The quit-smoking drug, Chantix (also known as Champix outside the US) is killing smokers. The Pfizer-manufactured drug has been found to be responsible for suicidal thoughts, leading to a reported 227 cases of attempted suicide, and 28 successful attempts. It’s also linked to potentially lethal cardiac rhythm disturbances, severe skin reactions, acute myocardial infarction, seizures, diabetes, paranoia, psychosis, aggression, hallucination and homocidal ideation.
Better than smoking, Pfizer seems to think. Their marketing plan? Government-imposed smoking bans, of course. Pfizer has been paying medical groups to advocate smoking bans and to promote smoking cessation through professional medical help (ie pharmaceuticals).
And they say “Big Tobacco” is corrupt and killing it’s customers.
Doctor Jennifer Holmes has an opinion piece in the St. Cloud Times that really irked me. She cites studies that have been debunked as gospel, preached by a doctor who should know better. Either she’s complicit in the lie or grossly incompetent. As the adage goes, never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
Your Turn: State’s nonsmoking progress helps all
Congratulations, Minnesota, for making it nine months smoke-free! I know that going smoke-free is old news, but I continue to hear the different sides of discussion even now.
As a physician, I have routinely been hearing cheers and jeers regarding the smoking restrictions. Most of the jeering is focused on an individual’s “right to smoke.”
I am not going to debate what is in the Bill of Rights we all hold so dear. Instead, I would like to bring forth evidence that is very well known to the medical community that supports a smoke-free workplace.
First, a statistic that startles me and should startle you: Secondhand smoke is attributed to 35,000 heart-related deaths and 3,000 lung cancer-related deaths among nonsmokers in the United States every year.
This is unacceptable. The exposure of nicotine to nonsmokers who work in an environment with unlimited smoking has been studied for well more than 20 years.
The evidence was already clear that nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke are at a higher risk of smoking-related health problems than nonsmokers who are not exposed to secondhand smoke.
These studies are the basis of many smoking bans in places of employment.
There have been multiple studies looking at the effects of these bans. Here are just a few examples:
The British Medical Journal in 2004 found that there was a significant drop in admissions for heart attacks a mere six months after such a smoking ban was enforced. This study was done in Helena, Mont.
The New England Journal of Medicine in 1996 published an article that looked at the inner layer of blood vessels in young, healthy nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke and the vessels of habitual smokers.
Interesting read at Clearing the Air:
Two unions have filed unfair labor practice charges against Caterpillar Inc. for a smoking ban on company property that went into effect June 1.
The United Auto Workers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers both allege that Peoria, Illinois-based Caterpillar violated the terms of their contracts by unilaterally banning smoking on the company’s property. The unions, which filed their charges separately, say employees have had the smoking privilege detailed in their contract for 60 years.
One of the big arguments often used to support smoking bans is that they will lead to people kicking the habit. “The Big Smoke,” A new exhibit at the Musuem of London seems to refute that notion. The exhibit chronicles London’s smoking habits, trends, statistics and advertising over the centuries.
One year after England enacted a total indoor smoking ban, 29% of Londoners (about 2 million people) still smoke, roughly the same number as before the ban.
This is yet another ban-supporting argument that’s been blown away by facts. Another: Smoking bans are good for business. Tell that to the 200+ businesses forced to close in the wake of Minneapolis’ smoking ban, and then watch this winter as outstate social venues begin to crumble and die.
County commissioners say the new beach smoking ban being implemented in Ramsey County is to “promote a healthy lifestyle…” Outdoors… Again. They also say they hope it will keep teens from smoking at “places they like to hang out.”
The new ordinance requires smokers to keep away, at least 50 feet from a beach before lighting up, or even cheeking a pouch of snuff. The ban is on all tobacco products.
The county asserts that it’s aim is to create “positive role-modeling for youth in the community.”
They are establishing the notion that even absent any actual health risk from second-hand smoke, simply witnessing tobacco use is irrepairably harmful.
