Quoted Text

CAPITAL REGION
Battle against smoke moves outside
Push is on for smoking bans
BY SARA FOSS Gazette Reporter

   Not too long ago, Sarah Cummings noticed something she’d never seen before.
   A group of adults, children in tow, were smoking at the Niskayuna Town Pool. Cummings, the pool’s manager, scanned the rules. Nowhere did it say that smoking was prohibited.
   So Cummings purchased “No Smoking” signs and hung them up.
   “We have about 100 people here every day,” she said. “Eighty-fi ve percent of those people are younger. Smoking didn’t seem appropriate. By putting up the signs, I put my foot down, and said, ‘In a family environment, at the town pool, there’s no smoking.’ ”
   With indoor smoking bans now commonplace — New York banned smoking in most workplaces, including restaurants and bars, in 2003 — anti-smoking groups are stepping up efforts to bar or restrict smoking in outdoor places such as concert venues, parks, pools, beaches and playgrounds. They say they are motivated by concerns about health, litter and overall quality of life.
   Last year, The Great Escape & Splashwater Kingdom amusement park in Lake George implemented a new policy making all but a few designated areas smoke-free. There is now a smoking-and-alcohol-free family zone on the lawn at concerts at the Saratoga Performing Arts Center. In 2006, the Washington County town of Hudson Falls made municipal parks smoke-free; several years ago, the town of Clifton Park made its pools smoke-free.
   But it’s possible that the New York State Fair in Syracuse made the biggest splash of all when it announced earlier this summer that it would no longer allow vendors to sell tobacco products on site.
   “In an effort to continue to make New York state the healthiest state in the nation, we have determined that the sale of tobacco products is not appropriate on the New York State Fairgrounds, and we want to encourage people to participate in a healthy lifestyle,” fair Executive Director Dan O’Hara said when the ban was first announced.
IS A BAN NEEDED?
   Not everyone believes that such steps are necessary.
   The Schoharie County Sunshine Fair, which begins Tuesday and runs through Sunday, has never considered banning smoking or restricting the sale of cigarettes, said Mike Montario, fair director in charge of concessions and vice president of the Cobleskill Agricultural Society. Although no one will be selling cigarettes at this year’s Sunshine Fair, it’s not because of any new policies; instead, a longtime cigarette vendor decided not to return to the fair and nobody is stepping in to take her place, he said.
   “We feel people come to enjoy the fair,” Montario said. “My personal opinion is that if people want to smoke outdoors, that’s fine. I don’t know how we would enforce [a ban on outdoor smoking].”
   Montario attends meetings of the New York State Association of Agricultural Fairs; he said there’s never been a discussion about prohibiting outdoor smoking or cigarette sales.
   “We don’t really want to limit all the rights people have,” he said. “Just move away from the smoker.”
   Two local groups, the Southern Adirondack Tobacco-Free Coalition and the Capital District Tobacco-Free Coalition, recently completed community surveys showing that a growing number of residents support restricting outdoor smoking. In 2005, 34.3 percent of Schenectady County residents said they supported banning smoking in public parks and outdoor recreation areas; this year, that number had grown to 47.9 percent. In the 2007 survey, more than 55 percent of county residents supported banning smoking at public beaches, 71.6 percent supported banning smoking around entryways, 78.3 percent supported banning smoking at playgrounds and 78.7 percent supported banning smoking at city pools.
   “People more and more understand the dangers of secondhand smoke,” said Judy Rightmyer, program director for the Capital District Tobacco-Free Coalition. “It’s been four years after the [state law banning indoor smoking] was passed, and people are used to an environment where there isn’t smoking. So when they’re exposed to smoking, it’s like, ‘I don’t really like this.’ ”
GROWING SUPPORT
   Rightmyer said the Capital District Tobacco-Free Coalition will soon ramp up its efforts to restrict outdoor smoking; the group plans to hire someone to head up those efforts and hopes to work closely with counties and cities.
   “It looks like it will be an easy sell, because there’s so much public support for it,” Rightmyer said.
   The Southern Adirondack Tobacco-Free Coalition has worked with local fairs on tobacco issues. Last year, the Saratoga County Fair signed a policy saying that it would not accept sponsorship or promotions from the tobacco industry; this year, the Washington County Fair enacted a similar policy, said Margaret LaFrance, program director of the Southern Adirondack Tobacco-Free Coalition.
   “It makes sense from an environmental and health view,” she said. “Tobacco butts contain toxins that seep into the earth and last for a long time.”
   Annie Tegan, senior program manager for the California-based Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, said a groundbreaking report released by the U.S. Surgeon General in 2006 helped spur some of the recent efforts to ban outdoor smoking. The report said that secondhand smoke dramatically increases the risk of heart disease and lung cancer in non-smokers and can be controlled only by making indoor spaces smoke-free.
   “There’s no safe level of exposure,” Tegan said. “In places where people congregate, they think it’s important to have smoke-free air. People like smoke-free air. They’re enjoying it. ” At the same time, “It’s not about the smoker,” she said. “It’s about the smoke. We’re not trying to demand that anyone stop smoking entirely.”
   More than 500 cities have passed laws banning smoking at public parks, beaches and plazas, while about 600 communities have enacted reasonable distance laws that restrict smoking near the entrances to certain buildings, such as hospitals, where smoking is prohibited, Tegan said. About 300 cities have also banned smoking in outdoor venues such as stadiums and outdoor theaters.
   “It’s happening in all corners of the country,” she said. “After cities passed indoor smoking bans, people began seeing the health improvements and turned their attention to outdoors. We’re just now coming into a time when people are demanding that outdoor areas be smoke-free.”
CLEANER AIR, SIDEWALKS
   These efforts don’t sit well with everyone.
   Audrey Silk, who in 2000 founded the smokers’ rights organization New York City Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, disputed the findings on secondhand smoke.
   “You’re not harming anyone outside,” Silk said. “There’s no evidence you’re harming anyone outside. ... Smoke dissipates into the air within seconds. It’s harming no one. Is that three seconds every day going to hurt them?”
   But one California city saw plenty of reasons, not all of them health-related, to take the lead in the effort to prohibit smoking in public spaces.
   In 2006, the city of Calabasas, Calif., passed what at the time was considered the most sweeping smoking ban in the country: a ban on smoking in all outdoor places, including sidewalks and streets, except for small outdoor “smoker outposts.” The city council, which voted unanimously in favor of the law, said it wanted to protect children from secondhand smoke, protect the public from smoking and tobacco-related litter and promote the family-friendly atmosphere of the town’s public places.
   Diane O’Connor, a spokeswoman for the Great Escape, said the amusement park’s smoking ban was enacted to “create a cleaner park environment.” Six Flags, the company that owns the Great Escape and a number of other amusement parks throughout the country, banned smoking at all its parks.
   “We’ve heard from a lot of guests who really appreciate it,” she said.
   Smoking is allowed in a few places, including behind the Red Garter Saloon in Ghost Town and next to Thunder Alley.
   Last month, the state Department of Health released a study showing a dramatic drop in secondhand smoke exposure since the state’s Clean Indoor Air Act took effect in 2003. The law has reduced non-smoking adults’ exposure to tobacco smoke by almost half, according to the report.  

Quoted Text

Once the Dems/libs get a hold of a cause they don't care whose rights they take away in order to achieve their goals.

Quoted from bumblethru

Like people are going to get sick from people smoking outside????  

Quoted Text

Secondhand smoke harmful — even outside

   The [Sept. 28] editorial “Park smoking ban goes too far,” calls into question legislation that would protect public health and well-being by restricting the locations in which individuals subject others to the deadly effects of secondhand smoke. Make no mistake: secondhand tobacco smoke kills. In fact, according to the U.S. Surgeon General, “there is no safe level of exposure” to secondhand smoke.
   Did you know that, because their lungs are so much smaller, children breathe in 50 percent more air than an adult? It is true, and it is why children are more susceptible to the dangers associated with inhaling tobacco smoke — even if outdoors. That is why we support legislation which removes these pollutants from an environment where children and families enjoy recreational activities.
   Tobacco smoke is a known asthma trigger. If enacted into law, this legislation could mean the difference of having an asthma attack — or not — for an individual enjoying the benefits of our public parks. Additionally, secondhand smoke is responsible for 54,000 deaths each year in the United States. In fact, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency classifies secondhand smoke as a known carcinogen.
   It is important that we act to avert these preventable problems by moving quickly to adopt smart, progressive laws that keep the dangers of secondhand smoke away from children and adults. Our citizens should not be forced to inhale another person’s toxic cigarette smoke.
If you know someone who does smoke, urge and encourage them to seek treatment and kick the habit. One easy way to start down that path is to pick up the phone and call the New York State Smokers’ Quitline at 1-866-NYQUITS (1-866-697-8487).
MICHAEL SEILBACK
Albany
The writer is senior director of Public Policy and Advocacy for the American Lung Association of New York  

Quoted Text

Cobleskill smoking ban
By: Mark Repasky

COBLESKILL, N.Y. -- The Village of Cobleskill may already be a good place to live, but Mayor Michael Sellers wants to make it a little bit better. That is if you are not a smoker.

