Cigarette Use May Explain Asthma Epidemic In Children, Study Suggests ScienceDaily Magazine, 2007-05-22 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070521161944.htm

The rise in cigarette use by adults over the past century may explain the asthma epidemic in children according to a study by researchers at the Mailman School of Public Health.

The prevalence of asthma has increased at least threefold during the past several decades, but the cause for this remains unknown, according to author Renee D. Goodwin, PhD, MPH, assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology at the Mailman School of Public Health. The increase is occurring most prominently in industrialized countries, but now developing countries are beginning to experience similar increases.

"We have identified parallel increases in childhood asthma and cigarette use among adults during the past century in the United States. These parallel trends suggest that the increase in cigarette use may be a contributing factor to the rise in asthma among children during the same period through increased exposure to environmental tobacco smoke," said Dr. Goodwin. . . .

Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) inhaled unintentionally by nonsmokers has a higher concentration of some toxic substances than the smoke inhaled by smokers, such as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Children breathe more air than adults and have narrower airways, so ETS is a greater causal risk factor of asthma in children. It can also increase the severity of their asthma symptoms. . . .

The study is published in Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, the scientific journal of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI).

Citation: R Goodwin. Environmental tobacco smoke and the epidemic of asthma in children: the role of cigarette use. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2007;98:447-454

Smoking and Sleep Affect Oral Health

Study: Smoking and Lack of Sleep Are Among Factors in Periodontal Disease By Jennifer Warner

From: WebMD Medical News

May 18, 2007

http://www.webmd.com/oral-health/news/20070518/smoking-and-sleep-affect-oral-health?src=RSS_PUBLIC

-- Smoking may be public enemy No. 1 when it comes to the health of your teeth and gums.

A new study shows smoking was the leading lifestyle factor affecting the progression of periodontal disease. Second to smoking in terms of worsening periodontal disease was not getting enough sleep.

"This study points out to patients that there are lifestyle factors other than brushing and flossing that may affect their oral health. Simple lifestyle changes, such as getting more sleep, may help patients improve or protect their oral health," says Preston D. Miller Jr., DDS, president of the American Academy of Periodontology, in a news release. "It is also important to keep these in mind as the body of evidence linking oral disease with systemic diseases continues to grow because ultimately these lifestyle factors might impact a patient's overall health."

Smoking Affects Periodontal Disease

Periodontal disease, which affects the teeth and gums and can ultimately lead to loss of teeth, is thought to be caused by an imbalance of bacteria in the mouth. But recent research has suggested that other factors may also play an important role.

In the study, Muneo Tanaka, DDS, and colleagues at Osaka University Graduate School of Dentistry, followed a group of 219 factory workers from 1999 to 2003 to examine the relationship between periodontal disease and different lifestyle factors.

Researchers analyzed the impact of a variety of lifestyle factors on the progression of periodontal disease among the workers, including physical exercise, alcohol use, tobacco use, hours of sleep, nutritional balance of the diet, mental stress, hours worked, and eating breakfast.

Out of all the lifestyle factors examined, researchers found the No. 1 one factor affecting the progression of periodontal disease was smoking.

The results, published in the Journal of Periodontology, also showed that more than 41% of those who experienced a worsening of their periodontal disease were current smokers.

Lack of sleep was the second most important lifestyle factor affecting periodontal disease with those who received seven to eight hours of sleep per night showing less periodontal disease progression than those who received six or fewer hours of sleep per night. High stress levels and daily alcohol consumption also had an impact on periodontal disease progression.

SOURCES: Kibayashi, M. Journal of Peridontology, May 2007; vol 78: pp 859-867. News release, American Academy of Periodontology.

Tobacco policies & low SES women and girls

In September 2006, the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health published a special supplement dedicated to the effect of tobacco control policies on low SES women and girls (all reports available online at http://jech.bmjjournals.com/content/vol60/suppl_2/). This special issue was funded by the National Cancer Institute and the American Legacy Foundation, and sponsored by the Tobacco Research Network on Disparities (TReND). Below is a synopsis of key findings from these articles and their policy implications. Following the synopsis are NNTPP recommendations related to low SES women and girls.

• Graham et al: “Biographies of disadvantage” are strongly connected to higher smoking rates and lower quit rates. Tobacco interventions need to focus on the living conditions of smokers in addition to current policy efforts. Social policies that aim to reduce socioeconomic differences between classes also serve to narrow tobacco related health disparities.

• Kim et al: Strong youth tobacco access policies lead to a lower likelihood that low SES girls will start smoking. Success is more likely with “proper implementation and rigorous enforcement” of all associated laws.

• Levy et al: Policies having the strongest effect on low education women were price, media, and state media/comprehensive campaigns. The policies examined in this study were directed at the general population, but Levy et al suggest that campaigns specifically targeting low SES people might even have a stronger effect.

• Shavers et al: Restricting smoking at home may have a stronger affect on working women than workplace restrictions - especially as workplace policies are not always adequately implemented, monitored, and enforced.

• Balbach et al: The political relationship between the tobacco industry and the Coalition of Labor Union Women (CLUW) was investigated by reviewing internal tobacco industry documents. When engaging with similar populations, tobacco control advocates can learn from tobacco industry tactics: understand the concerns of working class women, frame issues in a way that appeals to them, and be active in showing support.

