U of MN ethics standard panel conflict of interest.

Redrant:  I have been following the U of MN story for the last few days to see what happened.  I commented previously on s study of paying doctors $100 per patient to steer patients to the Minnesota "no cost" stop smoking program".  Since it's free to the patient and much of the advice isn't bad (though obvious) this should be a "no brainier" for doctors.  Like mechanical repair, in a situation that is not time critical you try the cheapest "fix" first.  I recently talked with a woman who got involved with quit plan.  I considered the advice they gave here to be generally good but they seemed to quick to push the pharmaceuticals.  She was on disability so she got these on very low co-pay but they were "top shelf" pharms.  I suspect the programs are set up to "gin" sales of these smoking cessation pharms.  Her counseling was very light on avoiding smoking situations.  That was critical to me when I quit.

The very well written Star Tribune story, has someone on the U of MN panel on ethics guidelines not stating the serious ethics charges against against one panel member because the the past ethics guidelines were deemed "not important".  

Hello!  The key to ethics is that "sunlight is the best disinfectant".  An accusation is not proof of guilt but all information (which can usually be googled anyway) should be put "on the table" and an opportunity for rebuttal offered.  From the Star Tribune story, it looks like the U of MN medical department is at the very least "dysfunctional" in several ways.  This same department is the recipient of many of the grants from the Minnesota tobacco settlement.

Again, this seems a well done article.  The Star Tribune tends to do a good job when they are not "political".  Please read the article and give the Star Tribune credit when it is due. http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/36500989.html?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUvDE7aL_V_BD77:DiiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU

Also, the comments are insightful and worth browsing.  http://ww2.startribune.com/user_comments/comments.php?d=asset_comments&asset_id=36500989&section=/lifestyle/health

Document:  disiplinary letter:  http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/dpafurchtlet.pdf?elr=KArks7PYDiaK7DUvDE7aL_V_BD77:DiiUiacyKUU

Update from Shelia and Sunday Star Tribune article.

Hello Everyone -

 

It has been a long time since I sent anything out but I'm still here and am in for the long haul. Greg has been doing a great job of posts on the www.freedomtoact website and Shawn as well on the www.banthebanminnesota.com website. Please make sure you visits the sites for updates. Enjoy the article below and I guess I am just not "smart" enough to keep my mouth shut! More updates will follow!

 

Have a Merry Christmas!

 

Sheila

 

 

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/36112634.html?elr=KArksUUUU

Whose life is it anyway? Workers pay price for unhealthy ways

By MAURA LERNER, Star Tribune

December 13, 2008

Sheila Kromer doesn't want any help.

She enjoys smoking and she doesn't want to quit.

Nor does she want advice on how to eat right. Or how to exercise. "I'm smart enough to take care of myself," she says.

As a chemist at 3M, she's had plenty of chances to join health and fitness programs on the job. But like many Minnesotans, she's simply chosen not to.

Now, that choice is starting to get costly.

At a growing number of workplaces, employees are paying a price for refusing to take part in wellness programs. Some face hundreds of dollars a year in higher costs for health insurance. Some are missing out on cash and gifts used to reward their colleagues -- not for their work, but for the way they eat, exercise and conduct their lives.

Once, on-site gyms and Weight Watchers classes were viewed as perks. But now, many employers see wellness programs as their best weapon in the war on health costs.

"I think everyone is collectively beginning to understand that the 400-pound gorilla in the room is health and wellness," said Dr. Ted Loftness, a vice president at Medica Health Plans. "We can't dance around it anymore. We have to do something about it."

Experts say that upwards of 40 percent of U.S. medical costs are linked to obesity, smoking and other lifestyle factors -- a statistic not lost on the nation's employers. As a result, more than half of large corporations now use incentives to get employees to shape up, a 2008 survey found.

But in the process, employers are pushing the boundary between work life and private life.

At 3M, General Mills and many other Twin Cities worksites, employees can earn up to $100 in cash or shave hundreds of dollars off their health insurance if they (and sometimes their spouses) take a "health risk assessment" -- a detailed survey of their personal health habits.

Some companies are tying payments to medical test results. This year, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota is offering $200 insurance rebates to its own employees who can maintain "healthy levels" of blood pressure, cholesterol and other risk factors -- or show they're making an effort to improve them.

In other parts of the country, employers have gotten even tougher. Alabama announced plans to charge what some call a "fat tax," a $25 monthly surcharge on insurance for state employees who are clinically obese.

This can be troubling news to people who simply want to do their jobs and be left alone.

"I really think it's an encroachment on our freedoms and our choices in life," said Kromer, 50, of White Bear Lake. "They should not be able to tell me what I can and cannot do off of work time."

Last month, she turned down the $100 incentive at 3M to fill out a health survey.

Like many companies nationwide, 3M is promoting the health risk assessments as a tool to encourage people to modify their behavior.

"I would never fill one out," says Kromer, who admits she's a contrarian. (She cochairs a committee to repeal the state's smoking ban.) As a smoker, she worries that the information might be used against her. "If I ever had to fill one out, I'm going to be real honest with you," she confesses. "I would lie."

David Bornus, who works for the Minnesota Department of Corrections, also refused to take a health assessment last year. He said he found the questions silly and patronizing: Do you have a smoke detector? Exercise? Eat vegetables? Drink to excess? Own a gun and keep it locked? He drew the line, he said, when he learned that his wife also would have to fill it out to get the incentive: $5 off copays for doctor visits.

"At this point, I decided that I did not like the incremental intrusion into my and my family's private matters," he said. "It's not worth it."

This year he changed his mind after the spousal requirement was dropped and some questions became optional. Still, he says, "the whole approach is a bad idea."

To some, employers are crossing the line in their zeal to contain health costs.

"When you have your employer kind of dictating how to live your life, it's kind of a scary thing," said Shawn Gertken, 35, a government worker in Wabasha County. "Where does it all end? Pretty soon they're going to be after you if you choose to ride a motorcycle after work."

Good reason to worry

But health and wellness experts say businesses have good reason to worry about what employees do in their off hours -- if it jeopardizes their health. "That's because employers are paying about $10,000 a year [per person] for employee health care costs," says Don Powell, president of the American Institute for Preventive Medicine in Michigan. "Companies are clearly tired of paying increases [of up to 10 percent] each year."

The drive to change behavior has been fueled by some alarming trends: Nearly two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese, according to federal statistics. Diabetes has soared at the same time. While smoking rates have dropped, they're still one of the biggest factors in heart disease, strokes and, of course, lung cancer.

"The cost trend is not sustainable. We all know that," said Loftness of Medica. "We're going to bankrupt the country on the backs of diabetes, obesity and tobacco.''

It's no surprise, then, that, many businesses are losing patience footing the bill for preventable diseases, says Susan Relland, a Washington, D.C., attorney who specializes in health law. "Just running the math, they realize that the health of their employees is having a very direct financial impact on the company."

"They've offered wellness programs for a long time, but they're having a hard time getting employees engaged," Relland added. Now "they've gotten a lot more serious about it."

General Mills at forefront

Few have pushed employee health more vigorously than General Mills, with its state-of-the-art fitness center, outdoor running paths and even a medical clinic at its Golden Valley headquarters. But after 20 years of wellness programs, it's still an uphill battle to draw in every employee, says Dr. Timothy Crimmins, the company's medical director.