“We want to be a family friendly community, we want to be friendly to youth and young people and smoking cigarettes is not an activity that I think should be around young people,” said Michael Sellers, Cobleskill Mayor.

So he said it's time to quit smoking in the villages three parks. Although he admits the law will be hard to enforce he said it's more about education and keeping cigarettes out of the hands and eyes of children.

The Village of Cobleskill may already be a good place to live, but Mayor Michael Sellers wants to make it a little bit better.

“Smoking kills people and we've got to be honest about that and the government sector has a role to play in educating people what is healthy and let people know and maybe enforce a law that would keep them from participating in activity that wouldn't be good in front of younger people,” said Sellers.

Residents have mixed reactions. Some said this park already has too many rules and the village is overstepping its bounds.

“I think it's a bunch of nonsense because you're out in the outdoors. I can see if it was enclosed but you're outdoors,” said Alan Surnear, Cobleskill resident.

Gabby Capone, a student at SUNY Cobleskill, said she would support the measure because it may help her cut back on her own bad habit.

“I don't smoke in public places and it would keep me from smoking here,” said Capone.

One thing all sides agree on is the problem these messy cigarette butts create. Though this smoker had a plan of his own.

“They should put out ashtrays so people can put them in there,” said Surnear.

That seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.

Quoted Text

Smokers are often inconsiderate, so outdoor ban needed

   I would like to comment on your Sept. 26 editorial, “Park smoking ban goes too far,” regarding the proposed outdoor smoking ban in Cobleskill. Since we recently took our grandchildren to the Cobleskill Fair, and shared the fairgrounds with smokers, I feel qualified to respond to your comments.
   Our experience was the worst we have had using the same outdoor space as smokers. The majority of them were inconsiderate, rude and downright nasty to those in the near vicinity — without regard to the discomfort of others.
   They walked in crowded areas, swinging their arms with lighted cigarettes in their hands, making it difficult to navigate the walkways with small children in danger of being burned.
   They stood in close proximity, in line for children’s rides, blowing smoke over their shoulders, into the faces of our grandchildren and us, flicking ashes wherever it was convenient for them, without consideration that it made a very uncomfortable experience for the rest of us. They threw lit butts on the ground, causing a risk to those wearing sandals. It also seemed an extremely dangerous practice, considering the dry hay, papers and other fire hazards at the fairgrounds.
   In other words, the difficulty was not only from secondhand smoke — but all of the above. The saddest part of this, for me, was that most of these people were parents and grandparents with little children who obviously have this exposure every day. To me, this borders on abuse.
   I know many people who still smoke, and most of them do so with consideration to those around them. Since it is impossible to control the way people deal with their individual smoking behavior, it seems a greater infringement on the rights and safety of others to allow them to continue in this manner than it is to assign designated smoking areas for those who choose to continue the practice. Not everyone will apply common courtesy to their personal habits.
I wonder if it will take a major tragedy for necessary change to occur.
EDWARD GRINTER
Rotterdam  

Quoted Text

Public health and safety require tobacco-free parks

   Having come to expect thoughtful and considered editorial opinions from the Gazette, the Sept. 28 editorial, “Park smoking ban goes too far,” was both a surprise and a disappointment.
   Park smoking bans are no more an infringement on individual rights than open container laws, public nudity or any other number of restrictions placed on personal behavior in certain contexts for the public good.
   The 2006 Surgeon General’s Report says “there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.” What the Gazette editorial reduces to a “snoot full of secondhand smoke” can, for some people, be enough to trigger a heart attack, asthma attack or other respiratory failure. Results from a Stanford University study indicate that “a person near an outdoor smoker might inhale a breath with 50 times more toxic material than in the surrounding unpolluted air.” That toxic material includes human carcinogens that can penetrate deep inside the lungs.
Tobacco-free public parks are a matter of public health and safety. The concerns are magnified by the fact that parks are where our children play — on playgrounds and the sports fields; in the pools and the sprinklers. As a community, we should not only be protecting them from the toxic effects of secondhand smoke, but also from the normalization of tobacco use.
Every year, nearly 25,000 New York youths begin to smoke. If they keep smoking, half of them will die. They deserve better. And so do we.
THERESA ZUBRETSKY
Troy
The writer is project coordinator for the Capital District Tobacco-Free Coalition.

Quoted Text

Higher cigarette taxes are the best deterrent

   The Oct. 1 AP article, “Smoking poor tapped to pay for health plan,” has it backward. It’s not the cigarette tax that’s regressive; it is the harm from smoking that is regressive. Higher rates of smoking among lower-income groups mean they suffer disproportionately from smoking-caused disease and disability as well as the financial costs of buying cigarettes.
   Raising the cost of cigarettes is a powerful incentive for lower-income smokers to quit or cut back and to keep adolescents from ever starting to smoke. Smokers with family incomes at or below the national median are four times as likely to quit when cigarette prices increase as those with higher incomes.
   A dollar increase in the cigarette tax would prevent 142,000 of New York children, alive today, from becoming smokers in the future and motivate up to 81,300 New York smokers to quit smoking — in the first year alone.
   Reinvesting revenue raised from cigarette tax increases into health care, education, tobacco cessation and prevention programs can be a further benefit of tax increases to low-income families and communities.
   According to the National Academy of Sciences, higher cigarette taxes are the single most direct and reliable way to reduce smoking by both encouraging cessation and reducing youth initiation. Better health, fewer deaths, and financial savings from fewer smokingrelated expenditures. That’s a win for everyone.
JUDY RIGHTMYER
Troy
The writer is director of the Capital District Tobacco-Free Coalition.  

Quoted Text

Don’t rely on tobacco industry’s help to stop teens from smoking
MEG DOHERTY Gansevoort

   I’m discouraged to see the recent appearance of Phillip Morris U.S.A. Quit Assist materials throughout Fulton and Montgomery counties.
   Tobacco industry-sponsored youth prevention programs show no evidence that they prevent kids from smoking or help smokers quit! In fact, among 10thand 12th-graders, higher exposure to the parent-targeted ads was associated with lower perceived harm of smoking, stronger approval of smoking, stronger intentions to smoke in the future, and a greater likelihood of having smoked in the past 30 days (Wakefield, M., American Journal of Public Health, December 2006). The net effect is the continuation of the tobacco industry’s pattern of attracting millions of new smokers each year to their deadly products.
   I ask that agencies instead consider the New York State Smokers’ Quitline materials to be distributed throughout your organization. Please call 1-866-NY-QUITS or 1-866-697-8487 for free patches, gum, or lozenges (if you qualify, and most smokers do) serving as a reliable source of information on smoking prevention and cessation. Your local tobacco-free coalition, Project Action-Tobacco Free Coalition, is available to supply you with a variety of materials the Quitline has to offer.
   Please contact Sue Arminio at 841-7288 or arminiosu@smha.org, and please visit http://www.nysmokefree.com for further information.  

Quoted Text

Don’t rely on tobacco industry’s help to stop teens from smoking

Quoted Text

Tougher tobacco rules welcome in schools

   I am proud to announce that several schools in Fulton and Montgomery counties participating in the Tobacco-Free Schools Policy Program have recently passed an updated districtwide tobaccofree schools policies. Congratulations go out to Gloversville, Mayfield and Broadalbin-Perth for reviewing, revising and now implementing their new tobacco-free school policy.
   The Tobacco-Free School Policy Program works to increase the number of schools that implement effective tobacco-free schools policies in compliance with state and federal law, and to establish a minimum standard where a variety of comprehensive standards are implemented.
   These schools passed policies that are meant as a starting point for behavioral and attitudinal change related to tobacco use on school campuses among students, their families, staff and members of the community. This policy will play a key role in supporting non-use of any and all tobacco products on all school grounds at all times as a way to prevent initial use of tobacco, or to interrupt habituated use among youth. The policy gives youth and adults an opportunity to live a more healthy life while complying with the law.
   The enforcement of this policy is applicable to everyone on the school campus at any time, and includes (but is not limited to) visitors, staff, students, faculty, bus drivers, maintenance and construction personnel.
   This proactive approach to health will make a difference to schools, students, staff and visitors.
   DENISE BENTON
   Johnstown
The writer is a Tobacco-Free Healthy Schools policy coordinator for Catholic Charities of Fulton and Montgomery counties.  

