Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Be forewarned lawmakers, more Nicoderm money is on its way to influence your vote.......

Today as I was perusing the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation website. I happened upon an anouncement from RWJF. (did you know they own $5.4 billion in Nicoderm (J & J) stock? (per 2004 financial statement pg.8)).

The announcement,
found here, states that as of January 2006 they have awarded new financial grants to help lawmakers mandate the use of their products Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ.......er, I mean, help lawmakers see the "truth", that passage of more smoking bans are required.

......the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation today announced $1.5 million in new grants to tobacco control initiatives at 17 sites nationwide.

The funds will support a range of efforts at the state and local level, using advocacy, communications and outreach to community partners to save lives by reducing tobacco use and exposure.

The grants represent the second round of funding for Tobacco Policy Change, a national initiative of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation that is investing $12 million in policy advocacy to reduce tobacco use and exposure in those communities, regions and states.....

Tobacco Policy Change is cultivating a new and diverse mix of partners who are well suited to engage communities around the tobacco challenges of the 21st century. This inclusive and broad-based network of advocates focuses on policy changes that have been shown to reduce tobacco use, including comprehensive clean indoor air laws, increased tobacco taxes,.......

We in Minnesota know that our own Governor Tim "used to be a Republican" Pawlenty bought into that last RWJF selling point increased tobacco taxes with some minor modification of course, calling it a "fee" instead of a tax.

The grant recipients are the usual suspects who have taken Nicoderm money in the past, in an effort to lobby lawmakers to vote in favor of smoking bans.....The American Lung, American Cancer, Clean Air Council, Lesbian Community Cancer Project....etc....etc. ........And let's not forget past multi-million dollar recipients like the American Medical Association which has received
$10,896,463.00 (scroll down to grant detail) from RWJF to ensure that everyone in the medical community is on Robert Wood Johnson's side of the issue.

In opposition are the small individual property owners, employees, and little ol' me with this
government air quality study proving that indoor secondhand smoke concentrations are 152 times safer than OSHA guidelines.....kind of hard to call something a "health hazard" when it's 152 times safer than, now ain't it?

But that's the dilemma you as our local politicians find yourselves in........on the one side is the rich and powerful special interest group demanding laws that financially benefit their interests.....and on the other side is the individual whose rights you were elected to uphold and serve. I guess it all comes down to a simple question: are you a servant of the people, or a slave to big money interests?

Oh.....and then there is that pesky little health department air quality study that proves secondhand smoke concentrations are
15 - 500 times safer than OSHA air quality standards.

What will you do?.........we'll all be watching, even a non-smoking asthmatic like me.

Mark Wernimont

Saturday, January 28, 2006

City council member seems to be operating under the premise that if he repeats a lie enough times even he may start to believe it

St. Paul's most anti-business council member and pro-smoking ban activist Dave Thune took to the air waves this morning, on AM 1280 the Patriot Saturday 1/28/06 11am - 12 pm.

You can listen to the show here. The question I asked on air can be found at minutes 47 - 50.

In a nutshell, the question I asked Thune was this, "...... since government indoor air quality testing of secondhand smoke concentrations proved to be 15 -500 times safer than OSHA regulations, in an effort to be consistent, would he move the St. Paul city council to now ban welding smoke in the workplace that wasn't also 15 - 500 times safer than OSHA regulations?" His reply was a disingenuous lie that the pro-smoking ban activists have been carefully instructed to repeat. "OSHA doesn't regulate secondhand smoke." Actually, Mr. Thune and the pro-smoking ban activists know this is false.....OSHA regulates each and every "harmful" component of secondhand smoke and as for secondhand smoke, OSHA has directly stated:

"Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded."

-Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Ass't Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997

As I have repeatedly stated, OSHA does regulate every chemical substance in secondhand smoke and during the radio show this fact was also pointed out by 1280 moderator and Pioneer Press columnist Craig Westover. To Thune's assertion however, that OSHA doesn't have a standard for regulating secondhand smoke as a whole, it also doesn't have a standard for regulating welding smoke as a whole in the factories.......OSHA does however, regulate the harmful airborne chemicals in both welding and tobacco smoke, which is how OSHA protects workers in factories regarding welding smoke.

