Saturday, June 30, 2007

Johnson & Johnson subsidiary ALZA

ALZA Corporation, a member of the Johnson & Johnson Family of Companies, serves as one of Johnson & Johnson's Pharmaceutical Research & Development sites.

Our website is in transition and will be closing down on June 30, 2008.

For more information on the available commercialized products incorporating the company's drug delivery technology sold worldwide, please visit our Commercial Products page.

Access to Free or Discounted Medications for Those Who Qualify With the growing number of assistance programs available to patients in the United States, it is sometimes difficult and confusing to determine which programs can help and who qualifies for them. Access2wellnessTM is designed to help.

Access2wellness.com, sponsored by Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems Inc., provides a single entry point for a broad selection of assistance programs that offer more than 1,000 prescription medications, for free or at a discount, to people who qualify.

For more information, please visit the website at http://www.data-yard.net/infocoalition/alza1.htm .

© 2008 ALZA Corporation

This site is published by ALZA Corporation which is solely responsible for its contents. It is intended for visitors from the United States.

Last Updated: Mar 27 2008 at 14:28:37 EDT

ATF


After an afternoon of shooting and cleaning the trusty .45, I relaxed with a cigar and beer, and thought to myself .......if I had a significant amount of cash I'd open a chain of retail stores called "Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms".
Unfortunately I fear that the America that exists today is intolerant of the simple freedoms this country once enjoyed in great abundance.

The fight for freedom across the pond

Freedom 2 Choose has taken on the ill -informed alarmists by filing a court challenge to the U.K.'s smoking ban.

More here:
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/news_detail.aspx?articleid=46256

It is appropriate that this legal challenge is being mounted over there, for it was the British Medical Journal which published air quality test results that confirm secondhand smoke is 2.6 - 5,000 times SAFER than Occupational Safety & Health Administration air quality standards* for secondhand smoke.

The BMJ published air quality test results are the key to nullifying the government's "health hazard" claim.

*OSHA has permissible exposure limits (PEL) for the chemical components of secondhand smoke. (PELs are the safe exposure levels for 8 hours per day; 40 hours per week)

Saturday, June 23, 2007

Clearing the Air correspondence with OSHA

Clearing the Air recently wrote to Minnesota officials within the Department of Labor and Industry, here is their partial response and Clearing the Air's rebuttal:

In your June 12, 2007, e-mail message, you questioned why OSHA was absent from the on going secondhand smoke debate.

Federal OSHA did propose an indoor air quality rule in 1994. It was met with vigorous opposition and was subsequently withdrawn in 2001.

Most of the debate about secondhand smoke has centered on protecting patrons. By federal law, OSHA's jurisdiction is limited to employers with employees...

With all due respect Mr. Isakson it appears to me, and thousands of others, as though OSHA caved into pharmaceutical nicotine special interests and pressure.

And regarding your assertion:

Most of the debate about secondhand smoke has centered on protecting patrons.

The fact of the matter is that tobacco control activists know that they cannot justify smoking bans on this claim.....so all smoking bans in the last couple of years have been justified as protecting the health of employees (Minnesota's included).

And since all the secondhand smoke
air quality test results (measuring for specific trace chemicals) conducted by pro-smoking ban groups around the world prove that secondhand smoke levels are far safer than OSHA permissible exposure limits (PEL).....it's time for OSHA to develop a spine and stand up for its PELs. Especially in light of the fact that remaining silent on the issue brings about more unneccesary smoking bans, countless business closings, and higher unemployment rates.

Smoking bans may seem politically correct to the politicos and
pharmaceutical nicotine special interests that fund them, but they damage local economies, and when the air quality testing is analyzed.....they are certainly not justified.

It's time for OSHA to stand up to these rent seeking bullies, and speak the truth......if your permissible exposure limits are acceptable for
welding smoke in the workplace......then they are acceptable for the far, far, less hazardous secondhand smoke component levels.

Related:
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/06/will-there-be-showdown-between-osha-and.html

Air quality testing of secondhand smoke by pro-smoking ban researchers prove levels are far SAFER than OSHA permissible exposure limits for indoor workplace air quality. (see link below:)

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/05/peer-reviewed-and-bmj-published.html

Friday, June 22, 2007

Flashback: How the media silences science in order to promote its politically correct agenda

Clearing the Air highlighted this story back in September 2006:

This study investigates the silencing undertakings that developed around the smoking article that claimed secondhand smoke might not be as dangerous as usually believed.

It uses both quantitative and qualitative data to examine the silencing tactics employed by the different kinds of partisans. We then examine international media coverage of this study, based on searches of the Internet. The results of the Internet search, which indicate a high degree of self-silencing by the media..

All of the stories on secondhand smoke were examined, and the results revealed a strikingly one-sided discourse consistent with self-silencing by the media. Specifically, out of more than 500 articles examined, fewer than 10 afforded any sense of either scientific uncertainty or of negative findings challenging the prevailing consensus. -Sheldon Ungar and Dennis Bray

The media and the pro-smoking ban (Nicoderm/RWJF funded) activist groups have determined that in order to railroad their smoking ban agenda through local governments nationwide, only one side of the issue can be presented to the public......that fact was confirmed by this University of Illinois at Chicago Project Director who received $2.3 million from pharmaceutical nicotine interests at RWJF to study the effects of media coverage of smoking bans and their effects on future enactment of smoking bans.

Therefore, you also won't find the American Cancer Society air quality facts which prove secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than OSHA regulations, on the front page of your local newspaper, or on your local network broadcast.......it doesn't however, make those test results any less factual.......just damaging enough to the pro-smoking ban movement that the activists don't want you to know about them.

Another worldwide air quality study of secondhand smoke published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) was presented as proof that secondhand smoke is a hazard.......however what the publication and the media kept silent about is the fact that analysis of these AQ studies as compared to Occupational Safety & Health permissible exposure limits (PEL) actually confirms that secondhand smoke concentrations are 2.6 - 5,000 times SAFER than established workplace air quality standards.

Activists and the media won't let facts interfere with their agenda........no matter how many jobs that agenda costs.

Thursday, June 21, 2007

The Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids (CTFK) sent me an email requesting my story on how tobacco has affected my life

The following was my reply:

I can't say that tobacco has affected my life, but I can tell you that tobacco control activists have affected my life in a VERY NEGATIVE way.

My career of 15 years, selling Smokeeter air filtration equipment to bars and restaurants came to an abrupt end once the debate for smoking bans began. As an independent sales professional my unemployment came without benefits or insurance of any kind. Once bar and restaurant owners no longer needed my employer's air filtration equipment and services, I was relieved of my job and duties without so much as a thank you, back in 6/2005. It took 9 months before I finally became gainfully employed again.

During that time period of being unemployed, without the ability to continue making car payments my vehicle quickly fell into repossession status, and eventually was surrendered. Without the ability to continue making child support payments a family court judge decided I was in contempt and ordered me to jail. Without the ability to continue making mortgage payments our home quickly fell into foreclosure status, the sheriff's sale occurred on May 5, 2006, and we were evicted from our home on November 1, 2006.

Thousands of hospitality industry workers are affected in a very similar manner. And the fact that anti-tobacco groups are apathetic to the hardships they cause is indicative of their concern for the health and welfare of the general public.....it is non existent.

Concern for health and welfare is not part of the tobacco control movement which includes CTFK.......their primary concern is another $70 million from pharmaceutical nicotine groups like the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF):

http://www.rwjf.org/programareas/resources/grantsreport.jsp?filename=035929.htm&pid=1141&gsa=1

And that's how tobacco (control) has affected my life.


RWJF is a division of the Johnson & Johnson Company which manufactures Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ. RWJF is also one of the largest shareholders of J & J stock (approx. $5 billion worth of J & J shares). Lobbying lawmakers to ban the use of cigarettes (smoking bans) has less to do with health concerns than it does to ensure healthy sales of substitute nicotine products like Nicoderm & Nicoderm CQ.

Friday, June 15, 2007

Will there be a showdown between OSHA and local politicians regarding workplace secondhand smoke levels?

Clearing the Air wrote to officials at Minnesota Department of Labor (OSHA), to inquire about air quality testing and OSHA permissible exposure limits.

We questioned officials if they were aware that worldwide secondhand smoke air quality test results confirmed that there is NO workplace health hazard.

We further asked them if the results indicated that local politicians had over stepped their authority and common sense by banning secondhand smoke.......because it does not rise to health hazard claims.

The obvious question then was: When does OSHA have regulatory enforcement authority.....superceding uninformed local politicians?

Here was a Minnesota Labor official's response:

...Minnesota OSHA... has enforcement authority.......to protect worker's safety and health.....

