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

Skip to comments.

Green Bay Packer Demonstrates the Dangers of Secondhand Smoke/BARF ALERT
Yahoo News ^ | 17 July 2002 | Wisconsin Tobacco Control Board

Posted on 07/17/2002 10:47:58 AM PDT by SheLion

GREEN BAY, Wis., July 17 /PRNewswire/ -- Green Bay Packer Ahman Green's participation in a Wisconsin ad campaign designed to raise awareness about the dangers of secondhand smoke was unveiled today. Green will be part of a series of television and radio advertisements that launched early-June and are being broadcast throughout Wisconsin. The new ads use personal stories told by Wisconsin residents who have suffered the effects of secondhand smoke.

Green is not a smoker himself, but he grew up in a household with a smoker and was diagnosed with asthma at age 14. The 25-year-old running back has to pay special attention to avoid smoke-filled environments in order to perform at his best. His personal experience and concerns for his own health and that of others has inspired him to share his story in hopes that it will lead to a smoke-free Wisconsin.

"Because my asthma is aggravated by secondhand smoke, I have to be very careful where I go. My options of which restaurants to eat at or what places I can go to often depend on whether there will be cigarette smoke in the air," says Green. "This can be frustrating and limiting, but staying healthy is important to me and vital to my career."

Green is featured in a television ad that takes place in a cafe. As he enters the smoke-filled cafe, he slips an oxygen mask over his face. The ad conveys the message that secondhand smoke can have serious effects on a nonsmoker. One of the most obvious places where cigarette smoke lingers is in bars and restaurants. Kathie Bundy, pub owner and performer from Manitowoc, WI is featured, along with Ahman Green, in the campaign ads. Bundy opened Stage Door Saloon, one of just a few nonsmoking pubs in Wisconsin. She is featured in a television ad that takes place in a smoke-filled restaurant. Bundy's story is meant to encourage other restaurants and bars to go smoke- free.

"Between concerns about my own health and complaints from nonsmoking customers, I decided that it was the right decision to go smoke-free," Bundy says. "Of course I had concerns about the repercussions this decision would have on my business, but the pub is as busy as ever and customers are happy they have a place to go that isn't filled with smoke."

Restaurant owners who are currently smoke-free or those owners who are considering making their restaurant smoke-free, can advertise their restaurant free of charge on the new Wisconsin Smoke-free Online Dining Guide. Owners simply log onto WWW.HADENOUGHWISCONSIN.COM , enter the Smoke-free Dining Guide section and submit requested information. All restaurant details will be verified and then posted. The new site feature was designed to encourage restaurants to go smoke-free and to support restaurant owners and customers that prefer a smoke-free environment.

The secondhand smoke media campaign is a component of the WTCB's statewide initiative for smoke-free restaurants, work sites, municipal buildings and homes. Each ad contains a tag line that directs viewers to the hadenoughwisconsin.com web site where visitors can share their own stories or seek help in quitting smoking.

The Wisconsin Tobacco Control Board is a Governor-appointed Board charged with developing a strategic plan, allocating funds and evaluating the effectiveness of Wisconsin's tobacco prevention and control efforts. The Board is comprised of state and local leaders representing businesses, education, health care, public health and political leaders from across the state.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Culture/Society; Government; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: antismokers; butts; cigarettes; individualliberty; michaeldobbs; niconazis; prohibitionists; pufflist; smokingbans; taxes; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-219 next last
To: RedBloodedAmerican; Madame Dufarge
I'll repost this, flagging both of you so you can perhaps see how inconsiderate you're both being:

Considerate smokers recognize the right of non-smokers to breathe clean air.

Considerate non-smokers recognize the right of smokers to partake in a legal product.

So what we have is not smokers and non-smokers, but considerate and inconsiderate people.

As a parent and a smoker, I consider it far more important that my son learn how to be considerate than it is for him to be programmed to be a non-smoker.

Inconsiderate smokers inflict their second hand smoke on others who do not wish it. Inconsiderate non-smokers believe it is right to indignantly proclaim to the world that smoking is evil, and they never miss an opportunity to do so, do they?

Perhaps the two of you need to decide whether you are considerate or inconsiderate, adult or childish.

101 posted on 07/17/2002 3:49:19 PM PDT by brewcrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Pakrman
a true FR response - no thought, no brain, no wit

I knew you weren't from around here and with that snotty reply, you've proved it.

Back to DU, young lady.

102 posted on 07/17/2002 3:58:31 PM PDT by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: brewcrew
Perhaps the two of you need to decide whether you are considerate or inconsiderate, adult or childish.

Ok, I'll bite.

Brushing aside your condescending tone, I've never considered defending myself from attack "childish", which you imply.

Maybe the other poster feels stung, I don't.

103 posted on 07/17/2002 3:59:14 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Flyer
That's true for the teenagers who're destined to be losers anyway, but not for the kids who actually give a d*mn about their lives.

Whereas smoking USED to be "cool" and dangerous, there's too much information out there. The kids who pay attention will be okay.

If you're going to be a loser, you're going to be a loser. Nothing much to be done about that. It's a free choice.

104 posted on 07/17/2002 4:08:42 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Mark17
Good riddance to freedom too, huh?

Funny you should use the word in re smoking. There is NOTHING that makes you less free than being addicted to something that will kill you.

105 posted on 07/17/2002 4:10:38 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember
Sorry, your wrong! It is a fact, and the cause of lung cancer a person can get CAN be determined! And second hand smoke is cancer causing.

A simple, quick search of "lung cancer" on google will bring back info on it. I don't need it, I know what she has. Maybe it will benefit you or someone else.