In Thune's response stating he was satisfied with OSHA's regulatory authority and aptitude in the factory workplace regarding welding smoke, or something to that effect......he proved his understanding of OSHA's role in regulating indoor workplace air quality. Yet he contradicts himself, when he demands a smoking ban in St. Paul's private bars & restaurants even as government air quality testing in St. Louis Park, MN. 2004 proved scientifically that secondhand smoke concentrations are 15 - 500 times safer than OSHA regulations regarding the specific chemical measured. Results here. The median test result showed secondhand smoke concentrations to be 152 times safer than OSHA regulations.

So the only remedy for Thune and pro-smoking ban activists who want to maintain any credibility is to also ban workplace process emissions like welding smoke, oil mist in machine shops, V. O. C's in printing facilities etc., that don't also prove to be 15 -500 times safer than OSHA regulations. Anything less would be hypocrisy.

Of course, the logical and more likely solution is to repeal these smoking bans which are now based on the false premise of "public health hazard".............before the powerful law firms catch on to this fact and sue each and every local government that enacted one.....especially now that they all know about the St. Louis Park, MN. health department study.

More on the subject from columnist Craig Westover:

If the issue were really about public health and not shifting the failure of health groups to get people to stop smoking onto the taxpayer, we’d be talking air quality, not behavior change.

Westover's complete post here.

Mark Wernimont

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

California lawmaker reinforces the stereotype we all have of that dimwitted state......

The mayor of Calabasas moves to ban smoking outdoors.....this is too moronic to even waste the time to post.

I will however point out that the California EPA measured secondhand smoke air quality levels outdoors recently.......and the test results showed secondhand smoke concentrations to be 50,000 times safer than OSHA guidelines.

These people are too stupid to live.......their hybrid vehicles pollute at levels many times more harmful than secondhand smoke concentrations outdoors could ever reach.

When California falls off into the ocean, instead of federal disaster relief.......there will simply be a general feeling of relief.

More from the earliest proponent of smoking bans, Dr. Michael Siegel, here:

Ultimately, I think this is going to hurt legitimate efforts .....(to ban).....secondhand smoke because it is only a matter of time before the public and policy makers start to question the justification for these policies. And once it is clear that anti-smoking groups are promoting some policies that are not based on sound scientific evidence.....(then they might catch on to the scam (editorial)).

Smoking ban defeats.....hopefully a new trend in upholding property rights for all.

Fortunately, 23 proposals to restrict smoking were defeated this year. Only eight states passed smoking ban restrictions: Georgia, Illinois, Maine, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Rhode Island and Vermont in 2005. Of the eight states, only three passed new restrictions banning smoking in bars and restaurants. -Source...a loyal fan.

Here's one additional fun fact:

On December 2, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that they would no longer hire tobacco users beginning December 1, 2005. As one columnist put it, "Under WHO's policy, if Franklin Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, Albert Einstein and Adolf Hitler applied for a job, only Hitler, the sole nonsmoker in the group would be eligible for consideration....... I feel certain the pro-smoking ban activists revel in the "acceptable" company they keep.

Friday, January 20, 2006

Government Environmental Health Department and OSHA prove secondhand smoke not a hazard

Comparing the St. Louis Park Environmental Health Department secondhand smoke air quality test results to the OSHA guidelines, side by side:



click to enlarge 1 milligram mg = 1,000 micrograms ug (full OSHA table can be found here)


click to enlarge (actual SLP results found here)

The upper table is the actual partial OSHA permissible exposure limit table for airborne contaminants ie. these levels are the safe exposure limits for humans. You'll note that the nicotine* safe level is 0.5 milligrams mg / cu. M (or 500 micrograms (ug) / cu. M). The bottom table is the actual St. Louis Park test results for 19 establishments of measured airborne nicotine* levels during busy evenings. You can see the median establishment, Applebees, had a reading of 3.3 micrograms ug / cu. M.

500 ug (OSHA safe level) divided by 3.3 ug (median reading Applebees) = measured airborne nicotine* levels are 152 times safer than OSHA regulations ie. In other words NO HEALTH HAZARD as per OSHA workplace indoor air quality standards.

It is therefore disingenuous to implement smoking bans based on the argument that secondhand smoke is a health hazard, that argument has been scientifically proven false, and is a canard.