So the company has added financial incentives to the mix as it tries to overcome people's natural affinity for donuts and a sedentary life. "We've had to work harder to fight the tide of American culture," says Crimmins.

Today, employees can eat at a "gently subsidized" salad bar, while burgers are full price, and collect $10 monthly nonsmoking bonuses. At sales meetings, staffers can meet with health coaches and get free blood pressure and cholesterol tests. There's a $50 bonus for filling out a health risk assessment (double if a spouse fills one out, too). In January, a $60 exercise credit makes its debut.

To Pamela Matovich, a systems analyst at General Mills, the payoff was more personal. She lost 75 pounds through the company's fitness and weight-loss programs, which she was able to fit into her workday.

"It's made a huge lifestyle difference for me," says Matovich, a Cottage Grove mother of two small children. Before, she was on insulin for diabetes and faced surgery for back pain. The weight loss made both unnecessary. "I think companies have the right to be able to say we'd like you to be healthier," she said. No one forced her to change, she adds; when she was ready, the company gave her the help to do it.

Crimmins wouldn't say how much General Mills spends on wellness, but he's confident it's worth it. Company surveys show that the rate of obesity has dropped from 23 percent to 12 percent among its sales force since 2005. In general, experts estimate that every $1 spent on health and wellness saves $3 in medical costs.

At some point, even supporters say companies may tire of paying people to help themselves, especially in a tightening economy.

Behind the scenes, there's growing talk of a tough love approach -- making some health programs mandatory. "It is a controversy right now," says Dr. David Plocher, chief medical officer at Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota. "No one has really agreed on the direction."

But some predict that will never fly, for legal and practical reasons.

"The coercion thing just doesn't work," says Crimmins, of General Mills.

Loftness of Medica agrees. "People don't change their behavior when they're threatened," he said. "I really believe you have to help them."

Maura Lerner • 612-673-7384

Health care costs and insurer/employer intrusion.

Redrant: The basic premise is the "settled science" that says that since something has been "proved" the costs are "proved". Junkscience.com calls this "chasing numbers": IE lower cholesterol numbers or lower weight directly translate to lower medical costs. The link isn't really there.
At Hennepin County the "single" health insurance costs tended to rise at single digit rates while the family coverage rose at double digit rates. You might argue that a lot of single people are young but Hennepin County has a very low turnover and relatively few "starter job" young hires. We subcontracted out a lot, 3M probably did in the last decade. The workforces at major employers is aging.
Katherine Kerstine of the Strib recently had an article about how legislated mandates add more than 20% to Minnesota Health care/insurance costs. They basically need a "boogieman" to try to blame the costs on.
On a personal level: On Friday I got "Shanghaied" into Health Partners for a physical under threat of not renewing my prescription for generic blood pressure medications. Seems I haven't been in there in three years. I am significantly overweight but no health problems. The doctor told me to lose weight and keep taking the meds but otherwise OK. I tend to believe that "sugar" is the big culprit nowadays. One pound of sugar can last me years at home. The only time I drink "sugar pop" is at a bar when I don't want to drive beer. I usually eat cereal that it unsweetened and drink only "skim milk". It's amazing the number of people who seem to live on a sugar based diet! I had one of those little disposable salt shakers I brought from work a year ago. It still isn't empty. I have "religiously" taken at least one aspirin a day for my entire adult life (always those little aches and pains). It's amazing how few people do this and keep doing it. I tell them to get a big bottle of cheap generic aspirin, it's all USP anyway. I try to lose weight but it's mostly for "quality of life" reasons.
Relatively few "office workers" in major corporations now smoke. The Hennepin Government Center has a daytime population of probably 10,000 people but I see only a handful smoking outside. Sedentary work and smoking are a more "toxic" combination but most smokers are in the "trades" where the work is more physical or in smaller employers.
One little "secret" is that in any Health Plan group a very small portion of the people use the vast majority of the services. It can be as high as 10% using 90%. It would probably be "un-PC" to profile these "frequent fliers". They have the accounting to easily do this. I didn't get a letter detailing costs when I got a flu shot at a HP flu shot "event" but they send me cost details for other things. If they can do that they can do a detailed analysis of who really costs the insurance in each subcategory. For example, the rise in rates for those with single coverage rises a lot less than those with family coverage. They could easily factor age in there. They can use these cost figures like an accounting spreadsheet where they can look at any factors they want.
HP didn't charge me the copay because this was an annual physical. I would predict that I will get a statement that this visit and the blood work cost HP $200, all done by HP in-house. The costs to insurers by smokers is probably lower than they say because smokers usually "tough out" colds and flue rather than go to the doctor for every sniffle

Greg Lang

Minnesota Institute of Public Health confuses "profit" with "revenue" in pulltab analysis.

Email I sent them: 

http://www.miph.org/projects/gambling-problems-resource-center/activities/pulltabs

Accounting 101:  Revenue minus expenses equals profit.  Beyond the fact that all Minnesota pulltabs except Indian Casino's are "non-profits" there are a variety of taxes and expenses before the 25% "revenue" becomes a "profit", or in the case of non-profits, funding for the designated charity.  Another appropriate term might be "takeout" which is somewhat like a retail store "markup". 

I have very mixed feelings about Pull Tabs and other legal gambling but you should strive for accurate terminology.

No need to contact me about this

Takes in 3,399 cards at $1 per card	$3,399
PAYOUTS
1 winner @ $250	$250
4 winners @ $249	$996
4 winners @ $100	$400
12 winners @ $25	$300
28 winners @ $10	$280
336 winners @ $1	$336
Payout 75%	$2,562
Profit to the seller 25%	$837

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.miph.org/projects/gambling-problems-resource-center/activities/pulltabs

Redrant:  It's amazing how a a supposedly responsible non-profit can confuse "revenue" or "markup" or "takeout" with "profit".  Anyone who has ever tried to run a business knows the difference.  Perhaps they think that the public and other reading their website are too stupid to understand the concepts. Greg Lang

My "Red Rant" spiel on the excellent, must read CNBC story.

