FARMINGTON — Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, is a bulldog when it comes to cracking down on tobacco or for that matter, any nicotine-laced product.

A bill he introduced in the house to restrict “e-cigarettes,” and flavored smokeless tobacco, moved through a House committee Tuesday.

And Davis health officials are rallying behind his efforts.

“We are happy the issue is on the radar of legislators,” said Isa Kaluhikaua, a health educator with the Davis Health Department, whose expertise is in tobacco education. “We are concerned about the promotion of these products.”

The products that Ray and health officials are most concerned about are alternatives to smoking, which health officials fear may encourage young people and even children to try them out.

There’s Snus, a no-spit tobacco pouch meant to be placed under the upper lip, and Orbs, dissolvable breath-mint sized tobacco, with a camel imprinted on each. Strips are dissolvable, like breath freshening strips, containing tobacco, and dissolvable Sticks.

They’re each packaged in bright, attractive colors, which often look like candy packages.

Kaluhikaua is concerned products like these “could fall under the radar” and into the hands of children, “and that even the (store) clerks may not know what they are.”

She did some checking, and found the products are age-restricted. and when they are rung up at the register, the clerk should receive a notice to check for ID proving the buyer is 19.

Kaluhikaua said that she hasn’t done a check of which products are available at local retailers; she has seen some of them.

At a board of health meeting last month, Kaluhikaua told board members that if a child were to ingest three of the Orbs, they would get ill, and 10 would result in serious illness. Yet, she compared them to Tic-Tacs in appearance, and said they come in a variety of flavors children could mistake for candy.

“Some are designed to fit into creative packaging, and are marketed as a safe alternative to smoking,” Kaluhikaua told board members. She warned that the tobacco industry is creating new products all the time to keep the products in the public’s mind.

However, she warned, “There’s no such thing as a safe tobacco product.”

On Tuesday, House committee members heard from the public, some of whom defended the new electronic cigarette, “e-cigarette” which they say has helped them quit smoking.

The e-cigarette is a battery-powered device that looks like a cigarette and allows smokers to stop inhaling tar and other compounds found in cigarette smoke.

All the products contain some level of nicotine, which is of special concern to Ray, who told committee members that if he had his way, he would ban tobacco altogether. Countries worldwide are calling for additional studies of the e-cigarette and possible effects to the user’s health, especially if used for an extended period.

Most of the products still don’t have Federal Drug Administration approval, Kaluhikaua said.

by Melinda Williams, Clippertoday
Feb 04, 2010

The company that manufactured a cigarette that allegedly exploded in the mouth of a security guard has paid compensation equal to less than Rp 1 million for each of the teeth the man lost.

Andi Susanto, 31, was riding his motorcycle along Jl. Teuku Umar in Cibitung, Bekasi, last Thursday, and smoking a Bentoel Clas Mild — marketed as the ultimate experience of satisfaction and smoothness — exploded in his mouth with devastating consequences.

The mysterious explosion blew five teeth from his mouth and required numerous stitches.

His helmet was also found to have cracked.

Widia, Andi’s sister, confirmed that Bentoel had paid Rp 5 million ($535) in compensation — a figure that would have equated to Rp 1 million per tooth had it not been for the fact that another two teeth were extracted on Monday.

“The cigarette company has provided us with compensation. We have accepted their goodwill to help us,” Widia said.

She said the company had agreed to pay all of Andi’s immediate medical expenses at the Bekasi General Hospital and would also fund the ongoing rehabilitation treatment — presumably to include a new set of teeth.

“We have settled all the outstanding matters with the cigarette company,” she said, adding that Andi’s condition was steadily improving.

“The doctor says that he can go home, but we have to wait until his condition is much better,” she said.

Bekasi Police investigators are waiting on the results of laboratory tests, which are expected today, to help shed light on what they admit is a highly unusual case.

Bekasi Police Chief Herry Wibowo said on Sunday that the laboratory would test the remaining fragments of the cigarette as well as Andi’s jacket and helmet.

Herry said investigators were looking for traces of explosives, including potassium.

He said there were no plans to recall Clas Mild cigarettes.

Iwan Sulistyo, the marketing chief of the Clas Mild brand, said the company could offer no explanation for what had happened to Andi.

Iwan confirmed, however, that the company had agreed to provide compensation and would also ensure that Andi’s medical bills were paid in full.