Given that Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) officials have a far better understanding of workplace air quality hazards and long established permissible exposure limits, they (OSHA) are in a far better position than politicians, who prove to be easy prey by special interest groups; in providing final regulatory enforcement.

OSHA permissible exposure limits (PEL) provide that critical balance allowing business and jobs to proliferate, while also maintaining safe working conditions. If easily influenced politicians are allowed final regulatory authority to ban any and all workplace pollutants such as welding smoke, machining oil mist, ozone produced by office copiers, etc....etc.... businesses, jobs, and the entire free market system will perish under the weight of unreasonable and over regulatory laws.......as is currently being experienced by the hospitality industry.....worldwide.

We already have a government authority to oversee air quality hazards in the workplace, that authority is OSHA, which ALONE should provide the final regulatory enforcement of secondhand smoke levels..........not politicians.

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

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

The tobacco control movements atmosphere of preaching hate adds another victim in a Minnesota crime

Man charged with severing wife's tongue, windpipe

Excerpt:

...he slashed her throat after an argument about her smoking a cigarette....she wanted to buy cigarettes, but that she had quit smoking and that her husband would be mad if he found out....

An entire movement inciting hatred and crime.....by any other name would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.....

It seems that the tobacco control activists' agenda of de-normalizing smoking is right on track.

Their new slogan should be: Nicoderm, We'll make sure you stop using tobacco ...even if it kills you.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Peer reviewed and BMJ published secondhand smoke test results confirm there is NO workplace air quality hazard

The British Medical Journal published results shown here, were conducted using methodology which measured for the marker airborne chemical nicotine which in turn indicates the total airborne concentration of secondhand smoke present, and as scientists around the globe have stated:

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 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, according to OSHA, the authority on workplace safety and indoor air quality, they do not. If you wanted you could measure every airborne chemical in secondhand smoke and then compare them to OSHA guidelines for each specific chemical, the results would be the same, if not more dramatic.

The BMJ test results which ranged from 0.1 - 192 micrograms (ug) / cu. M, are actually 2.6 - 5,000 times SAFER than OSHA indoor air quality permissible exposure limits (PEL) for the secondhand smoke component -nicotine.
(partial OSHA permissible exposure limit table)

The OSHA safe level of exposure for nicotine for an 8 hour day, 40 hour week time period is 0.5 milligrams (mg) / cu. M; which is the equivalent of 500 micrograms (ug) / cu. M.


Checking the math:

500 ug divided by BMJ results of 192 ug = SHS AQ test results are 2.6 times SAFER than OSHA air quality regulations.

500 ug divided by BMJ results of 0.1 ug = SHS AQ test results are 5,000 times SAFER than OSHA air quality regulations.

The significance to this find is that pro-smoking ban advocates, particularly in the medical community tried to claim that our earlier AQ results (which proved secondhand smoke was 15 - 25,000 times SAFER than OSHA regulations) were invalid because they were not published or peer reviewed........now however, the identical secondhand smoke air quality test results are not only peer reviewed and published.......but published by the British Medical Journal (BMJ) no less.

Clearly now, we can battle and reverse the exaggerated and fabricated claims made by pro-smoking ban activists.......using their own data.

Update: In a separate BMJ published test result which measured secondhand smoke levels near smoking rooms in U.S. airports comes an even more dramatic example of just how exaggerated secondhand smoke health hazard claims are.

The airport test results shown here, indicate that secondhand smoke concentrations as determined by measuring the marker chemical nicotine, averaged 0.15 ug (micrograms) / m3 (cubic meter), 0.46 ug/m3, and 0.72 ug / m3.

However since the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) for nicotine is 0.5 mg (milligram) / m3, same as 500 ug (micrograms) / m3 (8 hours/ day. 40 hours/ week); the results tell us that secondhand smoke levels near airport smoking rooms were 694 - 3,333 times SAFER than OSHA regulations.

500 divided by 0.15 = 3,333
500 divided by 0.46 = 1,087
500 divided by 0.72 = 694

Does that sound like a health hazard to you?

Looking at all these air quality test results provided by pro-smoking ban groups it is apparent that there is a concerted effort to deceive lawmakers and the general public about the facts.......perhaps there is an underlying agenda.

Numerous other air quality test results at link below confirm the data above:

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2010/10/air-quality-testing-of-secondhand-smoke.html


How does secondhand smoke in the workplace compare to welding smoke in the workplace? Why the double standard?

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2007/03/double-standard-welding-smoke-vs.html

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