TEN YEARS LATER, TOBACCO DEAL GOING UP IN SMOKE
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2008/11/ten-years-later.html#posts
Redrant: Greg Lang
The Tobacco Master Settlement happened shortly after the Minnesota tobacco trail ended. I'm surprised it's been ten years. I saw the effort then and now as a defacto "tax". I fully read the first proposed national settlement. Essentially it was a per pack "fee" on cigarettes from those who agreed to the settlement, essentially "big tobacco". New entrants into the market and "small tobacco" (niche brands and imports mostly) could agree to join in the settlement at the same per pack rate and be covered. If they declined to join the settlement they would need to place 150% of the per pack "fee" in escrow until it is released by a court after there is no potential for claims against the money.
Anyone who has dealt with a contested estate knows that the claims can go on forever. A growing supply of money escrow invites litigation "creativity". As an example one local company made a product used in a tiny fraction of the old silicone breast implants. They were constantly facing lawsuits for their one to two percent market share basically because the rest were made by companies that went bankrupt once the litigation started. For so called "small tobacco" with limited resources it was generally easier to "switch than to fight" (pun intended).
The irony here is that the legal logic behind the original tobacco litigation was the claim that the cig makers were concealing information about the dangers of their products. Under law a product can be dangerous. It's the known concealment of danger that gives the grounds for litigation. As an example, bicycles has one of the highest injury rates per mile of any vehicle. This is not grounds to sue.
Now let's say that you build a bicycle with a front springer fork with a cable operated disk brake. Let's say the cable is too short or designed to be attached in a way where it can crimp and apply the brakes hard when the fork spring is fully depressed. Let's say this locks up the front wheel so the rider is flung forward off the bike.
As example two lets say you are a legal distiller producing gin to the "gin mill" trade. (think "skid row"). The "booze" itself is not healthful but "Willy the wino" has no grounds to sue.
Now let's say the distiller discovers that repairs to the gin making equipment were made using lead based solder. Lead leaches into the cheap gin and causes medical problems like blindness or lead poisoning. The gin then represents a defective product. Getting the lead out will be costly so there is a temptation to hide evidence of lead poisoning. Same with the bicycle. If you determined the brake cable was too short but you already had a batch made up you might be tempted to use them.
In both cases litigation is a counter to this behavior. I won't rehash the smoking litigation logic but it involves a known concealment of an unstated defect or danger. In the case of gin, the government regulates the lead content so the government has the option of making something potentially harmful illegal (lead laced gin) or accepting as legal a product that is potentially harmful (IE: Gin. For that matter, I have not heard of any health claims for distilled liquor except as an emergency disinfectant).
The 150% "escrow" requirement assumes that the small and new cig sellers are going to deceive the public about the health risks of smoking. First off, our society is awash with claims about the dangers of smoking so if smoking is unhealthful (it is!) it a very badly kept secret. Also, a new seller knows the "history" so they are careful with their claims. Also, it's pre-emptive punishment before a "crime" is committed.
The real issue is that with "big tobacco" and others in the settlement paying a "fee" of perhaps a dollar or more per pack this leaves opportunities for new competitors in the market. To give an analogy, let's say all the butchers in a town were "in cahoots" with local inspectors so they under weighted by 10%. Now let's say a higher government agency got word of this and set up a "sting" where they followed this for a long time. When the bust came the all the local butchers got their "clocks cleaned" and they all had to raise prices by a third to cover the settlement costs. Let's say an honest butcher came into town and set up shop. The new butcher would have a definite cost advantage. Now let's say, the new butcher could sell meat or foul at $1 per pound. With the settlement costs "big butchers" have to charge $1.35. The new butcher would obviously have a competitive advantage. Now lets say the "city" reasons that the new butcher might cheat so the new butcher must put fifty cents per pound of meat or foul sold in escrow against this contingency. Thus the new butcher, who has committed no deception could join and charge $1.35 or not join and charge $1.50 with the fifty cents in escrow.
This obviously makes for a very poor business model for the new entry. If all cig sellers have to pay the same "fee" it is essentially a tax and a "level playing field". To give an example of this gas prices have varied in the last year but stations competed in a very limited range depending on the market. $3.60 used to be "cheap" now $1.60 is "cheap". In both cases the "spread" was minimal, maybe ten cents per gallon. If someone could sell gasoline at fifty cents less per gallon there would be "demand".
This is getting long but I want to get to "securitization". I looked into this maybe five years ago. The media gets a lot of it wrong. The first example is the big lottery prizes. Everyone knows that for Lotto America jackpots "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" in the sense that if you take the "lump sum" it will be about half of the total of 25 years of structured payments. Interestingly, the first really big Lotto America jackpot was won by a cheesehead who took the lump sum and vowed to get a Harley with a sidecar. This happened at the same time as the Minnesota settlement and the local media described the Cerisi law firm front end settlement as the same as structured payments. Unbelievable! The average lottery ticket buyer understood "time value" better than the media.
I'll use my first FHA 30 year 8% mortgage as an example. I got a mortgage for $57K with payments of $422 per month. Doing the math $422 x 360=$151,920 If it was bought for $57K the day of the mortgage that would be a 37.5% "yield". That sound bad but it represents the "time value" of the money. My mortgage was transferred several times, I have no idea the price but there is also risk factored in. In my case my loan could be prepaid, I refinanced the mortgage twice before paying it off. A lot of factors affects someone buying or "scrutinizing" my mortgage but risk of repayment is a major one.
I have been following this for ten years. The smoking ban efforts have gone "viral" in the last two years. A regular reader of http://freedomtoact.com/ will know this. The current stock market is depressing "securitization" to be sure but if you "follow the money" tobacco securitization is is another example of "creative financing" by the likes of Bear Stearns that either went under or needed government finance to survive. We have a financial crisis now because of institutions that embraced these "creative" financial instruments.

Current Economic Situation Prompts Increased Smoking, Delay in Quit Attempts, Middle and Low-Income Americans Hit Hardest

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Current-Economic-Situation-Prompts-Increased/story.aspx?guid={DCEE1911-E0FD-428A-B865-36C0C11F426F}

Last update: 5:00 a.m. EST Nov. 10, 2008

Washington, Nov 10, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- One in Four Smokers Stressed About State of Economy Smoking More on Daily Basis

Today the American Legacy Foundation(R) -- the nation's largest public health foundation dedicated to reducing tobacco use in the U.S. -- announced the results of a new survey conducted on their behalf by Harris Interactive which found that stress about the ongoing financial downturn is having a clear and immediate effect on smokers.

Seventy-seven percent of current smokers report increased stress levels due to the current state of the economy and two-thirds of those smokers say this stress has had an effect on their smoking.

November marks Lung Cancer Awareness Month, a time when smokers might reflect on the life threatening nature of their addiction, yet this new data indicates smokers are suffering more than ever as stress is causing smokers to delay a quit attempt, increase the number of cigarettes they are smoking, or switch to a cheaper brand instead of quitting. Moreover, some former smokers report they are starting to smoke again because of the stress over the financial situation.

Among the survey findings:

    --  One in four smokers stressed about the economy say this stress has         caused them to smoke more cigarettes per day, higher among women (31%)         than men (17%).     --  Those smokers with lower household incomes are especially affected by         the financial crisis.  A greater percentage of stressed smokers with a         household income of less than $35k reported smoking more cigarettes per         day (38%) due to the current state of the economy, compared to those         with household incomes of $35-74k (24%) and those with incomes of more         than $75k (13%).     --  In addition, a greater percentage of middle-income ($35-74.9k) stressed         smokers have delayed their quit attempts because of stress over the         economy (20%) than those with household incomes of under $35k (14%) and         to a greater extent more than those stressed higher-income (more than         $75k household income) smokers (6%).     --  Unemployed smokers stressed about the economy reported smoking more         cigarettes per day (29%) in greater numbers than full-time or         self-employed stressed smokers (17%).   

"We are especially concerned about how the economy is impacting those struggling to quit and stay quit," said Cheryl G. Healton, Dr. P.H., president and CEO of the American Legacy Foundation. The survey found that 7 percent of current smokers surveyed had started smoking again due to stress over the economic crisis, even though they had previously quit. Furthermore, 9 percent of stressed-out former smokers said the state of the economy had tempted them to start smoking again. Even more telling, 13 percent of stressed smokers say their stress about the economy has caused them to postpone their plans to quit.