“We are communicating with the police and still waiting on the forensic laboratory tests,” Iwan said. “We do not put any strange materials in the cigarettes so we think that this is a weird case. This is the first time for us.”

Roger Cohen’s piece on “Climategate” (Herald, Dec. 9) miss-ed some key details. Serious scientists recognize the roles of both human-released atmospheric carbon dioxide and other natural phenomena on global temperatures.

Deniers who suggest the contrary, or who make uninformed claims over the recent decade’s temperatures, generate interesting sound bites and misinformation, but nothing more. Global temperatures result from a delicate balance between enormous heat radiated to Earth from the sun, counterbalanced with what Earth reflects back plus what it radiates into space.

CO2 reduces Earth’s radiation into space and disrupts that balance. Minute imbalances have profound long-term affects. The sun blasts Earth with, on average, 350 watts per square meter – pole-to-pole, day and night, summer and winter, 24/7. Without reflecting back 100 w/m2 and radiating 250 w/m2, average over the entire Earth, we would rapidly become a crematorium.

This precise balance controls our temperature.

Balance two 300-pound linebackers on a teeter-totter and nothing moves. Hand one a six-pack of beer, and he drops to the ground. Debating whether the 300-pound football player or the 5-pound six-pack caused the drop is ludicrous – which is the very logic used by deniers debating whether human-caused CO2 or natural phenomena cause global warming.

That humans increase atmospheric CO2 levels is beyond debate. At issue is the effect of CO2 on global temperatures. The correlation between global mean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 during the last 50 years is a stunning 79 percent. That means 79 percent of the variance in temperature is explained by CO2 level alone, the other 21 percent by all other causes combined.

It doesn’t matter if you use the temperature data from the much-maligned Hadley CRU, from NOAA or NASA. The relationship is 1 degree Celsius per 100 parts per million of CO2.

I wholly support Cohen’s suggestion to “follow the money.” Shell, BP and Exxon-Mobile most recently reported combined revenues of $1.2 trillion, with net earnings before taxes of $141 billion. Oil lobbyists received $125 million to discredit global warming science. It reminds one of big tobacco’s earlier denials of a link between smoking and lung cancer.

Gerald Baumann, Durango Editor’s note: Gerald Baumann holds a doctorate degree in mechanical engineering specializing in heat transfer and thermal science.

The great American Smokeout – a perfect time to highlight new findings that cigarettes are found to be laden with disease causing bacteria. The findings come from University of Maryland environmental health researcher and microbial ecologists at the Ecole Centrale de Lyon in France whose team found a “wide array” of bacteria in cigarettes that can harm human health.

According to Professor Amy R. Sapkota who led the research, “We were quite surprised to identify such a wide variety of human bacterial pathogens in these products. The commercially-available cigarettes that we tested were chock full of bacteria, as we had hypothesized, but we didn’t think we’d find so many that are infectious in humans.”

Sapkota says the bacteria found in cigarettes are believed to survive the smoking process. If so,”then they could possibly go on to contribute to both infectious and chronic illnesses in both smokers and individuals who are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke, so it’s critical that we learn more about the bacterial content of cigarettes, which are used by more than a billion people worldwide.”

Some of the bacteria found in cigarettes are the type found in soil. The study is the first to show there are as many bacteria in cigarettes as there are chemicals.

The researchers studied Camel; Kool Filter Kings; Lucky Strike Original Red; and Marlboro Red cigarettes, finding no difference in the amount and variety of bacteria in the cigarettes.

Cigarettes were found to contain bacteria that cause human infections, including those associated with blood and lung infection (Acinetobacter), a variety of bacteria related to anthrax and food borne illness (Bacillus), and Burkholderia – some of which are responsible for respiratory infections.

A bacteria that causes ten percent of hospital acquired infection in the US, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, was also found in cigarettes, along with Clostridium, and Klebsiella, both associated with respiratory, and other infection. The scientists found “hundred” of bacteria in cigarettes.

The study is the first to show that cigarettes are laden with bacteria, many of which can cause human illness. The research findings have important implications for public health.

