New smoking ban

[Miulang]

Re: New smoking ban

I'd be interested in seeing the research that leads to that conclusion, thanks.

Here's one piece that says smokers may be less likely to develop Alzheimers than nonsmokers...but the reason is because they will DIE from other causes (lung cancer, etc.) BEFORE they can develop the disease!

"A statistically significant inverse association between smoking and Alzheimer's disease was observed at all levels of analysis, with a trend towards decreasing risk with increasing consumption" (International Journal of Epidemiology, 1991). "The risk of Alzheimer's disease decreased with increasing daily number of cigarettes smoked before onset of disease. . . . In six families in which the disease was apparently inherited . . . the mean age of onset was 4.17 years later in smoking patients than in non-smoking patients from the same family" (British Medical Journal, June 22, 1991). "Although more data are needed . . . [an analysis of 19 studies suggests] nicotine protects against AD" (Neuroepidemiology, 1994). Nicotine injections significantly improved certain types of mental functioning in Alzheimer's patients (Psychopharmacology, 1992). One theory: nicotine improves the responsiveness of Alzheimer's patients to acetylcholine, an important brain chemical.

...Some of the research is contradictory. At least one scientist thinks smokers are less likely to develop Alzheimer's mainly because they die of smoking-related diseases first. Smoking isn't like low-to-moderate alcohol use, which is probably harmless and may even be beneficial. Although the data is unclear, many believe the relationship between smoking and disease is linear: the more you smoke, the greater your risk--but any smoking presents some risk. Right now the only known benefit of smoking is a societal one: if the heavy smokers die young, they won't deplete the retirement funds for everybody else.

Pick the way you want to die, I guess.

Miulang

P.S. Here's another abstract on the benefits of smoking. Apparently there are some proven benefits (the association with Alzheimer's is still being debated) to smoking, though: reducing the risk for endometrial cancer, recurrent apthsous ulcers, ulcerative colitis, and weight control.

[1stwahine]

Re: New smoking ban

MAMA and I visited her only sister and sibling yesterday. She's five years younger. She was diagnosed with Cancer over twenty years ago. Still she continued to Smoke. The Cancer came back recently. On the operating table they opened and closed her up. Her heart and lungs too weak.

My mother doesn't drink nor smoke. Both made their choices. MAMA also suffers from diseases. I guess what I'm trying to say ~ bottom line...we make our choices. Some can argue by not smoking, one's life can be prolong. Then again you can walk outside and get hit or run over by a car. No one knows when it's their time to go.

Enjoy Life the way "You" want to enjoy it. You have only one Life to Live...make it the best you can!

As long as it's Legal!

Auntie Lynn

[Palolo Joe]

Re: New smoking ban

I guess maybe some of those smaller Korean bars should take advantage of the loophole...maybe not have the strippers, but employ all their family members and allow smoking along with your drinks. Bet they'd do landmark business.

There are no strippers in hostess bars. And even those "smaller" ones employ 15-20 people.

Forget loopholes, forget silly attempts to get around the law. JUST REPEAL IT.

[glossyp]

Re: New smoking ban

I'd be interested in seeing the research that leads to that conclusion, thanks.

It was a question and the answer/s to it is one I'm most interested in learning more about as well. Miulang provides some links in her post. Also, there is a wealth of information available by doing research online. The ongoing debate about whether smoking, or nicotine more precisely, benefits only those who carry the 'Alzheimer gene' and adds risk to smokers who don't have the gene is as yet unresolved. My hope is that scientists will continue to research all possible avenues that could provide relief for and eventually prevention of Alzheimer's. If you've ever known someone with Alzheimer's, it is truly a dread disease and it's especially tragic to witness the loss of a loved one's mind.

Of note, the average age a person is the U.S.A. is diagnosed with lung cancer is 70 and 60% of those die within a year of the diagnosis. The average age to be diagnosed with Alzheimer's is nearly 80 which is probably why the astonishing increase in people much younger being diagnosed is causing concern. The average age of death from any cause is 72.6 years for men and 79.4 years for women.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: New smoking ban

It was a question and the answer/s to it is one I'm most interested in learning more about as well.

Thanks, glossyp; I agree with your earlier assessment - it's an area of research that is fraught with difficulty; researchers will probably come up against some real financial challenges when trying to get support to look into "positive effects of chemical compounds released by smoking tobacco." Sure, the cigarette companies would be happy to fund it - but then, no one would trust the results.