Why not find an oncologist who is a chain smoker and ask them about it?!
106 posted on 07/17/2002 4:22:28 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
Actually, I dont worry about what I will die of. If I was still a smoker, I would not use that as an excuse to not quit. Maybe someone who is a chronic worrier can't deal with one more thing to worry about ;)
107 posted on 07/17/2002 4:24:13 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: brewcrew
And thats it! I interact with smokers on both a professional and personal level daily! I don't say anything to them if unless it comes up. But I don't hold back when someone is throwing their life away based on incorrect information that when exposed, could make a difference in their lives!
108 posted on 07/17/2002 4:27:12 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Hmmm. One linebacker, one small squeeze tube of concentrated smoke, one squeeze.
109 posted on 07/17/2002 4:30:07 PM PDT by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Funny you should use the word in re smoking. There is NOTHING that makes you less free than being addicted to something that will kill you.

You must not have read my post very closely. I said I have never smoked a single solitary cigarette in my entire life, and I will never smoke one. I think smoking is stupid, and dirty and disgusting. On the other hand, if people want to be stupid, and endanger their own health, they have that freedom. It is not against the law to be stupid. I think you are right, that being addicted means people have less freedom, because the cigarettes enslave them, but again, it is not against the law to be stupid.

110 posted on 07/17/2002 4:31:49 PM PDT by Mark17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: VRWCmember; Lovergirl
That said, how about a little consideration and courtesy toward those with whom you disagree.

Where did lovergirl display discourtesy?

111 posted on 07/17/2002 4:33:06 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
But I don't hold back when someone is throwing their life away

Perhaps the considerate individual would simply say, "it's none of my business."

I believe most smokers know, at some level or other, that it's not a good habit. But it also is not deadly when done in moderation, and that's a fact. Making oneself into a basket case by quitting altogether, rather than cutting way back and getting deeper enjoyment out of each smoke, is far deadlier.

112 posted on 07/17/2002 4:34:07 PM PDT by brewcrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Maybe someone who is a chronic worrier can't deal with one more thing to worry about ;)

Then why are you worrying about something you have total control over?

You have more than ample opportunity to avoid a situation where tobacco smoke is present; and in those situations where you might be in its presence, let's face it - they must be rare.

Do you honestly think these rare situations are going to affect your health?

For crying out loud, lighten up.

Worry is going to kill you, not "second-hand" smoke.

113 posted on 07/17/2002 4:47:20 PM PDT by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: brewcrew
But when second hand smoke does reach you, then it is your business. Its not like it is a natural body function. If flatulance were to cause cancer (dont know if it does, but have come across some I thought I would die from!!), would you sit by me all day as I tooted continuosly? What would that say about me? Well, what if I couldn't (not "wouldn't", as in smoking) stop? I could relocate, or you could. But take it somewhere else, and am I knowingly spreading death to those around me? So whose "rights" are being swept away? Lets switch this to an object where someone has the ability to control it, to not do it (such as smoking)...

We were born with the right to live, IMO, not die at the hands of someone else, nor knowingly inflict death on others (the ignorant claim ignorance).

114 posted on 07/17/2002 4:54:07 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Mark17
You must not have read my post very closely.

Of course I did. And I repeat: Using your "freedom" to become enslaved is a rather odd thing for a sane person to do.

It is not against the law to be stupid.

Of course it is. Most people don't intend to lose control of their automobile and crash, possibly injuring or killing themselves and others, because they're fooling with a cigarette or a cell phone. But they do, because they're STUPID. And it's against the law to be stupid, foolish and reckless.

And you may also have heard the adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse." You have a responsibility as a citizen to be informed, to know what your rights are as well as your obligations. In fact, if there's one thing the founders continued to harp on, it was the RESPONSIBILITIES of the citizen to maintain liberty, and to do their part in the civic arena. They spoke about freedom in VASTLY different ways than we hear gabbled about by the Libertines here and elsewhere. They thought liberty was anything but free, and that it carried heavy obligations and responsibilities.

The liberty that we enjoy ceases to have meaning when we mistake it for license.

115 posted on 07/17/2002 4:54:15 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
Worrying can be detrimental. But I don't worry, as you suggest. That is getting to be an old line, need to find some new material to justify your position.

It seems from ALL your posts to me, you have my entire life figured out; who I deal with, where I travel....

Maybe you can help Miss Cleo out a little.

116 posted on 07/17/2002 4:56:28 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: brewcrew
You may smoke all you wish out of sight and out of mind and out of smell. The MOMENT your smoking intrudes into the immediate vicinity of others, you are commiting an egregious act of impropriety, and continued insistence that you will do see is evidence that you lack the maturity needed to even be allowed out in public.

These new anti-smoking measures are VERY popular, and that's not a coincidence.

117 posted on 07/17/2002 4:56:46 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Illbay; Mark17
No, its not against the law to be stupid. Some stupid things are outlawed in the interest of safety and preservation of life and limb. If stupidity were illegal, DU would not exist.
118 posted on 07/17/2002 4:58:24 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
Hey!! Live in a bubble, don't drive a car, and for
God's sake don't live in a city. You will die from SMOKING.
Factories and buses and cabs and trains also cause lung cancer. Just go outside in a city and inhale for 30 years and..walla... you have bad lungs. It's not just smoking that causes lung cancer.
119 posted on 07/17/2002 5:11:31 PM PDT by Lovergirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: RedBloodedAmerican
If stupidity were illegal, DU would not exist.

LOL, You are right, but a lot of Freepers would not exist either, I suppose.

120 posted on 07/17/2002 5:12:39 PM PDT by Mark17
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-219 next last

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.

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