Rather than culturing bacteria from small samples of cigarettes, the researchers used DNA microanalysis to find total amounts of bacterial genetic material, uncovering bacteria in cigarettes that could cause infection in humans. The findings that cigarettes are full of potentially harmful bacteria, known to cause disease in humans, arrive just in time for the Great American Smokeout 2009

By Kathleen Blanchard, Nov 20th, 2009

Smokers are huffing and businesses fuming over a controversial new proposal to drastically reduce the number of stores in The City that can sell cigarettes.

Since 2003, retailers hawking tobacco products in San Francisco have had to apply for a special permit. The permitting process helps The City keep track of sellers and crack down on those vending to minors, officials said.

But now there are too many permits citywide — particularly in low-income neighborhoods — according to city officials and anti-tobacco advocates, who have created legislation that would greatly reduce the number of stores that sell tobacco.

An initial proposal imposes a cap of 35 permits for each of the 11 supervisor districts — 385 total in The City. That is a more than a two-thirds reduction from the 1,097 stores currently selling tobacco products citywide.

The proposal would not take away permits from businesses, but it would reduce them through attrition until there are no more than 35 per district. Also, owners would not be able to transfer the permits when they sell their stores, said Janet Clyde, a commissioner in the Office of Small Business.

The proposal might limit options for smokers, but it would also limit tobacco exposure to children, said Matt Rosen, senior director of community programs for the Youth Leadership Institute.

The institute wrote the legislation and is receiving guidance from Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi and the Department of Public Health.

The legislation is still being vetted and has not been endorsed by a supervisor.

“[Children] can see advertising,” Rosen said. “They can see stores that are visibly selling tobacco and other kinds of products that aren’t very good for them.”

The Department of Health says limiting permits would be an extension of its “commitment to public health.” Last year, tobacco-related death and disease cost The City $4,310 per smoker, anti-tobacco activists say.

Opponents of the proposal, mainly from the small-business community, say the bill would severely damage the health of retailers in The City.

For most stores, “approximately 30 percent of the revenue is tobacco-related,” said Jimmy Shamieh, president of the Arab American Grocers Association, which has proposed alternative legislation that bans new permits but allows a transfer to new owners.

The stores become “valueless” when owners cannot transfer their tobacco permit to a person who wants to purchase the store, Shamieh said.

“It will change the landscape of San Francisco as we know it,” Shamieh said. “It will make it corporate-friendly. It will be devastating to mom-and-pop businesses.”

While small-business advocates do not like the proposal, they say they are all for limiting tobacco sales in The City.

If The City is intent on discontinuing a business’ tobacco permit, it should help small businesses modify their business model in a way that would make up for the lost value, said Regina Dick-Endrizzi, director of the Office of Small Business.

maldax@sfexaminer.com

Limiting nicotine sales latest step in city’s war on smoking

The legislation to reduce the number of stores that can sell cigarettes is the latest attack against tobacco in The City.

Last year, San Francisco became the first city in the nation to ban tobacco sales in pharmacies. The law exempts supermarkets and big-box stores, such as Costco, that contain pharmacies.

Also, The City recently imposed a 20-cent fee on each pack of cigarettes sold in San Francisco to offset the cost to clean up cigarette butts from city streets.

Supervisor Eric Mar is also reigniting stalled legislation that would forbid smoking in a slew of new settings, adding to an existing ban in bars, restaurants, parks, transit stops and taxicabs.

The bill would expand no-smoking zones to include farmers markets and the outdoor seating areas of restaurants, cafes and coffee shops. Smoking would also be prohibited while waiting in lines at ATMs, theaters, athletic events and concert venues.

Apartment buildings and other multiunit residences would also have new areas with no-smoking signs. Smoking would be prohibited in common areas of apartment buildings, including hallways, elevators, parking lots, lobbies, waiting areas, bathrooms, laundry facilities and recreation areas.

By Mike Aldax
November 16, 2009

RONAN – Rick and Vicki Wheeler recently got their first letter from the Lake County Health Department saying someone had complained that people were still lighting up in their Ronan bar, The Club, despite a statewide smoking ban that took effect on Oct. 1.

Rick Wheeler says they demanded to know who had turned them in – the law entitles them to that, he said.

Then he lit a cigarette while tending bar.

Here on the Flathead Indian Reservation, the Montana Clean Indoor Air Act has run into some hazy skies.

Tribally owned bars and casinos are exempt from the state’s smoking ban. That means the Grey Wolf Peak Casino north of Evaro and the Kwa Taq Nuk Resort in Polson, owned by the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, still offer both smoking and nonsmoking casino areas.