[Miulang]

Re: New smoking ban

Here are abstracts of 13 more studies designed around studying whether or not nicotine therapy could help people afflicted not only with Alzheimer's disease, but inflammatory bowel disease, depression, Tourette's syndrome, schizophrenia, and epilepsy. In most cases, the nicotine is delivered via patches, not in a cigarette.

Maybe the argument isn't over the nicotine in a cigarette as much as it is the smoke and the toxic chemicals that go into the air when that cigarette is burned that's the problem?

An unlit cigarette poses no problem, but this is what a lit cigarette emits:

Cigarette smoke is a complex aerosol containing thousands of distinct
chemicals that are produced during the heating, burning, and chemical “cracking” of the cigarette. Most of the known carcinogens in cigarette smoke (such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons) are substances that are not present in an unlit cigarette, but are formed during the process of smoking. Hydrogen cyanide, formed during smoking, has toxic effects on the cilia that line the respiratory tract, and may cross the placenta in a pregnant smoker to harm the growing fetus. Oxidants and nitrogen oxides, formed during smoking, contribute to lung damage and the development of emphysema. Carbon monoxide, formed during smoking, reduces the oxygencarrying capacity of red blood cells [1].

If this is true, that the additives in a cigarette--and not the nicotine--is the dangerous part, then chewing tobacco should be safer. Brown & Williamson, one of the major cigarette manufacturers in this country, published a list of ingredients that go into their cigarettes...all 599 of them . All the ingredients are legal (FDA Generally Regarded as Safe).

Miulang

[blindleader]

Re: New smoking ban

A column/blog had something to say about these new smoking bans that are appearing all over the nation:

This past weekend I rented "Thank You for Smoking," a satirical comedy about fictional tobacco spokesman Nick Naylor and how he spins the truth to make cigarettes look good. Yeah, the movie makes a mockery of Big Tobacco, but if the real players are as persuasive as this guy, I'll be investing in Tarceva.

But unfortunately for you tobacco backers, society is catching on. Smoking bans are popping up faster than stupid Jessica Simpson quotes. Many states now have some sort of a statewide smoking ban.

Monday, during a rerun of "Yes, Dear," I watched the character Jimmy Hughes, a blue collar quasi-dope, find his wife Christine smoking a cigarette in the backyard. Although Jimmy's lack of education sometimes limits him to basic arithmetic and a limited vocabulary, he's still very aware that cigarettes are harmful.

Other quasi-dopes seem to be learning, too. Take my dad, for example. He stopped smoking after decades of loyalty to Vantage cigarettes -- one of Camel's cousin brands. Cool Joe Camel never sent him a thank you note or Christmas card. My mom followed suit a few years later, cutting her ties with Phillip Morris. No fruit basket ever arrived from old Phil in gratitude for her years of patronage.

The rest is at http://sayist.blogspot.com

[mel]

Re: New smoking ban

I'm jumping into this one late, and I haven't read all 367 previous posts. I've read a few of the later ones. Pardon me if some of this has been brought up before.

1. I am a non-smoker and don't frequent places where people are known to smoke. Through the years I have been aware of the smoke free places and knew which places to avoid.

2. I think the Smoking law is too far reaching in so much as it applying to bars, nightclubs and private membership clubs.

3. At this point I don't think the law can be repealed unless the public outcry is very, very loud. While the chance of repeal is slim, it can be done and sometime quickly. The recent repeal of the gas cap law and the van-cam law a few years before are good examples of laws that were repealed very quickly after public outcry against them.

4. The key to this is that enough of the public or at least all of the bar/nightclub businesses and patrons should be calling their legislators and the Governor to urge a repeal. On the Mike Buck (KHVH AM 830) show this afternoon this very issue came up as a topic, and from what I heard, the sentiment was about as equally divided as it is on this thread.

5. From what I briefly heard on the radio this afternoon, there is a petition being circulated among bar and nightclub owners to try and get the law repealed or changed. I think change is probably more realistic as legislation can be drawn up to create an exemption to the law for perhaps "bars and nightlcubs and other places for adult entertainment". The exemption can be added in as an amendment to the present law. BTW one bar owner who called in said he saw a 20% drop in his business since the law went into effect.

6. Of course smokers are going to need to get someone from the legislature to introduce the bill. Last I checked only 6 legislators opposed the current law by voting "no" on the bill when it made its way to final reading last session.

7. The chances of a repeal or amended form of the law even getting a hearing may be slim. However getting something introduced may be worth an effort even if only to create public awareness.

