The Delaware County Health Board has asked its attorney to draft a comprehensive ordinance that would ban smoking countywide.

County commissioners approved a smoking ban four years ago but excluded bars, truck stops along Interstate 69 and bingo halls that became private clubs that bingo players could join.

Cecilia Williams of the Tobacco Free Coalition of Delaware County tells The Star Press that she thinks the commissioners would enact a comprehensive ban if there were enough public support.

Source: Chicago Tribune

“I was developing a project for a studio, and the character was this totally messed-up guy. He was in his mid- to late 20s; he frequented whores; he took an enormous amount of Ecstasy, and in many, many scenes he would smoke.

“Well, the studio was obsessed with him not smoking. And I used to say, `The guy’s doing all these other crazy things, you’re worried about him smoking?’”

Very worried.

Last week, the Motion Picture Association of America announced that cigarettes will now be a factor in movie ratings. In a statement, the body responsible for those parental advisories – the PGs, PG-13s, Rs and NC-17s accorded for scenes of sex and violence, for profanity, drinking and drugs – noted that “depictions that glamorize smoking or movies that feature pervasive smoking outside of a historic or other mitigating context may receive a higher rating.”

Fine, smoking kills. Studies from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have linked movies to teen smoking, and health organisations, youth advocacy groups and outfits like Morality in Media have long lobbied Hollywood to kick those butts off screen. (Morality in Media wants any film featuring a lit cigarette to get an automatic R.)

“Think about it,” wrote consumer advocate and activist Ralph Nader in a Tobacco and Hollywood editorial. “The movies are glamorous, and they portray smoking as glamorous, whether or not it is a good guy or bad guy lighting a cigarette.”

With that kind of logic, it was only a matter of time before Hollywood officially ceded.

“Smoking is increasingly an unacceptable behavior in our society,” Dan Glickman, president of the MPAA, said in his statement last week. “No parent wants their child to take up the habit. The appropriate response of the rating system is to give more information to parents on this issue.”

OK. But where is all this going? What’s next – an R rating for a scene of grade-schoolers scarfing trans-fat doughnuts? What about a movie that offends vegans – stars chomping on meat, wearing mink, stopping the Mr. Softee truck for a vanilla cone? And who’s going to protect the moviegoing public from all the other potentially destructive, addictive activities “glamourised” in the movies?

Source: The Star

Warren Custis of the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) in Salisbury says bars and restaurants will miss out on a major part of their business.

“It’s wrong to try to tell someone where to smoke at,” said Custis.

Custis also mentions that businesses spend lots of money installing smoke eaters. This device sucks up the smoke when its in the air allowing for separate smoking and non-smoking sections.

“Restaurants and bars have them, now it’s useless,” said Custis.

“They tell me they’re expensive to run, some places run them and some don’t,” said Don Kersey.

The statewide smoking ban includes bars, restaurants, and private clubs. Lawmakers tentatively agreed to the ban last week, a formal agreement may be reached Monday. The bill then heads to Governor Martin O’Malley, who plans to sign it.

Maryland would join Washington D.C. and Delaware with statewide smoking bans.

Source: WBOC

Vince Rennich, a table games supervisor, doesn’t buy the argument that his dismissal was part of a larger staff reduction as the new owners reorganize the property.

“They threw me under the bus,” the Somers Point man said Monday. “They took the opportunity to get rid of me.”

A Tropicana spokeswoman declined comment on the reason behind the layoff. But since Columbia Entertainment took over for Aztar Corp., a couple hundred employees have been let go.

“This is not an easy thing. We’re sensitive to the people who work here,” said Tropicana president and CEO Fred Buro The casino offered a six-week severance package, Rennich, 49, said.

Rennich sued the Tropicana last summer, alleging failure to protect employees against secondhand smoke on the casino floor. Rennich, a nonsmoker, was diagnosed with lung cancer two years ago and had part of his lung removed.

Rennich said he never saw the firing coming.

“I didn’t think they had the nerve to do it,” he said. “How can you do that to someone. I’m devastated. I have no job, no benefits. Health insurance will cost me $800 month. Who’ll hire a guy with lung cancer who is suing the casino industry?”