Quoted Text

Mohawk reservation still a soft spot for cigarette smuggling
BY MICHAEL HILL The Associated Press

AKWESASNE, Ontario — Mohawk police spotted a red van with swiped license plates riding through the reservation on a recent night looking like it was loaded down with something heavy.
   It was.
   After a brief pursuit, the offi cer pulled over a vehicle that smelled like a humidor. Garbage bags packed with more than a ton of golden cut tobacco filled the back from floor to ceiling.
   Another night, another illegal load of tobacco headed to Canada from the United States through this Mohawk reservation. Akwesasne, which stretches south into New York state, is by far the busiest spot for cigarette smuggling along the northern border. While the U.S.-Canada border runs some 4,000 miles through mountains, plains and some of the largest freshwater lakes on the planet, the security challenges posed by Akwesasne are unique.
   A bit smaller than the Bronx, the reservation straddles New York state, Quebec and Ontario and is sliced by the St. Lawrence River. Border crossers here pass through land controlled by four distinct governments: New York state, U.S.-side Mohawks, Canadian-side Mohawks and Ontario. This geopolitical complexity has helped make Akwesasne a go-to gateway for smugglers at least since Prohibition.
   Right now, cigarette smuggling is big.
   “They take advantage of the geography and the jurisdictional nightmare,” said Royal Canadian Mounted Police Sgt. Michael Harvey.
   Tobacco smuggling caught on after Canadian officials boosted cigarette taxes in 2001 to combat smoking. Criminals can sneak in their own cigarettes and retail them for as little as $10 a carton, compared to $80 or more for legal cartons. Mounties are seizing almost 17 times more tobacco than in 2001. Last year, they seized 472,000 cartons across Canada — 90 percent originating from this Mohawk reservation.
   Harvey said the tobacco is trucked north to the territory, where factories on the American side of the reservation, known as St. Regis, can pump out millions of cigarettes a year. Others simply smuggle bulk tobacco through the reservation, presumably to be made into cigarettes up north.
   Sneaking the goods into Canada is a cat-and-mouse game. Smugglers zip across the river at night in low-profile duck boats with no lights to the Ontario portion of the reservation, which is an island. Then they can take a bridge to Cornwall, Ontario. Or they can boat a dozen miles down-river to any number of coves or marinas on the Canadian shore. In winter, they can drive trucks or snowmobiles over the ice.
   Once in mainland Canada, it’s an easy drive to Montreal, Ottawa or Toronto. The contraband cigarettes, often sold at “smoke shacks” on Indian land in Canada, look like any other, except without labels or boxes. They are packed parallel in clear plastic resealable bags.
   Harvey said the Canadian-based organized crime groups behind tobacco smuggling will sometimes bring ecstasy or hockey bags full of marijuana back down to the United States. Still, it does not appear U.S. officials view Akwesasne as a comparable floodgate for illegal immigrants, drugs or money — which are their primary U.S. northern border concerns.
   U.S. Border Patrol spokesman Mark Henry said Akwesasne is a geographic challenge, but it is among several that agents focus on in their Northeast patrols. The Border Patrol does not keep seizure figures for Akwesasne. But the agency’s Swanton sector — which stretches 295 miles from northern New York to New Hampshire — last year made 1,119 arrests for alien smuggling, a bit less than one in five of all such arrests along the northern border.
   Chief Andrew Thomas of the St. Regis Tribal Police said smugglers exploit opportunities wherever they find them and the reservation’s reputation as a “gateway” is unwarranted.
   “That happens here, that happens points east, that happens points west,” he said. “We seem to get all the attention.”
   Thomas has 16 officers to patrol the American side of the reservation, a flatland of woods, fields, modest houses and a bunch of gas stations that can sell tax-free fuel and cigarettes. Thomas said tobacco is “not a high priority with my agency.” In his view, cigarette smuggling would disappear overnight if Canada would simply lower tobacco taxes.
   “We have smuggling issues that my office focuses on, and that’s the drug trade, weapons and illegal immigrants and illegal aliens,” Thomas said. “Those are the real criminal issues that we deal with.”
   Law enforcement officials say Mohawk authorities on both sides of the border routinely cooperate in crackdown efforts, which are aggressive. Mounties have seized dozens of smugglers’ pickup trucks and minivans (many with back seats removed to make room for more product ) this year alone. This summer, they teamed up with the U.S. Coast Guard to patrol the river under a pilot project called Shiprider.
   On the U.S. side, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said it has seized 16 tractor loads of tobacco headed to Akwesasne in the past 18 months.
   But police actions involving Akwesasne can still be complicated by jurisdictional issues. Many Mohawks remain deeply connected to their land and sovereign heritage, a point of view summed up by a prominent banner hanging along the main highway here reading: “This is Mohawk Land Not NYS Land.”
   Consider that the St. Regis Tribal Council, the American-side government, lists six factories registered with the tribe to manufacture cigarettes, but there appears to only be one with federal approval.

Quoted Text

Ask your grocer to reduce promotion of tobacco products

   Nov. 15 was the 31st Great American Smokeout. On this day, I witnessed Capital Region grocery store customers sign 3,000 postcards and petitions asking stores to make tobacco advertising and tobacco products less visible to young people. This is a way to decrease the attractiveness of smoking and to protect them from the often fatal effects of lifetime tobacco use.
   As a customer, you can voice your concern to stores that have tobacco advertising by asking them to please remove or rearrange their tobacco ads. These ads lure individuals, most often children, to begin smoking in the fi rst place.
   Together we can address the issue of smoking where it starts — with advertising. Please be a voice to retailers to protect our children and make tobacco advertising and tobacco product placement less visible in stores. Adult customers who smoke will still be able to obtain tobacco products.
   Change can simply start with just relocating tobacco products and sales to the customer service desk.
   SUE ARMINIO
   Amsterdam
The writer is program coordinator for Project ACTION of Hamilton, Fulton & Montgomery Counties.  

Quoted Text

Cigarette firm to cut out print ads

   NEW YORK — The R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., which has been under intense pressure from antismoking groups and members of Congress over print ads for its cigarettes, said Tuesday it would not advertise its brands in newspapers or consumer magazines next year.
   The company had been criticized sharply for both its colorful and feminine Camel No. 9 ads, which appeared in fashion magazines and were seen as cynically aimed at young women, and also for a recent ad in Rolling Stone.
   R.J. Reynolds spokeswoman Jan Smith said the decision had actually been made in late September or early October and was unrelated to the Rolling Stone controversy.
   The Washington-based Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, which has long protested the Camel ads, called the company’s decision “more a strategy to deflect criticism than a real change in marketing.”
   Matthew Myers, president of the group, said it was unfortunate that R.J. Reynolds had not committed to permanently stop print advertising. Smith said the company, based in Winston-Salem, N.C., would make decisions about future years at a later time.
   A number of magazines refuse to accept tobacco ads, including Self, Men’s Health and Money, according to the Tobacco-Free Periodicals Project.  

Quoted Text

Supermarkets should stop selling cigarettes
LISABETH A. MANY Albany

    It’s about time that, as a community, we begin to confront and act on tobacco advertising and location in our grocery stores.
    Many smaller businesses and large corporations are signing policies refusing to accept financial benefits from the tobacco industry. In the case of smaller businesses, this funding could be a huge financial aid; however, they are able to comprehend all the negative effects tobacco advertising has on easily influenced youth in their communities.
    I find it extremely unlikely that chain grocery stores, such as Price Chopper and Hannaford in our area, rely on cigarette sales to heighten their estimated $2.5 billion annual revenue. Will the movement of cigarettes to an unseen location and the removal of advertisements have a great impact on these companies’ annual revenue? I highly doubt it.
    In my opinion, buying wine in a grocery store as opposed to a liquor store makes more sense. Perhaps we should just stop selling cigarettes in our grocery stores altogether and instead open cigarette shops.

Quoted Text

The tax money from the cigarette tax for government programs bother me and so does the taking away of people's rights.