* (As per air quality researchers) Nicotine is the only unique or "trace" chemical in secondhand smoke. If you measured for formaldehyde, the carpet and other interior sources of formaldehyde would corrupt the test result, formaldehyde is formed naturally in our atmosphere due to photochemical oxidation. Benzene is given off from burning foods in the kitchen or diesel exhaust outdoors so again a false reading would be obtained. Therefore, nicotine is the ideal chemical to measure for to determine secondhand smoke concentrations in the air. And then our comparison to OSHA guidelines is the logical manner in which to determine if secondhand smoke levels pose a health hazard, as you can see, they do not. If you wanted you could measure every airborne chemical in secondhand smoke and then also compare them to OSHA guidelines for that specific chemical, the results would be the same.

OSHA itself has stated regarding secondhand smoke:

"Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded."

-Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Ass't Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997

Smoking cigarettes can be hazardous to the smoker, no argument there. However, secondhand smoke is not hazardous to anyone, except of course to those who rely on Nicoderm interests for further funding.

Coverage of the St. Louis Park, MN. government air quality testing in the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

Mark Wernimont

Though they try...and try....and try.....they just can't justify.....

Bob from the American Lung tries to dismiss secondhand smoke air quality test result comparisons to OSHA regulations by stating to a reporter I've been corresponding with " .....that there are no OSHA standards for secondhand smoke", regarding the findings on this post, secondhand smoke concentrations are 152 times safer than OSHA regulations.

The pro smoking ban people love to try to dismiss OSHA by saying there is no air quality standard for secondhand smoke. Actually OSHA is more specific than that, OSHA has a permissible exposure limit (pel) for each and every "harmful" chemical in secondhand smoke. If you want to measure the formaldehyde levels in secondhand smoke then you compare the readings to OSHA (pel) for formaldehyde, benzene same thing etc. etc. etc. If the readings are lower than the OSHA (pel) for that particular chemical, then there is no health hazard.

OSHA also does not have a permissible exposure limit for welding smoke, but that doesn't keep them from regulating the air quality for the harmful components given off in welding smoke at our factories. So for instance to control the hazards of stainless steel welding in factories, they measure for airborne chromium (Cr) or nickel (Ni) both carcinogenic components of stainless steel welding smoke. Odd that the American Lung doesn't complain about OSHA air quality standards in our factories......must be a specific "agenda" the American Lung is addressing.

Perhaps this is their agenda, a grant from RWJF, the largest single shareholder of Nicoderm manufacturer Johnson & Johnson company. $99 million dollar to the American Lung, American Cancer, American Heart Association from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to "......provide financial support and, in particular, funds to help lobbying efforts........" with the anticipated result of "......bringing about social change."

If I were compensated for the financial loss the smoking bans have incurred upon me, I might not fight the exaggerations & fabrications about secondhand smoke that the pro-smoking ban groups carelessly espouse. But absent the ability to sell Smokeeters to bars and restaurants and thus financially support myself, I have all the time in the world to exhibit the air quality facts the pro-smoking ban folks try to hide and or discredit.

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Mayor Davlin of Springfield IL under attack for a common sense approach

This story coming out of Springfield, IL. shows the misguided, uninformed, and blatantly deceptive lengths that the paid pro-smoking ban activists will go to.

The Mayor proposed a smoking ban exemption for establishments which installed upgraded ventilation systems.

The pro-ban activists fired back with threats from the EPA saying it had no indoor air quality standards for secondhand smoke......no duh! That's because OSHA regulates indoor air quality not the EPA and the pro-smoking ban activists don't want to consult with OSHA because according to the workplace authority there is no air quality problem with secondhand smoke. The St. Louis Park, MN. environmental health department proved that when they found secondhand smoke compared to OSHA regulations is 152 times safer than necessary.

A new hat in the MN. Governor's race.....

....Clearing the Air has never been a "breaking story" blog. We merely dig up the facts which contradict the Nicoderm marketing department agenda - more smoking bans.

We have however, uncovered a story about a new Minnesota candidate for Governor.

Sue Jeffers professes to stand for principles our current Republican Governor claimed he once held, however has long abandoned.

Both parties do have their differences, but overall they both continue to offer more taxes, "fees", laws, and programs as the solution to our problems. Republicans have proposed an 8% spending increase and Democrats have proposed 11%. Both parties are making government much larger, which means less control and choices you have in your life. We need a voice for smaller, effective government.

The last sentence sounds like a slogan I've heard somewhere before......perhaps here. Sue further added that she would gladly sign a Taxpayers League of MN Taxpayer Protection Pledge, thereby promising to "oppose (and vote against/veto) any and all efforts to increase taxes.".....and stick to it.

