Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SheLion
DON'T LET THE HEADLINES FOOL YOU
Court throws out challenge to EPA findings on secondhand smoke - (December 2002) - The ruling was based on the highly technical grounds that since the EPA didn't actually enact any new regulations (it merely declared ETS to be a carcinogen without actually adopting any new rules), the court had no jurisdiction to rule in the matter.  This court ruling on the EPA report is NOT a stamp of approval for that report. Judge Osteen's criticisms of the EPA report are still completely valid and is accompanied by other experts.

The Illinois Clean Air Act, banning smoking in public and government buildings and on public transportation has been in effect for over 15 years.  This is not an issue about smoking in public buildings....it is about removing the rights of private businesses...restaurants and bars and smoking outdoors.   Most people don't even understand what these intrusive bans are about and it is being implied that everyone smokes everywhere.  That hasn't been the case for a long, long time.  

Oak Ridge Labs, TN & SECOND HAND SMOKE 

Statistics and Data Sciences Group Projects

I think any anti who tries to dismiss the findings of the U.S. Department of Energy labs at Oak Ridge, should be confronted with the question: "Are you saying that DOE researchers committed scientific fraud and that their findings on ETS exposure are untrue?" But where does this Taliban-like anti-smoking campaign come from? It can't really be this stuff about second-hand smoke. The famous 1992 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study showing a causal relationship between second-hand smoke and cancer was so roundly debunked as junk science (even by other federal agencies) it was finally declared "null and void" by a federal judge. Sure, second-hand smoke can be annoying, and it can't be healthy, but if you relegate smokers to their own enclosed space _ say a bar or a separate part of a restaurant where people, including staff, only go of their own free will _ who can object?


10 posted on 08/01/2006 4:29:55 AM PDT by SheLion ("If you're legal, you can fly with the Eagle!" - Michael Anthony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: All
American Cancer Society catches the Surgeon General in an outright lie...
United Pro Smoker's Newsletter ^ | July 1, 2006

The Surgeon General showed up very regal looking to provide a press release rehashing the tired old argument that secondhand smoke is deadly and must be banned. And with his next statement:

Separate "no smoking" sections DO NOT protect you from secondhand smoke. Neither does filtering the air or opening a window.

It seemed a feeble attempt to pre-empt any action short of a total smoking ban.....as if to confirm that pro-smoking ban activists' credibility in the public is failing miserably.

Well I am sorry to report that the American Cancer Society conducted air quality testing at several smoking venues which prove the Surgeon General flat out wrong.



Take a look at the above table, do you see the 20 reading? It represents a restaurant with an enclosed (separate) smoking area. And the 20 is actually 20 nanograms, a nanogram is 10 (-9).

So......let me put a number to that nanogram for you: 0.000000020 of a gram/cubic meter was the secondhand smoke concentration for the restaurant with the enclosed smoking area. Which is 25,000 times SAFER than OSHA regulations for the secondhand smoke measured airborne component. Thus the American Cancer Society destroys the Surgeon General's and RWJF (Nicoderm) funded James Repace argument that seperation and ventilation don't work.

The Surgeon General can stomp his feet, and scream at the top of his lungs...like a little Napoleon "....because I said so....." all he wants. But it doesn't change the facts........and the facts show he is telling a bold faced lie to the American public.
Read

14 posted on 08/01/2006 4:36:32 AM PDT by SheLion ("If you're legal, you can fly with the Eagle!" - Michael Anthony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson