Sunday, November 27, 2005

It turns out that the St. Louis Park study I regularly cite......

......was to be heralded as a great achievement when it was cited by this online publication back in September 2004.

Secondhand Smoke Monitoring Seen as Alternative to Ban. The St. Paul Pioneer Press even did a story about it.....but as you'll note from the dead hyperlink in the story....the Nicoderm marketing department must have corrected the Pioneer Press on the position they were really supposed to have on the subject.

As the article points out:

"....The program gives advance notice to customers interested in dining in the non-smoking sections on how much nicotine they would inhale. According to Brian Hoffman, director of inspections for St. Louis Park, customers who think the level is too high can opt to go to another restaurant......"

And if you've followed Clearing the Air, you'll know that the St. Louis Park Environmental Health Department test results showed the secondhand smoke levels to be 500 - 15 times safer than OSHA guidelines for secondhand smoke. It's no wonder then that anti-smoking activists a.k.a Nicoderm marketing department want to bury information about this's hard to lobby for a smoking ban on the basis of health hazard when the city of St. Louis Park, MN. as well as the California EPA proved quite the opposite in their air quality testing.

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage
  • Why a Non-Smoker Fights the Pro-Smoking Ban Lies
  • Is RWJF, a 501(c)3, violating IRS rules by funding pro-smoking ban lobbyists?
  • RWJF funds and promotes universal healthcare policies which are the basis for and primary objective of Obamacare
  • Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs
  • Is the smoking ban movement fueled by pharmaceutical nicotine interests?
  • Now that smoking bans have been implemented, what can be done?
  • How do smoking ban lobbyists profit from smoking bans?
  • Pharmaceutical interests project the alternative nicotine marketplace to be $4.6 billion +
  • WHO report secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? NO
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? Part 2
  • Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?
  • OSHA standards prove SHS is not a health hazard
  • Tired of the nanny-state, big, socialized, corrupt, government legislation coming out of our state and federal capitols these days? Vote Republican in November 2010 & 2012

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


    "Though we may not be able to protect your business property rights, we certainly support your Second Amendment Rights"

    Shop for Aircleaners

    Combustion Engine Emissions Eliminator (CE3)