He also ruled out going to court to get his job back at the Tropicana “I don’t want them if they don’t want me,” he said.

Rennich said he will continue the fight for a full smoking ban on the casino floor. “This is not about me. It’s what’s happening in Atlantic City. It’s not OK for us to die.”

Last year, the state enacted a smoking ban, but exempted the casinos for fear of an economic downturn. Atlantic City council introduced its own ordinance to close the loophole, but last month backed off, approving an amendment to permit separate smoking areas on 25 percent of the casino floor. Plans for the separation must be submitted to the state Department of Community Affairs by mid-September, five months after the ordinance takes affect April 15.

The state has since revisited the exemption. Last week, the Senate Health Committee approved a measure to ban smoking on the gaming floor. Rennich testified at the hearing.

Tropicana’s Buro last week said the casinos would likely go smoke-free by installing gaming-free smoking lounges.

“That seems to be the most practical way,” he said.

Rennich supports the move. “We pitched that idea to them. This is all about worker’s safety. We’re not trying to get people to stop smoking. But no one should have to die to earn a paycheck,” he said.

Source: Courier Post

Anti-smoking forces are lining up against the tobacco industry and some restaurant owners, with lobbyists from both sides seeking to win over lawmakers.

“We’ve got a lot of national resources that are focusing on this,” said Sen. Rodney Ellis, a Houston Democrat who proposed the legislation. “Texas is a trendsetter state on so many issues.”

Sixteen states, including California and New York, already have comprehensive smoking bans; 13 others are considering them. Houston, Austin, El Paso and other Texas cities already have comprehensive smoking bans.

Ellis’ proposal is aimed at eliminating secondhand smoke in indoor public places. It would ban smoking in government offices, private workplaces, restaurants, bars and the seating area of outdoor entertainment events. It also would prohibit smoking within 15 feet of the entrances to those places. The bill proposes a fine of up to $500 for violating the ban.

The bill, which was filed Tuesday, must survive legislative committees before facing a vote from lawmakers during the legislative session, which ends May 28.

Smoke-Free Texas, a coalition of the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, American Heart Association and Texas PTA, is pushing the measure.

The American Cancer Society and the American Cancer Society High Plains Division, which sponsored the poll, have 11 lobbyists for the legislative session, according to the Texas Ethics Commission.

Leading opposition to the ban is tobacco giant Philip Morris USA Inc. Spokesman David Sutton said the company advocates helping people avoid secondhand smoke in public places, but wants business owners to have flexibility in accommodating them.

There are ways to protect nonsmokers short of a complete ban, he said, such as separate rooms for smokers and high-quality ventilation.

“Total bans on indoor smoking fail to respect the comfort and choices of both smoking and nonsmoking adults,” he said.

The Texas Restaurant Association also figures to be a major player in the debate.

“Increasingly we see that cities are adopting bans,” said executive director Richie Jackson. “We have some concerns. One is, we want a level playing field — if you’re going to ban smoking in restaurant bars that you don’t allow smoking in bars. That’s an ongoing equity issue with us.”

Joining a throng of health officials to promote the legislation were Dallas restaurant owner and executive chef Kent Rathbun and Austin-based blues musician Marcia Ball.

Ball, a former smoker, said while smokers can make their own choices about whether to light up, waiters, entertainers and non-smoking patrons don’t have a choice about breathing secondhand smoke if it’s in the air. Customers won’t stop going to bars and restaurants if they can’t smoke inside, she said.

“They, we, can adapt,” she said

Source: Am New York

The Liberals say it’s not a double standard to allow casinos in Windsor and Niagara Falls to build shelters for smokers even though bars and restaurants cannot. Health Promotion Minister Jim Watson says casinos can build smoking shelters because their primary business is gambling, not serving food and alcohol.

But critics say the casinos are in the hospitality industry, just like bars and restaurants, and should not be allowed the advantage of smoking enclosures.