• Shopland et al: The odds of quitting smoking were found to be seven to eight times greater with home smoking restrictions than the odds of quitting found with workplace smoking restrictions. Promoting the adoption of smoke-free homes could be an important addition to existing tobacco control programs.

• Moore et al: Low SES female bartenders in San Francisco are more likely to experience secondhand smoke in an Asian or Irish bar, while Latino bars are overwhelmingly compliant with the laws. A better enforcement mechanism should be created to pressure bar owners to comply with smoke-free laws.

• Greaves and Jategaonkar: All researchers assessing tobacco policies are strongly urged to include gender and diversity based analyses. The current approach to tobacco control should be expanded to include more economic and social policies (examples given are “housing, access to childcare, and care giving burdens for girls and women”).

The National Network on Tobacco Prevention and Poverty has been addressing tobacco use among low SES populations since 1990. Through our work with national Stakeholder organizations and as a result of the findings from a series of focus groups conducted with low SES individuals, NNTPP has the following recommendations regarding the impact of tobacco policies on low SES women:

􀂾 Tobacco policies (CIA regulations, city/county ordinances and state restrictions) appear to primarily impact the mainstream, middle class community. These policies often do not reach those living in poverty, the unemployed and those without health care benefits.

􀂾 Organizational tobacco policies (those passed by organizations, agencies and others serving low SES populations) restricting or prohibiting tobacco use, do appear to have an impact in low SES communities and individual smoking behavior.

􀂾 Programs targeting low SES communities to encourage individuals to impose restrictions on smoking in their homes and vehicles are needed. Individuals’ efforts to restrict secondhand smoke exposure to nonsmokers (especially children) have not been successful.

Smoking among low-income pregnant women

By Robert H. Anderson

One of the greatest challenges we face in tobacco prevention is addressing smoking during pregnancy. Although some women quit smoking upon learning they are pregnant, many others do not. Most women who quit during pregnancy resume smoking within 6 months after delivery. And since low-SES populations have a higher prevalence of smoking, this is an issue of great concern to the NNTPP. For example, respective smoking rates for white women with less than 12 years of education are 41.6%. For white women who have completed high school (12 years of education) the rate is 22.7%. Data from CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2004) find that while adult smoking prevalence is 20.5%, it is higher among low-income populations: 30.6% for households with an income of less than $15,000, and 27.8% for households falling in the $15-$25,000 income bracket.

Although virtually every pregnant woman has access to prenatal care, many do not receive appropriate advice on the importance of quitting smoking, nor do they get appropriate counseling on smoking cessation. Similarly, in focus groups conducted by the NNTPP in 2003, low SES participants noted that their tobacco use is rarely addressed by their physician. It is well established that pregnant smokers have a greater chance of miscarriage, placental problems (double the risk), prematurity, low birth weight infants (nearly double the risk), stillbirth, and infant mortality. It is estimated that if all pregnant women in the US stopped smoking, this would bring about an 11% reduction in stillbirths and a 5% reduction in infant deaths that occur in the first 28 days. Moreover, new research suggests that prematurity may account for as much as 34% of infant mortality. The role of smoking is clear in this regard, since 27% of premature births are linked to smoking. In addition, we would see a reduction in admissions to Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs). The cost of such care is high; the “cost” of parental stress is incalculable. Secondhand smoke is also a risk to the fetus. The 2006 Surgeon General Report, “TheHealth Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke,” finds that there is a causal relationship between secondhand smoke exposure and low birth weight, and with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. This means that aside from counseling pregnant smokers about cessation, all pregnant and postpartum women need to be informed about secondhand smoke and the risks exposure poses to infants. Both the US Public Health Service, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and other professional societies recommend following the 5 A’s.

Cessation rates could improve by 30%-70%, were trained clinicians to spend 5-15 minutes with patients. They need to ask about tobacco use, advise the patient to quit, assess the patient’s willingness to try to quit, assist the patient with quitting, and arrange to follow-up with the patient. Details on the 5 A’s may be found at http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tobacco/tobaqrg.htm#Willing. The NNTPP encourages those working with health care providers, especially those that serve low SES communities, to adopt tobacco cessation protocols. Even brief interventions with smoking patients are beneficial and can lead to long term cessation. In addition, more interventions are needed to educate low SES communities about the danger of tobacco use during pregnancy. The NNTPP is assessing new approaches to cessation which includes the development of curricula that can be integrated into community and social service settings and the integration of cessation programs for low SES youth and young adults in out-of-school settings. For more information on any of the NNTPP programs, please contact us at 888-442-2836.

Babies may absorb smoke residue in home

Posted 8/6/2006 6:44 PM ET

By Liz Szabo, USA TODAY

As any parent knows, crawling babies explore the world by touching — and tasting —anything they can get their wet little hands on. If their parents use tobacco, that curiosity may expose babies to what some doctors recalling "third hand" smoke - particles and gases given off by cigarettes that cling to walls, clothes and even hair and skin. Up to 90% of the nicotine in cigarette smoke sticks to nearby surfaces, says Georg Matt, a professor at San Diego State University. Preliminary research by Matt and others suggests the same chemicals that leave a stale cigarette odor on clothes and upholstery also can be swallowed, inhaled or absorbed through the skin of non-smokers.

As expected, babies whose parents smoked around them had the highest cotinine levels — nearly 50 times higher than the babies of non-smokers, according to the study. Smokers who tried to shield their infants had only partial success, Matt says. The babies of parents who smoked only outside had cotinine levels seven times higher than in the infants of non-smokers, the study showed. Adults also may be exposed to significant smoke residue if they rent cars, hotel rooms or apartments that have soaked up years of smoke, Matt says. He worries more about youngsters, however, because they may be exposed day and night for years. Children also may be at greater risk because they breathe faster than adults and inhale more chemicals, says Jonathan Winickoff, an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. Crawling babies may take in chemicals through their skin. Though scientists have extensive evidence about the damage caused by secondhand smoke, they know relatively little about the potential risks of third hand exposure, says Brett Singer, a scientist at California's Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. "The million-dollar question is: How dangerous is this?" Singer says. "We can't say for sure this is a health hazard."

Matt agrees that doctors should study children — ideally for 10 or 15 years or more — to see whether low levels of smoke residue worsens asthma or harm the development of a child's lungs. Smoke residue may linger for hours, days or months, depending on the ventilation and the level of contamination. In some cases, contaminants may need to be removed by rigorously cleaning or replacing wallpaper, rugs and drapes, Matt says. Matt cautions that his research needs to be confirmed by other studies. But his work suggests that babies may take in nicotine and other chemicals just by hugging their mothers — even if their mothers never light up next to them. About 43% of children ages 2 months to 11 years live with a smoker, according to research described in Matt's 2004 study in the journal Tobacco Control. In his small study of 49 infants under 13 months old, Matt found nicotine in the air and dust throughout smokers' homes, even when parents smoked only outside. Tests also found a nicotine byproduct, cotinine, in babies' urine and inside shafts of their hair.

Second-hand smoke linked to long-term harm
Wed Sep 6, 2006 1:23 PM ET LINK

By Megan Rauscher

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Results of a new study provide more evidence that exposure to second-hand smoke has long-term adverse effects on respiratory health, and reaffirms the benefits of banning smoking in public places, researchers say.

As part of the European Community Respiratory Health Survey, investigators studied the association between second-hand smoke exposure and the onset of respiratory symptoms or change in lung function by following more than 4,200 adult non-smokers for nine years.

Two hundred eighty three subjects (6.7 percent) had "new" exposure to second-hand smoke during the study, while 713 (17 percent) had ongoing exposure to second-hand smoke. Results demonstrate "an increased likeliness of developing respiratory symptoms in subjects exposed to passive smoking during the study period," Dr. Christer Janson of Uppsala University in Sweden told Reuters Health.

New exposure to second-hand smoke was associated with a 77 percent higher risk of wheezing and breathlessness compared with unexposed individuals, Janson reported at the Annual Congress of the European Respiratory Society underway in Munich.

The risk of chest tightness at night was 80 percent higher in those with new or recent passive smoke exposure.

The results were similar for those with ongoing exposure to passive smoke. For example, these individuals were 69 percent more likely to wheeze during exertion and more than twice as likely to have a persistent cough during the study.

"This longitudinal study adds further to evidence for a causal relationship between environmental tobacco smoke exposure and respiratory symptoms in adults," Janson and colleagues state in a summary of their meeting presentation.

The good news, Janson told Reuters Health, is that there has been "quite a large decline in exposure to environmental tobacco smoke." Since the ECRHS began in 1990, the number of non-smokers exposed to second-hand smoke in Europe has fallen by 50 percent, no doubt as a result of measures adopted in many countries to ban or markedly reduce exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke.

Nicotine Addiction heightened

http://www.wvgazette.com/section/Editorials/200609067

Editorial: The Charleston (WV) Gazette

September 07, 2006

Cigarette manufacturers are, in effect, dope-pushers. Their profits derive from millions of American smokers who are hooked on nicotine. Various studies say that three-fourths of puffers want to quit, and often try, but can't overcome their bodily craving for the extremely addictive narcotic.

We've never understood why America criminalizes marijuana, a relatively harmless plant, yet legalizes a different plant that causes an estimated 430,000 premature U.S. deaths yearly. Maybe it's because Big Tobacco has donated $56 million to federal-level politicians since 1990 * three-fourths of it to Republicans.

Now there's evidence that tobacco corporations deliberately increase the nicotine level in cigarettes to make it harder for smokers to quit. Massachusetts requires tobacco sellers to reveal the amount of nicotine in "cancer sticks" * and filings say the content increased an average of 10 percent over the past six years, especially in brands preferred by teens. Marlboro Reds, first choice of young smokers, saw a 13 percent jump. Kool brands, favored by black youths, rose as much as 30 percent.

Evidently, Big Tobacco conspired to keep customers hooked * not caring that the addiction can ruin their health and cause early death. The figures support what a federal judge wrote last month in upholding a federal racketeering suit against the tobacco industry:

"Defendants continue to fraudulently deny that they manipulate the nicotine delivery of their cigarettes in order to create and sustain addiction."