Read Ramsey County’s official statement here.
Contact Ramsey County Comissioners here.
Property rights advocate Dave Shegstad received the Republican endorsement in his run against Jim Davnie for the 62A House Seat on Wednesday, June 25th.
Though Shegstad is a nonsmoker, he is adamantly opposed to government-imposed smoking bans. “It’s a property rights issue, plain and simple,” he says.
A small business owner, Shegstad understands the challenges entrepreneurs face in Minnesota, especially in Minneapolis, where he’s been a life-long resident.
Shegstad ran against Minneapolis’ smoking ban godfather, Gary Schiff for the Ward 9 City Council seat in 2005. He campaigned hard, but didn’t win - that round. The experience has left him wiser, though and over the past several years, he’s become more involved and built a network of support.
Shegstad’s candidacy should attract the support of anti-ban crusaders. He faces a tough race against DFL-endorsed Davnie in an urban district, but he’s willing to work hard for a win. To support Dave, visit his website and find out how to volunteer or donate to his campaign.
Sue Jeffers has been hosting her new radio program for about a month now, Saturdays 5-7 on KTLK 100.3 FM. This week, she’s got a show about smoking bans. Surprised? Probably not. Listen close. I might pop in.
Barnacles owner, Shiela Kromer and attorney Mark Benjamin are expected guests this Saturday. Updates on the theater night appeals are among likely topics.
Don’t miss it!
I was in Olmstead county, recently. Rochester, to be precise. I found the sleepy city to be less than hospitible. I’d rather not return any time soon, but my work brings me there again this summer for the Olmstead County Fair. The organization I work for will be maintaining a booth there. I set it up. Had I realized the county had gone completely off the deep end, I probably would have declined this particular fair.
Smoking will be prohibited at the Olmstead County Fair… Outdoors. That means fair workers (and volunteers) will have to leave the fair grounds completely to grab a puff. Attendees as well, naturally. I rather suspect attendance and overall sales will be down. It wouldn’t surprise me if vendor participation also declines. Had I known about this, I wouldn’t have pursued a booth there. In fact, I may investigate seeking a refund.
Property of 50-year Frogtown fixture will be redeveloped
Pummeled by the defection of bowling leagues and facing the consequences of years of neglect, the 50-year-old Minnehaha Lanes in St. Paul’s Frogtown neighborhood has closed.
The St. Paul Port Authority agreed this week on a $1.8 million deal to buy the building and the 4 acres it sits on near Minnehaha Avenue and Milton Street, viewing it as a key step toward redevelopment of the entire dilapidated Minnehaha Mall.
“Unfortunately, it’s somewhat of a sad day,” said Harvey Anderson, founder of a company that owned the bowling alley and several others in the east metro. “But its problems deteriorated. It would take a lot of investment from us.”
The lanes were founded in 1958 by William Manion, a St. Paul native and well-known bowling advocate who died in 1997.
Anderson has owned the lanes for about a decade, but it was operated by Harry “Dutch” Erkenbrack, whose management company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection earlier this year.
Erkenbrack could not be reached for comment, but he had complained in the past that the smoking ban, which took effect in St. Paul more than a year before it reached the rest of the state, had driven a primary source of income — bowling leagues — away.
Read the rest at Pioneer Press.
Forcing smoking patrons outside has led to an increase in noise and disturbance complaints around St. Paul bars, prompting city leaders to consider imposing costly new security mandates on taverners. City Council Member Lee Helgen proposes increasing 2 AM license fees by $200 and requiring indoor and outdoor security cameras be installed. Helgen also wants to require at least two employees remain on duty until all bar patrons have left the premesis.
Bob Kessler, director of public safety and inspections said the city is spending more money dealing with noise and loitering complaints since the smoking ban took effect.
Fixing the unintended consequences of the smoking ban will further squeeze struggling bar owners, it appears.
