John Davidson 
Member since Nov 17, 2012


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Idaho Moms Want Statewide Ban of Smoking In Cars With Children

Manufacturing the science to meet the agenda, in black on white. Does anyone still have doubts?

''Bal laughs when asked about the role of scientific evidence in guiding policy decisions. “There was no science on how to do a community intervention on something of this global dimension,” he says. “Where there is no science, you have to go and be venturesome—you can’t use the paucity of science as an excuse to do nothing. We created the science, we did the interventions and then all the scientists came in behind us and analyzed what we did.”

Read under the title :
Tobacco Control: The Long War—When the Evidence Has to Be Created

http://www.milbank.org/uploads/documents/0…

Posted by John Davidson on 03/24/2014 at 7:34 AM

Re: “Idaho Moms Want Statewide Ban of Smoking In Cars With Children

"People swear at my kids, and blow smoke on them and call them Socialists,” Pickett said.

Pickett said they're not Socialists, but are simply concerned about the well-being of children.

The Führer thanks you from the grave:


Hitler was a Leftist
Hitler's Anti-Tobacco Campaign

One particularly vile individual, Karl Astel -- upstanding president of Jena University, poisonous anti-Semite, euthanasia fanatic, SS officer, war criminal and tobacco-free Germany enthusiast -- liked to walk up to smokers and tear cigarettes from their unsuspecting mouths. (He committed suicide when the war ended, more through disappointment than fear of hanging.) It comes as little surprise to discover that the phrase "passive smoking" (Passivrauchen) was coined not by contemporary American admen, but by Fritz Lickint, the author of the magisterial 1100-page Tabak und Organismus ("Tobacco and the Organism"), which was produced in collaboration with the German AntiTobacco League.

http://constitutionalistnc.tripod.com/hitl…

Posted by John Davidson on 03/24/2014 at 6:51 AM

Re: “Idaho Moms Want Statewide Ban of Smoking In Cars With Children

This pretty well destroys the Myth of second hand smoke:

http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/28…

Lungs from pack-a-day smokers safe for transplant, study finds.

By JoNel Aleccia, Staff Writer, NBC News.

Using lung transplants from heavy smokers may sound like a cruel joke, but a new study finds that organs taken from people who puffed a pack a day for more than 20 years are likely safe.

What’s more, the analysis of lung transplant data from the U.S. between 2005 and 2011 confirms what transplant experts say they already know: For some patients on a crowded organ waiting list, lungs from smokers are better than none.

“I think people are grateful just to have a shot at getting lungs,” said Dr. Sharven Taghavi, a cardiovascular surgical resident at Temple University Hospital in Philadelphia, who led the new study...........................

Ive done the math here and this is how it works out with second ahnd smoke and people inhaling it!

The 16 cities study conducted by the U.S. DEPT OF ENERGY and later by Oakridge National laboratories discovered:

Cigarette smoke, bartenders annual exposure to smoke rises, at most, to the equivalent of 6 cigarettes/year.

146,000 CIGARETTES SMOKED IN 20 YEARS AT 1 PACK A DAY.

A bartender would have to work in second hand smoke for 2433 years to get an equivalent dose.

Then the average non-smoker in a ventilated restaurant for an hour would have to go back and forth each day for 119,000 years to get an equivalent 20 years of smoking a pack a day! Pretty well impossible ehh!

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by John Davidson on 03/24/2014 at 6:47 AM

Re: “Idaho Moms Want Statewide Ban of Smoking In Cars With Children

The inconvenient truth is that the only studies of children of smokers suggest it is PROTECTIVE in contracting atopy in the first place. The New Zealand study says by a staggering factor of 82%.

“Participants with atopic parents were also less likely to have positive SPTs between ages 13 and 32 years if they smoked themselves (OR=0.18), and this reduction in risk remained significant after adjusting for confounders.

The authors write: “We found that children who were exposed to parental smoking and those who took up cigarette smoking themselves had a lower incidence of atopy to a range of common inhaled allergens.
“These associations were found only in those with a parental history of asthma or hay fever.”

They conclude: Our findings suggest that preventing allergic sensitization is not one of them.”
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume 121, Issue 1 , Pages 38-42.e3, January 2008
http://www.jacionline.org/article/S00...(0…

.
This is a Swedish study.