Jeffers supports a plan to implement the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR). She doesn't support a taxpayer funded stadium of any kind. Nor does she support expansion of light rail at taxpayer expense. And she believes in upholding property rights......while many local governments are bent on outright elimination of those rights.

The Jeffers for Governor Slogan:

Work For People, Not Special Interests In a climate of partisanship and gridlock, as governor I will work with both parties to find common ground, instead of the special interests.

I will work with Democrats on issues we agree on including: • stopping corporate welfare projects• helping the working poor with lower taxes• protecting our environment from dangerous corporate polluters• protecting our civil liberties

I will work with Republicans on issues we agree on including:• protecting property rights• advocating choice in education• reforming excessive regulations

She's sure to do better than "Vlad the Impaler" for governor......I wonder if he has a plan to impale those who support smoking ban legislation?

More coverage on Jeffers' bid for Governor:

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2006/01/bar_owner_butts.asp#comments

http://restraininorder.blogspot.com/2006/01/sue-jeffers-for-governor.html

http://craigwestover.blogspot.com/2006/01/whats-punisment-for-taking-easy.html

http://www.residualforces.com/index.php/2006/01/20/more-on-jeffers/

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Apparently the St. Louis Park, MN. secondhand smoke air quality testing program.........

..... results page was inadvertently (I'm sure) removed from their website. No need to worry though, I expected that and saved a backup copy. I know you folks at MPAAT, the American Lung as well as Bloomington city council and Robert Wood Johnson will be relieved to know that.

Here is the St. Louis Park, MN. Environmental Health Department secondhand smoke air quality test results in a side by side comparison to the OSHA permissible exposure limits table.


1 milligram mg = 1,000 micrograms ug
(full OSHA table can be found here)


St. Louis Park readings are in micrograms (ug). (Click to enlarge)

The upper table is the actual OSHA permissible exposure limit table for airborne contaminants ie. these levels are the safe exposure limits for humans. You'll note that the nicotine* safe level is 0.5 milligrams mg / cu. M (or 500 micrograms (ug) / cu. M).

The bottom table is the St. Louis Park test results for 19 smoking establishments of measured airborne nicotine* levels during busy evenings. You can see the median establishment, Applebees, had a reading of 3.3 micrograms ug / cu. M.

500 ug (OSHA safe level) divided by 3.3 ug (median reading Applebees) = measured airborne nicotine* levels are 152 times safer than OSHA regulations ie. In other words NO HEALTH HAZARD as per OSHA workplace indoor air quality standards.

It is therefore impossible to implement smoking bans based on the argument that secondhand smoke is a health hazard, that argument has been scientifically proven false and is therefore disingenuous.

* (As per air quality researchers) Nicotine is the only unique or "trace" chemical in secondhand smoke. If you measured for formaldehyde, the carpet and other interior sources of formaldehyde would corrupt the test result, formaldehyde is formed naturally in our atmosphere due to photochemical oxidation. Benzene is given off from burning foods in the kitchen or diesel exhaust outdoors so again a false reading would be obtained. Therefore, nicotine is the ideal chemical to measure for to determine secondhand smoke concentrations in the air. And then our comparison to OSHA guidelines is the logical manner in which to determine if secondhand smoke levels pose a health hazard, as you can see, they do not. If you wanted you could measure every airborne chemical in secondhand smoke and then also compare them to OSHA guidelines for each specific chemical, the results would be the same.

Smoking cigarettes can be hazardous to the smoker, no argument there. However, secondhand smoke is not hazardous to anyone, except of course to those who rely on Nicoderm interests for further funding.

Monday, January 16, 2006

The history of OSHA and secondhand smoke.....

OSHA and the case against smoking bans.

In 1999, comments were solicited by the government from an independent Public and Health Policy Research group:

"We posit a sealed, unventilated enclosure that is 20 feet square with a 9 foot ceiling clearance.

"Taking the figures for secondhand smoke yields per cigarette directly from the EPA, we calculated the number of cigarettes that would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold for each of these substances.

The results are actually quite amusing. In fact, it is difficult to imagine a situation where these threshold limits could be realized.

"For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold.

"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes would be required.

"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

"At the lower end of the scale-- in the case of Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up simultaneously in our little room to reach the threshold at which they might begin to pose a danger.

"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes are required. Perhaps we could post a notice limiting this 20-foot square room to 300 rather tightly-packed people smoking no more than 62 packs per hour?

