Ok 
Posted on 07/21/2006 3:15:06 PM PDT by SheLion
Poor Heather Crowe, the Ottawa waitress who recently died of lung cancer and had lent her persona to the anti-smoking lobby as the typical victim du jour. Crowe was said to be a "typical" restaurant worker who spent 40 years working in Ottawa restaurants, all the while breathing the second-hand smoke that’s said to have claimed her life.
There are so many things wrong with Heather Crowe’s case that it begs for an official inquiry, but like all politically correct causes the anti-smoking lobby can do no wrong. Crowe, who really did die of lung cancer, was anything but a typical restaurant worker. Apparently she worked in three different restaurants, starting her day at 6:00 AM and ending her day usually around 2:00 AM the following morning. Most individuals working as servers in restaurants do not work three full shifts per day, totaling upwards of 20 hours.
In the commercials that Crowe made for the anti-smoking lobby she said she wanted "to be the last person to die from second hand smoke." If she did die of exposure to second hand smoke, it’s likely that Crowe was also the first person in the world to die from this condition. There is not one documented case of anyone ever dying of second hand smoke. Anti-smoking groups like to bandy about numbers of people who have died of second hand smoke, however the truth is that no one knows if anyone has died as a result of this because the numbers being quoted are not garnered from death certificates, but are made up through epidemiological estimates that do not involve review of individual death certificates.
What’s more, the numbers most people quote as individuals who are dying of second hand smoke vary from place to place. For instance the anti-smoking lobby of Lambton, Ontario claims that this year alone some 5,000 people will die of second hand smoke there. That seems awfully high, given that the overall population is just over 127,000. Other places use different numbers; Calgary claims it’s 3,000 deaths, while British Columbia claims it will only be 500 deaths this year.
When Heather Crowe was first diagnosed, her doctor told her that she had an inoperable "smoker’s tumor" in her lungs. As a diagnosis, the term "smoker’s tumor" is novel in that it is not a medical term and does not appear in medical dictionaries. It sounds like the doctor who made this diagnosis was following an agenda.
What’s more, when Heather Crowe sought compensation from the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (OWSIB), the board ruled in her favor, a fact which many of the anti-smoking lobbyists tout as being proof positive that second hand smoke causes cancer as well as a plethora of other ills. The OWSIB ruling only proves that it pays to have friends in high places, of which Heather Crowe appears to have had many. A number of influential politicians, as well as Dr. Robert Cushman, Ottawa’s Chief Medical Officer of health wrote letters in support of Heather's application for compensation. Crowe’s case was supported by a study emanating from California that claimed restaurant workers there inhaled the equivalent of 1.5 to 2 packs per day. I find it curious that the details of the OWSIB ruling were never made public.
As for the study from California, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) specifies that .5 mg of nicotine per cubic meter is an acceptable level. Testing conducted in 2004 of 18 restaurants in St. Louis Park, Minnesota disclosed that none of the restaurants had second hand smoke levels close to the allowable minimum specified by OSHA. In fact, most were far, far below the minimum.
So why all the hysteria? Can you say money? The anti-tobacco lobby is being controlled in large part and funded by pharmaceutical companies that are doing a land office business in selling smoking cessation medications. That’s the real hidden agenda of which I doubt even the staunchest anti-tobacco crusaders are aware.
But let’s face it, when organizations such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) distribute millions of dollars to anti-smoking groups, maybe someone should take a closer look at this foundation. The board of directors of the RWJF includes some very interesting people. Robert Wood Johnson IV is the chairman and CEO of the Johnson Company, a New York investment firm that seems to hold an inordinate amount of pharmaceutical investments. Other directors include what appears to be the entire former board of directors of Johnson & Johnson Company, which incidentally is a major manufacturer of alternative pharmaceutical nicotine products. Robert E. Campbell is the retired chairman of J & J; George S. Frazza and was corporate counsel and member of the J&J executive committee. Edward Hartnett is the retired group chairman of J&J Pharmaceuticals. Ralph S. Larsen is former chairman and CEO of J&J. So, it’s evident there is a lot of interest in the RWJF to encourage governments to impose smoking bans. Could this by any chance have anything to do with the fact that RWJF is holding in excess of $5 billion in J&J shares?
You are why freedoms are being curtailed. Don't pretend that you were "polite" in the past. Many smokers are. Go to another hotel.
It IS a permanent cash cow. I've bought plenty of the gum. I tend to rotate between that, chew and cigarettes. I once asked the clerk where I pick mine up how many people they know of that have bought the nicotine gum for more than a year. She said "most are repeat buyers that never stop.
The big pharms get to sell their "medicine" at much higher prices than tobacco company products. And they know people won't quit, just like the tobacco companies knew.
It is a major coup and it is pure BS. I recall when the FDA stopped a tobacco company from selling nicotine lozenges years back, long before they gave permission to the big Pharms to do it.
The whole thing is a sham.
Heh.. I read this post after my own where I stated essentially the same thing.
Ok
Well said,, you are not the only one who feels this way. I could care less about their "rules" anymore.