But here on the Flathead Reservation, some enrolled tribal members who own liquor licenses also allow smoking in their bars.

“The way I understand it, the state and health department won’t pursue it if we allow it, because they have nowhere to take it,” says Lori Peterson, an enrolled member of the tribes and owner of the Pheasant Lounge in Ronan.

Rick Wheeler’s bar sits a block away, on the other side of Ronan’s Main Street.

“Ninety percent of my customers smoke,” says Wheeler, who is not a tribal member. If he enforces the smoking ban, Wheeler says, virtually all of them will simply cross the street to a bar where they can light up inside, and the business he’s owned for 20 years will go belly-up.

“That’s not right,” he says. “This bar is my retirement – do they want to take that away from me, too? It’s racial discrimination.”

The majority of bars on the Flathead Reservation had either already gone smoke-free or did so on Oct. 1 when the ban on smoking in enclosed public places was extended to those that serve liquor.

Even Peterson pressed a “smoke-free establishment” sign on the window of her door and put away the ashtrays for a week, before learning it was up to her whether she would enforce it.

“We did lose customers” when the Pheasant initially went nonsmoking, Peterson says. “I have nowhere for smokers to go, except into the street or the alley. Most of the other bars have a deck or a beer garden where they can smoke outside.”

Her business hasn’t gone up from pre-Oct. 1 levels since the ashtrays returned to the bar and tables, but it did allow her to recoup the business she had lost.

“It just lets us keep our own customers,” Peterson says. “It’s not like Missoula, where if there was just one bar where you could smoke, it’s where all the smokers would be.”

That’s because Peterson isn’t the only tribal member on the reservation who owns a bar and allows smoking.

Neither is Wheeler the only nontribal member who owns a bar on the reservation but is not enforcing the smoking ban.

He’s just not afraid to admit it.

“The next thing they’ll go after is the obese thing,” Wheeler says. “If you’re 10 pounds overweight they won’t be allowed to serve you anything but water and vegetables in a restaurant. They’ll get it to where they won’t let you eat what you want. This country is turning into a dictatorship.”

Wheeler, 65, says he’s smoked since he was 15 years old. His wife smokes, two of his three bartenders smoke, and the third chews smokeless tobacco – also banned under the Clean Indoor Air Act.

Like Peterson, Wheeler says business isn’t up because he still allows smoking – it just hasn’t gone down. Of the 10 percent of his regulars Wheeler says don’t smoke, only one has quit coming into The Club.

Likewise, Peterson says her nonsmoking patrons have remained loyal since she removed the “smoke-free establishment” sign and replaced it with one that says “smoking allowed.”

“If people want to smoke, they should have that right,” Wheeler says. “It’s their choice. We have rights, too. There are plenty of places for nonsmokers to go.”

One of them is the Second Chance Saloon, which sits next door to the Pheasant Lounge and doesn’t allow smoking. The Second Chance has a deck and fire pit out back where customers who smoke can go outside and stay relatively warm in the winter months.

Owner Rod Smart, who has had the Second Chance for nearly 30 years, says the recession has hurt local bars more than the smoking ban. His friend and next-door competitor, Peterson, agrees.

“It isn’t gaming, it isn’t smoking, it’s the recession,” she says. “We lost Plum Creek, which was a big employer here. People don’t have the money for groceries, gas, lights and heat.”

Still, both Peterson and Wheeler say they know bar owners on the reservation who enforce the smoking ban, and who say their businesses are off as much as $1,000 since their smoking patrons were directed outside every time they want to light up.

“It never should have been passed,” Peterson says of the smoking ban in bars. “The state’s not paying our bills, what gives them the right to step in and tell people how to run their businesses? I think if people aren’t allowed to smoke, the state shouldn’t be allowed to sell cigarettes.”

Wheeler says he invested in high-dollar exhaust systems at The Club.

“You can have it full of smokers, and not see much smoke,” he says. “I do what I can to keep secondhand smoke out of here.”

That, Wheeler says, includes the use of high-efficiency particulate air, or HEPA, filters, and he changes the filters each week.

Diana Schwab of the Lake County Tobacco Prevention Program was out of town attending meetings Tuesday and Wednesday and could not be reached for comment. The director of the Lake County Health Department, Emily Colomeda, did not return a phone message Wednesday.

