acludem

P.S. I am a non-smoker

Absolutely!!

 

[Nienna]

I get EXTREMELY annoyed by inconsiderate smokers. It CAN affect other people, even in open, outdoor places. It is a health hazard. Case in point: my asthmatic son. While viewing a soccer game, outside, a man chain-smoked, the entire time. When he lit up the first time, I thought, "Okay, just hold my breath until it's over." But then he lit up again... and again. My asthmatic son was sitting there, and he began to cough. We moved our seats, but the breeze was such that we would have had to had to leave the field to get away from it. That guy had a SERIOUS problem if he couldn't go 45 minutes without a smoke. I have seen a smoker blow smoke in someone's face, and then look at them, like "What are you going to do about it?"

That being said, I still don't think it is the government's place to regulate this.

 

[insein]

I hate smoking, but this is getting rediculous. Reminds me of Demolition Man..."salt is bad for you, hence it is illegal".

Exactly where its going.

 

[insein]

My personal favorite are people who complain about smoking in bars and cocktail lounges. If you are in a bar drinking alcohol, you have no business bitching about smoking.

I oppose these bans, especially on businesses. Restuarants and Bars should be able to decide for themselves whether to allow smoking. Government should not be regulating legal activity on private property. It should be up to the property owner. There is already a move afoot to consider smoking in a home with children as child abuse and prosecute people for it. The anti-smoking zealots are getting widly out of control.

acludem

P.S. I am a non-smoker

My god! I can't believe you typed that. Letting a PRIVATE business owner make a decision instead of the GOVERNMENT. Wow i think this place is rubbing off on you too much, acludem.

 

[dilloduck]

My god! I can't believe you typed that. Letting a PRIVATE business owner make a decision instead of the GOVERNMENT. Wow i think this place is rubbing off on you too much, acludem.

Naaaa--It's a cheap trick. The ACLU defends rights of "privacy" when it suits thier agenda.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Allowing or not allowing smoking really should boil down to a question of property rights. If a bar owner wants to allow it, it's his property. Bar employees and patrons know as soon as they step in the door for the first time if it's a smoking establishment. They can choose to accept the risks, or not.

Ideally, this would be the same way for public places--the public places would be privately owned. Let the beach owner or park owner decide whether or not to allow smoking.