"Of course the moment we introduce real world factors to the room -- a door, an open window or two, or a healthy level of mechanical air exchange (remember, the room we've been talking about is sealed) achieving these levels becomes even more implausible.

"It becomes increasingly clear to us that secondhand smoke is a political, rather than scientific, scapegoat."

It is time to hold lawmakers accountable for their flawed support of smoking bans.

The first step is to circulate this information as far and wide as possible. And this 2004 government testing which shows secondhand smoke to be 152 times safer than OSHA regulations should also become general public knowledge.

Some of my more informative smoking ban posts.......

........come from letters and emails which I have submitted to lawmakers around the country. This is one such post, it was sent to lawmakers as well as the special interest funded groups such as the one the moffit man represents. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation also received an advance copy.

Dear council members and paid pro-smoking ban activists,

Did you know the guise used by your council to pass smoking ban ordinances, "........that secondhand smoke poses a health hazard....." has been proven false by two government agencies? The St. Louis Park, MN. environmental health department and OSHA. In addition the California EPA Air Resources Board recently conducted air quality testing of secondhand smoke and obtained similar readings as St. Louis Park, MN. officials; using the identical methods that the SLP environmental health department used.

Proof provided below:

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/11/did-i-miss-anything.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/12/ventilation-not-legislation.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/10/secondhand-smoke-in-bars-restaurants.html

http://www.rwjf.org/research/researchdetail.jsp?id=2002&ia=143 $99,000,000.00 funding from Nicoderm affiliated RWJF to American Lung, American Cancer, American Heart Assoc. (any information provided to lawmakers by these and other health organizations as well as "research" universities, who received RWJF funding, is highly dubious to say the least)

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-pharmaceutical-company-funding.html

In light of the facts that this new air quality testing exposes, you may need to review the viability of an ordinance which is predicated on health hazard.

Saturday, January 14, 2006

The "Foot" lends a hand....

I always knew there was something I liked about Learned Foot from the Kool Aid Report, in this case it's our mutual contempt for a certain vermin and the organization he represents.

In this post the "Foot" as an acredited lawyer provides a potential real world solution. As the American Lung infringes upon our property rights and livelihoods the logical solution is that they should compensate those of us negatively and financially affected. And as RWJF points out in this financial grant of $99 million to the American Lung, American Cancer, American Heart Association, assuming all three organizations divided those proceeds equally, then $33,000,000.00 is the portion that an astute law firm might file a claim to.

You do work on continguency don't you Foot?

Friday, January 13, 2006

How can you tell when the anti-smoking movement has gone from restrictive to draconian......

....when the father of the anti-smoking movement Dr. Michael Siegel, compares modern day anti-smoking measures to "McCarthyism".

Robert Wood Johnson what have you done?

Copy letter submitted to New Jersey lawmakers, restaurant association and media

Friends in New Jersey,

I used to sell Smokeeters in bars & restaurants in MN. for 15 years, however, partial smoking bans and the threat of a statewide ban here eliminated a great paying career. I am looking for work, my cars are up for repossession my house is in foreclosure, and I recently spent 8 days in jail over Christmas (with a New Jersey inmate incidentally) for not paying child support. When the non-profits tell lawmakers that business will be unaffected, or will even increase with a ban on smoking, they are lying and need to be held accountable. I am mad as hell about smoking bans to say the least.

Anyway for the last year I have put together a weblog, and have used it to educate lawmakers about air quality facts regarding secondhand smoke. We have fought off state lawmakers from imposing a statewide ban for two years now, and one of our counties eased their smoking ban restrictions. Below are some posts about air quality facts that may interest you in your efforts.

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/09/st-louis-park-mn-secondhand-smoke-test.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/11/did-i-miss-anything.html

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/12/ventilation-not-legislation.html

How I spent my Xmas holiday:
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2006/01/being-out-of-work-is-just-cause-for.html

One of the biggest strikes against you folks in New Jersey is the proximity to Johnson & Johnson Company who manufactures Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ (ALZA div.) (feel free to circulate this website http://boycottjohnsonandjohnson.blogspot.com/), and whose sister organization Robert Wood Johnson Foundation supplies hundreds of millions of dollars to the non-profits to influence smoking ban legislation.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-pharmaceutical-company-funding.html

http://www.rwjf.org/research/researchdetail.jsp?id=2002&ia=143 $99 mill grant from RWJF to the ALA, ACS, AHA to become "activists" in pushing for smoking ban legislation

http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/035929.htm $70 mill grant from RWJF to Tobacco Free Kids (nice sounding name, but why are they spending money to keep kids out of secondhand smoke in bars?)

