Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and AMA working with 44 states to take away smoking rights.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ^ | 17 September 2002

[SheLion]

Then click on TOBACCO. Scroll down and see just how much money your state is getting in BLOOD MONEY to further ban, control, restrict and raise taxes on people who choose to smoke a legal product.

Why is YOUR hospitals going smoke free? For The MONEY!

Why is YOUR Doctor after you to Quit Smoking? For the MONEY!

Think about it: the states are in dire financial need for health care. In steps old Easy Money Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. If the state signs up to chop off the heads of their smokers, the state will be a recipient to big grant money. For renovation, brand new MRI machines, you name it, the health facility will get it. All because they are doing away with the smokers and the smoking. Sound fair to you?

The higher the bans, control, restrictions imposed on a smoker in each state, the more grant BLOOD money the state will receive from the RWJ Foundation and the American Medical Association. Think about it.

[hobbes1]

Not nanny State. Historically, Universities had always been required to act "in Loco parentis" and advising you that binge drinking is bad, is something your mother would do....

[hobbes1]

; )

[hobbes1]

"We simply have overdeveloped our medical capacity….

Proof that as an economist, I hope he's a good doctor.

[ozone1]

They also promote "smart growth"

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, believes that auto-oriented land use planning is damaging the health of people of all ages.
http://www.asla.org/Members/land/national.html

[cosine]

My apologies. Looks like CRC's search engine is down for now. Some of their work can be found at http://www.capitalresearch.org/publications/foundation_watch/0205a.htm about the Faith in Action Program, http://www.capitalresearch.org/publications/alternatives/2000/march.htm about RWJF connection with the March of Dimes, http://www.heartland.org/pdf/23804z.pdf about RWJF's intital bankrolling of the anti-tobacco crusade, http://www.conservativenews.org/indepth/archive/199808/IND19980826f.html about how "Tobacco Free Kids Operates," http://www.capitalresearch.org/publications/foundation_watch/fw-1100.htm for how RWJF worked over Colorado's health care policy. Heartland (heartland.org) has three of the Center's papers reprinted in its PolicyBot section. Click on PolicyBot, put Robert Wood Johnson in the search keyword space.

A terrific article from 1996 is Brigid McMenamin "Trojan horse money." Forbes, Dec. 16, 1996, p. 214. It isn't on the web any longer--you'll have to hit the library. Samuel Rohrer writes about some of the dangers at http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/1997/apr97/rohrer.html. Pennsylvania had one of the atrocities McMenamin referred to and it happened in his district. He tried, unsuccessfully, to get model legislation passed stopping the practice of mixing the Foundation with state government.

[hobbes1]

ThanX!

[SheLion]

ozone, that's a lot of programs, isn't it? Really makes one step back and take a pause. So much money.....

I bookmarked it so I can go back later and really take a good look.

[SheLion]

Have you seen the latest "stand" infomercials your tax dollars are paying for? Kinda underhanded to make us pay for the anti smokers propaganda campaign.

steve! Patrick Reynolds (of the famed R.J.Reynolds family, who turned his back on them and came after the smokers?) Well, he was in Maine Monday and Tuesday. Guess what? He was being paid by two donors and also the Human Health Services of Maine. We all know where the Human Health Services get their money. From the smokers who pay taxes on cigarettes.

So, old Patrick is STILL being paid by the smokers. Go figure.

[SheLion]

I always thought Robert Wood Johnson was a company that made sex toys out of natural materials.

Peel away enough layers, and you will probably find THAT, too!

[SheLion]

cosine, thanks for the information. I bookmarked it, as well, so I can really read it good.

[SheLion]

Wow! Ozone! Thanks so much. Your good!!!

[I'm_With_Orwell]

But its Ok for you to join in in malignig VRWCminons wife, bc of a joke he made? I guess the Hypocrite part was right on

VRWC_Minion viciously attacks us smokers every opportunity he gets.

When it comes to smoking, any "joke" he makes is laughing at us, not with us. I therefore have no problem in laughing at him for what I perceive to be his own character flaws.

While his wife was involved in my post, the clear direction of the post was not towards her personally (said I wouldn't want to live with her and that's a fact, not an attack), but towards his proclivity to mould himself to her ideal of the perfect husband, while castigating us for failing to change in the way he has done.

I sincerely believe that an ex-smoker who chastises, gloats, demeans and denigrates current smokers is worthy of our contempt.

[Joined2Justify]

This is getting beyond absurd. Of course we all “know” smoking tobacco “causes lung cancer”, I mean we’ve had that line shoved in our face for how long now? Oh, for as long as the automobiles companies have know about benzo-a-pyrene, becoming informed of the “slight problem” they’d face soon, due to what was coming out the ass end of their cars. Yes the number one cause of many, lung included, cancers is this little unseen, untasteable, little chemical.

Anything that burns gives it off. We breath it in tobacco smoke. So I guess we get the most of it, perhaps, but by far the largest source is from burning fossil fuels. Not just gas cars? That’s right, got an oil furnase in your home? Whatever you do, don’t buy a home downwind from the big city airport. These people are SICK, and you my friend, are not hearing about it.

And while we all “know” that tobacco smoke is the worst thing since the invention of worst things, how about a few high notes, just for variety mind you. Asbestos workers who smoke have a 50% lower risk of lung cancer.
“Relative risk of lung cancer for asbestos workers was "highest for those who had never smoked, lowest for current smokers, and intermediate for ex-smokers. The trend was statistically significant. There was no significant association between smoking and deaths from mesothelioma"

0565. University of London, School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. "Cancer of the Lung Among Asbestos Factory Workers."