U.S. taxpayers spend more than $60 billion a year through Medicaid and Medicare treating tobacco-caused illnesses. Yet the Republican-controlled federal government does little to restrict rampant marketing of cigarettes to the young.

Back in the 1990s, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration attempted to classify cigarettes as a "drug delivery device," which would have allowed tight regulation of them. But tobacco corporations won court battles halting the effort. Now, it would take congressional action to let the FDA proceed * but this is unlikely, as long as GOP politicians wallow in Big Tobacco money.

Nonetheless, we urge all West Virginia members of Congress to strive for any possible clampdown on the lethal industry that is boosting nicotine levels to keep Americans addicted.

INCREASED REACH AND EFFECTIVENESS OF A STATEWIDE TOBACCO QUITLINE AFTER THE ADDITION OF ACCESS TO FREE NICOTINE REPLACEMENT THERAPY

Subtitle: 2006;15:286-293; doi:10.1136/tc.2005.014555

Source: Tobacco Control

Date: 2006-08-01

URL: http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/15/4/286

ID: 229710

What this paper adds?

Tobacco users receiving behavioral and pharmacological assistance are more likely to quit. Telephone quitlines provide population access to counseling, however few offer pharmacotherapy.

The addition of free NRT to a state quitline is followed by increases in participation and abstinence rates resulting in an eightfold increase in programme impact. These findings support the addition of access to pharmacological therapy as part of quitline services.

Despite these limitations, this study offers important information on how the addition of access to NRT influences the reach and effectiveness of quitline services. In the case of the Minnesota QUITPLAN Helpline, the addition of NRT was associated with a substantial increase in programme participation, increased enrolment in multi-session counselling, and greater use of pharmacological therapy. These changes resulted in an increased cessation rate and a nearly eightfold increase in the number of new ex-smokers per month among programme users. These findings strongly support the addition of access to pharmacological therapy as part of quitline services. _______________________________________________________

PARENTAL SMOKING AND CHILDREN'S RESPIRATORY HEALTH: INDEPENDENT EFFECTS OF PRENATAL AND POSTNATAL EXPOSURE

Source: Tobacco Control

Date: 2006-08-01

URL: http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/15/4/294

ID: 229709

Uncertainties remain about the relative importance of smoking at different periods in the child's life. We investigate this in a pooled analysis, on 53 879 children from 12 cross-sectional studies-components of the PATY study (Pollution And The Young).

Methods: Effects were estimated, within each study, of three

exposures: mother smoked during pregnancy, parental smoking in the first two years, current parental smoking. Outcomes were:

wheeze, asthma, "woken by wheeze", bronchitis, nocturnal cough, morning cough, "sensitivity to inhaled allergens" and hay fever.

Logistic regressions were used, controlling for individual risk factors and study area. Heterogeneity between study-specific results, and mean effects (allowing for heterogeneity) were estimated using meta-analytical tools.

Results: There was strong evidence linking parental smoking to wheeze, asthma, bronchitis and nocturnal cough, with mean odds ratios all around 1.15, with independent effects of prenatal and postnatal exposures for most associations.

Conclusions: Adverse effects of both pre- and postnatal parental smoking on children's respiratory health were confirmed. Asthma was most strongly associated with maternal smoking during pregnancy, but postnatal exposure showed independent associations with a range of other respiratory symptoms. All tobacco smoke exposure has serious consequences for children's respiratory health and needs to be reduced urgently.

7/21/06 7:45 AM

Experts cite tobacco’s drain on productivity
SHRM Magazine - Alexandria,VA,USA

Tobacco use can cause workplace productivity to go up in smoke, according to experts at a recent conference on tobacco who suggest that employers have an ...U.S. employers lost $92 billion in productivity attributable to smoking-related deaths last year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Dr. Corinne Husten pointed out during the “World Conference on Tobacco OR Health” in Washington,

http://www.shrm.org/hrnews_published/CMS_017850.asp

07/08/06
Georgia's Smoking Ban: One Year Later

It's been a year now since Georgia's smoking ban went into effect for area restaurants. Many eatery owners were worried the ban would turn away some of their customers and hurt business.

All across Georgia, restaurants like Ronnie's on Dean Forest Road have been smoke-free since last July. Paul Sheppard is a smoker, but he actually prefers to eat in a smoke-free environment.

"Not in a restaurant," he said. "It doesn't really go well with your food."

Until the smoking ban went into effect, many of the folks who ate at Ronnie's would light up after a meal. Now, it's against the law. Trey Rackley says he ate here then and eats here now because he loves the food.

"It doesn't really bother me," Rackley admitted, "because I don't smoke while I eat anyway. It doesn't bother me at all."

Stephanie Ertzberger has been a waitress at Ronnie's for six years and says there's hardly ever a complaint about the ban.

"Usually the customers are pretty good about it," she explained. "They'll come in and say, "Can we smoke?" We say, "no," and they say, "okay, no problem." It hasn't bothered the business. It's actually increased."

That's because more families are dining here now.

"I think it's a good idea," said Sheppard, "especially because I have kids. Even when I didn't have kids, I didn't think it was a good idea to invade other people's thoughts about smoking."

Across town at Mellow Mushroom, business is still booming there, too. They've also noticed more families eating here.