You can still challange the ban as they are all passed by local government agencies who claim they have the authority because secondhand smoke poses a public health hazard, however this comparison to OSHA guidelines http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/11/did-i-miss-anything.html proves that to be a disingenuous justification.

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/10/secondhand-smoke-in-bars-restaurants.html

Good luck, keep up the fight, and contact me if I can be of further help.

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Sounds to me like the local smoking bans are worthless threats.....

Smoking Bans are unconstitutional in Minnesota

Couple that bit of statutory fact with the air quality facts and I think you'll start to see the repeal of smoking bans everywhere, not just Hennepin county.

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

The new face of St. Paul....the anti-business city council....

.....made good on its threat to side with the special interest groups ignoring the facts which prove secondhand smoke is not a public health hazard (152 times safer than OSHA standards actually).

And ignoring the trend in Minnesota, whose state lawmakers for two consecutive years have told the pharmaceutical funded activists "....sorry, but we won't cater to the Nicoderm marketing department..." and whose local governments have also recently eased smoking bans in Hennepin county as well as Duluth; St. Paul city council voted to implement a smoking ban in a final desperate effort to "force" state lawmakers to bend to their puny demands.

Well if it makes Bucky feel like an important person have at it.......but its too little too late for you and your puny maniacal scheme as well as the American Lung, American Cancer and the other paid schills of the Johnson & Johnson / RWJF company....the St. Louis Park test results are the genie in the bottle which will not be ignored nor put back into the proverbial bottle.

St. Paul establishments will now be more equally represented in the Hennepin / Ramsey establishments out of business though, congratulations. The first casualty will of course be the Buttery.......let's add that to the list shall we.......anybody in particular you'd like to see added to the list next?

You may recall a few months ago Bucky when I asked how much the pharmaceutical nicotine special interest groups contribute to election campaigns.......I'm still waiting to hear your answer? $600,000 spent in 2004 by the American Cancer Society must have bought a few votes......wouldn't you say?

More analysis from The First Ring

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

For those individuals and businesses who defy the anti-smoking zealots, "Clearing the Air" would like to offer a clean air solution

A Robert Wood Johnson Foundation executive admitted recently that secondhand smoke is not harmful. But that doesn't stop them or the non-profits from lying to government officials to get smoking bans implemented, in the hopes that smokers will quit smoking.

For those who defy the nanny special interest groups and would like clean air quality solutions for your home, office, or hospitality establishment please check out our extensive line of air filtration equipment for residential, commercial, or industrial.

www.clean-air-quality.com

Live your life on your terms.......not theirs. We help accommodate smokers & non-smokers with air quality products to keep everybody happy & healthy.

Bankruptcy Filings Hit Record 2M in 2005

From the AP comes this story about how bankruptcy filings are up. I can personally atest that smoking bans have indeed contributed to this historic trend.

Congratulations RWJF, American Lung, American Cancer, American Non-Smoker's Rights etc. for dragging the US economy further into the depths, while all of you enjoy $200,000,000.00 + in grant money.......when will politicians wake up and see that smoking bans are funded by special interest pharmaceutical nicotine, for profit and a bigger piece of the grant funding pie, not health.

Monday, January 09, 2006

Were Snoopy & the Peanuts Gang snuffed out by the smoking ban?


Today we heard the tragic story that Mall of America negotiations with United Media, the licensor of the Peanuts and Camp Snoopy brands; had been severed. As of January 19 MOA can no longer use the Peanuts or Camp Snoopy name.

It doesn't take an MBA to figure out that money, or lack thereof, is the most likely cause of the breakdown in negotiations. And I'd bet all my Camp Snoopy tokens that the Mall of America revenue losses, due to all the 4th floor bar & restaurant closings; because of the Bloomington smoking ban, had something to do with Mall of America management coming up short of Snoopy cash.

Bloomington, MN. smoking ban kills Snoopy as well as numerous Mall of America businesses.

Let's see what Bloomington city council members have to say.

And let's not forget the role the instigator's; American Lung, MPAAT, American Cancer, Robert Wood Johnson etc.; played in depriving children and visitors to MOA of the Peanuts experience...............Good grief Charlie Brown, it's for their own good.