Quoted Text

Stores that sell tobacco shouldn’t display it quite so prominently

    Wegman’s Food Markets, a grocery store chain anchored in the Rochester/ Buffalo/ Syracuse area with over 71 stores in five states and over 37,000 employees (many under the age of 21), has made a decision to stop selling tobacco in their stores as of Feb. 10. As a parent of two small boys, I applaud Wegman’s for making such a proactive decision toward health.
    As a parent, I would love to see our local grocery store chains, such as Price Chopper and Hannaford, make similar decisions. I wonder if our local grocery stores have ever thought about the sale and use of tobacco, and how it fits the image of healthy living or eating. Sadly, no one reaps any benefits from using tobacco in any form. It’s not meant to heal sickness or wounds, it’s not meant to give you energy or boost metabolism, it’s certainly not meant to increase your life span. There really are no positive effects for anyone who uses tobacco.
    Of course, tobacco use is a personal choice, and tobacco sales can be profi table for businesses; but once again, it doesn’t seem to fit the image of promoting healthy living or eating.
    If stores like Price Chopper and Hannaford chose to continue to sell tobacco products, that is their right. I just hope they would they at least consider putting the products behind the customer service desk, where people, especially children, don’t have to look at it at the end of the checkout lines.
    I am a dedicated shopper at my local Price Chopper, and believe it is a fine place to do business. I think that they are extremely philanthropic and are more than generous to our local communities, organizations, athletic teams and charities. They have helped countless individuals, families and organizations, and should be repeatedly commended for their graciousness.
    But I believe that even just moving tobacco or displays to a more secure, less public location, would warrant these businesses another well-deserved feather in their cap.
    DENISE BENTON
    Gloversville

Quoted Text

State mounts $800G campaign to discourage smoking in films
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
The Associated Press

NEW YORK — New York health officials don’t want kids to imitate celebrities who smoke in movies, and they’re spending $800,000 trying to change the way movies are rated when actors light up.
With full page ads in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, the state Health Department is encouraging the movie industry to consider smoking — along with nudity and violence — when applying ratings. State Health Commissioner Dr. Richard Daines thinks cigarettes merit an ’R’ rating, restricting children under 18.
Daines wrote to the chief executive officers of six major motion picture studios and to the president of the Motion Picture Association of America, asking them to reduce childrens’ exposure to smoking on-screen.

Quoted Text

Drugstores should also stop selling cigarettes

Re April 3 article, “Health chief urges grocers to stop selling cigarettes — Industry leader warns of ‘slippery slope’”: I agree with the movement to get the big grocery stores to take tobacco products off their shelves. What I really think is that drugstores should remove tobacco products also. In my opinion, a store that sells products to cure or prevent illnesses should never sell a product that causes all the health-related problems associated with tobacco.
BERNARD WITKOWSKI

Quoted Text

Drugstores should also stop selling cigarettes

Re April 3 article, “Health chief urges grocers to stop selling cigarettes — Industry leader warns of ‘slippery slope’”: I agree with the movement to get the big grocery stores to take tobacco products off their shelves. What I really think is that drugstores should remove tobacco products also. In my opinion, a store that sells products to cure or prevent illnesses should never sell a product that causes all the health-related problems associated with tobacco.
BERNARD WITKOWSKI

Quoted Text

The last thing we need is for the government either federal or state to start regulating more of peoples lives when they can't even balance a budget.

Quoted Text

Limiting access to cigarettes is all about gov’t control

    Re the April 15 letter “Good policy to make cigarettes less accessible,” by New York State Health Commissioner Richard F. Daines, give me a break. First of all, he has to say something like that because he is the health commissioner. And second, why are nonsmokers trying to control smokers?
    [If] you’re going to take cigarettes out of every market, then take beer and wine out also. The stand against smokers is hypocritical. Daines should try focusing some of his energies on the alcoholics who are drinking and driving. They are the ones getting behind the wheel and killing innocent people or themselves.
    And, just like smoking, there are a ton of health problems with alcohol, like liver cancer, spleen, etc. But alcohol is promoted on television, in magazines, on billboards, etc. There are a lot of people and companies making millions of dollars on alcohol.
    I agree it’s not healthy to smoke and, yes, I’m for not smoking in certain places. But in our own homes and outside in fresh air? That is going too far. We are not sitting there smoking in your face for 45 minutes straight.
The government is setting itself up so that there will be a black market, just like in the 1920s and ’30s with liquor. Why? To control people? The people in government need to think about this the next time they are drinking their alcohol at dinner or lunch.
SUE MIZEJEWSKI
Niskayuna

Quoted Text

Time for serious regulation of tobacco

We live in a nation of regulations. Except when it comes to cigarettes and other tobacco products, that is. It’s astonishing, really. The Food and Drug Administration does not have the authority to regulate a pack of cigarettes. Nor does the Department of Health and Human Services. No department or agency in the federal government has that authority. The U.S. House of Representatives is looking to change that, and has taken a real step toward giving the Food and Drug Administration the authority it needs to have over cigarettes and other tobacco products.
This is a good law, long overdue. It deserves broad support.
--The Republican, Springfield, Mass.,

Quoted Text

Health Department will continue efforts to cut tobacco consumption
First published: Thursday, April 24, 2008

The state Health Department recently ran an advertisement in the Times Union suggesting that parents and other consumers call on all supermarkets to end sales of tobacco products, as many have already done. Your April 7 editorial "Smoke signals" makes the odd counterargument that because cigarettes are legal, supermarkets selling them should be sheltered from such criticism.
Supermarkets make many choices about what products to offer for sale in their communities. These decisions are based on a product's appropriateness for the community, consistency with the store's mission, and on daily interactions with customers. Our efforts to inform and energize the public regarding the inconsistency of tobacco retailing alongside sales of healthy food are an entirely appropriate addition to this dialogue.
     
As state health commissioner, I will continue to use every available tool to reduce tobacco consumption. The 25,600 smoking-caused deaths that occur every year in New York are a constant reminder of the grave health consequences associated with this deadly product. You also argue that in light of the state's campaign against tobacco sales, it is somehow hypocritical for the state to raise cigarette taxes to balance the budget. I strongly disagree.
The state spends $8.2 billion every year on treatment for tobacco-caused disease, including $5.4 billion in the Medicaid program alone. This is far in excess of the money that the cigarette excise tax will raise for state coffers in one year even after including the $265 million the increased tax will bring in this year. Is the state's use of taxes any more hypocritical than the Times Union's acceptance of state money to run our advertisements while, as in your editorial, decrying the content and purpose of those ads.
Nearly every proposed advance made against tobacco consumption over the last 40 years has been opposed by some flimsy argument. Restrictions in advertising, controls to prevent youth consumption, the clean indoor air movement and the recovery of tobacco-related health costs from Big Tobacco have each had to survive charges of nannyism, impracticality or hypocrisy. Looking back, is there any one of these measures that an informed public would choose to revoke? If not now, then at some future date, tobacco will not be sold by virtually all public spirited supermarkets. The important question then for the last stragglers to come on board will be, "Why did it take you so long?"
RICHARD F. DAINES, M.D. State Commissioner of Health Albany

Quoted Text

Tobacco one of many supermarket killers

    New York State Health Commissioner Dr. Richard F. Daines wrote that “tobacco is the only product sold in grocery stores, when used exactly as intended, that will kill customers and increase the number of those dying from devastating diseases such as cancer” [April 15 Gazette]. I respectfully disagree.
    There are probably thousands of items sold in supermarkets that, used as intended, shorten people’s lives. Much of the food sold in grocery stores is contaminated with pesticides and herbicides, tainted with artificial flavors and colors, and genetically modified; some is nanofied or irradiated.
    Large numbers of farm animals in the United States — sources of meat, cheese, eggs, butter, and milk — are raised in concentration camp-like conditions, fed growth hormones and dosed with antibiotics.
    Much of the food sold in supermarkets is packaged in plastics that leach dangerous chemicals into the food. These include phthalates and bisphenol A. Phthalates, a known human carcinogen, are added to polyvinyl chloride. Bisphenol A — hormone disrupter — is found in a variety of items, including baby bottles.
    Remember: What you don’t know can hurt you. More than 1,500 new chemicals are introduced in commerce each year in the United States. Few are tested for safety — they are simply let loose.
    We live in a rapidly changing world, where large corporations wield tremendous capacity to quickly saturate markets with new products and poisons. Greed trumps safety. Unfortunately, we can’t count on government to protect us. Most federal (and many state) politicians have been neutralized by large corporate campaign contributions. Regulatory agencies are far too weak to deal with the pollution onslaught.
    I encourage readers to carefully research the safety of both the food you purchase and the containers it is packaged in. Teach your loved ones to do the same.
    TOM ELLIS
    Albany

Quoted Text

Industry studies delay re-evaluation of plastics
Independent research warns of additive in baby bottles
BY LYNDSEY LAYTON The Washington Post