“Children of mothers who smoked at least 15 cigarettes a day tended to have lower odds for suffering from allergic rhino-conjunctivitis, allergic asthma, atopic eczema and food allergy, compared to children of mothers who had never smoked (ORs 0.6-0.7)

CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an association between current exposure to tobacco smoke and a low risk for atopic disorders in smokers themselves and a similar tendency in their children.”
Clin Exp Allergy 2001 Jun;31(6):908-14
http://www.data-yard.net/30/asthma.htm

Posted by John Davidson on 03/24/2014 at 6:47 AM

Re: “Idaho Moms Want Statewide Ban of Smoking In Cars With Children

Another Junk Study from CDC most likely funded by a grant from big pharma like their 9 states economic harm study on smoking bans!
Below explains how the Junk science of car bans is so JUNKY!
Thats why CDC didnt include any measurements of anything in their study.Its normal tobacco control propaganda,questionaires to get a science by headline story tossed out there for the liberal media to spread like poison.

Chris Snowden does an excellent job debunking the junk science of car ban science!

Just open the window!

http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/20…

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by John Davidson on 03/24/2014 at 6:47 AM

Re: “Idaho State Journal: Pocatello could see a smoking ban

Heres a time line starting in 1900,dont be surprised to see the same thing playing out today nearly 100 years later.

1901: REGULATION: Strong anti-cigarette activity in 43 of the 45 states. "Only Wyoming and Louisiana had paid no attention to the cigarette controversy, while the other forty-three states either already had anti-cigarette laws on the books or were considering new or tougher anti-cigarette laws, or were the scenes of heavy anti- cigarette activity" (Dillow, 1981:10).

1904: New York: A judge sends a woman is sent to jail for 30 days for smoking in front of her children.

1904: New York City. A woman is arrested for smoking a cigarette in an automobile. "You can't do that on Fifth Avenue," the arresting officer says.

1907: Business owners are refusing to hire smokers. On August 8, the New York Times writes: "Business ... is doing what all the anti-cigarette specialists could not do."

1917: SMOKEFREE: Tobacco control laws have fallen, including smoking bans in numerous cities, and the states of Arkansas, Iowa, Idaho and Tennessee.

1937: hitler institutes laws against smoking.This one you can google.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by John Davidson on 09/06/2013 at 8:29 AM

Re: “Idaho State Journal: Pocatello could see a smoking ban

Tobacco Control Scotland has admitted it has no record of any deaths or demonstrable harm caused to anyone from second hand smoke as the UK Govt pushes forward the idea of third hand smoke, aka Invisible Smoke, without any evidence at all.

Bill Gibson, The International Coalition Against Prohibition (TICAP) chairman, was interested to know how many actual deaths and respiratory illnesses were recorded in Scotland from passive smoking, given the reported guesstimate 13,000 figure which is repeated parrot fashion year after year.

He put in an FOI request and found that there wasn't one death or respiratory illnesses attributed to SHS or tobacco. Perhaps I should repeat that. Not one death has been recorded in Scotland as definitely related to tobacco smoking or passive smoking.

http://patnurseblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/f…

If we did the same the world over we would get the same answer.

Remember this story from last year:

B.S. Study: 600,000 People Die Worldwide From Secondhand Smoke Every Year

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/bs-stud…


US Bureau of Labor Statistics Shows Zero Deaths From 2nd Hand Smoke
Where are the deaths?
If people who work in bars die from secondhand smoke, why does the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the last 4 years show ZERO DEATHS from exposure to harmful substances or environments?
http://stats.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb02… This data is for 2011. (pg38 of 53). Notice that 31 people died while working in a "drinking place"(which my bar is classified as). 27 deaths were by violent injuries by persons or animals(?). 2 died by fires or explosions. I don't know where the other 2 deaths are listed however, there are 0 deaths from exposure to harmful substances or environments.
So where are these deaths from SHS?
Notice 2010 under this below. In 2010, there were 28 total deaths, 25 from violence and 0 from exposure to harmful substances or environments.
http://stats.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb
0250.pdf (pg 18).
In 2009, 32 deaths of bar workers. 31 were violent deaths and 0 from exposure to harmful substances or environments.
http://stats.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb02… (pg 18)
In 2008, 35 deaths of bar workers. 32 were violent deaths and 0 from exposure to harmful substances or environments.
http://stats.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/cfoi/cftb02… (pg 18).
They aren't crawling out and dying in the parking lots either. We would have noticed 'em."
Sheila Martin
http://stjtelegraph.org/wp-content/uploads…
stjtelegraph.org

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by John Davidson on 09/06/2013 at 8:29 AM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2016 Boise Weekly

Website powered by Foundation