The rest of the story can be found here.

Sunday, January 08, 2006

A very well written article against smoking bans.......

.....shows up in our own socialist Star Tribune.......who'd have thunk it?.

Burdened by the Smoking Ban

The Star Tribune editorial board afterall, came out in favor of job eliminating smoking bans long ago.

One point in Sue's letter is further backed by scientific environmental health department data:

We know that bars and restaurants equipped with ventilation equipment have air quality higher than OSHA standards. (152 times safer than OSHA standards to be exact)

Great letter Sue, it's nice to see the opinion page print an article that surely inflamed the editorial staff. And if you'll recall an earlier RWJF grant I uncovered, RWJF and the non-profits they fund, pay handsomely to ensure the pro-smoking ban side of the issue is the only side highlighted in the media.

Expect the American Lung Moffit man to throw a tantrum, and demand more RWJF funding.

And by the way Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, don't you feel like you're being used? These incompetent non-profits keep getting their smoking bans exempted or repealed to some extent, and I'm certain that every time they do they keep begging for more of your Nicoderm funding.

RWJF just keeps throwing more Nicoderm money down the drain on these non-profits, when what they ought to concern themselves with is an advertising campaign to get smokers to voluntarily quit smoking; and of course buying up this piece of information which proves secondhand smoke is not the catastrophic health hazard that activists try to sell to lawmakers. In fact there is NO HEALTH HAZARD as per OSHA workplace indoor air quality standards., which surprisingly a RWJF executive confided to me recently.

Friday, January 06, 2006

The repeal of prohibition brings back customers and profits to one local bar....

Many know that Hennepin county commissioners voted in December to relax the smoking ban, to exempt traditional bars and private clubs from the draconian smoking bans.

The exemption took effect January 3, 2006, so I decided to step outside and see if any non-smokers were being rushed to the hospitals.

I visited Al's Liquors of St. Louis Park, MN and inquired how business was going since they were now allowed smoking......the huge smiles on the faces of the employees told me all I needed to know. I also visited a couple of fringe Hennepin county establishments who were also hopeful that the good old days of profitability would soon return.

When you allow businesses to make decisions all by themselves they usually can figure it out. And I'm sure that non-smokers can figure out, all by themselves, that if they don't like smoke they should avoid the smoking bars.

Common sense and the free market is a beautiful thing....but don't expect MPAAT or the non-profits with all their hundreds of millions of dollars to understand either. Now if only the local politicians would stop pandering to these special interest non-profits perhaps they could get some real work done....and so could I.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Smoking cessation drugs like Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ as well as Zyban & Wellbutrin have been linked to deaths......

Deaths have occurred due to heart attacks for those using nicoderm patches ............

And the smoking cessation drug Zyban is dangerous, perhaps fatal, to your health.

Deaths due to anti-smoking drug Wellbutrin are documented here.

Update: A reader points out a serious health hazard for those with Crohn's disease who quit smoking. See Lcomeno's comment here.

Monday, January 02, 2006

Being out of work is "just cause" for incarceration in the MN family court system

I used to think debtor's prison was simply a fictitious place out of a Dicken's novel......well, it still exists in our family court system....

Soon after the American Lung, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Non-Smoker's Rights, MPAAT etc. and their financial benefactor RWJF (Nicoderm) bought their first smoking bans here in the Twin Cities area I informed the judge in my child support case that I was deeply concerned I would lose my job selling Smokeeters and subsequently my ability to make child support payments. The judge informed me that if I lost my job, I should promptly file a motion to temporarily reduce support until I was gainfully employed again; which I did........and which she promptly denied in court around July of 2005.

In the meantime, I searched for work......unable to make support payments, house payments, or car payments, etc. Now, it is interesting to note that although I haven't been able to make any mortgage payments since June '05.....the mortgage company hasn't had me thrown into jail.......nor the lending institutes for my vehicles......nor the utility companies. MN family court on the other hand is a different story.......Judge Tanya Manrique who advised me to file the motion to suspend child support while unemployed due to the smoking bans, and who then denied that same motion, was happy to sentence me to 90 days in the Hennepin County workhouse for failure to pay the child support.

I haven't been able to contribute any writings to this blog for more than a week as I did end up serving approximately 8 days in jail on the judge's order, until the love of my life Jordan was able to borrow nearly $10,000 from a friend of hers. No doubt the court will construe the payment for my release as proof that I am financially able to pay my bills, when in truth, all it does is to ensure that I will not be able to make future child support payments even after I find a job as I will be required to repay the loan.