So that was shocking, how about this: We've all heard about the surgen generals report on smoking, but you haven't read it. In fact none of your friends have read it, you don't even know a doctor who has read it. What? Go ahead tell me that's not true. The Information Superhighway should have it, yes? Well yes it should have it, but it doesn't. (correction: In the last few months it has appeared, with more than a few “doctorings”) So has anyone read this great report on how bad smoking is for you? Yes a few people have read it. A lawyer did obtain a copy on microfilm from a small company in Alexandria Virginia. The same lawyer by the way who did an investigation on the government "truth" about aids. Turns out the surgen generals report is full of interesting facts. The first third of the report,about 100 pages deals with lab tests on mice, rats, geini pigs, dogs etc. Pumping very large quantities of smoke into these animals did not produce lung cancer. Before getting too excited about these experiments, however, we need to consider this: the largest known rats weigh no more than an average of one pound. Forcing a one pound rat to smoke 8 cigarettes per day is the equivalent of forcing a 160 pound human to smoke 1280 cigarettes per day (64 packs). Such experiments are not realistic and in no way replicate exposure to ordinary tobacco smoke. Given the enormous concentrations of smoke used by the experimenters, it is wonder that any of the animals even survived the ordeal; yet, they did, and only a small percentage developed tumors. Painting high concentrations of tar all over various parts of their bodies didn't either. Hmm. The middle of the report, another 100+ pages is more revealing as to the way our government likes to do things. Tons of "facts", quotes from medical surveys are pointing to how hazardous smoking is. Fortunetly the bibliography is there. The bibliography was traced back and guess what was found out? The numbers have been "cooked" to produce the desired result. At first the lawyer thought he was coming accross some typos, then more typos. Wait a minute there are waay to many figures wrong to just be typos. The end of the report finishes up with some interesting tidbits like Dolls own finding that ( Doll is one of the most anti of anti-smoking doctors out there!) inhalers live longer than non-inhalers. Whoops! So are you still wondering why very few people have read the report?

The Austrailian study:
Another very good example of this sort of attitude was the Australian government's health survey (1989-90 National Health Survey Lifestyle and Health Australia, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Catalogue No. 4366.0, Ian Castles, Australian Statistician). We tend to think of the Australians as manly and tough, a view put across in such amusing films as Crocodile Dundee, but about smoking they have become almost Kalifornian in their alarm about the habit. But then, we once thought the Americans were manly and tough.

Yet, in this government survey, in which there was no question of finance by an interested parties, or any pro-smoking bias, and in which 22,000 families were studied, it came over quite clearly, that smokers were on the whole, in better health than non-smokers, and definitely better than ex-smokers.

Throid Cancer:
Cigarette smokers had a decreased risk of statistical significance compared to nonsmokers (30% reduction)
(Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996 Jun;5(6):425-31 (ISSN: 1055-9965)

Endometrical Cancer:
Moreover, women who smoke may have a reduced risk of uterine fibroids, endometriosis, hyperemesis gravidarum, and benign breast disease. (40-60%)
(Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990 Feb;162(2):502-14 (ISSN: 0002-9378)

Bladder Cancer:
Coffee drinkers are at elevated risk, however coffee drinkers who smoke have a lower risk!
(Cancer Lett 1988 Jul;41(1):45-52 (ISSN: 0304-3835)

Breast Cancer:
The researchers were surprised by the results. "We found that among women who carried a mutation in one of these genes, cigarette smoking did have an effect in reducing their risk of developing breast cancer," said Dr. Caryn Lerman of the Lombardi Cancer Center. Many studies have found a reduction of nearly 45% for women who smoke filter cigarettes and over 65% for those who smoke non-filters.

Evidence is growing that cigarette smoking and nicotine may prevent or ameliorate Parkinson's disease, and could do so in Alzheimer's dementia
(PMID: 8746297, UI: 96362361 )

... smokes for thought.

[brat]

Only by activism. I've tried and tried to get smokers motivated to march on capitals, etc, but they just won't do it. Until they will, we can expect more and more of our rights taken away. Also, join the Smoker's Tea Party by buying your smokes on foreign soil. I use yesmoke.com and get my Camel 100's for $14.95 per carton. You can order up to 5 cartons at a time. Spread the word to your addy book. Everyone knows people who smoke. It's time we told the gov where to go! They've been nothing but abusive to smokers and we're just not going to take it anymore. They can live without our tax dollars!

[brat]

Some patriot you are. I guess the Constitution only applies to you and what you approve of.

[brat]

I wouldn't give them the satisfaction. The gov can go where the sun don't shine.

[brat]

He might be a Republican, but he's no Conservative if he's behind all this. He's a Rockerfella Republican which is to say, no Republican at all.

[justrepublican]

I wish I had the time and ability to examine the possibility of a correlation between the decline in smoking and rise in the use of antidepressants.

[PoorMuttly]

I was at an "Embassy reception" in NYC tonight. Someone offered me an American Spirit cigarette. It was excellent.

My key to it all is that I never BUY one.

The natural stuff is a whole different animal than the mega-industry product. Just like food....simple is best.

Take that.

[Joined2Justify]

Try the correlation between a drop in the female smoking population over the last 30 years and a rise in their spending time stuck in commute traffic. The number of their Lung Cancer rates has risen greatly. Wouldn't be their increased exposure to BaP, nahhh.