"It is no secret that stress is a major factor in smoking habits," Dr. Healton added. "The turbulent global stock markets have caused virtually every American a certain level of stress. Those who also struggle with an addiction to tobacco products are at an increased disadvantage as they contemplate quitting, or feel the urge to smoke more cigarettes. Quitting smoking under normal circumstances is one of the most difficult things you can do. Smokers need to create a comprehensive quit plan, use the right medications or nicotine replacement products to help them with their quit attempt, and get social support from family, friends and colleagues. It's challenging to make a comprehensive attempt to quit when issues like job security, uncertainty about the future, and the worries of your family and friends keep you from having all the resources you need to tackle this very difficult addiction."

2,375 U.S. adults aged 18+, of whom 1,347 had ever smoked, participated in the survey. The survey also found economic stress is causing smokers to re-evaluate their buying habits when it comes to tobacco products:

    --  One-fifth of smokers stressed about the state of the economy have         switched to a cheaper brand to save money.     --  More stressed smokers with household incomes of less than $35k (28%)         reported brand-switching compared to those with household incomes of         more than $50k (12%).  One quarter of those with incomes of $35-$49k         reported switching brands to save money.   

November is Lung Cancer Awareness Month and November 20 marks the Great American Smoke Out --- both serve as important reminders about the ongoing issue of tobacco addiction in our country, and the 45 million Americans who smoke, many of whom desperately want to quit. Each year, approximately 70 percent of smokers say they want to quit, but only about five percent are successful long-term.

Now more than ever, smokers need reliable and relatable information about quitting.

Earlier this year, Legacy and a coalition of public health groups launched EX(R), a quit smoking program that encourages smokers to "re-learn life without cigarettes." The campaign aims to educate smokers about the daily triggers that make them want to smoke, and preps them how to overcome triggers with practice and preparation.

Financial stress is a prime smoking trigger and smokers can learn valuable tools to help them prepare for a quit attempt by visiting www.BecomeAnEX.org. The Web site features action-oriented tools and information to help smokers prepare for quitting by developing a personalized plan, as well as offering a virtual community, where smokers can reach out to others for support and to share stories about their quit attempts.

It is a widely held belief among the public health community that setting a quit date and planning your quit attempt around that date is an important step in the quit process. With the American Cancer Society's Great American Smoke Out slated for November 20 this year, smokers have an ideal date to choose as their quit date, alongside millions of other smokers, both to add years to their lives and dollars back to their wallets.

November is also a powerful month to quit as it marks Lung Cancer Awareness Month. Lung cancer is the nation's number-one cancer killer. Despite this fact, there is no test or exam that's sure to catch the disease at its earliest stage. That's why prevention -- quitting smoking or never starting -- remains so important to reducing lung cancer.

About 85 percent of people diagnosed with lung cancer are current or former smokers. Lung cancer sufferers also suffer from an unfair social stigma -- the perception that they had the power to avoid a lung cancer diagnosis if only they had been able to quit. For more information about lung cancer, please visitwww.americanlegacy.org/codeblue.

The American Legacy Foundation(R) is dedicated to building a world where young people reject tobacco and anyone can quit. Located in Washington, D.C., the foundation develops programs that address the health effects of tobacco use, especially among vulnerable populations disproportionately affected by the toll of tobacco, through grants, technical assistance and training, partnerships, youth activism, and counter-marketing and grassroots marketing campaigns. The Foundation's programs include truth(R), a national youth smoking prevention campaign that has been cited as contributing to significant declines in youth smoking; EX(R), an innovative public health program designed to speak to smokers in their own language and change the way they approach quitting; research initiatives exploring the causes, consequences and approaches to reducing tobacco use; and a nationally-renowned program of outreach to priority populations. The American Legacy Foundation was created as a result of the November 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) reached between attorneys general from 46 states, five U.S. territories and the tobacco industry. Visit http://www.americanlegacy.org.

The American Legacy Foundation(R) is equipped with a VideoLink ReadyCam(TM) television studio system, providing you with faster, easier access to the nation's leading tobacco prevention and cessation experts. From this in-house broadcast studio, Legacy can offer immediate access to its experts to comment on breaking news, new research publications, or any news related to youth smoking prevention, adult quit smoking programs, or any issue related to smoking. The studio is connected directly to the Vyvx fiber network and is always available for live or pre-taped interviews. To arrange an interview, please contact Julia Cartwright at 202-454-5596.

Methodology

This survey was conducted online within the United States by Harris Interactive via its QuickQuery(TM) online omnibus service on behalf of The American Legacy Foundation between October 28th and 30th, 2008 among 2,375 U.S. adults aged 18 years and older, of whom 1,347 have ever smoked. Results were weighted as needed for region, age within gender, education, household income and race/ethnicity. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents' propensity to be online. No estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated; a full methodology is available.

About Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive is a global leader in custom market research. With a long and rich history in multimodal research that is powered by our science and technology, we assist clients in achieving business results. Harris Interactive serves clients globally through our North American, European and Asian offices and a network of independent market research firms. For more information, please visit www.harrisinteractive.com.

SOURCE American Legacy Foundation

 http://www.americanlegacy.org  

Copyright (C) 2008 PR Newswire. All rights reserved 

KTCI-Twin Cites Public TV. MN Smoking 9PM November 01, 2008

Redrant:  I'll try to tape and watch.  One half hour.  Ususally these end up online.  I'll watch for that and post if I find link.  Greg Lang

http://www.pbs.org/modules/tvschedules/includes/programinfopopup.html?display_format=ep_description&title_id=62775&display_date=2008-11-01&display_time=21:00&display_feed=3030&feeds=977,3030,11708,9864,9865,9866,13319&station=KTCA&zipcode=55101-1447&transport=&provider=&supersite=stations

Tobacco vs. Minnesota: Clearing the Air

Saturday, November 1, 9:00pm

CHANNEL 17 (17)

Efforts to end tobacco use in Minnesota are examined.

CC

Sheila Kromer: Theater Night Update 10-27-08

 

Hello Everyone -

 

It has been a while since my last update....I'll bet you thought I deserted our cause! Don't worry....it won't happen! As you all know the elections are right around the corner. Please check out the legislative scorecard at www.banthebanminnesota.com , more updates have been posted on the candidates & incumbents. And don't forget to check out the blog also....many new comments have been added from the candidates. Thanks for all your hard work Shawn! Please pass this website along to as many people as possible....we need to show those incumbents who feel it is their right to dictate our rights and KICK them out the heck out of there!! And we can do it at the poll booth! I have a good feeling about this! Mark should be hearing something soon about his appeal...we'll keep you posted. I have copied 2 articles below for you. They are rather interesting and maddening. Don't forget to check out Greg's website www.freedomtoact.com , he has posted a really good article,  "Taverns are a hotbed of grass-roots politics "

 

Break a leg!

Sheila

 

 

 

Now they want to shut down Cigar Bars?

 

http://www.twincities.com/ci_10816544?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com

Boston may supersize its smoking ban

Plan among strictest in U.S.

By Katie Zezima 
New York Times

Article Last Updated: 10/25/2008 09:21:59 PM CDT

BOSTON — For Jay McGwire, Churchill's cigar bar is a place to relax and strike up conversations while sipping a stout and smoking a cigar.

"I come here and I meet nice people," McGwire said. "And I can't smoke cigars in my house."