Under the Georgia law, restaurants, even ones with bars, are not allowed to have smoking customers as long as most of their business comes from serving food. However, while the bar is off limits, outside is not. That's where Debbie Thomas was enjoying her meal.

"As a smoker, I prefer not to smoke indoors either," she explained. "Banning it indoors is a good policy for everybody. Your clothes don't smell. People who don't smoke can breathe and people who do smoke can breathe."

Doug Renner and his kids wish outdoor dining could be smoke free too. They were sitting downwind of Debbie.

"It bothered my son more than it did me," he said, "not as bad as inside, but there was some bother to us."

Most agree this past year of smoke-free dining inside restaurants is a great start; however, some people WTOC spoke with, who didn't want to go on camera, said they don't like the smoking ban. They feel the law violates their rights. Meanwhile, some Hilton Head Island officials are pushing for a smoking ban in their restaurants.

Reported by: Michelle Paynter, mpaynter@wtoc.com

Governor signs smoking ban
The Daily Advertiser - Lafayette,LA,USA Gov. Kathleen Blanco on Friday signed into law Senate Bill 742, known as the Louisiana Smoke-free Act, giving restaurants and other ...

Statewide smoking ban looms
Canon City Daily Record - CO, United States ... to the public. Colorado is the 13th state to implement a statewide smoking ban in public businesses and workplaces. But not everyone

Group mounts push to ban smoking in gaming halls
Press of Atlantic City - Atlantic City,NJ,USA ... Assemblyman Jim Whelan, D-Atlantic, who did not attend the meeting, said Thursday he plans to push his bill to include casinos in the smoking ban in September ...

Lawmakers: Restaurant Revenues Up During Smoking Ban
WTOP - Washington,D.C.,USA ROCKVILLE, Md. (AP) - Restaurants in Montgomery County are thriving since the region's first smoking ban took effect in 2003, two county lawmakers said Monday. ...

Group Wants to Ban Smoking in Pennsylvania Restaurants
WFMZ-TV Online - Allentown,PA,USA ... WFMZ's Joscelyn Moes has more. Smokers in Pennsylvania may soon have to put it out , if a proposed smoking ban takes effect. At ...

"Breathe Easy" Signs Tout Maine's Smoke Free Status (Click on PLAY VIDEO on the right—pretty cool idea!!) WCSH-TV - Portland,ME,USA Maine is the first state in the nation to advertise itself as smoke free in public buildings and businesses. Tuesday morning, Governor ...

Where There's Smoke

From: The Wheeling News Intellegencer

Date: June 28, 2006

By BETHENY HOLSTEIN

http://www.news-register.net/News/articles.asp?articleID=7721

U.S. Surgeon General Vice Adm. Richard Carmona speaks during a Washington press conference Tuesday to discuss a report on secondhand smoke.

Local health officials seem to have been ahead of the game when they passed clean indoor air regulations prohibiting smoking in all but a few public venues, as the surgeon general Tuesday claimed any level of secondhand smoke is harmful.

"Certainly, I am very pleased it has come out now," said Dr. William Mercer, medical director of the Wheeling-Ohio County Health Department. "I think this coming from the surgeon general is great. This kind of justifies what we have been doing in Ohio County for the past two years. Now there is no doubt about secondhand smoke. There is no safe limit" for secondhand smoke.

A clean indoor air regulation was enacted in Ohio County a year ago. Similar regulations have been in place in Marshall County since July 2002 and in Brooke County since last year.

U.S. Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona on Tuesday issued a report that concludes there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. The report, "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke," finds that even brief secondhand smoke exposure can cause immediate harm. It states the only way to protect nonsmokers from the dangerous chemicals in secondhand smoke is to eliminate smoking indoors ― which was the goal of the Wheeling-Ohio County Clean Indoor Air Regulation, according to Mercer.

"This new report reinforces what the health department and health agencies have been stating all along ... that, among other things, exposure to secondhand smoke causes disease and premature death in adults and children who do not smoke," said Pam Wilson, American Lung Association representative and Regional Tobacco Prevention Coalition coordinator. "And cleaning and ventilating the air does not eliminate the cancer-causing chemicals. Hospitality workers, such as servers, bartenders and casino workers, are particularly at risk. In addition, after Surgeon General Carmona's comments today, we now know that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke."

Secondhand smoke exposure can cause heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and is a known cause of sudden infant death syndrome, respiratory problems, ear infections and asthma attacks in infants and children, the report finds. Nonsmokers exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their risk of developing heart disease by 25 percent to 30 percent and lung cancer by 20 percent to 30 percent. The finding is of major public health concern due to the fact that nearly half of all nonsmoking Americans still are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke.

However, Mercer said he believes this report is going to spur more counties in West Virginia ― as well as more states in the nation ― to enact strict clean indoor air regulations to cut down on the amount of secondhand smoke to which people are exposed.

"What you are going to see from this, with it coming from the federal government, is a lot of counties in West Virginia making regulations similar to ours," Mercer said, adding that he believes the state of Ohio may see enough support as a result of this report to be able to pass a statewide regulation.

"Here in Ohio County, it has been a year. We have had our regulation in place for one year," Mercer said. "I feel it is working very well, and we will continue to see it improve. ... Before we had 75 percent compliance, and over the past several weeks, I have been meeting with the individual bar owners who were previously not in compliance." Mercer pointed out many of these bar owners now say they are going to comply, and Mercer believes the county will reach a more than 90 percent compliance rate.

According to the report, secondhand smoke contains more than 50 cancer-causing chemicals and is, itself, a known human carcinogen. Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke inhale many of the same toxins as smokers. Even brief exposure to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and increases risk for heart disease and lung cancer, the report states.

In addition, the report notes that because the bodies of infants and children are still developing, they are especially vulnerable to the poisons in secondhand smoke.

"Those West Virginia county boards of health who have passed 100 percent clean indoor air regulations and those work sites who are in full compliance with these regulations should be commended for their efforts to protect the citizens, visitors and workers from these harmful substances," Wilson said. "The current trend is a move to healthier workplace environments, and this report only supports the efforts of those involved in this movement."

To help communicate the report findings as widely as possible, the surgeon general also unveiled a guide with information on the dangers of secondhand smoke and steps people can take to protect themselves.

Channel 11 Uncovers Second-Hand Smoke Dangers

Several Local Locations Hit Hazardous Mark

Gordon Loesch

POSTED: 2:52 pm EDT May 15, 2006

UPDATED: 7:25 pm EDT May 15, 2006

Colleagues.....Channel 11 in Pittsburgh did an excellent piece on secondhand smoke in restaurants and bars. They actually measured the toxic chemicals in these establishments. You can access this piece at: http://www.wpxi.com/health/9218724/detail.html?rss=burg.

R.J. REYNOLDS CONTINUES TO MARKET TO KIDS, OPPOSE POLICIES TO REDUCE SMOKING

Source: Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids ID: 222471

Date: 2006-04-24

URL: http://tobaccofreekids.org/Script/DisplayPressRelease.php3?Display=910

The tobacco companies never miss an opportunity to claim they are reformed and no longer want kids to smoke. But their actions continue to show otherwise. For example, the most recent actions by the R.J.

Reynolds Tobacco Company, the company that once marketed cigarettes to kids with the cartoon character Joe Camel, are as egregious as ever.

In the past two years, R.J. Reynolds has with increasing frequency introduced youth-oriented marketing campaigns and has stepped up their efforts around the country to defeat proven measures to reduce smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke, such as cigarette tax increases and smoke-free workplace laws. . . .

* This year, Reynolds is promoting a new version of its Camel brand, called Camel Wides, with hip bar parties that feature graffiti artists.

* In December 2005, state Attorneys General exposed an R.J. Reynolds promotion called "Drinks on Us" in which Reynolds mailed customers celebrating their birthdays a promotional package that contained six drink coasters and promoted excessive drinking. . . .

Reynolds continues to market candy-flavored cigarettes that are clearly aimed at children. (see images) . . .

In fact, R.J. Reynolds has become increasingly desperate in its efforts to defeat cigarette tax increases, smoke-free workplace laws and other tobacco prevention measures

W.Va. sues to get money from tobacco companies

http://www.dailymail.com/news/News/2006042545/

Charleston (WV) Daily Mail

April 26, 2006

Jake Stump; Daily Mail Staff

The West Virginia Attorney General's Office is suing major tobacco companies to recover a $7 million shortfall in settlement payments.

Tobacco companies usually pay West Virginia $57 million annually, but the state has received just $50 million this year.

Companies, including R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard, have withheld about $755 million of their $6.5 billion payment to states nationwide because they contend they are entitled to a reduction. The country's top tobacco makers cite an independent study that shows major manufacturers losing market share to smaller companies since the landmark 1998 settlement. Several small companies were not part of that settlement between tobacco manufacturers and 46 states, which agreed not to sue cigarette makers for causing health problems to the general public in exchange for annual payments. "There's a possibility that negotiations between tobacco companies and states will continue and some resolution achieved," said state Senior Assistant Attorney General John Dalporto. He believes the disputing tobacco companies don't have a solid argument.

The agreement states that companies can't have their payments reduced unless states fail to enforce certain statutes involving tobacco makers excluded from the settlement, Dalporto said. Instead of paying money into a general fund, smaller companies must pay money into escrow accounts used for future health care costs. "I've been in contact with states throughout country for four years," Dalporto said. "There's a great effort on all states to enforce these statutes. "We've had difficulties with renegade companies whereby they fail to fund the escrow accounts, and we've been litigating vigorously against them since the inception."

West Virginia prepared for a possible reduction in payments and expected at least a $10 million decrease.

Gov. Joe Manchin urged legislators to divert $10 million from the state budget to health care areas usually financed by settlement monies. The settlement payments are divided into two funds: the West Virginia Medical Trust Fund Endowment for tobacco prevention and cessation programs and one to help fund Medicaid, Medicare, state health facilities and Capitol construction projects. Last year, the Legislature passed a bill introduced by Manchin that redirects the first $30 million of the settlement money to a workers' compensation debt reduction fund.

In 2001, the state transferred $47 million of settlement money to mental health hospitals. In addition to the $57 million received in settlement funds, West Virginia gained $100 million in tobacco taxes last year. The state spent just $6 million of that total for anti-smoking initiatives, particularly the "Raze" advertising campaign.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends West Virginia spend at least $14 million on anti-tobacco programs. Some states are owed a more significant amount of money. The $7 million shortfall pales in comparison to what tobacco makers owe New York. Companies owe that state $100 million of their $837 annual payment. More than a dozen tobacco companies had made their full payments this year, including Philip Morris, which paid $3.4 billion. R.J. Reynolds and Lorillard have withheld $647 million and $109 million, respectively. Dalporto says R.J. Reynolds is withholding 19 percent of its total payment. The economic study by the Brattle Group found that major cigarette makers' market share dropped from 99.6 percent in 1997 to 92 percent in 2003.

Contact writer Jake Stump at 304-348-4842.

Passive Smoke Could Prompt Diabetes Precursor: Report By REUTERS Filed at 3:58 a.m. ET (from The New York Times) http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/news/news-smoking.html Published April 7, 2006

LONDON (Reuters) - Exposure to second-hand smoke can increase a person's risk of developing glucose intolerance which is a precursor to diabetes, according to research reported on Friday.

Scientists in the United States found that smokers had the highest risk of developing glucose intolerance but non-smokers who breathed in other people's smoke were not far behind.

"These findings support a role for both active and passive smoking in the development of glucose intolerance in young adulthood,'' said Thomas Houston of the Birmingham Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Alabama.

"We identified passive tobacco exposure in never-smokers as a new risk factor for glucose intolerance,'' he added.

People suffering from glucose intolerance have elevated blood sugar levels. They still produce insulin but the amounts are insufficient to control blood sugar levels effectively.

Houston and his team studied the impact of smoking on 4,572 men and women in four American cities over 15 years. Their findings are published online by the British Medical Journal.

Smokers in the study had the highest risk of developing glucose intolerance at 22 percent, compared to 17 percent risk for people who did not smoke but who had been exposed to second-hand smoke.

Non-smokers who had not breathed in others' smoke had the lowest risk at 12 percent followed by smokers who had given up who had a 14 percent risk.

Whites in the study were more susceptible to the effects of smoking on glucose intolerance than African-Americans, according to the scientists.

They noted that passive smoke contains similar toxins to active smoke but is produced at different temperatures and in different conditions so some toxic substances are even more concentrated in passive smoke.

If one of the concentrated toxins affects the pancreas, which produces insulin, it could explain the findings, they added.

"We found that tobacco exposure is associated with the development of glucose intolerance over a 15 year period, with a dose-response effect apparent,'' Houston added.

Restaurant Workers Demand Clean Air

New Hampshire House passes smokefree workplace bill Parts excerpted from Manchester Union Leader and Concord Monitor, 3/21/06

Concord (NH), 3/21/06 -* New Hampshire moved a step closer today to eliminating cigarette smoke in all restaurants and bars. The House approved a statewide smokefree workplace law, 189-156. It now heads to the Senate.

A group of restaurant workers and owners yesterday called on the New Hampshire House to pass the bill. At a press conference, Gardner Berry of the band Momma Kicks said he's worked in bars as a musician for 40 years and still has trouble dealing with what he called, "the telltale air of bar stink" after work.

"Your freedom ends where my nose begins," he said. Singers and other musicians have to breath deeply while performing to project, and inhale more smoke than the average bar goer, he said.

Tim Scanlon of the Sunset Grill in Campton said HB 1177 is a matter of health, not freedom. "Every other industry protects its workers from second-hand smoke," he said. Kristen Cote, who works at the Red Blazer in Concord, agreed, asking, "Why should people be able to smoke at my job and put me in danger of developing cancer or heart disease?"

Priscilla Giles, secretary treasurer of the local American Federation of Musicians, said her members cannot simply change jobs. She said no other workers are expected to make those kinds of choices. "You shouldn't expect someone to find a new job because they don't want to breathe a hazardous substance," she said.

"This is a health issue," said Hampton Rep. Sheila Francouer. "I believe in New Hampshire's 'Live Free or Die' motto as much as anyone in this room, but I ask if any one of you have seen someone die of lung cancer."

Manchester Rep. Hector Velez talked about his job as a health care worker and having to enter smoke-filled restaurants as part of his work. "I am affected by that smoke," he said.

A recent poll by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center showed that 79 percent of those contacted support the ban. The group Clean Air Works for New Hampshire is the lead advocate for the bill with support the American Heart Association, American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society, and the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids. The Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce also supports the ban, having found after finding that 80 percent of its members support the ban.

California, Delaware, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Montana, Vermont, Washington, New Jersey, Utah, Colorado, Puerto Rico, and Washington DC have passed comprehensive smokefree workplace legislation for workers, including restaurant and bar workers.

Study on smoking ban impact finds most bar and restaurant revenues up
City of Minneapolis

Results were released today from a study to examine any changes in business revenues before and after the Minneapolis smoking ban went into effect, and it's good news for both establishments and those who enjoy a smoke-free environment. The study compares sales revenue of establishments licensed to serve alcohol from April to September of 2005, 2004 and 2003. The analysis of combined alcohol and food sales for these establishments found that:

* Revenues for alcohol and food sales combined increased 7.08 percent for the second and

third quarters of 2005 (post-ordinance) compared with the same period in 2004. This rate of

increase was greater than the 6.20 percent increase from 2003 to 2004.

