Court classifies paintball guns as weapons, citing use in vandalism-PA

Posted on Fri, Dec. 24, 2004

HARRISBURG, Pa. - A student who kept six paintball guns in the trunk of his car violated a state law against possession of a weapon on school property, in part because he used one of the guns to commit vandalism, the state Superior Court has ruled.

The defendant, then 17, and another youth drove away from Central York High School during lunch hour in September 2003 to fire a carbon dioxide-powered paintball gun at three parked vehicles and a garage door, according to court records. Police recovered the guns after the boy's father consented to a search of his car that night.

The youth, unnamed in court documents, was charged with possessing a weapon on school property; improper use of paintball guns, air rifles and paintball markers; and criminal mischief. He admitted to the acts of vandalism, authorities said.

York Common Pleas Judge John Uhler in January found him delinquent, but the case was appealed to Superior Court to challenge Uhler's determination that paintball guns are among the weapons prohibited on school grounds.

State courts had previously ruled that gas-powered BB guns should be considered weapons, but had not considered the question of paintball guns.

In a decision released Thursday, Superior Court Judge Richard B. Klein wrote that the mere possession of the guns would not have been criminal if one had not been used illegally.

Klein cited an exception to the prohibition of weapons on school property if the weapon is "used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose."

The defendant had used the gun the previous night at a church-sponsored paintball game and intended to participate in another such event after school on the day of the incident.

"While it is a close case, I believe the unlawful use during the lunch hour deprives the defendant of the defense ... that he had the paintball guns for a lawful use," Klein wrote.

The youth's lawyer, public defender Scott E. Lineberry, said Friday that without the vandalism, the ruling might have gone the other way.

"How far is the court going to extend that definition of weapon? What about a kid on the archery team? If they have a bow and arrow sitting in the trunk of their car - is that going to constitute a weapon? It's an open question, I suppose," Lineberry said.

Klein said the law's firearms definitions are "all over the lot in different sections of the statutes" and noted that "baseballs and hockey pucks can cause serious bodily injury or even death. So can a pencil if poked in someone's eye."

Lawmakers could have made it clear that the penalties for having a firearm on school property also apply to paintball guns, he said.

"The Legislature knew how to spell out nunchuck sticks, and it could have spelled out paintball guns as well," Klein wrote.

ON THE NET

Opinion: http://www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Superior/out/s46028_04.pdf

http://www.timesleader.com/mld/timesleader/10493898.htm

Study finds modest drop in teen drug use  -PA

SAM HANANEL, Associated Press Writer12/26/2004

WASHINGTON – Fewer teenagers are smoking cigarettes or using illegal drugs‚ but a survey released Tuesday shows a troubling increase in the use of inhalants by younger adolescents.

The smoking rate among younger teens is half what it was in the mid-1990s‚ and drug use by that group is down by one-third‚ according to the University of Michigan study‚ done for the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Less dramatic strides have been made among older teens.

Health experts and government officials called the annual survey of eighth‚ 10th and 12th-graders a sign of continued progress in the effort to reduce youth drug use and said further declines would come only with a sustained public education campaign about the consequences of drug abuse.

Overall‚ illicit drug use among teens declined by 7 percent in the past year‚ and 17 percent in the last four years. There are now 600‚000 fewer teens using drugs than there were in 2001.

“These are sustained‚ broad and deep declines‚” national drug policy director John Walters said at a news conference. “The challenge before us is to follow through.”

Altogether‚ gains in 2004 over 2003 were modest. Researchers are troubled by increases – especially among eighth-graders – in the use of inhalants such as glue and aerosols‚ and a rise in the use of the pain-control narcotic OxyContin. Use of most other drugs declined or held steady.

Health officials said they are concerned that use of inhalants‚ which are easily accessible to children‚ may rebound unless children are warned about the grave dangers they pose. Inhalant use had been declining since 1995‚ when the Partnership for a Drug-Free America began an anti-inhalant media campaign.

“Research has found that even a single session of repeated inhalant abuse can disrupt heart rhythms and cause death from cardiac arrest or lower oxygen levels enough to cause suffocation‚” said Nora Volkow‚ director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Researchers also noted the apparent growing popularity of OxyContin‚ a powerful and potentially addictive synthetic narcotic. Up to 5 percent of 12th-graders and smaller percentages of younger teens reported having tried it in the last year‚ the study showed. By contrast‚ 1 percent or less of teens had tried heroin in a year.

The survey found 15 percent of eighth-graders‚ 31 percent of 10th-graders and 39 percent of 12th-graders had used drugs in the previous year – down 1 percentage point or less from the year before.

This was the eighth consecutive year that smoking rates among surveyed teens dropped‚ a turnaround that began in 1996 among students in grades eight and 10 and a year later among 12th-graders.

Researchers credited higher cigarette prices‚ tighter marketing practices‚ anti-smoking ads and withdrawal of the Joe Camel logo among reasons smoking has fallen out of favor with more teens. Close to three-quarters of surveyed 12th graders now say they’d rather not date a smoker‚ up from close to two-thirds in 1977.

“When smoking makes a teen less attractive to the great majority of the opposite sex‚ as now appears to be the case‚ one of the long-imagined benefits for adolescent smoking is seriously undercut‚” said Lloyd Johnston‚ lead researcher for the Monitoring the Future study.

Overall‚ the percentage of eighth-graders who had ever tried cigarettes declined to 28 percent this year‚ down half a percentage point from 2003 and from a peak of 49 percent in 1996.

About 41 percent of 10th-graders had tried cigarettes‚ down 1 percentage point from a year earlier and from 61 percent in 1996.

And 53 percent of high school seniors had smoked at least once in their lives‚ down 1 percentage point from 2003 and from more than 65 percent in 1997.

Even so‚ cigarette use has hardly been stamped out among youth. The study reported that 25 percent of 12th-graders said they had smoked within 30 days of being surveyed‚ as did 16 percent of 10th-graders and 9 percent of eighth-graders.

The study also found that progress in discouraging teen drinking in recent years held steady for the lower grades in 2004. Researchers said it would take another year to know whether a small increase in drinking by seniors was real or a statistical blip.

http://www.thereporteronline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13627584&BRD=2275&PAG=461&dept_id=466404&rfi=6

Latest news in brief from northern Nevada-NV

December 26, 2004 at 17:14:40 PST

INCLINE VILLAGE, Nev. (AP) - A rash of fires set by juveniles in Incline Village has resulted in a new program in line with the area's zero-tolerance policy on the problem.

Youthful offenders in the north Lake Tahoe community now must attend a three- to four-hour program that features a video presentation about the consequences of starting fires.

Twenty fires have been set by youths over the last year in Incline Village, up from a total of six over the last decade, fire officials said.

Lake Tahoe faces one of the highest fire threats in the nation because of overgrown forests.

The program adopted by the Washoe County Sheriff's Department and North Lake Tahoe Fire Protection District is similar to one used by the Henderson Fire Department.

"The problem was getting way out of hand and we had to find a way to deal with it on the prevention end," said Tom Smith, fire marshal for the local fire district.

"The kids that get in trouble for starting fires, bringing fireworks to school or even being caught in possession of a cigarette lighter can find themselves in the program," Smith added.

Youthful offenders will be given talks about what "messing around with fire" can do to themselves as well as an entire community.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2004/dec/26/122610923.html

Bonds set for men involved in stabbings  -FL
Read more Crime in St. Johns County online

By LORY POUNDER Staff Writer Sunday, December 26, 2004

Circuit Judge Robert Mathis set bonds for two Jacksonville men involved in separate stabbings Christmas Eve in St. Johns County.

Suspect Faron Perry wanted to plead his case to Mathis during Saturday morning's first appearance in the county jail's courtroom.

"Don't tell me about the case that carries ... 30 years in prison," Mathis cautioned Perry who had not been appointed a lawyer.

About 11 a.m. Friday, Perry, 49, of 10602 Patchwork Road in Jacksonville, stabbed his ex-employer numerous times in the neck and chest area, said Deputy Greg Suchy.

Perry's bond was set at $150,000 for a charge of attempted murder.

"I acted in self-defense," Perry said Saturday.

Perry said he tried to claim a paycheck owed to him after he was fired several days ago. He went twice to see his former supervisor, Brian Kilhof, 25, of 4608 Martindale Road. Finally, he gave him an ultimatum, Perry said.

A fight broke out at the construction job site at Palencia development off U.S. 1 between Perry and Kilhof, Suchy said.

"I would have walked away, but he wouldn't have let me," Perry told the judge.

Kilhof's injuries were not life-threatening, Suchy said.

Forty-five minutes later, Steve Reeve Tolbert, 42, of 2812 Sunnyside St. in Jacksonville, was arrested on a charge of aggravated domestic battery.

Mathis set his bond at $10,000 with the stipulation that he have no contact with the victim.

Tolbert cut his son around the eyes and nose in a car at the Belz Outlet parking lot, Suchy said.

Tolbert's son, Alvin Anderson, 21, did not have life-threatening injuries, and his mother took him to the hospital, Suchy said.