But McGwire worries that eventually he will not be able to light up at Churchill's, either. The Boston Public Health Commission is proposing some of the nation's strictest smoking regulations, banning the sale of cigarettes at drugstores and on college campuses, and shutting down the city's 10 cigar and hookah bars by 2013.

The goal, the commission said, is to discourage young people from buying tobacco products, to keep a harmful product out of stores that promote health and to protect employees who are exposed to secondhand smoke.

The city Board of Health will vote on the regulations Nov. 13. If approved, they will take effect within 60 days.

"Should tobacco be treated as any other consumer good? No," said Barbara Ferrer, director of the Board of Health. "We don't sell guns everywhere, we don't sell alcohol everywhere and we don't need to be selling tobacco everywhere. They're all dangerous products, and they all require regulation."

The proposal has angered smokers and small-business leaders, who say pharmacies and cigar bars are being singled out unfairly.

"We believe, frankly, it's discriminatory," said Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, which represents small businesses, including

pharmacies. "It's tying the hands of sellers and consumers alike, and that isn't what government should be about."

People who want to smoke and employees of the establishments where they still can say their rights are being threatened.

"They shouldn't be in the business of putting local businesses out of business," said Drinnan Thornton, a bartender at Churchill's. "It's an issue of free choice. Cigar lounges aren't frequented by people who don't smoke."

Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who championed the workplace smoking ban in 2003 but who has not taken a public position on the Health Commission's ban, says steps should be taken to keep tobacco products away from young people, but that the financial well-being of small businesses should be considered.

 

Look What's Happening in New York - Does this surprise anybody?

http://weblogs.amny.com/entertainment/urbanite/blog/2008/10/violations_of_citys_smoking_ba.html

Violations of city's smoking ban rise by a third

By Marlene Naanes

That haze hanging over the bar late at night isn’t just a beer fog.

Violations for smoking inside bars and restaurants jumped by a third in the past year, which comes as no surprise to nonsmokers, who complain that bartenders are increasingly blowing off the five-year-old smoking ban.

The health department said the bump follows a jump in inspectors conducting late-night checks. But some bargoers say the numbers reflect what they can smell on their clothes each night.

“I go out a lot, and I definitely notice it…all over the place,” said Susan Siegel, a Manhattan resident who says bars and clubs on the Lower East Side and in the Meatpacking District are the worst offenders. “I hate smoking in bars.”

And nonsmokers say it’s about to get worse: As winter approaches, the prime season for illegal indoor smoking is set to begin.

The number of smoking violations doled out to bars and restaurants increased to 917 infractions in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, compared to 694 in the same period the year before. Health department inspectors started going out later at night when places are more likely to allow patrons, or even employees, to light up, a spokeswoman said.

“The last thing a restaurant owner is going to think is an inspector is going to be there,” said Celina De Leon, a health department spokeswoman, who added that inspectors can be out as late as 4 a.m.

She would not speculate if people’s behavior changed.

“There’s no way to know if this happens at all bars at night,” she said. “We’re not there 24-7.”

While smoky bars still exist, some smokers insist they are by no means easy to find.

Mark Benkes was smoking outside a bar on the Lower East Side on a recent night, and he perhaps put it best: "You'll find people doing blow more openly than smoking."

Still, smokers say plenty of renegade bars exist, especially on the Lower East Side, but people treat them like a secret stash of joy. Gavin Motnyk, 28, said he knew of several places where people smoke, and he even offered to take a reporter and photographer to one, but then backtracked.
s
Motnyk said he does not mind the ban because smoking less saves him money, but he complained about how the regulation is making bar owners treat their smoking customers.

"When you smoke outside, there's more noise outside," he said. "They make smokers go 100 feet, 50 feet down the block."

While drinking holes still flout the anti-smoking regulation, the height of violations occurred during the first two years of the ban. In 2003 and 2004, smoking violations made up about 11 percent of restaurant inspections, while now it represents only 6 percent.

Still, Siegel says indoor smoking is rampant, and has even felt the urge to demand that a SoHo bar pay her dry cleaning bill. Sometimes she cannot get staff — who sometimes smoke themselves — to stop smokers, despite fines ranging from $200 to $2,000.

“I go up to people,” she said. “It’s the law and I feel like I have a right to say something.”

Jed Kim contributed to this report.

Top smoking ban violators

Establishment: Number of violations

Florio's Restaurant & Pizzeria 21
192 Grand St.
Manhattan

World Cup Night Club 20
13431 35th Ave.
Queens

Cafe Korza 20
652 E. 187th Street
Bronx

18 Club 19
131-66 40th Road
Queens

Portofino Café 18
2008 Williamsbridge Road
Bronx

Kalymnos Society 18
2403 31st St.
Queens

Havana Dreams Cigar Lounge 18
6310 Woodhaven Blvd 
Queens

Queens Village 18
220-27 Jamaica Ave.
Queens

Home 16
542 W. 27th St.
Manhattan

Coco Bar 16
131-37 A 41st Ave. 
Queens

Source: New York City Department of Health

* For the year through August 2008

Violations are largely for smoking indoors, but some reflect the presence of ashtrays and the absence of no-smoking signs.

**********

The number of smoking violations by fiscal year*:

Number of Number of Violation rate
Violations Inspections 
2008 917 14,399 6.4 percent
2007 694 20,006 3.5 percent
2006 481 23,429 2.1 percent
2005 437 25,471 1.7 percent
2004 3,091 26,765 11.5 percent
2003 2,268 21,781 10.4 percent

Source: New York City Department of Health

The period covers July 1 through June 30

**********

Smokeless tobacco offers an increasingly popular and legal way to get a nicotine fix at bars and restaurants.

Sales of chew, dip and other forms of smokeless tobacco soared nationally by about 26 percent as cigarette sales dropped by almost 14 percent, according to a recent Harvard School of Public Health study that surveyed its use from 2000-06. The study partially attributed the growth to clean indoor-air policies.

Less messier types of smokeless tobacco, such as teabag-like Snus, as well as lower sales taxes compared to cigarettes, also contributed to the increase, particularly among young people, the study found.

-- Marlene Naanes

Independence Party Senate candidate Dean Barkely use to "big tobacco" lobbyist.

Redrant:  After the first Senate appointment by then Governor Ventura Dean Barkley worked as a lobbyist for tobacco giant Lorillard for $3K per month.  I've done some checking and there is no evidence that either Barkley or "big tobacco" did anything to help oppose the Minnesota smoking bans.  First my comment at the story and then the story link and text.

"Greg Lang (Greg Lang)Says: 

October 20th, 2008 at 8:32 am

Dean Barkley taking $3K per month from “big tobacco” doesn’t necessarily make him an advocate or friend of Minnesota smokers. I have been following the 2005 Minneapolis and then Minnesota bar smoking bans at my http://freedomtoact.com

I don’t recall Dean Barkley’s name ever coming up. Big tobacco did little if anything to oppose the bar ban. The proponents of the ban were very heavily finances by Minnesota tobacco settlement money diverted from the Minnesota taxpayer and Blue Cross awards. (sort of like lobbying by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac)"

http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/10/19/mde-from-archives-barkley-not-against-lobbyists-contributing-to-his-campaigns/#comments

« TEAM BARKLEY RESPONDS TO MDE POST, BUT DOESN’T UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE: IT’S ABOUT WHO PAID BARKLEY TO LOBBY AND WHY | Home | FORUM COMMUNICATIONS ENDORSES COLEMAN; RIPS FRANKEN’S “UNDISGUISED DISDAIN” FOR COLEMAN »

MDE FROM ARCHIVES: BARKLEY NOT AGAINST LOBBYISTS CONTRIBUTING TO HIS CAMPAIGNS

By Michael B. Brodkorb | October 19, 2008

Former U.S. Senator Dean Barkley appeared on KSTP tonight (I’ll have more on his appearance later) and railed against the evils of special interest money.  Throughout this campaign Barkley has spoken out against contributions from lobbyists and special interest money, often boasting that he hasn’t accepted money fom lobbyists.

