Assembly Concurs with Senate Amendment 1

In case you haven't heard the big news yet, the Assembly decided to take up Senate Amendment 1 late last night. The amendment was made to what is called a "reviser bill." This is a bill that is a catch all for any re-numbering, minor errors, or other edits to legislation passed throughout the legislative session. AB 720 fixed plenty of errors in other laws but also sought to make a significant policy change to the statewide smoke-free air law. This amendment did one positive thing-- which was define a solid wall as substantial. However it created more confusion about the definition of enclosed place.

Enclosed place is defined as "a structure with a roof and  two or more substantial walls."

A substantial wall is defined as "a wall with no opening or with an opening that either does not allow air in from the outside or is less than 25 percent of the wall's surface area." 


This definition does not clarify what can and cannot be considered inside or outside. 


Common sense must prevail in the face of so-called "legislative fixes."


The public is smart enough to know what is inside and what is outside. The vast majority of Wisconsinites support this law (69%) and know that all Wisconsin workplaces including bars and restaurants will be going smoke-free on July 5th 2010. 


To read coverage from various news sources click the links below:


http://blogs.wispolitics.com/quorum/2010/04/reps-adopt-smoking-ban-change.html

http://wcco.com/wireapnewswi/Wis.lawmakers.approve.2.1651552.html

http://www.channel3000.com/politics/23236100/detail.html

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/91891769.html?viewAll=1#comments

http://www.wuwm.com/programs/news/view_news.php?articleid=6086

http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/91900754.html

Sinus and nasal problems increase with secondhand smoke exposure

It's a familiar scene- a couple of friends invite you over for some drinks at their house. Or maybe its a house warming, or graduation party, or even better a Halloween party.... Its a cheap alternative to the bar and would allow for a better conversation. The only catch here is that your friend smokes in their apartment. This type of exposure to secondhand smoke could place you at risk for sinus issues among other health issues.

A new study released this week shows that secondhand smoke (SHS) may be to blame in people's nose and sinus issues. Exposure to SHS was linked to an increased likelihood of suffering from sinusitis. Just in case you needed one more reason to support smoke-free public places here it is!

The study found that exposure to secondhand smoke at work tripled the risk for sinus issues, while risk was double for those who are exposed at private social functions. This research did delve into new territory in the sense that it examined SHS exposure in private social settings. Previous studies have examined sites of exposure like at work or in your own home.

While legislation has addressed the vast majority of workplaces, public places, and entertainment venues that people frequent-- a friend's private resident is clearly not covered under these laws. While there has been some progress made at multi-unit housing, single family homes remain unregulated. If you weren't totally convinced on the importance of smoke-free housing perhaps you are now.

To read the REUTERS article click here. 

The paradox between tobacco and cannabis regulation

Earlier this week CNBC posted an article (part of  a special report on "Marijuana & Money") debating the business models of Big Tobacco and Big Pharma when it comes to the marketing and sale of legal cannabis. This article points to the larger debate about the legality and medical uses of cannabis. Here in Wisconsin a so-called "medical marijuana" bill was offered up but did not pass either house of the legislature.

Wisconsin's bill sought to provide for a registry of medical cannabis users and to de-criminalize the act of purchasing, possessing, growing, and using cannabis. There are very specific illnesses called out in the law such as Chrohn's Disease, AIDS, cancer, and other debilitating illnesses. 

With today being April 20th, a day of demonstrations across the globe asking for two things, first, the right to access medical cannabis; and second, to legalize cannabis for recreational use. There are really two segments of the pro-cannabis movement medical and recreational users. However one approaches the issue of legalization there is an interesting debate that rests a between regulation of tobacco and the potential for regulation of legal cannabis. What does tobacco control have to teach the medical marijuana movement?

Should cannabis be legal? Only in cases of medical use? Should it be taxed and regulated like tobacco? Should it be treated like a pharmaceutical drug? A recent AP-CNBC survey  showed that public opinion is swaying towards medical use. Should marijuana become legal it could be taxed like cigarettes, prohibited from being smoked in public places like tobacco, and people could even be prevented from driving under the influence like alcohol. The question remains- how would legal cannabis fit within the framework of tobacco control? Treated the same or differently? Drug delivery device or more like tobacco? What are your thoughts? Comments welcomed!

The CNBC article debated who is a better fit to market cannabis- Big Tobacco or Big Pharma? With Big Tobacco clearly having the one up on distribution-- Big Pharma has the ability to make the product safer for use. To read more about this debate check out the CNBC Article. 

Tobacco candy a new poison

A new study was released today from the peer-reviewed journal, Pediatrics. Data from poison control centers in 2006 and 2008 showed that over 10,000 kids under six are poisoned by tobacco products each year. That number could rise with the new products that Camel has been test marketing. 

Small amounts of nicotine are very hazardous to young children. One milligram is enough nicotine to cause illness in a small child. This new study pulls together data that examines the issue of accidental poisoning by tobacco products. This research is rather timely in that the market for smokeless products is certainly growing. 

These products modeled after candy or breath mints could be attractive to small children. While Big Tobacco claims their products are not marketed at children or that they resemble Tic-Tac's; I think the public will see things differently. 

Harvard researchers including Greg Connolly studied the contents of the orbs and found that they have a higher amount of free nicotine in them than cigarettes or other smokeless products would. 

For more information on Big Tobacco's Lies on these new products visit MELTDOWN (website out of Virginia). 

Chew on this

A hearing was held on Wednesday at the congressional level to discuss a prohibition of spit tobacco by Major League Baseball players. Currently, the use of smokeless or spit tobacco is prohibited in the Minor League. The Major League does prohibit players from smoking in public and while in uniform. Recent years there has been a rise in the use of smokeless products according to the CDC's Terry Pechacek. He was quoted in a Rueters article saying that the downward trend in smokeless use has been gradually rising in recent years. The increase is primarily among white and Latino males. 

The risks of smokeless tobacco are perhaps not as well known or in the public eye in the same way that the risks of smoking are. Spit tobacco is a cancer causing product with devastating, disfiguring effects. 

At the hearing the issue of banning spit tobacco in the Major League brought people from all sides of the issue to discuss the issue. Health advocates made the case that youth are influenced by their role models. Athletes are held in a particularly high position in our society and young children are highly influenced by their behaviors. Some players spoke in support of eliminating spit tobacco from the league. 

According to Greg Connolly, a Harvard Professor, about 1/3 of MLB players use chew. This high of a number definitely role-models the behavior and addiction to fans of all ages. Connolly also brought to light some of the social networking that young people are doing around baseball and spit tobacco. He read off the types of messages that Facebook users write to other users and the content was disturbing. One quote was "The bigger the dip, the better he plays!!" in reference to this young person's favorite player. Another interesting quote was " Baseball and Skoal... God Bless America!" A quick visit over to YouTube will also shed some light on how users influence other users all while protecting Big Tobacco's bottom-line and perpetuating addiction. 

Gruen Von Behrens (see pictures of before and after) also testified before the committee on the issue. For those who don't know Gruen, he is public speaker in schools who shares his story of cancer and spit tobacco. He started at age 13 and by 17 he was diagnosed with throat cancer. A video of his story can be seen here. 

To read the Reuters article click here.


To read the ABC article click here. 

As for the hearing, no decision has been made. Hopefully the Majors will join the Minors in saying NO! to spit tobacco.