Michael Perley of the Ontario Coalition for Action on Tobacco says casinos serve food and drinks as a major inducement to attract patrons, just like bars and restaurants.

The opposition parties accuse the Liberal government of trying to protect its own dwindling casino revenues at the expense of the private competition. A tobacco-industry funded lobby group says the government should let restaurants and bars construct smoking shelters to level the playing field with the casinos.

Source: TB Source

A review team told Gov. Ted Strickland that the new state law banning indoor smoking is among the five most controversial regulations in the prison system. Though a ban has been in place since November 2005, some question how widely it is being enforced.

About 70 percent of Ohio’s 48,500 inmates and an unknown percent of the department’s 14,400 staff smoke. That’s compared to 20.9 percent of American adults.

For years, prison officials resisted going smoke-free, saying it could result in unrest and turn tobacco into contraband. Ironically, smoking has been prohibited on death row. The 2005 ban on indoor smoking mirrors the new state law that took effect Dec. 7.

Prisons spokeswoman Andrea Dean said the new policy hasn’t led to increased violence. But the smoking ban has been haphazardly enforced, said Attorney David Singleton, executive director of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center, a legal clinic in Cincinnati.

“It may not be going over well with prisoners because a lot of prisoners like to smoke. But there needs to be a way to protect those prisoners who don’t want to be around second-hand smoke,” Singleton said. “In fact, we are contemplating litigating the lack of enforcement of the smoking ban within the prisons.”

The argument in such a case: second-hand smoke exposure is cruel and unusual punishment.

“They cannot be deliberately indifferent to a serious medical needs,” Singleton said. That argument has been used with mixed results in other states.

Some prisoners have complained about the smoking, but fear retaliation if they snitch on guards or fellow inmates, said Singleton and SmokeFreeOhio, an anti-smoking coalition that campaigned for the new state law.

Dean said the department received 32 inmate grievances regarding smoking in 2005 and 55 in 2006.

“If an inmate is really having a problem, it is addressed,” she said.

Tracy Sabetta of the SmokeFreeOhio, which campaigned for the state law, said “We hear from inmates on a fairly regular basis that the (prison smoking policy) is not being enforced in their particular facilities. I get complaints from all across the state. And there is fear of retribution. They don’t feel they can go to the wardens or supervisors.”

Source: Dayton Daily

Although similar statewide measures have been adopted in Arkansas and Louisiana, Bangor is the first city to adopt such an ordinance, which goes into effect next week.

Violators of the newly approved law face a $50 fine, which applies to any motor vehicle on any public roads within the city confines.

Supporters of the newly enacted ordinance argue that children need the legislation to help protect themselves from the adverse health effects of second-hand smoke. However, opponents of the measure argue that the law detracts the police department from more important issues and is an unnecessary government intrusion into people’s lives.

The study shows that tobacco industry-sponsored prevention ads aimed at parents often have harmful effects on students, also increasing their likelihood of smoking.“We suspected this the minute we saw the kind of ads the tobacco companies were creating. Their objective is to get customers, not to stop customers from finding them,” said Brian Flay, a professor in the Department of Public Health at Oregon State University.

Flay was one of nine researchers from “Bridging the Gap,” a policy research program based at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Michigan, who worked on this study, which is the first to examine how youths are affected by parent-targeted ads sponsored by the tobacco industry.

More than 100,000 students in their 8th, 10th and 12th grades were surveyed to assess the relationship between exposure to tobacco-company prevention advertising and youth smoking-related beliefs, intentions and behaviours.

Each additional youth-targeted prevention ad viewed by a student resulted in a 3 percent stronger intention among all students to smoke in the future.

There was a 12 percent increase in the likelihood that 10th- and 12th-grade students would become smokers if they watched prevention ads targeted at their parents.

The study appears in the December issue of American Journal of Public Health.

Eric Herzik, a political science professor at the University of Nevada, Reno., also offered a simple explanation for this week’s surprising victory for strict regulations on smoking.

“People just don’t like it anymore,” he said

“When you’re this frontier state of 200,000 people, that live-and-let-live-attitude – no problem,” Herzik said.