What Barkley has failed to disclose in this campaign is that he has previously accepted campaign contributions from lobbyists:

“In September, the governor was the chief attraction at a $100-a-head reception in St. Paul to retire old congressional campaign debts for Dean Barkley, Ventura’s campaign chairman and state planning director. About 15 lobbyists helped that event raise $6,500, Barkley said.” Source: The Associated Press, December 6, 1999

###

“The event was planned by Barkley’s campaign committee, which includes lobbyist and longtime friend Maryann Campo. At least 60 people attended. At one point, Campo said she counted up to 18 lobbyists in the room, although people came and went quickly. She also told several reporters to leave the room. Neither Barkley nor Ventura accepts money from political action committees. Ventura didn’t accept campaign money from lobbyists and has made much of the fact that he develops policy without consulting them. Barkley, however, said many of Ventura’s commissioners often meet with lobbyists to talk policy. ‘I’ve never discriminated against anybody based on their profession,’ Barkley said.” Source: Associated Press, September 9, 1999

How do you spell hypocrite? B-A-R-K-L-E-Y.

Please check back to Minnesota Democrats Exposed for more information on this developing story.

Topics: Uncategorized |

General Tobacco Launches New Product Line Extension Vaquero Filtered Cigars

Redrant: Yesterday I was at a convienience store here in Minnesota. Little cigars" were $1 per pack. I thought I would check up on it. They are taxes far less than cigarettes and not covered by the master settlement. Greg Lang


General Tobacco Launches New Product Line Extension Vaquero Filtered Cigars
Last update: 10:09 a.m. EDT Oct. 17, 2008
MAYODAN, N.C., Oct 17, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Vidal Suriel, Founder and President of North Carolina-based General Tobacco (GT), announced today the launch of the new Vaquero Filtered Cigars 100's Box. The Vaquero Filtered Cigars are the latest addition to GT's product line catalog and will be available in a variety of flavors, such as Natural, Lights, Vanilla, Menthol, Peach, Cherry and Wildberry.
"We are very pleased to present our new Vaquero Filtered Cigars," said J. Ronald Denman, Executive Vice President and General Counsel for General Tobacco. "For years, Vaquero has been a favorite among 'little' cigar smokers, and to reward our loyal customers and show our appreciation, we have launched this new filtered product in the 100's Box. Due to the increased weight and re-design of our packaging, the Vaquero Filtered Cigars comply with legal requirements for cigars, and therefore avoid the higher taxes associated with cigarettes."
Vaquero Filtered Cigars 100's Box joins the other successful brands of General Tobacco including GT One, Bronco, Silver, 32 Degrees and Champion. For more information regarding General Tobacco and their entire catalog of tobacco products, visit www.generaltobacco.com.
General Tobacco Company, the sixth largest tobacco company in the nation with approximately $300 million in annual sales, is a full participating member of the Master Settlement Agreement. The company began its operation in 2000 distributing its own cigarette brand, GT One(R). Because of the popularity of this value-priced, excellent quality product, the company now distributes Bronco(R), Silver(R), Vaquero Little Cigars(R), 32 Degrees(R) and Champion(R). As one of the largest tobacco companies in the country, General Tobacco continues to hold a leading position in the value-priced cigarette market. Its mission is to distribute superior quality tobacco products at competitive prices.
SOURCE: General Tobacco General Tobacco
Kelly Dickerson, Director of Marketing
336-445-4000 / 877-500-9595
kdickerson@generaltobacco.com
Copyright Business Wire 2008

Star Tribune: How can you encourage more smokers to quit?

How can you encourage more smokers to quit?  (From a reorting sense, fairly well written.  Worth reading the full article.)  http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/health/30909814.html 

Redrant:  My comment posted:  Greg Lang

If this wasn't so blatently unethical it would be funny!

Let's see!  We have this super-duper freebie help to quit smoking.  Doctors apparently don't' believe in it enough to try to refer patients to it with giving the doctors a de facto "bribe".

Did I mention that it is a free service to Minnesota residents?  It saves the medical provider the cost of their own co-pay counseling service. A paramedic type at the doctors office can handle the basics of explaining Clearway "program".  Like fixing a car, you try the cheapest option first.  

Clearway must be a great program.  After all, the mainstream media told us that it was!  Interesting that doctors in Minnesota won't use it without a de facto "bribe".

Minneapolis Star Tribune: Feeling the burn over back-yard fires.

http://www.startribune.com/local/30870774.html?cache=n&uccb=1223917765#post_comments

READER COMMENT OF DAY: "Social Engineering at finest!

You can thank your social engineers for this beauty. There's is a formula for socialism: 1) Force people to live in confined spaces. 2) Remove freedoms under the guise of "protecting the minorities". 3) Individual freedoms are lost. Seven years ago we moved outside the range of the social engineers for these very reasons. We water when we want, we burn when we want, we party when we want, etc... We look at everything inside 494/694 as the "Soviet Zone of the Twin Cities".

posted by seneubA on Oct. 13, 08 at 10:39 AM

Redrant:  Comments I posted Greg Lang 

All together now, sing along!  "Let the circle be unbroken".

Smoke cops (WROTE)

I live in the Seattle area and I thought the left wing smoke cops lived out here, but I see they are starting to creep out into the heart of America. Seattle has banned beach fires because of global warming. First the smoke nazis will start with health reasons to ban bon fires. The next reason will be global warming. And politicians who are beholden to environmentalist nuts, will act immediately and ban the bon fire due to global warming concerns. Mark my words, it will happen. I witnessed it out here on the left coast. .

Like the cranky shopkeeper who wants you away from his awning when it rains citing "insurance regulations" Seattle wants to ban beach bonfires due to "global warming".  

Like the cited shopkeeper, theses "greenie weenie" don't know what their are talking about.  In Seattle, it is basically driftwood that is burned in the bonfires.  In the "global warming/climate change" claim burning of bio fuels such as wood is considered "carbon neutral".  The carbon, according to this theory, is mined" IE coal, oil or natural gas.  There is a 99+% chance that a dead tree will decay with time, especially in a moist environment.  The biological decay agents, from bacteria to termites convert the carbon in the wood to carbon dioxide in the decay process so the beach fire is technically "carbon neutral".

That said, wood fires emit a lot of soot and gaseous pollution.  This tends to be localised, rain and moisture in the air eventually knock it down so it doesn't really contribute to "global warming/climate change" according to the "carbon footprint" claims. 

The Strib discussions seems to limit posting size so save to a notepad or word (where you spellcheck) before posting so you don't "lose your muse!"