Tolbert said Saturday that he told his son not to light a cigarette, but he did anyway. They started to argue and Anderson jumped out of the passenger side and ran around the vehicle, Tolbert told the judge.

"He was telling me how he going to hurt me and jump on me," Tolbert said. "He done this before. He came around and swung on me."

Family members, including Anderson's mother and other children, were in the vehicle at the time.

Mathis told both men a lawyer would be appointed to defend them.

http://www.staugustine.com/stories/122604/new_2787458.shtml

Enough to scare you to death -UK

 By Fionnuala Bourke, Sunday Mercury Dec 26 2004

This is one of the shocking graveside images designed to scare parents into finally quitting smoking in the New Year.

The NHS has launched the hard-hitting TV adverts today as part of an unprecedented £6 million Government push to encourage more mums and dads to quit the killer habit.

One heartbreaking image shows two distraught children leaving the graveside of their father following his funeral. A wreath is shaped simply in the word 'Dad'.

Another sees a young girl laying flowers on her parent's grave, and a floral tribute spelling the word 'Mum'.

One film shows mourners huddled round a grave during a funeral service. The words flashed on the screen read "Always went outside to have a cigarette'.

A fourth has a mother struggling to break the news that she has cancer to her kids.

On each, an accompanying caption reads: "Giving up. The only way to protect your family from the effects of smoking."

The new drive, which seems designed to make smoking parents feel guilty, follows a series of hard-hitting campaigns in recent years, including ads showing fatty deposits in smokers' arteries.

The adverts also feature real-life exsmokers who quit with the help of their local NHS Stop Smoking Service, including Midlander Peter Lee.

Mr Lee, from Leamington in Warwickshire, began smoking when he was at university. By his 30s he had a 20-a-day habit and his GP referred him to his local NHS Stop Smoking Service.

The 38 year-old, who has now been a non-smoker for two years, said: "My NHS advisor was brilliant. I found understanding the psychology behind giving up smoking as well as seeing what it was doing to my body - through weekly carbon monoxide monitoring - extremely motivational.

"Most important of all, I felt supported and reassured that I was doing something positive in my life. I absolutely did not want to let the adviser, or myself, down."

NHS figures show that over the Christmas break around 3,000 people - including many parents - will die due to smoking-related illnesses such as cancer and heart disease.

Latest figures from the West Midlands Public Health Group show nearly a quarter of adults in the region smoke. This is despite research that reveals one in two smokers will die early because of the habit and spiralling costs of cigarettes.

Paul Hooper, of the West Midlands Public Health Group, said: "It's more important than ever to give up smoking this year because of all the help around to help smokers succeed.

"There are more products to help them quit and local NHS Stop Smoking Services have proven highly successful.

"Also, more places are going smoke-free than ever before. And with the law about to change to ban smoking in more public places, it's a good idea to quit now.

"You can't expect to pass your driving test without having any lessons, similarly you can't expect to give up smoking without help.

"Even if people have tried to give up before and failed, they can always try again as there is no need to give in to smoking.

"We especially want people to under-stand they should not be afraid of nicotine products.

"Nicotine makes people addicted to cigarettes, but it's the 4,000 chemicals they contain that wreck their health."

* For more information on stopping smoking call the NHS Smoking Helpline on 0800 169 0 169 or visit www.givingupsmoking.co.uk.

http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100localnews/tm_objectid=15014590&method=full&siteid=50002&headline=enough-to-scare-you-to-death-name_page.html

Anti-smoking drive targets families -UK
Lee Glendinning The Guardian Monday December 27, 2004
 An emotive image of grieving children laying flowers beside their father's grave is one of the central features of a new anti-smoking campaign aimed at families.

A series of five adverts showing parents and children struggling to come to terms with terminal cancer was launched yesterday as part of a £6m government campaign to encourage more people to quit smoking in 2005.

Scenes include children huddled around their mother at their father's funeral with the line "Never smoked around his children". Another advert features a girl laying a wreath spelling out "mum", while one shows a group of mourners at a grave with the line "Always went outside to have a cigarette". All the adverts will carry the message: "Giving up smoking - the only way to protect your family."

Up to 3,000 people will have died of smoking-related illnesses such as cancer and heart disease between Christmas Eve and January 4.

Recent figures from the University of London reveal that only 30% of smokers try to stop, and fewer than 3% a year succeed. For the government to achieve its promise to cut smoking to 21% of the population by 2010, 50% must try to stop and 6% succeed.

The stories of real-life ex-smokers who gave up after being helped by the NHS Stop Smoking Services will be used in the second part of the new campaign from January 4.

Last year, the services, which offer one-to-one counselling and nicotine replacement therapy, helped 200,000 people to quit smoking.

