Okay...3% carbon monoxide...still not very healthy for the brain, even at 3%...otherwise people wouldn't DIE from carbon monoxide poisoning when the concentration levels get much higher...(oh, is the word "poison" ever used in conjunction with carbon monoxide...???), and "4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke"...hmmm...that's 4,000 different chemicals that have a chance to attack your cells and cause them to mutate. Sounds healthy to me...NOT!
Username: pbj | On: January 18, 2010 at 9:42 p.m.
FEMPTOGRAMS NANOGRAMS..........IT AINT GONNA HARM YA MY BOY!
GO BACK AND READ THE AIR ACCORDING TO OSHA THEN THE RELATIVE RISKS..........your trying to defend the indefensible..second hand smoke is a joke!!!
You might also be interested to know that the 1992 epa report on second hand smoke was tossed as junk science by a federal judge and 2 congressional comittees.......you might also like to know the surgeon generals 2006 report was a rehash of that same junk science study.......when he claimed 50,000 deaths to shs/ets he was asked to name just one person.......when he admitted he couldnt name even one person,he then admitted it was all computer generated numbers on the sammac computer system....to this date there are no deaths to second hand smoke.....heres the ral clencher the surgeon general cherry picked his epidemiology studies and the best relative risk factor he could get was a 1.1 rr......had he included the enstrom study the rr would have been a .80 rr meaning a PROTECTIVE EFFECT AGAINST ANY DISEASE......
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke......
Outdoor bans are even crazier than indoor bans. The chemical make-up of shs is nearly 94% water vapor and A SLIGHT AMOUNT OF CARBON DIOXIDE with about 3% being carbon monoxide AND 3% CONTAINING THOSE SUPPOSED KILLER CARCENOGENS.........
n-nitrosomines which you hear so much about is actually inorganic arsenic..what they dont tell you is that the measurements they took match the naturally occuring arsenic in the air outside everywhere.
they measured levels at 0-29 picograms....which is totally safe.its the same as drinking a glass of water..the amount has to be 5 million times that to be harmful to humans........you see how they switched it. Trying to blame shs for what is actually a natural thing. The levels of other things in shs if they can be measured at all are millions if not billions of times smaller than the amounts needed to harm anyone......just remember this second hand smoke is a joke within nano seconds from the burn it turns into WATER VAPOR.....Even the exhaled smoke is loaded down with water vapor...osha has said nothing in shs/ets is going to harm you or anyone else.....what shs will do is irritate those with weak immune responces.......thats why shs is classified as a class 3 IRRITANT BY OSHA AND THE EPA.....Remember this a prohibition movement must rely on scare tactics and big money in order to succeed to the level of getting legislation....These outdoor regulations are even crazier than the first claims made for indoor bans.......lets do the silly math if one cig lets off 29 pico grams.We will use the high side of their measurement........and it takes 5 million picograms then thats 5 million divided by 29 = IN CIGARETTES SMOKED AT ONE TIME IN A SEALED ROOM.........172,414 CIGS SMOKED SIMULTANEOUSLY..........DIVIDE THAT BY 20 TO GET PACKS.........8620 PACKS ALL TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME...........SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE........and this same thing applies to anything they claim in shs/ets.........dont be fooled
Air quality testing done by OSHA (U.S. Dept. of Labor),Oak Ridge Nat'l Lab.,(U.S. Dept. of Energy) etc. all find that second-hand smoke levels indoors are well within safe limits.Add to this the fact that there have been a great number of studies that found that there isn't any statistical risk from second-hand smoke in the first place.It should be obvious to all,by now,that all this "smoker bashing" has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's health."Harm" from second-hand smoke is essentially a rumor,usually raised by people that simply hate smokers.Causation cannot be shown using statistical science.(USSG for one) Smoking bans,of any type,are nothing more than a form of ethnic cleansing and should be regarded as hate crimes.