Bicycling around my Longfellow neighborhood I see that these fires are a cool weather thing.  It is  social tool, people will usually invite you to join.  Being cold weather people can close windows and Minnesota houses are pretty "tight".  

You are reaping what you sow with supporting the anti-smoking prohibitionists.  They are always going for the next step, never, ever satisfied.  

I'm 58 and recall when Minnesota had far worse air quality.  This was not bad compared to Los Angeles and big Eastern cities but on the occasional "doldrums/inversion" days there would be a "haze". 

      Back then, asthma, allergies and respiratory diseases in children were rare even though the air was far more polluted back then.  After the Belin Wall fell Western health "experts" went into Danzig, Germany, which had bad industrial pollution expecting to find an "epidemic" of childhood respiratory diseases and allergies.  Surprise!, the rates were far lower than in the West.

The modern "prohibitionists" ignore this.

Ban the Ban Minnesota October 2008 Newsletter

From:                              Ban the Ban Minnesota [banthebanmn@gmail.com] on behalf of Ban the Ban Minnesota [info@banthebanminnesota.com]

Sent:                               Monday, September 29, 2008 8:48 PM

To:                                   .net

Subject:                          Ban the Ban Minnesota October 2008 Newsletter

 

Ban the Ban Minnesota

“The anti-smoking movement is driven by an agenda — an agenda that will not allow science, sound policy analysis, the law, or ethics to get in its way.”

--Michael Siegel, MD, Boston University School of Public Health

 

Become A Member

Get Active

Visit Our Scorecard

Ban the Ban Minnesota is a 401(c)(4) non-profit organization dedicated to fighting for private property rights and individual liberties.

Our belief is that the smoking ban is the first step into increased government regulation of our lives and our property.

Ban the Ban Minnesota Newsletter, October 2008

 

Dear Shawn,

Welcome to the first edition of the Ban the Ban Minnesota (BtBMN) newsletter! We hope to provide you with useful information on our continuing fight for liberty, and also provide you with ways that you can help. We here at BtBMN are very dedicated to what we do, and we want to help you regain your individual liberty and private property rights that were snatched away by busy-body legislators who feel it is their duty to tell you how to run YOUR life. However, we need your help! We cannot do this alone. With over 1,000,000 smokers, and hundreds of thousands of non-smokers out there that support allowing the use of a legal product in a private business, we can certainly win, but we need to get organized to do so.

We hope you find our newsletter informational, and encourage you to share any thoughts with us regarding the newsletter, or other smoking-ban related ideas. We sure hope you'll be willing to join us!

(The formatting of this newsletter may be a bit off. We're still working on that and hope to have it fixed in time for the November Newsletter)

-Sheila, Shawn, & Cathy, Ban the Ban Minnesota, Inc.

Our Legislative Scorecard

 

 

 

 

If you haven't checked it out yet, please visit our legislative scorecard, which can be found here.

The Minnesota House election in November is critical in our effort to modify or repeal the smoking ban. We currently have 80+ House candidates that have told us that they would support repeal of the ban or meaningful exemptions to the ban. If every one of them were to be elected, it's very likely that the smoking ban would be less restrictive by the end of next year's legislative session.

If you're not sure which district you're in, please click here to visit the Minnesota District Finder web page and simply enter the address of your home.

Please support candidates that support our cause with your Political Contribution Refund (PCR) money. If you are not familiar with the PCR program, it allows you to give money to Minnesota candidates and receive a refund of that money, up to $50 total (or $100 per married couple), from the state. To be eligible for that refund, you must follow the guidelines set up by the Minnesota Department of Revenue, and you will typically receive your refund in about a month from the time you file the required documents. Also, if you owe any taxes to the state, the refund will be applied towards the balance of your taxes.

If the candidates in your district do not support our cause, you may contact us to find a candidate that needs the money, and is willing to take a stand again the ban. For more information, please contact us at info@banthebanminnesota, or click here.

 

BtBMN's Advertising Campaign

 

 

 

 

On September 15th, BtBMN began running an advertising campaign with KQRS Radio. Our ad will run on the KQRS web stream until October 15th, and if our financial situation allows it, we will continue running the ad until Election Day. The ad has nearly tripled the amount of visitors we receive at our website. To listen to the ad, click here to take a listen. We would encourage any feedback on the ad.

We are also exploring other advertising mediums to get our message out. We are considering other radio ads, newspapers, and other forms of advertising such as various types of billboards.

Contact us at info@banthebanminnesota.com with any suggestions or to share your thoughts on a potential advertising campaign.

 

BtBMN at the Conservative Issues Fair

 

 

 

BtBMN was at the Conservative Issues Fair on Saturday, September 20th, at the Airport Hilton in Bloomington, and we want to thank everyone who stopped by to say hi and share their thoughts and support. A special thanks to Joey (of Ban the Ban Wisconsin) and her son, Mitchel, who helped us organize and prepare for the event. Also, Sue Jeffers of KTLK radio was very helpful and supportive, and we want to thank her as well.

We were impressed with the amount of interest we received at the fair, and Jason Lewis of KTLK radio was kind enough to give us a warm introduction as Shawn gave a short speech about our organization.

We've posted pictures of the event on our weblog, which can be found here. We hope that the Conservative Issues Fair will be an annual event, as we will surely be there again next year!

Become a Member of BtBMN!

 

 

 

We hate to do it, but fighting the smoking ban takes money, so we need to ask for donations. We have already invested over $1,000 of our own money for BtBMN, primarily for advertising. We do have several members that have also contributed to the fight, and we really want to thank them for their kindness! Unfortunately, we don't get any money from the Tobacco Settlement, and we're not a front for Big Tobacco, so we get nothing from them, either. Also, remember that we have full-time jobs, and we don't get paid for any of the work we do for BtBMN.

In these tough economic times, we would't ask for money if it wasn't truly needed. And we certainly understand that a lot of bar owners and employees are stuggling because of that along with the negative effects of the ban.

So, we've set up a membership program. For $25 a year (or $75 for a business), you'll become an official member of BtBMN. And if that wasn't enough, you'll also be among the first to receive our promotional items as we get them. That would include things such as BtBMN pens, lighters, bumper stickers, t-shirts, etc., and you will receive them at no additional cost to you! Also, as a member, you will be invited to BtBMN special events and our annual meetings so that you can have a say about BtBMN.

Of course, if you can't afford to come up with $25, and you really want to help us out, we'll accept anything you can come up with. BtBMN is now incorporated as a 501(c)(4) non-profit corporation, and a business membership may be tax deductible.

Go here for more information and to sign up if you haven't already!

We thank you for your consideration!

Help Wanted!

 

 

 

 

We're running ourselves ragged, and we could use some help. If you have a little ambition and a little passion, you may want to help. Here's what we're looking for:

A Blog Poster--If you have lots of opinions about the smoking ban, you may want to make posts to our blog! Currently, Shawn & Sheila are doing most of the posts, and we could use a fresh mind or two. Whether you want to post several times a day, or several times a month, we would certainly welcome you to do so, and we would set you up with the tools needed. Our blog can be found at http://banthebanminnesota.wordpress.com/.

A Data gatherer--If you love sorting through data and information, there's a ton of it out there, and it takes a lot of time to look through all of it. We would appreciate someone offering their time and energy to do that.