"We know 70% of smokers want to stop smoking. For some, however, fears about their children can be a stronger motivation to actually quit than fears for their own health," the public health minister, Melanie Johnson, said. "I am confident that the uncompromising message of this advertising will hit home with many parents."

But Simon Clark, the director of the smokers' lobby group Forest, said: "Everyone knows there are risks associated with smoking but these advertisements stigmatise all smokers irrespective of whether they are long-term heavy smokers or moderate smokers who keep fit and enjoy a healthy diet.

"To play on people's fears like this is cynical and manipulative."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1379913,00.html

Where is all the tobacco money?

Originally published December 26, 2004

I thank the good Lord the day He gave me the will power to stop a 40-plus-year smoking habit; that was six years ago.

I worried when I did smoke when there was talk of raising the price on a pack of cigarettes. My question is this: What has happened to all of the cigarette money that we are supposed to have? Where has it gone, and, if it is still in the bank, why must the price of a pack of cigarettes be increased?

Don't get me wrong: I am against smoking but I do believe it is an individual's choice to decide if he or she wants to quit. There are a lot of things that are far worse than smoking a cigarette.

So, does anyone know what happened to all that money?

David Saucier Jr.

Lumberton

http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041226/OPINION03/412260303/1014

Albany lobbyists gear up for 2005 -NY
By John Milgrim  Capitol Bureau 12/27/04

ALBANY — Christmas may be history, but a legion of special-interest groups, from medical centers and health-care workers to environmentalists and educators, hope state lawmakers stay in the giving mood for several months to come.

And their hands are already out, hoping the state adds billions more to the current $100 billion budget.

Like years past, advocates and organizations began making their pitches early this month with hopes of being included in next year’s budget. They’ll continue the seemingly incessant pleas at least until a budget is passed, which did not happen until August this year.

Many will try to make their cases through rallies and news conferences as part of their annual multi-million dollar lobbying efforts to sway the opinions of power brokers. For some unwilling or unable to negotiate closed-door deals with state leaders, they are the only tools available to get what they want.

And sometimes, the more noise they make, the more money they get.

"A squeaky wheel does get the grease, not to mix too many metaphors here," said Blair Horner, legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group.

Environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, want a doubling of the amount the state spends on land protection and park projects. Anti-smoking groups, like the American Cancer Society, want to double spending on state programs meant to help people quit.

In each case, the groups are talking about tens of millions of dollars in new state spending, and they’ve suggested ways the state could pay for it, such as increasing cigarette taxes.

Others are calling for spending increases in the billions.

A state court is expected to order the city and state to spend an additional $1.4 billion on New York City’s schools alone.

And heath-care workers and medical institutions are expected to push for the Health Care Reform Act, worth several billion dollars to their industry.

Even before new money is spent, however, the state is facing as much as a $6 billion budget deficit, according to Gov. George Pataki. By the third week in January, he’s expected to propose a spending plan showing who gets what.

Horner, who advocates on such issues as government reform, higher education and the environment, said groups with the least political clout, or money, often only have the public forum to make their cases. College students, for example, have a poor record of showing up at the polls and they rarely make political contributions, which often helps others access lawmakers who control the purse strings.

"On the other hand, the case they are making (for a public investment in education) is enormously popular," Horner said. "It’s not like we are trying to get a tax break for millionaires. The advocacy for that is focused on giving money to well-connected lobbyists to advocate in the dark."

E.J. McMahon, a senior fellow with the conservative Manhattan Institute think tank, said in Albany’s political climate, the most effective advocacy for state resources happens behind closed doors.

"Probably the most effective lobbying tool is the ever-popular implied promise of a campaign contribution followed closely by the implied threat of support for an opponent,"McMahon said.

Sometimes, the special interests have the greatest success employing a variety of tactics to sway political opinion their way.

Take, for example, the state’s largest health-care workers union. The Service Employees International Union local 1199 spent more than $10 million last year for an Albany rally of some 30,000 people and a statewide advertising campaign. They called for new taxes on the wealthy and more spending on health care.

In 2002, Dennis Rivera, president of the 350,000-member union, was credited with orchestrating substantial salary increases for health-care workers in legislation state leaders agreed to behind closed doors.

That same year, Gov. George Pataki won the union’s endorsement as part of a successful campaign for re-election.

http://www.thedailystar.com/news/stories/2004/12/27/lobby.html

Season turns blue for tobacco farmers ky

Manufacturers off the hook for balance of Phase II payments

By JOHN FRIEDLEIN

Hardin County farmers lost more than $1 million in expected tobacco settlement money when a North Carolina judge ruled that, because of the buyout that ended the quota system, companies no longer must make the final Phase II payment.

"I'm disappointed," said Elizabethtown grower Larry Thomas. "Every tobacco farmer is, I'm sure."

This news is another setback for growers and quota owners who have been coping with years of dwindling profits. "It's just another loss," Thomas said. Even the buyout approved by Congress this fall was less money over a longer period of time than some quota owners had hoped. The $10.3 million will be paid out over 10 years.

As for the 2004 Phase II money, Kentucky growers expected to receive $124 million, with $1.3 million of that going to local producers, said Thomas, who sits on the board of directors of the state Farm Bureau Federation.

North Carolina Business Court Judge Ben Tennille released cigarette companies of the obligation Thursday. An appeal is expected.

This is the sixth year of the $5.15 billion Phase II program, which would have lasted a total of 12 years. The money was intended to help farmers make up for loss of revenue from higher cigarette prices.

A final payment made this week or early next year would have helped carry growers over until buyout payments start next August. For the average producer, yearly Phase II payments are about the same as buyout payments are expected to be, said Ray Allan Mackey, a local farmer and president of the Hardin County Farm Bureau.

If farmers thought the state would make up for the loss of these payments, they'd be wrong. State officials have compensated for a shortfall in Phase II money in the past, but the law that allowed it does not make up for the absence of any sort of payment, said Keith Rogers, executive director of the governor's office of agricultural policy. Also, the North Carolina judge continued a moratorium on disbursment of those funds.

"That money had been promised," Mackey said. "The money should have already been set aside."

Tobacco companies made some Phase II payments this year, but farmers have not received the funds and the manufacturers expect to receive refunds.

"Clearly, the tobacco companies are not meeting their agreed upon obligations," said White Mills grower Steve Meredith. "It's a significant amount of money that we would have anticipated." It's also money he, other farmers and even those who lend to growers had figured into their budgets.

Meredith also said he would have been better off had the Phase II payments continued, instead of the buyout funds.

Because of the ruling, individual Hardin County farmers lost up to a few thousand dollars this year, Mackey said.

Not only will they not get a Phase II check, but they must also deal with production losses caused by one of the wettest years on record and, possibly, lower contract prices. Because of these factors, most tobacco farmers must consider whether or not to grow next year, Mackey said. "There's a lot of decision making yet to be done."

John Friedlein can be reached at 769-1200, Ext. 237, or e-mail him at jfriedlein@mail.the-ne.com.

http://www.newsenterpriseonline.com/articles/2004/12/27/news/news01.txt

In Mississippi, Many Want Higher Tobacco Taxes

December 27, 2004

(Angus Reid - CPOD Global Scan) – Many adults in the state of Mississippi back a proposal for higher tobacco duties, according to a poll by the John C. Stennis Institute of Government at Mississippi State University released by the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program. 63.5 per cent of respondents support a $1-a-pack tax increase on cigarettes.

Mississippi currently has the third-lowest cigarette tax in the United States, at 18 cents a pack. The national average is 84 cents a pack.

The Magnolia State has not raised its cigarette levies since 1985. 80.4 per cent of respondents want to spend the tax to fund health care programs, 78.6 per cent of respondents want to reduce tobacco use among kids, and 74.6 per cent see it as an option to deal with the state’s Medicaid budget problems.

Republican governor Haley Barbour—elected in November 2003—has pledged to fight any tax increase. Earlier this year, Barbour proposed shifting close to 50,000 state residents off the Medicaid program, but a federal judge temporarily denied the plan.

Polling Data

Support for tax proposal rationale and spending
(Only "Support" respondents listed)

Source: John C. Stennis Institute of Government at Mississippi State University / Mississippi Health Advocacy Program
Methodology: Telephone interviews to 601 Mississippi adults, conducted from Nov. 9 to Nov. 23, 2004. Margin of error is 4 per cent.
http://www.cpod.ca/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=5411

Experts: Second-Hand Smoke Poses Health Risk  -WV

By BETHENY HOLSTEIN

With the ongoing discussion of creating a smoke-free work environment in most of Ohio County's businesses, some people are wondering what the effects of secondhand smoke really are and whether they are bad enough to limit a person's opportunity to light up.

  The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 3,000 lung cancer deaths and 35,000 coronary heart disease deaths occur each year in adult nonsmokers as a result of exposure to secondhand smoke.

  "Out of every eight individuals that the tobacco industry kills, one of them has never smoked a cigarette - ever," said Dr. Michael Blatt, a local pulmonologist.

  Secondhand smoke, which also is called environmental tobacco smoke, is the mixture of the smoke from the burning end of a cigarette or other tobacco product and the smoke exhaled by the smoker.

  According to the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, a recent CDC study puts the adult smoking rate in West Virginia at more than 27 percent, which is the highest among all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

  Area cardiologist Dr. Robert Fanning pointed out that secondhand smoke also is associated with an increased chance of coronary artery disease, and that risk applies not only to those who may live with a smoker, but also those who are simply exposed in passing.

  "There is up to a 50 percent increase in coronary artery disease among those exposed as opposed to those who have not been exposed to secondhand smoke," Fanning said. He referred to a temporary clean indoor air regulation in Helena, Mont., which prohibited smoking in most places for about six months, and he pointed out that for the period of time the regulation was in place, heart attacks in the area dropped by 60 percent from the time period prior to the regulation. Additionally, after the ban was lifted, the rates of heart attacks again rose.

  "There is no doubt that the vast majority of studies published have all shown a reduced risk of heart attack from not being exposed to cigarette smoke," Fanning said. "I can't think of a better reason, as a cardiologist, to want to reduce smoking than a reduced risk of heart attack."

  He said that when cigarette smoke hits the body, it causes a constriction of blood vessels, activation of platelets and an increase in fibrinogen levels in the blood. Fibrinogen is an enzyme produced by the liver that the body uses to clot blood.

  All three of these activities within the body lead to a more sluggish blood flow, which can lead to heart attack.

  "The prevailing theory is that passive smokers are not accustomed to the smoke," Fanning said, adding that the result of that inexperience is that the smoke has a greater degree of effect on the person.

  Additionally, environmental tobacco smoke also causes serious lung problems, according to Blatt. He pointed out that secondhand smoke is responsible for nearly 150,000 acute lower respiratory infections per year, and he also added that of the 4,000 know chemical compounds in cigarette smoke about 69 are know to cause or are suspected of causing cancer.

  "A non-smoker who is exposed to secondhand smoke also starts to have damage to the lungs," Blatt said, explaining that the damage can make a person more likely to have respiratory infections.

  Also, Blatt said the particulate matter in environmental tobacco smoke can increase the risk of a person having an asthma attack, and the carbon monoxide in the smoke inhibits the ability of the blood the absorb oxygen. 

  "It was determined that the levels of cigarette smoke in restaurants is approximately two to three times more than one would would find in a home, and in bars, it is three to four times higher," Blatt said.

  Local pediatrician Dr. Charles H. Staab III added that many children he treats suffer from chronic respiratory ailments due to secondhand smoke.

  "I cannot prevent some of my patients from having chronic ailments because their parents smoke," Staab said. "I cannot get them to get better."

  Staab also pointed out that some children become over-sensitive after exposure to secondhand smoke, and they cannot be around the smell or remnants of the smoke without adverse effects.

  "We also know that if the mother or father smokes in the home, the children have two to three times the rate of respiratory infections and ear infections," Staab said, adding that secondhand smoke is also linked to sudden infant death syndrome, asthma and reactive air disease.

  According to the CDC, about 60 percent of people in the United States have some sort of biological evidence of their exposure to secondhand smoke, and information from the CDC also indicates that in 1991, nearly 90 percent of Americans have a measurable level of serum cotinine, a substance produced when nicotine is metabolized in their blood.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/508991/

Blair asked by ethics watchdog about holiday -UK

Sun Dec 26, 2004 01:14 AM GMT

LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Tony Blair has been asked by parliament's ethics watchdog about allegations he failed to declare a holiday at the home of an executive with ties to the tobacco industry.

A spokeswoman for Blair confirmed on Sunday that parliamentary standards commissioner Philip Mawer had written to the prime minister about his stay two years ago at a French chateau owned by Alain Perrin.

"It's a letter which hasn't been replied to yet," the spokeswoman said. "Whatever needs to be registered will be registered."

Perrin is a former chief executive of Richemont and remains an executive director with the luxury goods group, which owns about a fifth of cigarette maker British American Tobacco.

In November, the British government proposed a smoking ban for all workplaces, public buildings, restaurants and pubs in which food is served. It has also introduced new controls on tobacco advertising.

The allegations appeared in the Sunday Telegraph newspaper, which said opposition Conservative member of parliament Chris Grayling had complained to Mawer that Blair failed to enter his stay in the register of members' interests.
 

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=643876

Snus Ruse

Why lie about smokeless tobacco when a misleading half-truth will do?
Jacob Sullum

The European Union's highest court recently upheld the E.U.'s 12-year-old ban on oral snuff, saying it serves "the objective of health promotion." Since cigarettes, a far more hazardous form of tobacco, are still legally available in Europe, the E.U.'s policy is rather like banning bows and arrows as an intolerable threat to public safety while allowing a free trade in machine guns.

Worse, tobacco consumption patterns in Sweden, the one E.U. country where oral snuff (known there as snus) remains legal, suggest that Eurocrats are contributing to smoking-related disease and death by foreclosing a safer alternative to cigarettes. As the vice president of Swedish Match, the leading snus producer, put it, "Snus is clearly a significantly less harmful product than cigarettes and could play an important role in a much more responsible harm reduction strategy than the current cynical Quit or Die approach."

Swedish Match obviously has a strong interest in reversing the oral snuff ban. But its position has a solid enough empirical basis that prominent European health researchers and a leading British anti-smoking activist likewise have decried the "Quit or Die approach."

In the U.S., where smokeless tobacco remains legal, this approach takes the form of a misinformation campaign that encourages people to think oral snuff is just as dangerous as cigarettes. That belief, which seems to be widely accepted by smokers, is clearly wrong.

Based on the incidence of tobacco-related deaths among users, University of Alabama at Birmingham oral pathologist Brad Rodu estimates that smokeless tobacco is 98 percent safer than cigarettes. The difference is so stark that public health officials have been forced to quietly retreat from their false risk equivalence.

Last year, for instance, Surgeon General Richard Carmona told a congressional subcommittee "smokeless tobacco is not a safer substitute for cigarette smoking"—a claim that is scientifically unsupportable. But in the version of his testimony that appears on the Web site of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, he says "smokeless tobacco is not a safe alternative to cigarettes"—the same true but misleading warning that appears on oral snuff packages.

Similarly, a CDC Web page aimed at children asks, "Is smokeless tobacco safe?" The answer: "No way!" But the search listing for the page shows that the question used to be, "Is smokeless tobacco safer than cigarettes?" I suspect the CDC's answer was not "You bet!"

Perhaps the most telling recent change in the official line on smokeless tobacco was made to a pamphlet published by the National Institute on Aging. When I looked at the online version of the pamphlet in March, it said: "Some people think smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco and snuff), pipes, and cigars are safer than cigarettes. They are not." The passage now reads: "Some people think smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco and snuff), pipes, and cigars are safe. They are not."

This change came in response to a March 16 complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center arguing that the pamphlet violated the Data Quality Act by disseminating erroneous information. Among other sources, the complaint quoted a 2001 report from the National Academy of Sciences that said "the overall risk [from smokeless tobacco] is lower than for cigarette smoking, and some products such as Swedish snus may have no increased risk" (because they're especially low in carcinogens).

The fact that public health officials seem less inclined to tell outright lies about smokeless tobacco is a small victory. They are still obscuring the issue by doggedly repeating that smokeless tobacco is not risk-free when the relevant point for a cigarette smoker who is thinking about switching is that it's much less likely to kill him than his current habit.

Meanwhile, their allies in the private sector, unconstrained by the Data Quality Act, continue to explicitly promote the myth that smokeless tobacco and cigarettes are equally dangerous. "Some people believe that using smokeless tobacco is safer than smoking," the American Cancer Society says on its Web site. "This is not true."

The staffer who wrote that might want to ask Michael Thun, the society's chief epidemiologist, for a copy of the December issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. That issue includes a study in which a panel of experts estimated that the mortality risk posed by Swedish-style oral snuff is at least 90 percent lower than the risk posed by cigarettes. What makes me think Thun has a copy? He was one of the experts.

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason and the author of Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use (Tarcher/Putnam).

http://www.reason.com/sullum/122404.shtml

28 Dec 2004

The US government does not approve or control the "599 list" of non-tobacco chemical ingredients used to manufacture cigarettes. These additives, such as acetic acid (vinegar), chocolate, vanilla, and menthol are found in everyday foods. Scientists, supported by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), generally regard these substances as safe in foods, but the risks for smokers are not known after combustion in cigarettes and inhalation. Can the toxicological effects for smokers be measured? A new report concludes they can.

The Study
The independent, non-profit organization Life Sciences Research Office (LSRO) (http://WWW.LSRO.ORG) is conducting a review of how to determine the potential risk of non-tobacco additives for cigarette smokers. In a previous report LSRO concluded that testing added ingredients was feasible. In this latest published report, Evaluation of Cigarette Ingredients: Scientific Criteria, LSRO establishes scientific criteria for assessing the impact.

The criteria are based on the work of an expert panel, composed of Alwynelle S. Ahl, Ph.D., D.V.M., Highland Rim Consultancy, Lyles, TN; Carroll Cross, M.D., Professor, Department of Medicine, University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA; Shayne Gad, Ph.D., D.A.B.T., President, Gad Consulting Services, Cary, NC; Donald Gardner, Ph.D., F.A.T.S., President, Inhalation Toxicology Associates, Raleigh, NC; Louis Homer, M.D., Ph.D., Medical Director (ret.), Legacy Research Foundation, Portland, OR; Rudolph Jaeger, Ph.D., Principal Scientist, Environmental Medicine, Inc., Westwood, NJ; Robert Orth, Ph.D., President, Apis Discoveries, LLC, Cedar Hill, MO; Emmanuel Rubin, M.D., Chair, Department of Pathology, Anatomy, and Cell Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA; James Schardein, M.S., F.A.T.S., Consultant, Leesburg, FL; and Thomas Slaga, Ph.D., President, AMC Cancer Research Center, Denver, CO. Phillip Morris, USA funded the study.

Methodology
To identify optimum scientific criteria for additive testing, the investigators compared conventional toxicological and regulatory approaches to epidemiological studies. LSRO could not find toxicological tests that predicted the full range of adverse human health effects. Of particular concern was the difficulty in determining "safe" levels of additives in the context of the obviously unsafe act of smoking. To overcome these problems, LSRO adopted a relative risk approach. Investigators could compare cigarettes containing an ingredient to otherwise identical cigarettes lacking the same ingredient. This approach allows researchers to factor out the adverse health effects, revealing the effects of the additive, if any. This approach focuses on inhalation testing within a smoke matrix, instead of ingestion testing of purified additives.
Findings
The researchers concluded that this approach could establish whether:
(1) the additive, or a pyrolysis product of the additive, did not detectably transfer into cigarette smoke in such a way that smokers might be subject to a change in risk;
(2) the additive did not significantly change the chemistry, physics or biological properties of smoke; and
(3) the additive did not change exposure to cigarette smoke through altered smoking behavior.
If the additive met these three criteria, the expert panel concluded that they would not anticipate that use of the ingredient would increase adverse human health effects. If the additive did not meet one of the criteria, the panel recommended further testing. This could include reducing the amount of ingredient added and retesting or obtaining additional data demonstrating no change in the relative risk of adverse human health effects. The report gives examples.
Conclusions
The purpose of the report was not to create a safer cigarette. The authors state that the primary purpose of additive testing should be to assure the public that the additives do not increase the risk of premature death or illness beyond the levels already associated with smoking. Accordingly, they urge smokers to remember that regardless of the findings from testing, there remain significant risks from smoking even "additive-free" cigarettes.
Next Steps
LSRO will now embark on the next phase of the project, evaluating the impact of individual additives.
For nearly half a century, the Life Sciences Research Office (LSRO) has provided expert objective scientific opinions and evaluations to governmental agencies and leading corporations in the food, health and bioscience sectors. A non-profit organization originally established in 1962 by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, LSRO provides independent science-based analysis and advice.
Editor's Note: A copy of the report is available to the press in pdf format. To receive a copy or schedule an interview, please contact Donna Krupa at 703-527-7357 (office), 703-967-2751 (cell) or djkrupa1@aol.com.
Contact: Donna Krupa djkrupa1@aol.com 703-527-7357 (office)  703-967-2751 (cell)
Life Sciences Research Office

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=18385

July 23, 2003

(CPOD) Jul. 23, 2003 - Americans believe litigation against the fast-food industry is not warranted, according to a poll by Gallup. 89 per cent of respondents oppose legal action against restaurant chains.

Several attorneys have suggested possible lawsuits against the fast-food industry, in cases reminiscent of the first legal disputes against tobacco companies in the 1970s. 66 per cent of respondents do not believe restaurant chains are responsible for a customer's health problems.

Most Americans agree that fast-food is not healthy. 76 per cent of respondents believe such meals are not good for them.

Polling Data

Would you favor or oppose holding the fast-food industry legally responsible for the diet-related health problems of people who eat fast food on a regular basis?

 Favor        9%                Oppose  89%

 How responsible is the fast food industry for the health problems faced by obese people in this country?

Very / Somewhat responsible                    33%             Not too / Not at all responsible                   66%

 Overall, do you think that most of the food served in fast-food restaurants is very good for you, fairly good for you, not too good for you, or not good at all for you?

Very good            1%

Fairly good          22%

Not too good      53%

Not good at all    23%

Source: Gallup
Methodology: Telephone interviews to 1,006 American adults, conducted from Jul. 7 to Jul. 9, 2003. Margin of error is 3 per cent.

http://www.cpod.ca/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=404