8. The Governor will have to be persuaded to support something like this, because even on the slim chance the legislature passes it, she could veto it and the willpower to override a veto by the legislature may not be there in the end.

9. Had smokers, bar, nighclub owners and other businesses came out in mass to oppose the original bill, perhaps it may not have passed. However it is hard to oppose something when you got members of the public, special interest groups and even some government agencies out there in force to support such a measure. If a new bill is introduced to repeal or amend the law, the smoking community and business owners need to come out and support it.

10. The tobacco tax increases could also be repealed if enough people were to cry out loud about that too.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

The bars have no special group to represent them - the anti's do. The Tavern association in Las Vegas is fighting the ban.some feel it may be timefor hawaii to have one. The resturant assocition does nothing now to stop this ban, unlike before.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: New smoking ban

my prediction is that smokers' uproar will eventually die down and the isles will evolve more and more into viewing smoking as publically unacceptable. These laws are going to stay and many establishments, their staff, owners and even a good % of smokers themselves will enjoy the clean air and smell associated with smoke-free pubs/restaurants/etc.

alohakine, ya might be want to look at another issue with which to occupy yourself.

[Palolo Joe]

Re: New smoking ban

my prediction is that smokers' uproar will eventually die down and the isles will evolve more and more into viewing smoking as publically unacceptable. These laws are going to stay and many establishments, their staff, owners and even a good % of smokers themselves will enjoy the clean air and smell associated with smoke-free pubs/restaurants/etc.

I disagree. There are enough bar and club patrons who don't want the law, along with the bar/club owners themselves, to get it repealed.

As long as the cigarettes are legal, and the government is collecting taxes from sales, smoking still has a place here in Hawaii. I'm not a smoker, but if a business owner wants to cater to that demographic, they should have the freedom to do so.

The law has only pushed smokers from inside the bars and nightclubs out onto the street. And I've seen with my own eyes some of the problems that can cause.

The law needs to be repealed.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

my prediction is that smokers' uproar will eventually die down and the isles will evolve more and more into viewing smoking as publically unacceptable. These laws are going to stay and many establishments, their staff, owners and even a good % of smokers themselves will enjoy the clean air and smell associated with smoke-free pubs/restaurants/etc.

alohakine, ya might be want to look at another issue with which to occupy yourself.

That's what the antis want to happen. However, many people find it excessive. 90% of the bars want the ban repealed, per a survey of over 70 bars. Also 1 in 3 bans on the mainland get modified in smoker's favor or get repealed. It happens, it is not hopeless. We all should fight this law anyway we can. Support private property rights and the individual choices of adults using a legal substance.

[mel]

Re: New smoking ban

The bars have no special group to represent them - the anti's do. The Tavern association in Las Vegas is fighting the ban.some feel it may be timefor hawaii to have one. The resturant assocition does nothing now to stop this ban, unlike before.

Unfortunately you are correct. Still if smokers feel this passionate about the issue, something ought to be advanced at the upcoming legislative session.

As long as the cigarettes are legal, and the government is collecting taxes from sales, smoking still has a place here in Hawaii. I'm not a smoker, but if a business owner wants to cater to that demographic, they should have the freedom to do so.

The law needs to be repealed.

This is one of the very few times that I agree with PJ. Somewhere along the way in getting the law passed, legislators in the majority forgot that this was a business issue.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

Unfortunately you are correct. Still if smokers feel this passionate about the issue, something ought to be advanced at the upcoming legislative session.



This is one of the very few times that I agree with PJ. Somewhere along the way in getting the law passed, legislators in the majority forgot that this was a business issue.

It'll come up again. The legistlators didn't forget about business concerns, however it seemed they were pressured by the anti-smoking lobby that was singing the "virtues" of a ban like this. The people against the ban and the bars were disorganised and didn't put up a good fight to block it. The anti-groups and DOH pressed hard and were well funded with money they obtained in large part by raking it off the backs of working people, many of whom were opposed to the ban.
All the legistlators heard was the antis one sided profoundly biased political agenda. They tricked the legistlators and most of the public into believing that this ban would have no ill effect on bars or tourism. The truth is now coming out and their web of lies will expand to try to counter it. If it was great for business, then why are so many bars and clubs fighting bans after they took effect on the mainland?

Surprise Guys!! Having unhappy custumers is bad for business. The "Smoke Free Hawaii" law needs to be repealed.

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: New smoking ban

Alohakine, do you have any stats on how many adults are smokers in HI? Is your base growing or shrinking? And how many smokers are socialized to hide it/go outside/keep their habit discreet and as private as possible?