I am not one to ask for help, as you can see by my being exceedingly behind in mortgage, support etc. And I do not like to be a burden to anyone, it's just the way I was raised. I have however, put a simple website together to help me pay back the benefactor who sprung me from jail, the link is here. Any help would be greatly appreciated.......I would much rather have 10,000 people contribute $1, instead of one person contribute $10,000.........Unless that person is Robert Wood Johnson IV and the non-profits who ARE directly responsible for my job loss.

Typically, I would keep this entire embarrassing story a secret. But the events that have led up to my current financial situation are not of my doing.......And frankly, if this story ends up a human interest story exposing the fraudulent, disingenuous, cold and manipulative background of smoking bans and those who fund them........then I say, all the better.

Sunday, January 01, 2006

Will there be an investigation into this nationwide government scandal?

To the average non-smoker as I am, it might appear that the American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Non-Smoker's Rights, the American Medical Association, countless research Universities around the country, etc. are lobbying our politicians for smoking bans for health reasons.
However, upon some investigation it is clear that these NGO's are backed by $446,000,000.00 + from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) which has direct ties to the Johnson & Johnson Company, and J & J is the manufacturer of Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ via its wholly owned subsidiary ALZA. Recently, the buyout of Pfizer Consumer Health means J & J profits even more from the passage of smoking bans thru additional sales of Nicotrol, Nicorette, and Commit alternative nicotine products.

The data supplied to these NGO's and subsequently our politicians should be viewed as highly dubious at best, since it comes from the largest manufacturer of pharmaceutical nicotine products which benefits by selling their alternative nicotine products like Nicoderm, Nicoderm CQ, Nicotrol, etc. when tobacco nicotine use is prohibited via smoking bans.

In fact according to this industry watchdog pharmaceutical nicotine product sales is a $500,000,000.00+ annual business almost exclusively owned by the Johnson & Johnson conglomerate, of which RWJF is an entity and single largest shareholder of J & J stock, with a $5.4 billion dollar holding.
For whatever reason our local lawmakers seem to ignore the conflict of interest, if they know about it at all. I am curious if some of these local lawmakers receive campaign support from any or all of these special interests........Are local media outlets, or attorneys general interested in investigating? We'll see.
Here are some links to financial grants from the Nicoderm people at Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to:
Recipient: American Medical Assoc. $88,000,000.00

http://web.archive.org/web/20100206135236/http://www.rwjf.org/reports/npreports/smokeless.htm

Recipient: American Lung Association, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association $99,000,000.00
http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?id=14912

Recipient: numerous research universities around the country http://www.rwjf.org/publichealth/grantlist.jsp?page=3

RWJF ties to the Johnson & Johnson Company:
http://www.rwjf.org/en/about-rwjf/our-mission/our-founder.html

ALZA is the company which manufactures Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ for GSK:
http://www.data-yard.net/infocoalition/alza2.htm

ALZA is owned by Johnson & Johnson company
http://www.data-yard.net/infocoalition/alza1.htm

Why would a pharmaceutical company fund smoking bans? http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-pharmaceutical-company-funding.html

Government air quality testing of secondhand smoke (is secondhand smoke really harmful?):
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2008/06/review-of-air-quality-testing-and.html

The American Cancer Society air quality testing proves secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times safer than OSHA indoor air quality regulations for secondhand smoke:
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2004/04/american-cancer-society-test-results.html

In a special report out of Washington DC we've found an interesting bit of information:
...the pharmaceutical industry has mounted a sophisticated grassroots campaign to build support for its position on key issues that affect its bottom line. The industry has funded various groups to champion its positions, sponsored studies tilted to the industry and hired public relations firms to spearhead campaigns to soften up public opinion and government policies....

Update: Here are a number of grants by Nicoderm financed Robert Wood Johnson Foundation used to influence government policymakers and lawmakers.......and as you guessed it, that lobbying is designed to eliminate tobacco nicotine use.......while increasing pharmaceutical nicotine use......coercive marketing, also known as smoking bans.

http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/037549.htm?gsa=1

Also see information about the thousands of business closings and tens of thousands of jobs eliminated (prior to 2008 recession) since smoking bans were enacted:


http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2009/03/worldwide-economic-meltdown-and.html

Also

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