But they're pro-special interest groups here so it isn't too surprising. It would be nice if the Reps learned how to spell the word "people." And instead of 1 bad state rep and one good one, we will now have 2 REALLY bad ones come next election, neither of whom have a clue about local issues.
I think marriott is a mormon company and they don't allow smoking in their religion, or a lot of other things.
You just can't help letting your feminine side out, can you?
Made Best in Show yet?
Oh please. Conspiracy theories are the hallmarks of kooks. The fact is smokers have been their own worst enemy. Thank you.
It is not a conspiracy theory. The anti-tobacco lobby IS heavily funded by the pharaceutical industry. Have you ever heard of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation? It is nearly 100% funded through it's portfolio of Johnson & Johnson stock holdings. Other than cigarette taxes, RWJF is about the largest funder of the anti-smoker/tobacco lobby through it's grant programs.
Just I don't think I'd want to get between you and a niconazi, that's all. (Matter of fact, I'd probably join you...)
I religiously try to avoid smokers whenever possible. For example, I always request a nonsmoking room in a hotel, sit as far away as possible from the smoking section restaurant, etc. But many times I have to put up with their bad habit no matter what precautions I take.
The four times I wound up in the ER, I was either trapped (e.g. in a car with a smoking company president -- my boss -- in a blizzard and therefore unable to open the windows) or I was already "hypersensitive" (e.g. I received an allergy shot and then attended an "executive committee meeting" about 20 minutes later where several company officers lit up.
Incidentally, my mother smoked. She would stand outside in heat, cold and stormy weather because of the smoke's effects on myself and my two siblings (we would all begin to wheeze within a few seconds). Mother claimed it was her "only vice" (which is true) and claimed she derived great pleasure from smoking. Mother felt she was safe from the ill effects of smoking because she limited herself to one pack per day and tried not to inhale.
Mother was dead wrong. About 10 years ago she developed an aggressive form of large cell lung cancer. Medical science could do nothing other than nuke her wind pipe so she wouldn't cough continuously. She only lasted about three months from the date her diagnosis. During that time, the cancer ate up several of her bones (causing great pain and numerous fractures), spread throughout her abdomen (causing great pain) and spread to her brain (causing headaches and seizures). Eventually, her lungs filled with cancer cells to the point where she essentially suffocated.
Of course, not everybody who smokes will develop cancer. And not everybody who develops cancer will suffer as much as my mother. But many will.
I pity people who gamble a few minutes worth of nicotine rush against such a terrible outcome.
That's because Robert Wood Johnson II was the son of the founder, and a past president and long time chairman of Johnson & Johnson. The foundation was funded with his stock holdings after his death.
I know all that.........I was just correcting your erroneous comment that anti-smoker lobbies being funded by the pharmaceutical industry was a conspiracy theory. It is not, it is just plain and simple fact.
Johnson & Johnson is a large and diverse health care company. I would think that they would make far more money from the diseases caused by smoking than from smoking cessation products.
To claim that the RWJF is a front for J & J to make more money is ludicrous. Like I said, smokers are their own worst enemy. That's why more and more places are going non-smoking, by law or not, even in traditional tobacco growing regions.
I don't think She Lyin can hear you, as articulate as your post was. And I'm starting to wonder if the smokers use FR with a hidden agenda, i.e., the backing of the powerful tobacco industry. She Lyin's constant use of repetitive mini-dramas- ("And needless to say, I never go out anymore, blah blah blah") make me wonder if her cutback in smoking expenses aren't from rolling her own, but maybe tons of free complimentary smokes from the folks most grateful for her constant harping.
Can you say worthless and unfinished anecdote? I hope you will save it and preface your change of heart if and when the tide turns for you. If and when that happens, I hope you will have the courage to come to this forum with what happened. Lung cancer, heart disease, they go for long periods of time without manifesting themselves with obvious symptoms. The first symptom of a third of all heart attacks is death.
Sorry charlie - but you are wrong. You never heard of them until today, but I've been doing battle with them and those they fund for many, many years.....and not just on the issue of tobacco. They are funders of anti-2nd amendment groups, they have full control of MADD, they fund PETA, supposrt Center for Science in the Public Interest (which is aligned with PETA)
RWJF funds nanny-state organizations....that is not a conspiracy theory, it is just fact.
That you would support such an organization because the "seem like good people" says far more about you than any smoker I know. Don't come crying about how they are funding some group out to infringe upon something you do - as you have been warned.
I have no problem with places going smoke free, I have a problem with people like you forcing those that do not wish to do it to cater to your whim through the force of the government.
Those supporting the nanny-state in any manner whatsoever are their own worst enemy, because the nannies WILL come after you next.
If you don't want the abuse button used against you I suggest you ask a moderator to delete this post....and offer an apology to SheLion for your vicious attack on her.
To use the "nanny state" keyboard macro, and the same tired slippery slope argument isn't going to work. Unfortunately government action is required. Smokers who continue to smoke are addicts in a state of denial. Some issues are worth fighting for when it comes to government regulation. Smoking isn't one of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.