    WASHINGTON — Despite more than 100 published studies by government scientists and university laboratories that have raised health concerns about a chemical compound that is central to the multibillion-dollar plastics industry, the Food and Drug Administration has deemed it safe largely because of two studies, both funded by an industry trade group.
    The agency says it has relied on research backed by the American Plastics Council because it had input on its design, monitored its progress and reviewed the raw data.
    The compound, bisphenol A (BPA), has been linked to breast and prostate cancer, behavioral disorders and reproductive health problems in laboratory animals.
    As evidence mounts about the risks of using BPA in baby bottles and other products, some experts and industry critics contend that chemical manufacturers have exerted influence over federal regulators to keep a possibly unsafe product on the market.
    Congressional Democrats have begun investigating any industry influence in regulating BPA.
    “Tobacco figured this out, and essentially it’s the same model,” said David Michaels, who was a federal regulator in the Clinton administration. “If you fight the science, you’re able to postpone regulation and victim compensation, as well. As in this case, eventually the science becomes overwhelming. But if you can get five or 10 years of avoiding pollution control or production of chemicals, you’ve greatly increased your product.”
    Mitchell Cheeseman, deputy director of the FDA’s office of food additive safety, said the agency is not biased toward industry.
    “The fact is, it’s industry’s responsibility to demonstrate the safety of their products,” he said. “The fact that industry generated data to support the safety I don’t think is an unusual thing.”
    The FDA’s position on the compound was called into question earlier this month when a National Institutes of Health panel issued a draft report linking BPA to health concerns. Since then, Canadian regulators have banned BPA in baby products, and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., has introduced a bill to prohibit some uses of the compound. Ten states, including California and Maryland, are weighing their own restrictions.
    U.S. manufacturers produce 7 billion pounds of BPA annually, and business worldwide has been growing about 4 percent a year, driven by rising demand in Asia. A U.S. government ban on BPA would affect thousands of businesses and perhaps billions of dollars in profit for its largest manufacturers.
DELAYING TACTICS
    As part of his investigation, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, wants to examine the role played by the Weinberg Group, a Washington firm that employs scientists, lawyers and public relations specialists to defend products from legal and regulatory action. The firm has worked on Agent Orange, tobacco and Teflon, among other products linked to health hazards, and congressional investigators say it was hired by Sunoco, a BPA manufacturer.
    Dingell has asked the Weinberg Group for all records related to its work in connection with BPA, including studies it has funded and payments made to experts. He cited a letter written by a company vice president in 2003 as Weinberg managed opposition in a longrunning regulatory battle over a compound in Teflon. The strategy would be to discourage “governmental agencies, the plaintiffs’ bar and misguided environmental groups from pursuing this matter any further,” the letter said.
    In a statement, Dingell said, “The tactics apparently employed by the Weinberg Group raise serious questions about whether science is for sale at these consulting groups, and the effect this faulty science might have on the public health.”
    Matthew Weinberg, the firm’s chief executive, declined to be interviewed. But in a brief written statement, he said the company will cooperate with Dingell’s investigation.
    “The analyses we conduct are rigorous and adhere to established principles of scientific integrity,” the statement said. “We believe it is in the public interest for all scientific research to be subject to scrutiny and the views of all affected parties to be heard.”
    Scientists first flagged possible health risks of BPA more than a decade ago. From 1997 to 2005, 116 studies of the compound were published, many of them focused on its effects in low doses. Of those funded by government, 90 percent showed a health effect linked to BPA. None of the industry-funded studies found an effect; all of them said BPA is safe.
BOUGHT SCIENCE
    There is a clear bias in studies funded by industry, said Michaels, who now runs the Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy at George Washington University and who wrote the book “Doubt is Their Product,” which details how various industries have used science to stave off regulation.
    “This is a great example of the funding effect,” he said. “It’s not so much because scientists are shaving the truth, but they ask questions in a way to give them the answers they want.”
    Sharon Kneiss, vice president of products divisions for the American Chemistry Council, said in a conference call with reporters two weeks ago that industry research is unassailable. “We make it a policy to supply government agencies with data, and we have done it in the case of BPA,” she said. “We supplied studies following the highest levels of quality in terms of their study. We stand behind the quality of the studies.”
    The FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency both regulate BPA. Because the compound is most readily absorbed through food and drink, the FDA plays a critical regulatory role because it approves the compound’s use in plastic food containers and bottles, tableware and in the plastic linings of canned foods.
    For much of the regulatory history of BPA, traditional toxicology was used to assess risk to people — researchers tried to find the threshold amount above which BPA would cause cancer, malformation or death.
    Sarah Vogel, who holds a master’s degree in public health and is writing a doctoral dissertation at Columbia University on the politics and scientific history of BPA, said that because practical use of the compound was at levels much lower than the amount deemed toxic, scientists assumed it was safe. “The idea was: Look, this stuff is at such low levels, it really couldn’t effect any harm,” she said.

Quoted Text

While Bisphenol A was first synthesized in 1891, the first evidence of its estrogenicity came from experiments in the 1930's feeding BPA to ovariectomised rats (Dodds and Lawson 1936, 1938).    Some wildly popular water bottles are made of polycarbonate

Another compound invented during that era, diethylstilbestrol, turned out to be more powerful as an estrogen, so bisphenol A was shelved... until polymer chemists discovered that it could be polymerized to form polycarbonate plastic. Unfortunately, the ester bond that links BPA monomers to one another to form a polymer is not stable and hence the polymer decays with time, releasing BPA into materials with which it comes into contact, for example food or water.


Bisphenol A is now deeply imbedded in the products of modern consumer society, not just as the building block for polycarbonate plastic (from which it then leaches as the plastic ages) but also in the manufacture of epoxy resins and other plastics, including polysulfone, alkylphenolic, polyalylate, polyester-styrene, and certain polyester resins.

Its uses don't end with the making of plastic. Bisphenol A has been used as an inert ingredient in pesticides (although in the US this has apparently been halted), as a fungicide, antioxidant, flame retardant, rubber chemical, and polyvinyl chloride stabilizer.

These uses create a myriad of exposures for people. Bisphenol A-based polycarbonate is used as a plastic coating for children's teeth to prevent cavities, as a coating in metal cans to prevent the metal from contact with food contents, as the plastic in food containers, refrigerator shelving, baby bottles, water bottles, returnable containers for juice, milk and water, micro-wave ovenware and eating utensils.

Other exposures result from BPA's use in "films, sheets, and laminations; reinforced pipes; floorings; watermain filters; enamels and vanishes; adhesives; artificial teeth; nail polish; compact discs; electric insulators; and as parts of automobiles, certain machines, tools, electrical appliances, and office automation instruments" (Takahashi and Oishi 2000).

BPA contamination is also widespread in the environment. For example, BPA can be measured in rivers and estuaries at concentrations that range from under 5 to over 1900 nanograms/liter. Sediment loading can also be significant, with levels ranging from under 5 to over 100 µg/kg (ppb) BPA is quite persistent as under normal conditions in the environment it does not readily degrade (Rippen 1999).

What this all means is that most of your life you are within arm's length or closer to bisphenol A. No wonder the debate over its toxicity is so intense.



Some important recent studies of bisphenol A:

Experiments with rats demonstrate that low level exposure to bisphenol A during fetal growth causes breast cancer in adults. At all levels tested down to 2.5 parts per billion, BPA induced formation of aberrant cell growth patterns associated in rodents and people with breast cancer. Levels only 5 times higher than EPA's current safe level caused carcinoma in situ. Using these results to set safety standards would radically reduce use of BPA in plastics and resins. More...

In utero exposure to BPA causes long-term effects on mammary tissue development in rats, increasing risks to cancer, and also increases sensitivity to a chemical known to cause breast cancer. The study strengthens support for a link between increasing rates of breast cancer in recent decades and increasing exposure to estrogenic chemicals like BPA. It also indicates that human epidemiological studies that fail to incorporate developmental exposures can't be trusted to identify cancer-causing agents. More...

Perinatal exposure to extremely low levels of bisphenol A causes precancerous prostate lesions in rats. These lesions, called prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, or PIN, are cancerous and are considered to be a precursor of metastatic prostate cancer in humans. One hundred percent of rats exposed perinatally and then, during adulthood, treated with estradiol and testosterone to create hormonal conditions analogous to thos of an ageing man, developed high-grade PIN. The effect appears to result from the failure in exposed animals of a gene to become hypermethylated as the rats aged. More...

Experiments with mice reveal that chronic adult exposure to bisphenol A causes insulin resistance. Insulin resistance in people leads to Type II diabetes and congestive heart failure, and is part of the modern epidemic of 'metabolic syndrome.' The exposure levels used were within the range that people experience regularly. More...

In a small prospective study, researchers in Japan report that bisphenol A levels are higher in women with a history of repeated spontaneous miscarriages. This research was based on proof that BPA causes meiotic aneuploidy in mice. Meiotic aneuploidy is the commonest cause of miscarriage in people. The researchers also followed the pregnancies of the women to completion, and found evidence of aneuploidy in several of the miscarried fetuses. More...

Bisphenol A and the birth control pharmaceutical ethinylestradiol cause adverse effects in prostate development in mice at levels to which millions of Americans are exposed each year. The results implicate these compounds in human prostate diseases, including prostate cancer. The research also shows the futility of predicting the developmental consequences of low-dose exposures based on high-dose experiments. More...

A flood of new information about bisphenol A revealing both widespread human exposure and effects at extremely low doses sparks a call for a new risk assessment of the ubiquitous compound. Bisphenol A, the basic building block of polycarbonate plastic, alters development of the reproductive tract, the immune system, increases prostate tumor proliferation, changes brain chemistry and structure and affects an array of behaviors, including hyperactivity. Of 11 studies of the compound's effects at low doses, none funded by industry reported impacts. In contrast, 94 out of 104 government-funded studies found effects. This summary includes audio files of an international teleconference about bisphenol A. More...

Several 'weakly' estrogenic compounds including bisphenol A and endosulfan are as powerful as estrogen at increasing calcium influx into cells and stimulating prolactin secretion. The effects are mediated by a cell membrane surface receptor instead of nuclear hormone receptors, the focus of most studies to date. Changes in calcium and prolactin occur at extremely low doses, well within the range of human exposures. Wozniak, AL, NN Bulayeva and CS Watson. 2005. Xenoestrogens at Picomolar to Nanomolar Concentrations Trigger Membrane Estrogen Receptor-alpha-Mediated Ca++ Fluxes and Prolactin Release in GH3/B6 Pituitary Tumor Cells. Environmental Health Perspectives, in press.

Bisphenol A at extremely low levels causes changes in brain structure and behavior in rats. The locus coeruleus is believed to be a key brain center for anxiety and fear. Normally this is larger in females than in males. Rats exposed to BPA at levels beneath the current 'safe' exposure level established by the US EPA show a reversal in sex dimorphism, with males' LC larger than females.' . Kubo, K, O Arai, M Omura, R Wantanabe, R Ogata, and S Aou. 2003. Low dose effects of bisphenol A on sexual differentiation of the brain and behavior in rats. Neuroscience Research 45: 345-356.

Exposures to 1/5th the level considered safe are sufficient to alter maternal behavior in mice, including reductions in time spent nursing, increases in time resting away from offspring, and increases in time spent out of the nest. Palanza, P, KL Howdeshell, S Parmigiani and FS vom Saal. 2002. Exposure to a low dose of bisphenol A during fetal life or in adulthood alters maternal behavior in mice. Environmental Health Perspectives 110 (suppl 3): 415-422.

An accident in the lab, followed by careful analysis and a series of experiments, reveals that bisphenol A causes aneuploidy in mice at low levels of exposure. Because aneuploidy in humans causes spontaneous miscarriages and some 10-20% of all birth defects, including Down Syndrome, this implicates bisphenol A in a broad range of human developmental errors. Hunt, PA, KE Koehler, M Susiarjo, CA Hodges, A Ilagan, RC Voigt, S Thomas, BF Thomas and TJ Hassold. 2003. Bisphenol A exposure causes meiotic aneuploidy in the female mouse. Current Biology 13: 546-553.

Experiments by researchers at the University of Missouri raise the possibility of widespread contamination of laboratory experiments by bisphenol A. Their results demonstrate that at room temperature significant amounts of this estrogenic substance leach into water from old polycarbonate animal cages. This inadvertent contamination could interfere with experiments designed to test the safety of estrogenic chemicals, and lead to false negatives and conflicting results. Howdeshell, KA, PH Peterman, BM Judy, JA Taylor, CE Orazio, RL Ruhlen, FS vom Saal, and WV Welshons 2003. Bisphenol A is released from used polycarbonate animal cages into water at room temperature. Environmental Health Perspectives doi:10.1289/ehp.5993.

An analysis of the biochemical mechanisms of endocrine disruption suggests why industry has been unable to replicate crucial low-dose impacts of bisphenol A on prostate development. Welshons, WV, KA Thayer, BM Judy, JA Taylor, EM Curran and FS vom Saal. 2003. Large effects from small exposures. I. Mechanisms for endocrine disrupting chemicals with estrogenic activity. Environmental Health Perspectives doi:10.1289/ehp.5494

Using new analytical methods, a team of German scientists measured bisphenol A in the blood of pregnant women, in umbilical blood at birth and in placental tissue. All samples examined contained BPA, at levels within the range shown to alter development. Thus widespread exposure to BPA at levels of concern is no longer a hypothetical issue. It is occurring. Schönfelder, G, W Wittfoht, H Hopp, CE Talsness, M Paul and I Chahoud. 2002. Parent Bisphenol A Accumulation in the Human Maternal-Fetal-Placental Unit. Environmental Health Perspectives 110:A703-A707.

At extremely low levels, BPA promotes fat cell (adipocyte) differentiation and accumulation of lipids in a cell culture line used as a model for adipocyte formation. These two steps, differentiation and accumulation, are crucial in the development of human obesity. Hence this result opens up a whole new chapter in efforts to understand the origins of the world-wide obesity epidemic. Masuno, H, T Kidani, K Sekiya, K Sakayama, T Shiosaka, H Yamamoto and K Honda. 2002. Bisphenol A in combination with insulin can accelerate the conversion of 3T3-L1 fibroblasts to adipocytes. Journal of Lipid Research 3:676-684.

In cell culture experiments, BPA at very low (nanomolar levels) stimulates androgen-independent proliferation of prostate cancer cells. This finding is especially important because when prostate tumors become androgen-independent they no longer respond to one of the key therapies for prostate cancer. Wetherill, YB, CE Petre, KR Monk, A Puga, and KE Knudsen. 2002. The Xenoestrogen Bisphenol A Induces Inappropriate Androgen Receptor Activation and Mitogenesis in Prostatic Adenocarcinoma Cells. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics 1: 515–524.

BPA causes changes in rat ventral prostate cells that appear similar to events that make nascent prostate tumors in humans more potent: Ramos, JG, J Varayoud, C Sonnenschein, AM Soto, M Muñoz de Toro and EH Luque. 2001. Prenatal Exposure to Low Doses of Bisphenol A Alters the Periductal Stroma and Glandular Cell Function in the Rat Ventral Prostate. Biology of Reproduction 65: 1271–1277.

BPA induces changes in mouse mammary tissue that resemble early stages mouse and human of breast cancer: Markey, CM, EH Luque, M Muñoz de Toro, C Sonnenschein and AM Soto. 2001. In Utero Exposure to Bisphenol A Alters the Development and Tissue Organization of the Mouse Mammary Gland. Biology of Reproduction 65: 1215–1223.

BPA lowers sperm count in adult rats even at extremely low levels: Sakaue, M, S Ohsako, R Ishimura, S Kurosawa, M Kurohmaru, Y Hayashi, Y Aoki, J Yonemoto and C Tohyama. 2001. Bisphenol-A Affects Spermatogenesis in the Adult Rat Even at a Low Dose. Journal of Occupational Health 43:185 -190.

BPA at extremely low levels creates superfemale snails. Oehlmann, J, U Schulte-Oehlmann, M Tillmann and B Markert. 2000. Effects of endocrine disruptors on Prosobranch snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in the laboratory. Part I: Bisphenol A and Octylphenol as xenoestrogens. Ecotoxicology 9:383-397.

BPA is rapidly transfered to the fetus after maternal uptake: Takahashi, O and S Oishi. 2000. Disposition of Orally Administered 2,2-Bis(4-hydroxyphenyl) propane (Bisphenol A) in Pregnant Rats and the Placental Transfer to Fetuses. Environmental Health Perspectives 108:931-935.

An independently funded, academic laboratory can verify controversial BPA results, even though industry can't: Gupta, Chhanda. 2000. Reproductive malformation of the male offspring following maternal exposure to estrogenic chemicals. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 224:61-68.

Metabolic differences between rats and humans probably mean that humans are more sensitive to BPA than are rats: Elsby, R, JL Maggs, J Ashby and BK Park. 2001. Comparison of the modulatory effects of human and rat liver microsomal metabolism on the estrogenicity of bisphenol A: implications for extrapolation to humans. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics 297-103-113.

A confirmation of BPA low dose effects, and demonstration that the effects include impacts on estrous cyclicity and plasma LH levels: Rubin, BS, MK Murray, DA Damassa, JC King and AM Soto. 2001. Perinatal Exposure to Low Doses of Bisphenol A Affects Body Weight, Patterns of Estrous Cyclicity, and Plasma LH Levels. Environmental Health Perspectives 109: 675-680.

BPA speeds the pace of sexual development in mice, and causes mice to be obese: Howdeshell, K, AK Hotchkiss, KA Thayer, JG Vandenbergh and FS vom Saal. 1999. Plastic bisphenol A speeds growth and puberty. Nature 401: 762-764.

Quoted Text

Responsible stores would take down those tobacco advertisements

    What influences our children? Advertisements. Every day we pass by advertisements, selling everything from milk to tobacco. While I don’t mind my school age child drinking milk, I do mind her using tobacco.
    People who are addicted to tobacco don’t need advertisements to infl uence them into buying tobacco. So who are the advertisements aimed at? Who are tobacco vendors trying to infl uence? Since thousands of people die from tobacco-related illness yearly, tobacco companies must replace their customers. According to the Centers for Disease Control, nearly 90 percent of people start using tobacco before their 18th birthday. So, the advertisements aren’t aimed at adults, even though tobacco companies may say they are.
    As a mother, this realization bothers me. I don’t want my child manipulated into thinking smoking is glamorous or healthy. I want my child to know the cold, hard truth.
    So how do we protect our youth? The tobacco companies are not going to stop making signs that entice the youth. They spend millions on marketing, to keep sales up as their customers die. It’s the responsibility of our good neighbors, the business owner to take the initiative. The business owner, whether a small mom-and-pop shop or a store in a mega-chain, has the responsibility to protect our youth and take down or at least decrease the advertisements.
    While this may cost stores money, not doing it will lead to death and illness. Isn’t protecting young ones more important than feeding the corporate tobacco giants? Advertising plays a role in our culture. Advertising makes smoking look glamorous and appeals to kids that want to be cool. Smoking advertisements make the individual look cool and sexy.
    Stores across the state have decided to eliminate, decrease or rearrange their tobacco advertising. I would like to thank these stores for caring for kids.
    In my ideal world, tobacco would be gone. But short of that ideal, I would like to see stores take down their tobacco advertisements so that my child
can walk through stores and not be
manipulated.
ANGIE DRESSER
Saranac
The writer is a member of Project Action Tobacco Free Coalition for Hamilton County.

Quoted Text

Anti-tobacco crowd should give it a rest

    As I race toward 70 years on this earth, I grow weary of all the do-gooders. People have two faces — one when it does not affect them directly and one when it does.
    In her May 20 letter [“Responsible stores would take down those tobacco advertisements”], Ms. Angie Dresser states that responsible stores should remove tobacco advertisements. She doesn’t want her child manipulated. She further states that business owners have the responsibility to protect our youth.
    In my younger days, it was the parent who protected the child and taught them good and bad — not shop owners.
    She finally states she would like to see all stores take down tobacco advertisements. One must ask what face she is wearing. Is she serious, or a do-gooder? Would she be willing to give up her life if it meant the end of tobacco use? If not, she is nothing more than another person trying to force her opinions on others.
    JOSEPH GIBSON
    Ballston Lake

Quoted Text

Fight tobacco ads that hook kids

    Think kids don’t notice? Think again. It’s a fact: Kids today are more likely to be influenced by cigarette advertising than by peer pressure. The tobacco companies know this, and they are using it to their advantage. That’s why we are launching this initiative to reduce tobacco ads in retail stores all across our region.
Facts about advertising: Kids are more than twice as likely as adults to notice and remember retail tobacco advertising. Tobacco companies spend more than $13 billion on retail advertising and promotion — a successful strategy for hooking young smokers. Parents should be mad about the tobacco industry’s multibillion-dollar efforts to hook their children. Parents can fight back and can find out how at http://www.GetMadAboutAds.org.
JODI ABBOTT
Fonda
The writer is a Montgomery County Public Health/Community Health Educator and Project Action member.

Quoted Text

Either provide free nicotine patch, or don’t

    After 30 years of smoking and being barraged with the stop-smoking media campaigns and endless tax increases on cigarettes, I called the NYQUITS hotline May 15.
    During the 20-plus-minute phone call to NYQUITS, I was asked questions about my race, and other nonsmokingrelated questions, by a very nice young lady who was only doing her job. I informed her that I had set a target date of May 23 to stop and chose the patch as an aid in this much-needed, but not easy, endeavor. The delivery was supposed to arrive by DHL.
    It’s now May 25, Memorial Day weekend, and there has been no sign of these patches or a DHL truck. We are home almost constantly due to being on fi xed incomes, so we couldn’t have missed them. At least the commercials look good on television every 15 minutes or so.
    BILL GUTOWSKI
    Amsterdam

Quoted Text

Parents hold key to kids’ smoking choices

    What influences our children? Us.
    I’m a smoker, and I started really young. What made me start? Angelina Jolie? Joe Camel? No. Most likely, it was my parents being smokers. Are you a smoker? If not, good choice for your children and yourself.
    Why should tobacco be the only business whose advertisements are protested against daily, and who must contribute to their own demise? Philip Morris has pledged $100 million each year for antismoking advertisements directed toward teenagers.
    In 1998, Philip Morris and other tobacco companies had to pay $206 billion in settlements. In a capitalist democracy, this is absurdity. Did companies using CFCs [chlorofluorocarbons] have billion-dollar settlements? Does alcohol? Anheuser-Busch spends money advertising responsible drinking, which has no objective scale.
    What influences our children? Their parents. If you have a close relationship with your kids, then the faceless, nameless, big bad tobacco monster won’t be able to get them. Responsible parents should teach their kids the truth; it’s their job to keep their children safe. Responsible stores should keep up whatever advertisements they deem fi t; it is their job to keep a profit.
AMELIA VREELAND
Schenectady     

Quoted Text

NEW YORK STATE
Cigarette tax increase worries convenience store owners
BY JOE MAHER Gazette Reporter

    The next three to six months will be critical for mom-and-pop convenience stores dealing with higher cigarette taxes and slumping sales.
    Starting Tuesday, the cost of a pack of cigarettes will jump $1.25 because the state tax is increasing from $1.50 per pack to $2.75 per pack.
    “The timing is as bad as it can possibly be,” James Calvin, president of the New York Association of Convenience Stores, said Friday.
    People who smoke and don’t quit to protest the higher taxes will fi nd cheaper sources for their cigarettes, including Indian reservations and border states with significantly lower taxes, he said.
    “The primary concern all along for us has been the reservation tax evasion and how that is going to dramatically affect sales in convenience stores,” Calvin said.
    Calvin said the group thinks the average store will lose 30 percent of its sales volume after the tax hike goes into effect. The number will vary depending on the proximity of the store to border states or reservations.
    “But everybody is going to lose a lot of cigarette sales,” he said, sales that retailers depend on to generate traffic in their stores and, consequently, additional purchases.
    “I’m very fearful what’s going to happen to mom-and-pop convenience stores in the next three to six months,” he said. “It’s going to be a disaster.”
    Those stores are already hurting from lagging sales, according to shop owners.
TAX-FREE QUANDARY
    A Department of Health survey found half of New Yorkers who smoke admit to buying tax-free cigarettes. An economic study conducted on behalf of the convenience store association estimated that tax evasion from reservation sales amounts to $1.6 million per day.
    The state takes in just under $1 billion a year in cigarette taxes; the study estimated that another $1 billion a year was lost to reservation and black-market sales.
    But Tom Bergin, a spokesman for the state Department of Taxation and Finance, said there’s no real way to know.
    “Without disparaging certain groups or individuals, we’ve never been able to determine how much is lost in situations like this,” he said. “Over the years, people have taken plenty of guesses but there’s really no way to know it.”
    He said officials do know that criminal trafficking will increase as a result of the tax increase. The state arrests hundreds of people a year for transporting or selling untaxed cigarettes.
    “Our response is to go after those traffickers very aggressively. We always work closely with local law enforcement authorities,” he said.
    The state has yet to enforce a law, which dates to the Pataki administration, that requires reservations to report cigarette sales and to pay taxes. But the Indians contend that they’re sovereign nations and not subject to state authorities.
    “Everyone is in agreement this is a difficult issue to resolve,” Bergin said. “I think the administration is doing the best it can to resolve that issue.”
LOCAL SALES WOES
    Conventional retailers are bracing for a downturn in cigarette sales once the new taxes take effect.
    “It will have an impact on our business,” Gary Cunningham, a category manager for the Saratoga Springs-based Stewart’s chain, said. “There’s a lot of questions. Will they quit? Will they find other ways to buy? We have a lot of questions,” he said.
    Stewart’s has 325 shops, 10 of which are in Vermont. Cunningham said there is “an interesting border phenomenon” between New York and Vermont. A couple of years ago, Vermont’s cigarette tax was significantly lower and New Yorkers made it a point to buy in Vermont.
    Then it flip-flopped when Vermont instituted a tax higher than New York’s “and now it’s going back the other way,” he said.
    Avinash Moudgil, owner of the MUD Deli in downtown Gloversville, said rising taxes and slumping sales can be a lethal combination for a small business.
    “You have to find some other way to make a living,” said Moudgil, who has run the business for seven years. “Bills are going higher and higher, taxes are going higher and higher. Where do you get the money?”
    He said people haven’t really been stocking up in advance of the new tax but expects business will pick up, a sentiment echoed by Eddy Abraham of Naif’s Grocery, also in Gloversville, and by Cunningham.
    Abraham said he ordered extra cigarettes in anticipation of the tax hike. “I think people are going to buy a lot of them between now and Tuesday,” he said Friday afternoon.
    He said the profit margin on cigarettes is a relatively low 7 percent, and he thinks the government is unfairly targeting smokers.
    “You’re hitting a small percentage of the population. As a store owner I think it’s wrong and as a consumer I think it’s wrong,” Abraham said.
QUITTERS
    Tony Brown, who smokes between a half-pack and a pack of cigarettes a day, agreed.
    “I think it’s robbery, to tell you the truth. Come on. I know a bunch of people, that’s all they do, they go to the reservation to buy cigarettes,” he said.
    Other smokers said the price hike could mean quitting time.
    “I’m really seriously considering quitting with this buck and a quarter [increase],” Heidi Meher said after forking over $10 for two packs of Marlboro Lights at Naif’s Friday. “They’ve taken everything else away.”
    Linda Cunningham stopped by the store to pick up the paper and said she already gave up smoking, tired of high prices and concerned about her health. “I quit a year ago February,” she said.
    She’s not alone.
    Claire Pospisil, a spokeswoman for the state Health Department, said there is a downward trend among people who smoke. Figures from 2007 show 18 percent of New Yorkers, or 2.7 million adults, smoke.
    The percentage of high-school students who smoke stood at 13.8 percent, down from 32.9 percent in 1997.
    Smoking claims the lives of 25,500 New Yorkers every year, despite the fact that the state spends $83 million a year on “tobacco control.”
    “We do tons of things,” Pospisil said. “We fund 19 tobacco control cessation centers throughout the state. They basically work with people to help them stop smoking. We run the Quit Line and we expect additional calls to that.”
    DOH also supported the Clean Indoor Air Act, which bans smoking in most indoor public places, and launched a media campaign to encourage doctors to talk to patients about the dangers of smoking.
    And DOH Commissioner Dr. Richard F. Daines has asked the federal Food and Drug Administration to allow nicotine gum to be sold in small quantities at convenience stores, on display right next to the smokes.
    People who call the state’s Quit Line, 1-866-NYQUITS, can talk to a counselor and formulate a plan to improve the odds of successfully kicking the habit. They can also obtain a two-week supply of nicotine gum or patches for free.
    “We know it’s very difficult for people to quit and we’re doing everything that we can to provide smokers with the resources they need. And raising the price of cigarettes is one of the most effective ways to get people to quit,” Pospisil said.
    “We expect that with the increase in the cigarette tax that 243,000 New York kids will not start smoking,” she said. “Our goal is to have one million fewer smokers by 2010.”

Quoted from bumblethru

Well that's NYS for ya. They tax small businesses right out of business!!!!!! Don't ya just love the liberals?

Quoted from Sombody

Many statistics can show that there are  " positive effects " of smoking -  early death- which actually saves the government money.  Now would that be a liberal or conservative perspective ?

Quoted Text

CAPITOL
Cigarette tax increases by $1.25 per pack today
BY VALERIE BAUMAN The Associated Press

    New Yorkers start paying the highest cigarette taxes in the nation today with the latest $1.25 spike per pack that officials expect to bring in $265 million a year.
    Convenience stores in New York and the smokers who will be pay the price are angry about the change, but health officials hail the tax increase as a success. Officials said cigarette taxes will raise a total of $1.3 billion for the state budget in fiscal year 2008-2009, including the new tax.
    “Isn’t that something — to say that I’m excited about a tax increase? But I am,” said Dr. Richard Daines, the New York health commissioner. “This is a public health victory. We know one of the really effective tools to get people off of their nicotine addiction is to the raise the price.”
    Smokers will be paying $2.75 per pack in state taxes. The average price of a pack of cigarettes is currently $5.82 statewide, and about $8 a pack in New York City, Daines said.
    An estimated 140,000 New Yorkers will stop smoking with this tax increase, Daines said. That number is based on prior tax increases and cigarette consumption.
    “Youth are particularly sensitive to the price of cigarettes, so this price increase is expected to prevent 243,000 youth from smoking,” Daines said.
    Daines said the tax increase is just one part of an $83 million anti-smoking effort that includes advertising and public service announcements, attempts to get tobacco consumption out of youth rated movies and cessation centers around the state.
    “What we really want people to do is not to pay the price, but to stop smoking,” he said.
    Audrey Silk, who heads NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment said it’s ridiculous to expect smokers to quit just because the price is climbing. She switched to rolling her own cigarettes since the last New York City tax increase and suggests other smokers will find similar ways to satisfy nicotine cravings.
    “No product has a tax at this rate on it,” Silk said. “If there was, there would be screaming, but since we’ve been beaten into submission and nobody listens to us, what else is there to do? It’s unjustifiable and you turn to alternatives, and any consumer group would do the same.”
    Convenience stores, which historically count on cigarette sales, have also objected to the tax, saying it will drive smokers — and dollars — elsewhere.
    “The tax increase is only going to feed that epidemic,” said Jim Calvin, president of the New York Association of Convenience Stores. “More and more smokers in New York state are going to abandon our stores that have to charge the tax and shift their purchases to places that don’t charge the tax, most notably Native American stores, the Internet and bootleggers.”

Quoted from bumblethru

Neither! It is plain socialism and control and more rights being taken away....plain and simple!!

If they were really concerned about the health and safety of our nation, Universal Health care would not be open for discussion. They would revise laws to get the gangs off the streets and behind bars. They would close the borders of this country to stop illegals from entering. They would hang every bad cop out to dry. They would really be putting an effort forth on putting drug DEALERS behind bars for a very very long time. etc....Then cigarette smoking would be nothing more than a sand pebble on the beach.

They have bigger fish to fry....so they should get on with it!

Quoted Text

Thank you for not smoking at fair

By LEIGH HORNBECK, Staff writer
Tuesday, June 10, 2008

GREENWICH -- The Washington County Board of Directors is following the state fair's lead on smoking and has banned it from the grandstand.
     
Smoking has long been forbidden in buildings and tents on the fairgrounds.
``The board continued the ban as a courtesy to the public,'' said fair director Mark St. Jacques. ``People are sitting close together and you can't get away from it if someone is smoking next to you or in front of you.''
St. Jacques said the staff will post signs around the grandstand. Smoking is still allowed on the fairgrounds.
The Washington County fair week is Aug. 18-24.

Quoted Text

Smoking should be banned in all parks

    In response to the May 28 article, “Board eyes ban on smoking in town spaces,” I would like to highlight how important this issue is. As an avid park visitor, I enjoy being able to take in the outdoors without the annoyance of tobacco.
    Although I have no children, I would suggest they are the most important reason this smoking ban needs to be enacted. In addition to the health risks from secondhand smoke that everyone should already be aware of, smoking in front of kids is associated with a higher risk of them smoking in their adolescent years.
    Along with the hazards of public smoking on children, it’s also a fire hazard and unsightly for everyone trying to enjoy the natural beauty of parks. Why all parks aren’t already smokefree should be the real question, and the issue ought to be more focused on when, rather than if, smoking should be banned in our town parks.
While Niskayuna is one of the first in the area to take this initiative, I think more communities will follow in the near future.
I would urge everyone to be considerate and respect the surroundings of others. We need those who do smoke to lead by example and choose not to smoke where it may be either detrimental or a nuisance to others.
NATHAN STAHL
Albany
The writer is a student at Albany College of Pharmacy.

Quoted Text

Niskayuna OKs smoking ban

By PAUL NELSON, Staff writer
Thursday, June 12, 2008

NISKAYUNA - Parks and ball fields in town will soon be off limits to smoking, making Niskayuna among the first in the Capital Region to have such an extensive ban.
     
The Town Board voted 4-0 Thursday night to prohibit smoking at virtually all outdoor facilities where sporting events and other leisure activities often draw impressionable young people. Board member Liz Orzel Kasper was absent.
The amended local law covers the dozen or so playgrounds, pools, dog and skate parks and hike and bike paths as well as parking lots, concession stands, bleachers and pavilions, Supervisor Joseph Landry said.
"Our parks are designed for healthy activities such as walking, running, bicycl