Yes, ban smoking in public places. I am willing to have a few - 10%? - of bars designated Smoking, but that's it. As it stands, it is as far as I know 100% of bars with smoking, none without - so all we non-smokers have is NO choice. The tobacco lobby wants to keep it that way, and forks out millions of dollars in many ways to keep it that way; they could care less how many of us die or worsen our health.
As a start, how about say 10 brand new bar licences, that must be and remain smoke-free? A licence to mint money - and provide a choice to non-smokers. Then see what the market decides. I'll bet they'd do very well - I'd go - and then some other bars would go smokeless, and the tobacco lobby would have a fit. They can see that far ahead, and so will do all they can to make sure we never have the choice. May they rot in nicotine and carcinogens. --David Shove roseville On Fri, 23 Apr 2004, Andy Driscoll wrote: > YESSS! Thank you, Phyllis - and Louisiana Supreme Court! > > Ban the smoking! > > Andy Driscoll > Saint Paul > -- > > > > on 4/23/04 10:32 AM, Phyllis Kahn wrote: > > > I know why we can't pass a state wide smoking ban. To start we can't get > > the bills heard by Republican committee chairs. But I don't understand > > what is stopping the city of Minneapolis. Do we really need to fall > > behind not just New York City and Austin, Texas but Lexington, Kentucky? > > Here is a copy of the relevant article. > > > > This article from the Star Tribune has been sent to you by Phyllis > > Kahn. > > > > BYLINE: Marc Kaufman > > CREDITLINE: Washington Post > > HEADLINE: Smoke raises heart attack risk, CDC says > > > > > > WASHINGTON, D.C. -- For the first time, the Centers for Disease Control > > and Prevention (CDC) is warning people at risk of heart disease to avoid > > buildings and gathering places that allow indoor smoking. > > In commentary to a study in the British Medical Journal released > > Thursday, the CDC said doctors should advise people with heart problems > > that secondhand smoke can significantly increase their risk of a heart > > attack. The agency said that as little as 30 minutes' exposure can have > > a serious and even lethal effect. > > The commentary accompanied a study showing that the number of heart > > attacks in Helena, Mont., decreased substantially after the city banned > > indoor smoking. > > The number quickly returned to its former level after the law was > > struck down in court. > > That study found that, during the six months in 2002 when the ban was > > in effect, the number of heart attacks reported by Helena's single heart > > hospital fell by 40 percent. > > In his commentary, Terry Pechacek, associate director of science at > > CDC's Office on Smoking and Health, wrote that the research underscores > > evidence that secondhand smoke rapidly increases the tendency of blood > > to clot, which can restrict flow to the heart. > > Pechacek said the new study strengthens the growing body of research > > pointing to potentially fast and acute reactions to secondhand smoke, in > > addition to the long-term damage to nonsmokers who live with smokers. > > The CDC has estimated that secondhand smoke causes 35,000 heart disease > > deaths a year in the United States, but Pechacek said that estimate is > > likely to be revised upward. > > "We've said before that secondhand smoke increases the risk of heart > > disease in nonsmokers, but this is our first recommendation that > > clinicians advise their patients with heart disease to avoid indoor > > settings where smoking is allowed," he said. > > "We don't make these kind of statements lightly," he said. "What we are > > seeing in the data is a substantial biological change that occurs with > > even 30 minutes of exposure to secondhand smoke." > > Bans disputed > > The new recommendation is bound to become part of the often acrimonious > > national debate over whether smoking in public places should be banned. > > Public health advocates say the bans will save many lives, while > > cigarette makers and some businesspeople say the decision should be left > > to individual choice. > > Just Thursday, the Kentucky Supreme Court upheld a ban on smoking in > > bars, restaurants and other public places in Lexington, ruling that the > > city had acted within its authority to "promote and safeguard public > > health." That ban has drawn national attention because Kentucky has the > > highest smoking rate in the nation -- about one third of adults there > > are smokers, according to the CDC -- and is the second-largest producer > > of tobacco. > > As both the CDC and authors of the new study acknowledge, the Montana > > data are limited by the relatively small number of people involved. > > Pechacek said that similarly dramatic reductions in heart attacks are > > unlikely to be found in larger populations, but he said the study is > > nonetheless important because it offers the best real-world information > > to date on the connection between indoor smoking and serious heart > > problems. He said studies have been proposed or begun into the how > > indoor smoking bans in California, New York City and Delaware have > > affected heart attack rates. > > The CDC study's authors, Richard Sargent and Robert Shepard of St. > > Peter's Community Hospital in Helena, and Stanton Glantz of the > > University of California, San Francisco, collected information about the > > number of heart attacks from St. Peter's hospital records. > > During the six-month period in 2002 when the indoor smoking ban was in > > effect, 24 Helena residents suffered acute heart attacks. For the five > > years before and after 2002, the average number of heart attacks > > reported for Helena residents during the same six months was 40. The > > authors found through St. Peter's records that the number of heart > > attacks suffered by people living in the area outside Helena -- where > > there was no smoking ban -- did not experience the same 2002 dip as > > Helena. > > Of the patients followed in the study, 38 percent were current smokers, > > 29 percent were former smokers and 33 had never smoked. > > > > > > Phyllis Kahn, District 59B > > REMINDERS: > > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > > ________________________________ > > > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > > > > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL > PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