Likewise, Linda Lee, a supervisor with the Montana Tobacco Use Prevention Program, did not return messages left on her phone Tuesday and Wednesday.

But last week, in a Billings Gazette story about smoking being allowed in the Little Bighorn Casino on the Crow Indian Reservation, Lee told reporter Diane Cochran, “Reservations are sovereign governments. Unless they pass their own similar smoke-free laws, native-owned casinos on reservations have the choice whether to be smoke-free.”

Wheeler maintains he should have the same choice.

“Let them fine me, I’m not going to pay it,” he says. “They can appoint me an attorney and I’ll take them to court. Are they going to come in and fine my customers? Maybe they can fill the jail in Hardin up with smokers.

“This is a smoking establishment,” he continues. “Are they going to push me out of business because of that? I don’t know. Is that what they want? How many more taxpayers do they want to put on the street?”

Reporter Vince Devlin can be reached at (406) 319-2117 or at vdevlin@missoulian.com.
October 29, 2009

Some smokers, occasional or regular, satisfy their nicotine cravings with a hint of strawberry, vanilla, chocolate or pineapple. But the days of flavored cigarettes are finished. They are no longer available on the shelves of U.S. stores, groceries, gas stations and even mall booths.
As of Sept. 22, a nationwide ban on cigarettes containing certain flavors went into effect to help curb teen smoking, thus reducing the leading cause of most preventable deaths in the U.S.

According to the new Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, signed by President Barack Obama in June, any part of a cigarette cannot contain any characterizing flavors such as herb, spice or fruit flavors.
This prohibition also allows the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to greatly control manufacturing, marketing and sales of tobacco products in the country.
“These flavored cigarettes are a gateway for many children and young adults to become regular smokers,” FDA Commissioner Margaret A. Hamburg, M.D. said in an FDA news release.
A study from the FDA’s Web site states that 17-year-old teen smokers are three times more likely to purchase flavored tobacco than people older than 25 years old. The agency believes flavored cigarettes are made to cover up the unpleasant taste of tobacco, making it much easier for young people to start using tobacco products at an early age. When they begin to regularly use the flavored cigarettes, they are more likely to experiment with other tobacco products.
Another perspective from the American Cancer Society believes it is the “false image” of how these flavored cigarettes are marketed and advertised that draws people in at an early age. The group’s Web site states that manufacturers advertise flavored cigarettes as having less tobacco content and as clean and safer alternatives to regular cigarettes.

But what manufacturers don’t mention is that these flavored cigarettes contain the same harmful characteristics of regular cigarettes. Some even have higher nicotine levels. This addictive substance and other harmful ingredients such as carbon monoxide and tar are also found in both types of cigarettes.
Whether it’s masking the taste of flavored cigarettes or the false image that attracts young people, smoking is still ranked as the leading cause of preventable deaths in the country by the centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The CDC believes that cigarettes are responsible for approximately 443,000 premature deaths each year from smoking or secondhand smoke. Smoking sickens millions of people and costs the nation billions of dollars in health care bills each year. The total annual and private health care expenditure attributed to smoking is $96 billion.
The FDA believes this federal ban will reduce death rates, smoking-related diseases and prevent adolescents from starting to smoke.
A letter sent by the FDA to cigarette manufacturers said that any company violating the federal ban may be fined, have its products seized and even be criminally prosecuted. The FDA encourages consumers to be aware of this ban and report any violators.
The federal ban does not include menthol cigarettes. However, in a report by USA Today menthol cigarettes are also becoming increasingly popular with young people.
For more information about the federal ban on flavored tobacco products, limitations or to report violators, visit FDA’s Web site at www.fda.gov.

As part of an effort to snuff out youth smoking, selling candy-, fruit- and spice-flavored cigarettes is now illegal in the United States. The ban went into effect earlier this month. Health officials say that flavored cigarettes make smoking more palatable to kids, and studies back them up: 17-year-olds are three times more likely to use flavored cigarettes than adults are.

This is certainly a step in the right direction. But if we’re serious about wanting to improve kids’ health, how about a ban on hot dogs and Happy Meals while we’re at it? The children who eat chicken nuggets and pepperoni pizza today will likely grow up to be the obese adults and heart patients of tomorrow.