This is just another health scare tactic.Much is omitted.Tobacco is hardly the only source of cotinine,which isn't harmful.It doesn't matter if more is found because no harmful level of exposure to secondhand smoke has been found.The ability to detect or measure something doesn't make what is found dangerous.Compared to what? Potatoes have high levels of arsenic.Arsenic is a known poison.The level of arsenic in potatoes is merely higher than in other things.This high level is not considered harmful by anyone so no risk exists.
Oh my goodness harleyrider2010...WATER VAPOR??!! Are you trying to say second hand smoke is PURE WATER VAPOR???!!!! If I ever came across water that smelled like that, I surely wouldn't drink it! Have you ever smelled WATER on a person (disregarding sulphur water...that's the sulphur you smell, not the water)?
How long you been drinking the anti-tobacco koolaide......if you want to deny second hand smoke isnt 94% water vapor and ordinary air......Id shut my mouth.Ignorance isnt becoming of a smart person......
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.)
I ask you,would you allow these people to take away your rights and criminalize you just for living and doing what you have always done.........I say NO!!!
We are free tennesseans the volunteers that followed ANDY JACKSON all the way to new orleans to kick a tyrant king out for a second time.........we have bled for freedom not only as a state but for our own liberty and the creation of another state,that of texas......but even today on the battlefields of the middle east and before and after.....Why would we allow the wholesale outlawing of smokers,obese people or ourselves just for having a beer............its comming and is here....stand up tennessee against the totalitarian prohibitionists in our state and in our country....return freedom to the people and to ourselves.
Its not just discrimination of smokers in the work place but discrimination of smokers in the public arena,The facts are second hand smoke will no more harm you or your baby.
These draconian smoking bans need to be repealed and the taxes upon smokers put back to normal levels or below.
The injustives done to smokers by smokefree advocates and lawmakers is treason against all the civil liberties americans hold dear. Its time to end this practive of wholsale discrimination against people in general,just because they happen to smoke or are obese or even if they drink alcohol........this nanny state has to end and by the looks of the peoples opinions and polls the nannystate proponents are fixing to get thrown to the wolves.
Im a tennessean bent upon returning freedom to all of us,not just smokers......
Heres what these same nanny types tried to do in missippi last year....
Mississippi Legislature
2008 Regular Session
House Bill 282
House Calendar | Senate Calendar | Main Menu
Additional Information | All Versions
Current Bill Text: |
Description: Food establishments; prohibit from serving food to any person who is obese.
Background Information:
Disposition: Active
Deadline: General Bill/Constitutional Amendment
Revenue: No
Vote type required: Majority
Effective date: July 1, 2008
History of Actions:
1 01/25 (H) Referred To Public Health and Human Services;Judiciary B
----- Additional Information -----
House Committee: Public Health and Human Services*, Judiciary B
Principal Author: Mayhall
Additional Authors: Read, Shows
Title: AN ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FROM SERVING FOOD TO ANY PERSON WHO IS OBESE, BASED ON CRITERIA PRESCRIBED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE WRITTEN MATERIALS THAT DESCRIBE AND EXPLAIN THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON IS OBESE AND TO PROVIDE THOSE MATERIALS TO THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO MONITOR THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
----- Bill Text for All Versions ----
| As Introduced (Current)
Information pertaining to this measure was last updated on 01/29/2008 at 11:24
End Of Document
"We have taken the substances for which measurements have actually been obtained--very few, of course, because it's difficult to even find these chemicals in diffuse and diluted ETS.
"We posit a sealed, unventilated enclosure that is 20 feet square with a 9 foot ceiling clearance.
"Taking the figures for ETS yields per cigarette directly from the EPA, we calculated the number of cigarettes that would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold for each of these substances. The results are actually quite amusing. In fact, it is difficult to imagine a situation where these threshold limits could be realized.
"Our chart (Table 1) illustrates each of these substances, but let me report some notable examples.
"For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold.
"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes would be required.
"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.
"At the lower end of the scale-- in the case of Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up simultaneously in our little room to reach the threshold at which they might begin to pose a danger.
"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes are required. Perhaps we could post a notice limiting this 20-foot square room to 300 rather tightly-packed people smoking no more than 62 packs per hour?
"Of course the moment we introduce real world factors to the room -- a door, an open window or two, or a healthy level of mechanical air exchange (remember, the room we've been talking about is sealed) achieving these levels becomes even more implausible.
"It becomes increasingly clear to us that ETS is a political, rather than scientific, scapegoat."
Though repetition has little to do with "the truth," we're repeatedly told that there's "no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke."
OSHA begs to differ.
OSHA has established PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels) for all the measurable chemicals, including the 40 alleged carcinogens, in secondhand smoke. PELs are levels of exposure for an 8-hour workday from which, according to OSHA, no harm will result.
Of course the idea of "thousands of chemicals" can itself sound spooky. Perhaps it would help to note that coffee contains over 1000 chemicals, 19 of which are known to be rat carcinogens.
-"Rodent Carcinogens: Setting Priorities" Gold Et Al., Science, 258: 261-65 (1992)
There. Feel better?
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that:
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
Indeed it would.
Independent health researchers have done the chemistry and the math to prove how very very rare that would be.
As you're about to see in a moment.
In 1999, comments were solicited by the government from an independent Public and Health Policy Research group, Littlewood & Fennel of Austin, Tx, on the subject of secondhand smoke.
Using EPA figures on the emissions per cigarette of everything measurable in secondhand smoke, they compared them to OSHA's PELs.
The following excerpt and chart are directly from their report and their Washington testimony:
Smokers need not apply for a job
Okay...3% carbon monoxide...still not very healthy for the brain, even at 3%...otherwise people wouldn't DIE from carbon monoxide poisoning when the concentration levels get much higher...(oh, is the word "poison" ever used in conjunction with carbon monoxide...???), and "4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke"...hmmm...that's 4,000 different chemicals that have a chance to attack your cells and cause them to mutate. Sounds healthy to me...NOT! Username: pbj | On: January 18, 2010 at 9:42 p.m.
FEMPTOGRAMS NANOGRAMS..........IT AINT GONNA HARM YA MY BOY! GO BACK AND READ THE AIR ACCORDING TO OSHA THEN THE RELATIVE RISKS..........your trying to defend the indefensible..second hand smoke is a joke!!!
Smokers need not apply for a job
You might also be interested to know that the 1992 epa report on second hand smoke was tossed as junk science by a federal judge and 2 congressional comittees.......you might also like to know the surgeon generals 2006 report was a rehash of that same junk science study.......when he claimed 50,000 deaths to shs/ets he was asked to name just one person.......when he admitted he couldnt name even one person,he then admitted it was all computer generated numbers on the sammac computer system....to this date there are no deaths to second hand smoke.....heres the ral clencher the surgeon general cherry picked his epidemiology studies and the best relative risk factor he could get was a 1.1 rr......had he included the enstrom study the rr would have been a .80 rr meaning a PROTECTIVE EFFECT AGAINST ANY DISEASE......
Smokers need not apply for a job
Did you ever learn to read.........
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke......
Smokers need not apply for a job
Outdoor bans are even crazier than indoor bans. The chemical make-up of shs is nearly 94% water vapor and A SLIGHT AMOUNT OF CARBON DIOXIDE with about 3% being carbon monoxide AND 3% CONTAINING THOSE SUPPOSED KILLER CARCENOGENS.........
n-nitrosomines which you hear so much about is actually inorganic arsenic..what they dont tell you is that the measurements they took match the naturally occuring arsenic in the air outside everywhere. they measured levels at 0-29 picograms....which is totally safe.its the same as drinking a glass of water..the amount has to be 5 million times that to be harmful to humans........you see how they switched it. Trying to blame shs for what is actually a natural thing. The levels of other things in shs if they can be measured at all are millions if not billions of times smaller than the amounts needed to harm anyone......just remember this second hand smoke is a joke within nano seconds from the burn it turns into WATER VAPOR.....Even the exhaled smoke is loaded down with water vapor...osha has said nothing in shs/ets is going to harm you or anyone else.....what shs will do is irritate those with weak immune responces.......thats why shs is classified as a class 3 IRRITANT BY OSHA AND THE EPA.....Remember this a prohibition movement must rely on scare tactics and big money in order to succeed to the level of getting legislation....These outdoor regulations are even crazier than the first claims made for indoor bans.......lets do the silly math if one cig lets off 29 pico grams.We will use the high side of their measurement........and it takes 5 million picograms then thats 5 million divided by 29 = IN CIGARETTES SMOKED AT ONE TIME IN A SEALED ROOM.........172,414 CIGS SMOKED SIMULTANEOUSLY..........DIVIDE THAT BY 20 TO GET PACKS.........8620 PACKS ALL TOGETHER AT THE SAME TIME...........SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE........and this same thing applies to anything they claim in shs/ets.........dont be fooled
Smokers need not apply for a job
Air quality testing done by OSHA (U.S. Dept. of Labor),Oak Ridge Nat'l Lab.,(U.S. Dept. of Energy) etc. all find that second-hand smoke levels indoors are well within safe limits.Add to this the fact that there have been a great number of studies that found that there isn't any statistical risk from second-hand smoke in the first place.It should be obvious to all,by now,that all this "smoker bashing" has absolutely nothing to do with anyone's health."Harm" from second-hand smoke is essentially a rumor,usually raised by people that simply hate smokers.Causation cannot be shown using statistical science.(USSG for one) Smoking bans,of any type,are nothing more than a form of ethnic cleansing and should be regarded as hate crimes.
This is just another health scare tactic.Much is omitted.Tobacco is hardly the only source of cotinine,which isn't harmful.It doesn't matter if more is found because no harmful level of exposure to secondhand smoke has been found.The ability to detect or measure something doesn't make what is found dangerous.Compared to what? Potatoes have high levels of arsenic.Arsenic is a known poison.The level of arsenic in potatoes is merely higher than in other things.This high level is not considered harmful by anyone so no risk exists.
Smokers need not apply for a job
Oh my goodness harleyrider2010...WATER VAPOR??!! Are you trying to say second hand smoke is PURE WATER VAPOR???!!!! If I ever came across water that smelled like that, I surely wouldn't drink it! Have you ever smelled WATER on a person (disregarding sulphur water...that's the sulphur you smell, not the water)?
How long you been drinking the anti-tobacco koolaide......if you want to deny second hand smoke isnt 94% water vapor and ordinary air......Id shut my mouth.Ignorance isnt becoming of a smart person......
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.)
Smokers need not apply for a job
I ask you,would you allow these people to take away your rights and criminalize you just for living and doing what you have always done.........I say NO!!!
We are free tennesseans the volunteers that followed ANDY JACKSON all the way to new orleans to kick a tyrant king out for a second time.........we have bled for freedom not only as a state but for our own liberty and the creation of another state,that of texas......but even today on the battlefields of the middle east and before and after.....Why would we allow the wholesale outlawing of smokers,obese people or ourselves just for having a beer............its comming and is here....stand up tennessee against the totalitarian prohibitionists in our state and in our country....return freedom to the people and to ourselves.
Smokers need not apply for a job
Its not just discrimination of smokers in the work place but discrimination of smokers in the public arena,The facts are second hand smoke will no more harm you or your baby. These draconian smoking bans need to be repealed and the taxes upon smokers put back to normal levels or below. The injustives done to smokers by smokefree advocates and lawmakers is treason against all the civil liberties americans hold dear. Its time to end this practive of wholsale discrimination against people in general,just because they happen to smoke or are obese or even if they drink alcohol........this nanny state has to end and by the looks of the peoples opinions and polls the nannystate proponents are fixing to get thrown to the wolves.
Im a tennessean bent upon returning freedom to all of us,not just smokers......
Heres what these same nanny types tried to do in missippi last year....
Mississippi Legislature 2008 Regular Session House Bill 282 House Calendar | Senate Calendar | Main Menu Additional Information | All Versions
Current Bill Text: |
Description: Food establishments; prohibit from serving food to any person who is obese.
Background Information: Disposition: Active Deadline: General Bill/Constitutional Amendment Revenue: No Vote type required: Majority Effective date: July 1, 2008
History of Actions: 1 01/25 (H) Referred To Public Health and Human Services;Judiciary B
----- Additional Information -----
House Committee: Public Health and Human Services*, Judiciary B
Principal Author: Mayhall Additional Authors: Read, Shows
Title: AN ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FROM SERVING FOOD TO ANY PERSON WHO IS OBESE, BASED ON CRITERIA PRESCRIBED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE WRITTEN MATERIALS THAT DESCRIBE AND EXPLAIN THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON IS OBESE AND TO PROVIDE THOSE MATERIALS TO THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO MONITOR THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
----- Bill Text for All Versions ---- | As Introduced (Current)
Information pertaining to this measure was last updated on 01/29/2008 at 11:24 End Of Document
Smokers need not apply for a job
CALCULATING THE NON-EXISTENT RISKS OF ETS
"We have taken the substances for which measurements have actually been obtained--very few, of course, because it's difficult to even find these chemicals in diffuse and diluted ETS.
"We posit a sealed, unventilated enclosure that is 20 feet square with a 9 foot ceiling clearance.
"Taking the figures for ETS yields per cigarette directly from the EPA, we calculated the number of cigarettes that would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold for each of these substances. The results are actually quite amusing. In fact, it is difficult to imagine a situation where these threshold limits could be realized.
"Our chart (Table 1) illustrates each of these substances, but let me report some notable examples.
"For Benzo[a]pyrene, 222,000 cigarettes would be required to reach the lowest published "danger" threshold.
"For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes would be required.
"Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.
"At the lower end of the scale-- in the case of Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up simultaneously in our little room to reach the threshold at which they might begin to pose a danger.
"For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes are required. Perhaps we could post a notice limiting this 20-foot square room to 300 rather tightly-packed people smoking no more than 62 packs per hour?
"Of course the moment we introduce real world factors to the room -- a door, an open window or two, or a healthy level of mechanical air exchange (remember, the room we've been talking about is sealed) achieving these levels becomes even more implausible.
"It becomes increasingly clear to us that ETS is a political, rather than scientific, scapegoat."
Smokers need not apply for a job
THE AIR ACCORDING TO OSHA
Though repetition has little to do with "the truth," we're repeatedly told that there's "no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke."
OSHA begs to differ.
OSHA has established PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels) for all the measurable chemicals, including the 40 alleged carcinogens, in secondhand smoke. PELs are levels of exposure for an 8-hour workday from which, according to OSHA, no harm will result.
Of course the idea of "thousands of chemicals" can itself sound spooky. Perhaps it would help to note that coffee contains over 1000 chemicals, 19 of which are known to be rat carcinogens.
-"Rodent Carcinogens: Setting Priorities" Gold Et Al., Science, 258: 261-65 (1992)
There. Feel better?
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that:
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
Indeed it would.
Independent health researchers have done the chemistry and the math to prove how very very rare that would be.
As you're about to see in a moment.
In 1999, comments were solicited by the government from an independent Public and Health Policy Research group, Littlewood & Fennel of Austin, Tx, on the subject of secondhand smoke.
Using EPA figures on the emissions per cigarette of everything measurable in secondhand smoke, they compared them to OSHA's PELs.
The following excerpt and chart are directly from their report and their Washington testimony: