virginia's gov at it again

[steve r]

ok so for the second time in less than a year this asshole kane is trying to pass a smoking ban on the premisis of any place that serves food. so i urge anyone in va or hell anyone that visits virginia to email the govenor and let him know how stupid this is. the reasons he is giving is that second hand smoke kills and we shouldnt put people in that situation. well last time i checked there are thousands of jobs that you wont get smoke in and if you dont wanna be around it then dont work there. besides that many resteraunts have already gone smoke free. so im just hoping that people realize that they are just being our parents and smacking our hands for smoking. here is the article:

Governor Kaine Announces Restaurant Smoking Ban Legislation
– Clarifies definition of a restaurant, improves public health –

RICHMOND – Governor Timothy M. Kaine today proposed legislation for a statewide ban on smoking in restaurants, including dining establishments in public and private clubs. The legislation also clarifies the definition of a restaurant for purposes of the smoking ban.
Standing with members of the Hampton Roads Mayors and Chairs Caucus, the Virginia Beach Restaurant Association, General Assembly members, and public health advocates at Hot Tuna Bar & Grill in Virginia Beach, the Governor noted the public health risks of secondhand smoke.
“The scientific evidence about the health risks associated with exposure to secondhand smoke is clear and convincing,” said Governor Kaine. “Recognizing the negative health effects and high public costs of secondhand smoke, Virginia must act to protect the workers and consumers in its restaurants.”
The Virginia Department of Health estimates that secondhand smoke is responsible for 1,700 deaths per year. The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids estimates that the Commonwealth spends $124.9 million a year on health care expenditures related to secondhand smoke exposure.
The proposed legislation changes the definition of a restaurant to any food establishment – including dining establishments of public and private clubs – where food is available for sale and consumption by the public and includes the areas of a restaurant where food is prepared, served or consumed. The proposal excludes exterior dining areas of food establishments from the ban, unless the exterior area can be enclosed.
The recommendation for this definition was provided by the Department of Health, who held several public input sessions last year with interested groups and citizens on constructing the definition for purposes of a smoking ban. The Medical Society of Virginia, the Virginia Chapters of the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association of Virginia, the Cancer Society, March of Dimes, and American Academy of Pediatrics participated in the process.
Restaurant employees face major health risks when exposed to secondhand smoke at work. According to the American Lung Association, levels of secondhand smoke in restaurants and bars were found to be 2 to 5 times higher than in residences with smokers and 2 to 6 times higher than in office workplaces. Additionally, the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine reports that food service workers have a 50 percent greater risk of dying from lung cancer than the general population, in part, because of secondhand smoke exposure in the workplace.
In October 2006, Governor Kaine signed Executive Order 41 (http://www.internationalcigarclub.com/forums/redirector.php?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.governor.virg inia.gov%2FInitiatives%2FExecutiveOrders%2Fpdf%2FE O_41.pdf) banning smoking in all state buildings and vehicles in order to improve the health of Virginia’s employees and minimize health risks in the work place.
For more information on the restaurant smoking ban, or to comment on the proposed legislation, visit www.governor.virginia.gov/SmokeFreeRestaurants (http://www.internationalcigarclub.com/forums/redirector.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.governor.virgi nia.gov%2FSmokeFreeRestaurants)

[n2advnture]

Sent:


Dear Mr. Kaine,

You were recently quoted as saying “The scientific evidence about the health risks associated with exposure to secondhand smoke is clear and convincing.”

Could you please provide me with the scientific evidence that you have been given that supports this statement?

Have you read the World Health Organization's first study on second hand smoke? (the largest study on second hand smoke ever conducted).

The World Health Organization's first study on second hand smoke is a textbook example of the right way to conduct an epidemiological study. Unfortunately for them, it yielded unexpected results. They responded by doing a second one, a meta-analysis, that allowed them to extract the results they wanted. This is an analysis of their first study.

Fact: The World Health Organization conducted a study of Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) and lung cancer in Europe.

Fact: ETS is commonly referred to as Second Hand Smoke (SHS). The two terms are interchangeable.

Fact: This was a case control study using a large sample size.

Fact: The purpose of the study was to provide a more precise estimate of risk, to discover any differences between different sources of ETS, and the effect of ETS exposure on different types of lung cancer.

Fact: The study was conducted from twelve centers in seven European countries over a period of seven years.

Fact: The participants consisted of 650 patients with lung cancer and 1542 control subjects. Patients with smoking related diseases were excluded from the control group. None of the subjects in either group had smoked more than 400 cigarettes in their lifetime.

Fact: Three of the study centers interviewed family members of the participants to confirm the subjects were not smokers.

Fact: The study found no statistically significant risk existed for non-smokers who either lived or worked with smokers.

Fact: The only statistically significant number was a decrease in the risk of lung cancer among the children of smokers.

Fact: The study found a Relative Risk (RR) for spousal exposure of 1.16, with a Confidence Interval (CI) of .93 - 1.44. In layman's terms, that means

• Exposure to the ETS from a spouse increases the risk of getting lung cancer by 16%.
• Where you'd normally find 100 cases of lung cancer, you'd find 116.
-But-

• Because the Confidence Interval includes 1.0, The Relative Risk of 1.16 number is not statistically significant.

Fact: The real RR can be any number within the CI. The CI includes 1.0, meaning that the real number could be no increase at all. It also includes numbers below 1.0, which would indicate a protective effect. This means that the RR of 1.16 is not statistically significant.

Fact: A RR of less than 2.0 is usually not considered important and, most likely to be due to error or bias. An RR of 3.0 or higher is considered desirable.

This rule of thumb is routinely ignored by the anti-smoker activists.

Fact: The study found no Dose/Response relationship for spousal ETS exposure.

Fact: The RR for workplace ETS was 1.17 with a CI of .94 - 1.45, well below the preferred 2.0 - 3.0, and with another CI that straddled 1.0.

Fact: The RR for exposure from both a smoking spouse and a smoky workplace was 1.14, with a CI of .88 - 1.47.

Fact: The RR for exposure during childhood was 0.78, with a CI of .64 - .96. This indicates a protective effect! Children exposed to ETS in the home during childhood are 22% less likely to get lung cancer, according to this study. Note that this was the only result in the study that did not include 1.0 in the CI.

The WHO quickly buried the report. The British press got wind of it and hounded them for weeks.

Fact: On March 8, 1998, the British newspaper The Telegraph reported "The world's leading health organization has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could have even a protective effect."

Finally, the WHO issued a press release. Although their study showed no statistically significant risk from ETS, their press release had the misleading headline "Passive Smoking Does Cause Lung Cancer - Do Not Let Them Fool You." (I say "misleading" because it would be impolite to call it an outright lie.)

Fact: In paragraph four they admitted the facts: "The study found that there was an estimated 16% increased risk of lung cancer among nonsmoking spouses of smokers. For workplace exposure the estimated increase in risk was 17%. However, due to small sample size, neither increased risk was statistically significant." (Emphasis added.)

Fact: The press release doesn't mention the one statistically significant result from the study, that children raised by smokers were 22% less likely to get lung cancer.

Fact: The WHO tried to blame the results on a small sample size. However, in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, where the results were published, the researchers clearly state: "An important aspect of our study in relation to previous studies is its size, which allowed us to obtain risk estimates with good statistical precision..."

It should also be noted that the most likely effect of a larger sample size wouldn't be a large change to the RR, but a narrowed CI.

Synopsis of the WHO Study provided courtesy of "The Hitt Chronicle"

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

http://www.cigarmony.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=14

~Mark

[Seanohue]

Sent:



http://www.cigarmony.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=14

~Mark

Damn Mark, where were you 2 months ago when I needed to write a paper on this? This would have really helped me a ton :D

I'll do my part as well :tu

[Mark C]

Good luck down there. Our statewide ban in MD starts in 23 days.

