http://www.kellys-stuff.com/maine/maine-health-groups-request-1-per-pack-tax-on-cigarettes/ Join Us To Make Maine A Better Place! Sat, 22 May 2010 03:31:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 http://www.kellys-stuff.com/maine/maine-health-groups-request-1-per-pack-tax-on-cigarettes/#comment-6 Cigna Mon, 01 Mar 2010 16:47:12 +0000 http://www.kellys-stuff.com/maine/?p=45#comment-6 I also agree with the smoking bans, to an extent. The caveat is always "my rights end where yours begin" which is essentially saying that if I am bothered by someone smoking, they shouldn't be smoking. This makes sense in places like restaurants (remember the smoking and nonsmoking sections that were only separated by a 4-foot tall barrier?) but not so much in the open air. Heck - sometimes when I'm driving I can smell someone smoking AHEAD of me on the highway driving @ 70 MPH! That said, I fully support people's right to smoke. I don't smoke, but my father did and it killed him. I support the right to smoke just as I support my right to eat a cheeseburger or go skydiving. Everyone that thinks it's cool and fun to jump on the antismoking bandwagon, just wait until your wonderful government deems your activities as unhealthy and starts taxing/banning them. I also agree with the smoking bans, to an extent. The caveat is always “my rights end where yours begin” which is essentially saying that if I am bothered by someone smoking, they shouldn’t be smoking. This makes sense in places like restaurants (remember the smoking and nonsmoking sections that were only separated by a 4-foot tall barrier?) but not so much in the open air. Heck – sometimes when I’m driving I can smell someone smoking AHEAD of me on the highway driving @ 70 MPH! That said, I fully support people’s right to smoke. I don’t smoke, but my father did and it killed him. I support the right to smoke just as I support my right to eat a cheeseburger or go skydiving. Everyone that thinks it’s cool and fun to jump on the antismoking bandwagon, just wait until your wonderful government deems your activities as unhealthy and starts taxing/banning them.

]]> http://www.kellys-stuff.com/maine/maine-health-groups-request-1-per-pack-tax-on-cigarettes/#comment-5 harleyrider1978 Tue, 29 Dec 2009 20:38:27 +0000 http://www.kellys-stuff.com/maine/?p=45#comment-5 Since 1981 there have been 148 reported studies on ETS, involving spouses, children and workplace exposure. 124 of these studies showed no significant causal relationship between second hand smoke and lung cancer. Of the 24 which showed some risk, only two had a Relative Risk Factor over 3.0 and none higher. What does this mean. To put it in perspective, Robert Temple, director of drug evaluation at the Food and Drug Administration said "My basic rule is if the relative risk isn't at least 3 or 4, forget it." The National Cancer Institute states "Relative risks of less than 2 are considered small and are usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to mere chance, statistical bias, or the effect of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident." Dr. Kabat, IAQC epidemiologist states "An association is generally considered weak if the relative risk is under 3.0 and particularly when it is under 2.0, as is the case in the relationship of ETS and lung cancer. Therefore, you can see any concern of second hand smoke causing lung cancer is highly questionable." Note that the Relative Risk (RR) of lung cancer for persons drinking whole milk is 2.14 and all cancers from chlorinated water ranked at 1.25. These are higher risks than the average ETS risk. If we believe second hand smoke to be a danger for lung cancer then we should also never drink milk or chlorinated water. Since 1981 there have been 148 reported studies on ETS, involving spouses, children and workplace exposure. 124 of these studies showed no significant causal relationship between second hand smoke and lung cancer. Of the 24 which showed some risk, only two had a Relative Risk Factor over 3.0 and none higher. What does this mean. To put it in perspective, Robert Temple, director of drug evaluation at the Food and Drug Administration said “My basic rule is if the relative risk isn’t at least 3 or 4, forget it.” The National Cancer Institute states “Relative risks of less than 2 are considered small and are usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to mere chance, statistical bias, or the effect of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident.” Dr. Kabat, IAQC epidemiologist states “An association is generally considered weak if the relative risk is under 3.0 and particularly when it is under 2.0, as is the case in the relationship of ETS and lung cancer. Therefore, you can see any concern of second hand smoke causing lung cancer is highly questionable.” Note that the Relative Risk (RR) of lung cancer for persons drinking whole milk is 2.14 and all cancers from chlorinated water ranked at 1.25. These are higher risks than the average ETS risk. If we believe second hand smoke to be a danger for lung cancer then we should also never drink milk or chlorinated water.

]]>