But Nevada is no longer the Wild West.

“It’s a far more urban and thus regulated environment, and smoking is part of that,” Herzik said.

In a state where the flow of booze is perpetual, gambling fuels the economic engine and undertones of sex are flaunted, the outcome of Tuesday’s election caught many by surprise. Organizers didn’t target smokers in casinos, but they did impose government regulations in a state that prides itself on independence.

“Nevada has had a libertarian reputation, and has tried to uphold it, but that has been slipping away for quite a while,” said Michael Green, a history professor at the Community College of Southern Nevada.

“While we encourage people to come here and do things that are bad for them, we also have a growing baby boomer population,” Green said. “And that population is probably a bit more health conscious and might not want to be exposed to secondhand smoke.”

The state, now with a population of about 2.5 million, has the nation’s highest rate of smoking-related deaths and one of the lowest rates of smoke-free work places, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But Nevada also has a unique, almost-anything-goes economic relationship with tourists, and smoking has been regarded as what you do with your other hand while gambling.

Geno Hill, who owns five Rum Runner bars offering food and slots in Las Vegas and who is the president of the Nevada Tavern Owners Association, said he thought the independent leanings of Nevada’s rural counties would snuff Question 5.

“We were pretty comfortable the rural counties wouldn’t let California come in here any more than they are,” Hill said. “By golly, they did.”

Hill’s organization backed Question 4, a competing, less restrictive anti-smoking measure, which voters rejected, 52 percent to 48 percent.

Instead voters in Nevada’s most populated counties – Clark, Washoe, Douglas, and Carson City – as well as rural Churchill and Lincoln counties, approved Question 5. The remaining 11 rural counties turned it down.

Herzik was among many who projected Nevada voters would favor the less-restrictive measure, but he said he realizes his oversight.

“First and foremost, this was just straight anti-smoking,” Herzik said. “The majority of people do not smoke, the majority of people do not like smoking.”

Green said voters may have been confused between the competing measures, and he offered another theory.

“Nevadans are contrary cusses,” he said.

“There were a lot of advertisements saying vote yes on 4, vote no on 5,” he said, speculating many people voted just the opposite – just because.

Source: AP

About 19 percent of U.S. women smoke compared to 23 percent of men.

But women who choose to smoke must also face the health risks. Many smoking women have died and, unfortunately, many will continue to do so.

Since 1950, lung cancer death rates in U.S. women have increased 600 percent. And as of 1987, lung cancer has become the leading cause of cancer deaths in U.S. women.

The cancer now kills more than 72,000 women annually – more than the combined deaths from the two next-most-common cancer killers, tumors of the breast and colon.

Occasionally, nonsmoking women die from lung cancer. Such was the case of the recently deceased celebrity Dana Reeve, widow of actor Christopher Reeve. Factors that may contribute to cancer in these situations include family history, secondhand smoke exposure, environmental toxins and air pollution. But nearly nine out of 10 times, lung cancer occurs because at some point a woman smoked.

Currently, we’re at a crossroads. In terms of tobacco use and effects, women have nearly achieved gender equality with men. And at this juncture, I think it’s essential for all women to take a hard look at the costs.

Many health hazards

Besides lung cancer, a multitude of health problems threaten women who smoke. Research shows that females are more susceptible than males to a number of smoking-related illnesses.

Cancer: Women smokers have an increased risk of developing cancer of the cervix. Scientists have linked smoking to cancers of the mouth, throat, voice box, breast, pancreas, stomach, esophagus, bladder and kidney.

At any given age and smoking amount, women have a higher risk for lung cancer than men, according to a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association. This might result from gender differences in hormones and metabolism, the researchers say.

Cardiovascular disease: Smoking is linked to a higher risk for coronary heart disease, heart attacks, strokes and hardening of the arteries.

Chronic lung disease: Death rates from chronic bronchitis and emphysema have increased among women in the past 30 years. More than 90 percent of these deaths are attributable to smoking.

Pregnancy effects: Smoking reduces fertility and the chances of conception. Stillbirths, newborn deaths, and sudden infant death syndrome occur more often in the children of mothers who smoke. Infants of smokers more often are born small for age, weighing less, and having poorer lung function.

Bone density: Smoking women usually have a lower bone density than nonsmokers. This places the smokers at higher risk for osteoporosis and hip fractures, especially after menopause.

Digestive tract: Smokers have an increased risk of peptic ulcers and Crohn’s disease.

Eye disease: Smoking is associated with a greater risk for cataracts.

Depression: Smokers are significantly more likely to become depressed than nonsmokers.

Since women are more vulnerable to some of smoking’s adverse effects, they’ve got more to gain from quitting. Ask your doctor about the many options available today to help you to stop smoking. After all, it’s your life. It’s your choice.

Source: Heraldnet

While recent maneuvering in Harrisburg could result in a setback, Gegaris remains optimistic. One domino is down. The rest have to follow.

“It’s long overdue,” the head of the Luzerne County Tobacco Free Coalition said of a smoking ban in Pennsylvania. “Now it’s just a matter of time.”

Years of wrangling over a smoking ban in Philadelphia’s public places, from bars and restaurants to sports stadiums and office buildings, finally ended two weeks ago as a smoking ban became law in the state’s largest city.

Allegheny County has tried to follow suit, approving a smoking ban in public places by 14-1 vote last week.

Proving the issue is not an easy one to tackle, though, Allegheny’s efforts may go for naught.

The Pennsylvania Senate has approved a raft of amendments to the state’s gambling law, among them a provision that would exempt casinos from local ordinances such as bans against smoking. The state House will consider the same amendments in coming days.

Uncertainty about what direction the legislature will take has Allegheny County’s chief executive, Dan Onorato, mulling a veto of his county’s smoking ban.

“The potential for having a casino exempt from our local smoking ban would create an unfair situation,” said Kevin Evanto, a spokesman for Onorato. Onorato has until Thursday to decide but he plans to meet with legislators in the interim, Evanto said.

Talk of smoking bans often results in highly-charged debates, as health advocates say such measures are needed to protect non-smokers and employees from the known dangers of second-hand smoke. Bar and restaurant association trade groups, generally, say smoking bans represent an intrusion of personal freedom and will result in a loss of business as smokers go elsewhere.

While there has been some shift in thinking among former opponents, the debate is far from settled.

The Pennsylvania Restaurant Association recently changed its mind and now openly supports statewide restrictions in the interests of restaurant workers’ health.

“It was a big decision for us because it was a change from our long-held position,” said Patrick Conway, the association’s chief executive.

The key, however, is that a ban must be uniform, he said.

“We think the right approach would be to have a statewide ban that’s comprehensive and at the same time ensures businesses are operating on a level playing field in terms of competitive situation,” Conway said. “That’s what we support.”

Excluding casinos from any smoking regulation goes against that belief.

State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Willow Grove, has been trying for a decade to get a new Clean Indoor Air Act approved in Pennsylvania that would abolish smoking in workplaces.

While he can’t say when it will happen, he thinks the timing is finally right.

“Public opinion is firmly behind it,” he said. “The polls are 70 to 80 percent in favor.”

And if Greenleaf has any say about it, casinos will not be carved out of the law.

New Jersey’s smoking ban exempted Atlantic City casinos. That created an unfair situation for other bars and restaurants in that state that had to comply, the Pennsylvania Tavern Association claimed in a position statement to state legislators.

“If it is truly about employee safety, are the employees of a casino not as important as the health of other employees?” asked Amy Christie, executive director of the association.

Christie’s group maintains its opposition to smoking bans, though, saying such bans hurt “mom and pop” business owners. If casinos will be exempted from smoking, Christie said, “Then I would certainly hope they would let the bars and restaurants that are adult establishments with adult clientele make adult decisions about the use of a legal product.”

Casinos in New York state were not spared from the state’s restrictions on smoking, and some say it has a noticeable effect.

“The conventional wisdom in the industry is there is a significant disadvantage to not having smoking available in a casino environment,” said Charles Degliomini, spokesman for Empire Resorts Mighty M Gaming in Monticello, N.Y. “That said, there are a lot of our patrons who are very appreciative of the fact we do host a smoke-free facility.”

Highlighting the impacts of the smoking bans, Degliomini said Indian casinos in Canada, which are on sovereign property, have seen an uptick in business since Canada snuffed out smoking. Empire Resorts is nearing a deal to operate an Indian casino for the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe in Monticello, meaning a Monticello casino may some day be able to permit patrons to smoke.

State Rep. Todd Eachus, D-Hazleton, was one of 14 members of the House Health and Human Services Committee to block moving a statewide ban on smoking to the House floor recently. The committee deadlocked 14-14.

While he knows he’s in the minority, Eachus said he remains concerned about personal rights. He supports an alternative proposal that would regulate smoking by creating licensed smoking establishments. Under the proposal, a bar or restaurant would have to pay $500 for a state license to offer smoking, post themselves conspicuously as a smoking establishment, and pay unemployment compensation claims for any employee who doesn’t want to work in a smoking environment.

“The reality of that was that many of us think there should be somewhere indoors where smokers would have the right to smoke,” he said. “(But) If a smoking ban wins the day, then it should be a 100 percent smoking ban.”

Source: Citizen’s Voice

To get business owners ready, the River Valley Tobacco-Free Coalition hosted meetings and handed out information clearing up the laws.

“Our assistance is to show the best practices, and lay it all out in a kit. We will come in and do it for you for free… so basically we’re just kind of like a guide [to] offer a clear statement on what this actually means,” said Mona Clemons.

Business owner Jim Jenkins said the information he received helped clear the air.

“It was really informative, because there is a lot of stuff flying around, different rumors,” Jenkins said.

After the law takes effect July 21, business owners will have 30 days to make their restaurants comply.

Source: TheHometownChannel

Surgeon General Richard Carmona said yesterday that there’s evidence that second-hand smoke is more dangerous than previously thought, especially to children. “Second-hand smoke is not a mere annoyance. It is a serious health hazard that can lead to disease and premature death in children and nonsmoking adults,” Carmona said. That gave momentum to the local anti-smoking effort; Mayor Bill White asked City Councilwoman Carol Alvarado to lead the push for a total ban in the city, and Alvarado said she hopes to make a proposal early this fall.

Houston’s current smoking ordinance allows smoking in resaurant bar areas, outdoor dining areas and freestanding bars, but the new government report shows it might not work so well: Using ventilation systems to remove smoke from a shared smoking/non-smoking space isn’t effective, findings show.

“This is a big step for Houston and the surgeon general’s report should help endorse our push for a complete ban,” Alvarado told the Chronicle. “Houston’s been dragging in that regard. We need to act more than incrementally.”

Source: Houstonist

The council is banning all smoking in bars and restaurants.

“They don’t have enough time to change their business plan — they really don’t have a prayer with this short turnaround time,” Barbera says.

In Colorado, a statewide smoking ban goes into effect on July 1. Five hundred fifty bar and restaurant owners are suing to block the law, arguing it violates their constitutional rights.

“They don’t have to come into my establishment if they don’t want to be exposed to smoke,” says bar owner Larry Cusulos.

“How do you prove somebody is going to lose their business until it happens?” asks James VonFeldt, another bar owner.

So far, 14 states and Washington, D.C., have enacted some form of smoking ban. But Tuesday’s report from the surgeon general suggests those bans don’t hurt business. In fact, there’s compelling evidence that it’s quite the contrary.

In New York City, which banned smoking in 2002, tax receipts and employment in bars and restaurants jumped more than 8 percent after the ban. Same in Providence, R.I., and El Paso, Texas.

In Atlanta, restaurant owner Jeff Landau says his family business has actually picked up since Georgia’s smoking ban went into effect last year.

“By and large, the overwhelming majority of our customers like the change in the law,” Landau says.

And Americans are changing their habits. Ten years ago, a quarter of the population smoked. Today, it’s down to 21 percent, as the nation’s smoke begins to clear.

Source: MSNBC