[Cnote]

In Illinois, ours just went into effect earlier this month; hope Virginians can prevent this. Gotta love fascism.

[Tim D.]

I hate to say it, but this is what happens when people vote Democrat. I live in the People's Socialist Republic of Maryland, so I feel your pain. In the past, Virginia has been pretty libertarian, but recently it has been sliding left at an alarming rate. Good luck.

[jkorp]

Good luck down there. Our statewide ban in MD starts in 23 days.



I guy at Red Brick said they were doing a big smokeout that night. I might try to get over there.

[Mark C]

I guy at Red Brick said they were doing a big smokeout that night. I might try to get over there.

On Jan 31 to say goodbye to freedom, or Feb 1 to send a big :fu to the govmnt? Either way, sounds good to me.

[Churchlady]

Sucks to be a Merry-lander don't it boys? pretty soon we're not even going to be able to smoke anywhere in the state! we'll all be driving to WV for a smoke break.

[boonedoggle]

Sent:



http://www.cigarmony.com/index.asp?PageAction=Custom&ID=14

~Mark

Very nice Mark. I have to draft up something similar, but mine won' be 1/2 as good as this!
I STILL enjoy the smell when I walk into a Denny's here in NOVA and get that nice wiff of smoke. It reminds me of when I was a kid. I'm not even sure there is a non-smoking section! :r

[Volt]

Hey Steve R,

It seems he wants the state to go the same as Norfolk and the Beach. God save me from the people who are trying to save me from myself.

I'm new to the board and live up in Gloucester. Let me know if you might be interested in a meet and smoke some time.

[Spect]

Take this as an opportunity to remember to support your B&M! The wave of bans isn't even close to over, we have to do our best to support those last bastions of cigar freedom. It seems like only a matter of time until the few hold out restaurants and bars will be gone from the smoker friendly list. For the love of god you can't even smoke in an apartment in California anymore, wait until that one catches on...

Dig in, hold what you've got.

/preach

[roscoe]

So what's the answer? In NJ we were a cigar club for 12 years before we saw the law coming down. We had 100 members at the time and raised enough funds to open our own 24/7 private club. We've been open since June of 06 and have over 150 members now.

Now there is a fellow in VA that is seriously contemplating doing the same thing. If anyone in VA, MD or DC is interested I can put you in touch with him.

Roscoe
The Metropolitan Society, LLC
http://www.metrocigar.com

[Addiction]

Fellow Virginians,

I would like to be optimistic, but I think it is better to be honest. It may not be this term or even this administration but sooner or later we will see a smoking ban in this state. And I believe it is going to be sooner rather than later. While we are still a big time tobacco producer it doesn’t override the fact that most of the money (and thus the political power) in the state is far removed from the tobacco producers.

This is why I’m hoping to be proactive rather than reactive and form a private club specifically designed to be exempt from all but the harshest anti-smoking legislation. I’m hoping not only to create a haven to protect our rights, but a heaven including monthly dinners, poker tourneys, humidors and lockers, pool tables and a quiet room with two or three computers for when you need to finish of work.

If you have not seen the thread regarding the club you can view it here: http://www.clubstogie.com/vb/showthread.php?t=131293 (http://www.clubstogie.com/vb/showthread.php?t=131293) or email me at bryan_winston@yahoo.com (bryan_winston@yahoo.com) for details. Come be part of the solution BEFORE we even have a problem.

[ibosmiley]

I can't see VA going non-smoking... I mean this is a tobacco state for crying out loud. But, I guess we shall see. It hasn't passed yet...

[Addiction]

More and more of Northern Va becomes non smoking everyday, over the last month we just lost access to 4 more resturants between Rasberry Falls and McLean, with more going down soon. Its only a matter of time until this becomes a serious political issue in Va and its gets bargined away. We don't have the voters here that it can just be ramrodded through, but we do have enough votes that other things can slowed down and our representitives will end up using those votes as a bargining chip to get what they want. Thats the same exact formula they used to get support for transprotation measures over the last 10 years.