Our addiction to meat, eggs and dairy foods is making us — and our kids — sick. Thirty percent of children in the United States are now overweight or obese. According to a study published last year in the journal Obesity, if current trends continue, that number will double by the year 2030.

Overweight kids tend to become overweight adults who are at greater risk for heart disease, strokes and all the other ailments that stem from extra pounds. Children as young as 3 are showing signs of clogged arteries, and pediatricians are reporting an alarming increase in the number of children with type 2 diabetes, a disease that typically affects adults.

Simply by eliminating meat from your kids’ diet, you can slash their risk of obesity and heart disease. Population studies show that meat-eaters have three times the obesity rate of vegetarians — and nine times the obesity rate of vegans. Vegetarians are also 50 percent less likely to develop heart disease.

Vegetarian foods, which are packed with vitamins, phytochemicals and fiber, can also help your kids ward off cancer as they grow older. Researchers have found that vegetarians are 25 percent to 50 percent less likely to suffer from cancer than meat-eaters are.

In fact, the American Dietetic Association has determined that vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of life and that vegetarians are less prone to heart disease, cancer, diabetes and obesity than are meat-eaters.

Cut out meat, and you’ll also cut out a heaping dose of cruelty at every meal. Kids have a natural affinity for animals, and they’d be horrified if they knew what happens to animals before they reach our dinner tables.

The chickens killed for McDonald’s McNuggets, for example, are dumped out of their transport crates at slaughterhouses and slammed upside down into metal shackles — often resulting in broken bones, extreme bruising and hemorrhaging. The birds have their throats cut while they are still conscious, and many are immersed in tanks of scalding-hot water while they are still alive and able to feel pain.

Undercover investigators from PETA have documented factory-farm workers beating and kicking pigs and slamming piglets onto the ground. Fish — whom scientists now know can feel pain, as all animals do — bleed or suffocate to death on the decks of ships, gasping for oxygen. They can be left to suffer for as long as 24 hours.

If we don’t want our kids to know about the horrible abuses endured by animals in the meat industry, then the decent thing to do is to stop feeding them meat in the first place. Our kids would be better off if we did.

Lawmakers aren’t likely to ban burgers and fish sticks any time soon, so it’s up to us as parents to help our children make smart food choices. Encouraging kids to eat nutritious vegetarian foods will give them the fuel they need to be healthy and active now — and help protect them from a host of painful and debilitating ailments as they grow older. If a simple lifestyle change can help our children be happy and healthy, don’t we owe it

Chris Holbein is the project manager of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals’ Special Projects Division.

September 29, 2009 Sentinelsource

You remember Betsy McCaughey, don’t you? She’s the right wing hack who propagated a purposely misleading article in The New Republic that was used to torpedo the Clinton health plan, and more recently the author of the “death panels” lie.

Well, Rolling Stone’s Tim Dickinson has a hell of a scoop in their Oct. 1 issue in an article called “The Lie Machine: The Plot to Kill Health Care Reform”:

McCaughey’s lies were later debunked in a 1995 post-mortem in The Atlantic, and The New Republic recanted the piece in 2006. But what has not been reported until now is that McCaughey’s writing was influenced by Phillip Morris, the world’s largest tobacco company, as part of a secret campaign to scuttle Clinton’s health care reform. (The measure would have been funded by a huge increase in tobacco taxes.) In an internal company memo from March 1994, the tobacco giant detailed its strategy to derail Hillarycare through an alliance with conservative think tanks, front groups and media outlets. Integral to the company’s strategy, the memo observed, was an effort to “work on the development of favorable pieces” with “friendly contacts in the media.” The memo, prepared by a Phillip Morris executive, mentions only one author by name:

“Worked off-the-record with Manhattan [Editor's note: At the time, McCaughey was a fellow at the Manhattan Institute] and writer Betsy McCaughey as part of the input to the three-part expose in The New Republic on what the Clinton plan means to you. The first part detailed specifics of the plan.”

McCaughey did not respond to Rolling Stone’s request for an interview.

WEST RICHLAND — As J.D. Stanfield waded into the sea of 6-foot tall plants, only the top of his worn and stained cowboy hat poked above the elephant ear-sized leaves dangling from broomstick-thick stalks.

Those leaves will soon fill the corncob pipe that often juts from his lips. Stanfield’s a smoker and, at 81 years old, he’s decided to grow his own.

“This is my little plantation,” he said as he opened the gate to the 130 towering tobacco plants on his West Richland property.

Started as seedlings in May, the plants now are between 5 and 6 feet tall. The large, airy leaves bounce in the light wind and are almost sticky to the touch. Stanfield plans to harvest and cure them in the coming weeks, but a few pockmarked leaves show he’s not the only one smitten with the crop.

“The grasshoppers think they’ve found some chewing tobacco,” he said, as two pudgy insects munched on nearby leaves.

He ordered the seeds of Kentucky burley tobacco over the internet and printed an online farming guide. Stanfield started the seeds in a hot bed — a raised boxlike contraption that heats a bed of soil and waters the dirt from underneath, so the fragile tobacco buds don’t break.

From there, he transferred the seedlings into small, individual pots. Once they reached 4 to 5 inches in height, they were moved to his plantation.

About 90 days later, he’s just weeks away from his first harvest.

“I’m never going to buy tobacco again after this crop,” he said.

Inside his workshop — an eclectic building where eight-tracks of classic country play over loud speakers, and boxes of animal horns and bone-handled Bowie knives are mixed with leather-working tools and cow jaw artwork — Stanfield keeps a case for hanging and drying the leaves and a homemade kiln for rapidly curing them.

The entire process will take six weeks — three weeks hanging, three weeks in the kiln. From there, the former cattle rancher and cabinet-maker will form the tobacco into bricks and spray vanilla and rum flavoring on the brittle leaves before grinding them into smokable flakes.

He can’t wait.

“I’m overwhelmed,” he said. “I had no idea I’d get this big of a crop.”

Stanfield grew up in Kansas during the Great Depression — a time when families found a way to stretch their money. He decided to grow his own tobacco after watching store prices climb in recent years.

Stanfield said he pays about $26 for a 12 ounce bag at the store. “No more $30 a pound,” he declared.

A 12-ounce bag lasts him about two weeks, so growing his tobacco has the potential to save hundreds of dollars a year.

Although tobacco, of all plants, may seem unusual to grow, it fits in well on Stanfield’s six acres. With one look at the miniature water mill, the arching bridge, the brown Styrofoam bear or the dilapidated wagon he brought to his property from Oregon, it’s easy to tell Stanfield’s not only an artist, but a connoisseur of the curious. His back porch is flanked by larger-then-life carved Indians and a homemade cannon is perched near his home’s entrance.

“I made that because my neighbor up there threatened to shoot me,” Stanfield said. “So I set it up there and aimed it at his front door. He figured he was outgunned so there were no more threats.”

He’s built a grandfather clock, has a house full of cast bronze artwork and said he won West Richland’s Unboat Rally three years in a row. Tobacco, it seems, is just Stanfield’s latest endeavor.

“He’s pretty talented,” said Ann Stanfield, J.D.’s wife of 53 years.

Of his tobacco garden, she said, “You know it’s fascinating. When he first mentioned it, I thought, ‘Oh no, it’s another thing he’s getting into.’ But it’s been very educational.”

Although Stanfield’s just week’s away from his first harvest, he’s already got his mind on the second. Tucked behind his workshop and hidden by rows of tomato plants sits another tobacco patch. Between the 130 in his plantation and the 150 he plans to begin in February sit about 24 near the tomatoes.

Stanfield eyed the small crop approvingly.

“They’re in the process of maturing into a big plant,” he said. “… What amazes me is that little seed is planted in the dirt and can make a huge plant like that. It’s unbelievable.”

A new review of 89 studies confirms that the cancer risk associated with smokeless tobacco is tiny when compared to the cancer risk associated with cigarettes. The authors, British biostatisticians Peter N. Lee and Jan S. Hamling, find that “an increased risk of oropharyngeal cancer is evident most clearly for past smokeless tobacco use in the USA, but not for Scandinavian snuff.” In fact, “Any possible effects are not evident in Scandinavia.”

Recent U.S. studies find smaller risks than older ones, indicating that American smokeless tobacco is becoming more like Swedish-style oral snuff (snus), which has substantially lower levels of carcinogens. Lee and Hamling estimate that if all male cigarette smokers in the U.S. had used smokeless tobacco instead, the number of tobacco-related cancer deaths among them would have been 1 percent what it actually was in 2005 (about 1,100 vs. 105,000). If the entire male population (including those who have never smoked) used smokeless tobacco, the number of tobacco-related cancer deaths would have been something like 2,100, or 2 percent of the actual number.