* Food sales revenues increased 8.59 percent from 2004 to 2005 compared with a 7.23

percent increase from 2003 to 2004.

* Alcohol sales increased 1.80 percent from 2004 to 2005 compared with a 2.99 percent

increase from 2003 to 2004.

This study was planned as one way to evaluate any changes in business revenue before and after the Minneapolis Indoor Smoking Ordinance went into effect on March 31, 2005, and was conducted at the request of local hospitality industry representatives.

VA. SENATE PASSES INDOOR SMOKING BAN

Source: The Washington Post Date: 2006-02-14

Author: Rosalind S. Helderman Washington Post Staff Writer

The Virginia Senate voted Monday to ban smoking in restaurants and virtually all other public places, an extraordinary sign of cultural change in a state that is home to the worldwide headquarters of Philip Morris and whose agricultural economy has been rooted in tobacco farming for almost 400 years.

The bill is unlikely to survive review in the House of Delegates. Yet its passage on the floor of the Senate -- where smoking has never been formally banned and lawmakers lit up openly even until the late 1990s -- signaled mounting popular support for smoking restrictions.

Senate Bill 648, sponsored by a Republican from Roanoke, would make smoking illegal in all public workplaces with the exception of certain tobacco stores and offices. The prohibition would extend to bars, restaur

ants and bowling alleys.

"This is not about whether I prefer or do not prefer the smell of smoke," said Sen. J. Brandon Bell II, the sponsor. "This is about public health. . . . The research has come forward over the years, and it's shown us that secondhand cigarette smoke is a very insidious health problem."

The American Cancer Society said the Senate vote is a dramatic victory in efforts to educate the public about the dangers of secondhand smoke.

"This shows that Virginia is ready to move its way to where the mainstream is on health issues," said Keenan Caldwell, director of government relations for the group's regional office. "People are starting to see, even in Virginia and other tobacco-growing states, that there is proven science about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke."

New CDC Study Shows National Adult Smoking Rate Declines Again in 2004

An article in the November 11 issue of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) showed that the nationwide adult smoking rate continued its slow downward march in 2004. The article says that 20.9 percent of adults smoked in 2004 according to the 2004 National Health Interview Survey. This is a decrease from 21.6 percent in 2003 and 22.5 percent in 2002. The fall from 2002 to 2004 was the largest two-year drop since the late 1980’s. However, it appears increasingly unlikely the U.S. will reach the Healthy People 2010 goal of reducing the smoking rate to 12 percent by 2010. People were defined as current smokers if they had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime and said they still smoked on a daily or occasional basis. (Parts excerpted from: Mike Stobbe, CDC: U.S. Smoking Rate Continues to Fall, Associated Press, November 10, 2005.)

Study in Pueblo, CO Shows 27 Percent Reduction in Heart Attack Admissions After Ordinance

British Medical Journal
On November 14, a study was released at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions Conference in Dallas, TX that showed that the city of Pueblo, CO saw a 27 percent reduction in heart attack admissions at its two area hospitals in the 18 months after a smokefree air ordinance went into effect there in July 2003. The study compared the number of heart attack admissions 18 months before and 18 months after the smokefree air ordinance went into effect. The study also looked at information on heart attack admissions in an adjoining county without a smokefree air ordinance during the same time period and saw no significant decrease. This reinforces the results of a study done in Helena, MT that showed a 40 percent reduction in the number of heart attacks when a smokefree air ordinance was ieffect there for six months in 2002. The Helena, MT study was published in the British Medical Journal. (Parts excerpted from: Karen Auge, Heart Attacks Pared in Pueblo, the Denver Post, November 15, 2005.)

Hospitals Go Smoke Free

Ohio Valley Medical Center and East Ohio Regional Hospital Butt Out

WHEELING, WV— On January 1, 2006, the campuses of Ohio Valley Medical Center and East Ohio Regional Hospital will become tobacco and smoke-free. This move toward tobacco-free status will include buildings, grounds and vehicles owned, leased or managed by OVMC and EORH.

OVMC and East Ohio Regional Hospital are committed to providing the healthiest environments possible for our patients, visitors, and employees,” said Brian K. Felici, President and CEO of OVHS&E. “We chose this course of action after careful consideration and consultation with peer hospitals, as well as our own staff and the medical community. As a healthcare institution, we feel this is the right thing to do.”

For employees still trying to kick the habit, OVHS&E will provide access to tobacco cessation support groups, nicotine replacement therapy at a reduced rate compared to local drug stores and referrals to smoking cessation classes.

OVMC and East Ohio Regional Hospital join a growing number of healthcare organizations that have eliminated tobacco and smoking on their campuses. Currently, four hospitals in West Virginia and 14 in Ohio have gone tobacco free. Through programs designed to help adhere to the hospital’s commitment to become tobacco and smoke-free, OVMC and EORH will make every effort to support patients, families and staff with the implementation of this new policy.

“As one of the largest employers in the Ohio Valley it is part of OVMC’s and East Ohio