This comparison highlights the absurdity of the main “public health” objection to promoting smokeless tobacco as a harm-reducing alternative to cigarettes. Opponents of this strategy claim to be worried that it could lead to more tobacco-related mortality in the long run if it attracts nonsmokers to smokeless tobacco. But Lee and Hamling’s numbers indicate that if a significant percentage of smokers switched to oral snuff, the tobacco-related death toll would be smaller than it is now even if every nonsmoker in America started using oral snuff too. By the professed standards of public health, which seeks to minimize morbidity and mortality, this is a no-brainer. As with the opposition to electronic cigarettes, something else is going on here: a moralistic crusade to conquer sin disguised as a scientific quest to conquer disease.


© Reason

At a time when the government is ostensibly trying to cut health costs, why is it trying to ban something that might help people quit smoking tobacco, perhaps the most devastating health problem in the U.S.?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a press conference late last month to scare Americans about the so-called “e-cigarette” — claiming it was loaded with harmful “toxins” and “carcinogens.” The agency was implicitly saying: Stay away from these newfangled, untested cigarette substitutes — better to stick with the real ones, the ones that we are more familiar with, the ones that cause over 450,000 deaths annually in the U.S.

In making its distorted, incomplete and misleading statement, FDA was violating its long-cherished tradition of sticking to sound science as the basis for its policies. And in doing so, it is putting the lives and health of millions of Americans at risk.

The truthful part of the FDA statement was that e-cigarettes have not been through formal efficacy and safety tests at the FDA, and they have only been around a few years. But in the press conference, here is what the FDA did not tell you but should have:

c Traditional cigarettes are lethal not because of the trace level presence of specific “carcinogens” and “toxins,” but because by using them, smokers inhale enormous amounts of smoke — otherwise known as “products of combustion.” It is the inhaled smoke that kills in so many ways — from cancers, cardiovascular and lung disease, and more.

c The cigarette was a relatively obscure product in our society until the invention of a cigarette rolling machine, and sales rose quickly prior to World War I.

Before that, tobacco was used relatively safely — in chew, pipes, cigars — because little if any smoke was inhaled. Cigarettes changed all of that.

c The e-cigarette — a cigarette-mimicking device made up of a battery, an atomizer and a cartridge — allows smokers to inhale, getting a dose of the nicotine they crave, and then sending steam out the other end (with little or no odor) to mimic the ritual and feel of smoking normal cigarettes.

c The FDA complained that the e-cigarette was a “nicotine-delivery system.” Well, it got that much right. But again, it’s the smoke that kills, not the nicotine. Yes, nicotine is highly addictive, and it is what keeps the smoker hooked. But getting the nicotine without the smoke is an enormous health advantage for cigarette smokers (the nicotine inserts come in various strengths and the users can adjust them downward as they wish).

c The FDA has approved other nicotine-delivery systems in the form of gums and patches — and they have been abysmal failures. The smoking cessation rates using these devices is less than 15 percent after one year, condemning millions of addicted smokers to a lingering death. We desperately need other alternatives. But the FDA has now joined a long list of so-called public-health organizations — including the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids and the American Lung Association — whose collective motto seems to be “quit or die.” Not only do they reject e-cigarettes, but they also condemn other smokeless products like snus, which have a mere fraction of the health risks associated with smoking cigarettes.

c More than 1 million smokers are now using the e-cigarette — a product that offers some, if not all, of the “social amenities” of the real thing — holding the cigarette, taking a drag, seeing a plume of “smoke.” The FDA, lacking data that e-cigarettes pose a health hazard, was so desperate, it called on consumers to phone in adverse side effects of e-cigarettes so they could begin to build a case against them and proceed with their intended ban. They neglected, however, to request smokers who successfully quit using the e-cigarette to also call in.

Cigarette smoking remains the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States today. Any alternative acceptable to addicted smokers should be taken seriously. Instead of condemning the e-cigarette, the FDA should be sponsoring studies to evaluate its safety and efficacy — leaving it on the market in the interim.


© Washingtontimes