A Fundraiser--Fundraising is not easy, especially for us. We are not sales people nor telemarketers. If you think you have a knack for soliciting donations, and a little free time, you may want to help.

A Bar Owner--If you're a bar owner who is really determined to help us with this fight, we could certainly use a bar at which we could have a fundraising or similar event.

If you are interested in helping us, shoot us an email at info@banthebanminnesota.com

 

 

Thank you for supporting our efforts and remember to pass the word!

 

Ban the Ban Minnesota (BtBMN) sent you a copy of this newsletter, as it was requested by you, or you have been involved in the fight against the smoking ban. Our intention is not to send any unwanted emails.

If you wish to be removed from our email list, please click here, and send the email, and we will promptly remove you from our email list.

Second Theater Night Update 10-9-08

Hello Everyone -

Below are a few items of interest. I would like to draw special attention to the article below pertaining to the Surgeon General Carmona's 2006 report...this report was the beginning of the SHS issue. It was the "foot in the door" for all these smoking bans. Let's hope it gets the investigation that it deserves along with our esteemed Congress & Wallstreet for the current fiasco. We cannot allow Lies & Corruption to continue and then we suffer the consequences! For one....I am sick and tired of it and we deserve better! Don't forget to visit the www.freedomtoact.com and read the article "Fired-up Obama still smokes a cigarette now and then". http://freedomtoact.blogspot.com/2008/10/fired-up-obama-still-smokes-cigarette.html




"At Issues" (Channel 5 KSTP - Sue Jeffers debates Senator Sheran on Smoking Ban)

To watch the video with some comments added by Shawn. (Nice job Shawn!)

http://banthebanminnesota.wordpress.com/




Four Groups File Complaints Against Carmona's 2006 Report
Wed Oct 8, 11:30 AM ET
To: LEGAL AFFAIRS EDITORS
Contact: Pam Parker of Opponents of Ohio Bans, +1-614-565-6560, truth@opponentsofohiobans.com
COLUMBUS, Ohio, Oct. 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In June, 2006, then Surgeon General Carmona released his report titled "The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke". Since that date, his report has drawn criticism from Scientists and Epidemiologists worldwide.
Four separate groups have filed complaints with the Office of Research Integrity, Health and Human Services against Ex-Surgeon General Carmona's 2006 Report.
Opponents of Ohio Bans filed a complaint against the scientific misconduct (manipulation of research) of the economic assessment/impact of smoking bans. According to Carmona's report, smokefree policies do not harm business. Two thirds of the studies in Carmona's report were either authored or co-authored by Stanton Glantz, Director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California San Francisco School of Medicine, who is not an economist. He and his university have profited heavily by anti-tobacco funding and grants. Absolutely no studies or reports conducted by economists or trade organizations were cited in Carmona's report, although many sources were available at the time. For example, the highly regarded Deloitte and Touche reported a study for the National Restaurant Association study (2004), the Ridgeway Economic Associates New York Nightlife Association/Empire State Restaurant and Tavern Association Study (05/12/2004), and Terry L. Clower, Ph.D. & Bernard L. Weinstein, Ph.D. completed a study for Dallas Restaurant Association Study (10/01/2004). "This is a glaring and obvious attempt to stack the deck in favor of anti-tobacco versus the real damage done to the hospitality industry. How was it even possible that the highest medical authority in this country got away with this?" asks Pam Parker of Opponents of Ohio Bans.
The Hawaii Smokers Alliance filed a complaint against the public statement "there is no safe level of exposure". In addition to violating the basic tenets of toxicology, this actually crosses the line of fabricating results because the SG is the highest healthcare authority in the United States of America and his press release to announce the results of his meta-analysis truly is his report to the American public. "We are committed to holding those who have chosen to misinform or misrepresent information to the general public accountable for such reckless and egregious behavior. Such misrepresentations are solely responsible for the destruction and incalculable financial harm to businesses both large and small across the nation," states Jolyn Tenn of Hawaii Smokers Alliance.
Ban the Ban Wisconsin's complaint cites the haphazard use of RRs or "relative risks". Coupled with the fact that the larger studies not included in Carmona's report would have diminished the already unacceptably low RRs, questionable studies inflated the appearance of RRs. Moreover, the relative risks don't appear to be discussed with respect to absolute risks. In the ORI's terms, this is a significant departure from accepted practice in the relevant field. Early in Carmona's report, a brief subsection stated that, "The quantitative results of the meta-analyses, however, were not determinate in making causal inferences in this Surgeon General's report." Clearly, in the absence of hard evidence, the Surgeon General chose to pontificate according to his pre-determined results. Carmona couldn't have deviated any further from accepted practice in the relevant field without stepping in something.
Citizens Freedom Alliance's complaint is centered on "changing and omitting data". The data for a meta-analysis is the studies collected from the body of research, but the SG's meta-analysis omits relevant studies such as the Enstrom/Kabat study, belittles other large relevant studies, includes highly questionable studies, and relies heavily on the thoroughly discredited 1992 EPA report (which was not only discredited by a Federal Judge, but by three congressional committees). By omitting relevant long-term, large studies as well as relying heavily on discredited reports, the Surgeon General both changed and omitted data in his meta-analysis of research on secondhand smoke (SHS)/environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), which did indeed ensure that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. He, therefore, committed "research misconduct" as defined by the "falsification" according to the "Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct". According to Gary Nolan, U.S. Regional Director for Citizens Freedom Alliance, "Americans should be angry about this waste of tax payer dollars. I truly believe this study was released for purely political reasons and is an insult to every honorable scientist in the world. The result of Carmona's ETS study was to needlessly ruin business, cost jobs and harm the economies of local communities and states across the country. He should be ashamed of his actions."
Dr. Michael Siegel is a prominent doctor specializing in Preventative Medicine and Public Health. From his commentary on Carmona's 2006 report, he is quoted as saying, "The Surgeon General is publicly claiming that brief exposure to secondhand smoke increases risk for heart disease and lung cancer. But there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. Certainly, no evidence is presented in the Surgeon General's report to support this claim. And certainly, the Surgeon General's report draws no such conclusion." http://tinyurl.com/5fq7r6
Many researchers and prominent organizations have written about the powerful influences of the anti-tobacco activists. Dr. Carl Phillips, University of Alberta School of Public Health, Edmonton, Canada wrote "Warning: Anti-Tobacco Activism May Be Hazardous to Epidemiological Science". http://www.epi-perspectives.com/content/pdf/1742-5573-4-13.pdf . Other articles such as "Science and Secondhand Smoke: the Need for a Good Puff of Skepticism" by Sidney Zion (Skeptic, Volume 13, Number 3, 2007), "Where's the Consensus on Second Hand Smoke?" by Joseph Bast of Heartland Institute, and "Did Carmona Read His Own Report?" by Jacob Scullum with Reason Magazine 06/29/2006 http://www.reason.com/blog/show/114497.html are but a small representation of the articles that give a glimpse of how damaging the epidemic of anti-smoking is.
The fact is, the Surgeon General title is one that is held in highest esteem. It is the medical authority in this country. When, for whatever reason, that position is compromised into producing a report that wreaks the damage his report has had on this country, that authority should be held accountable. Carmona's 2006 report is the sole reason given for several smoking bans, Ohio's ban for one. These bans have had devastating financial impacts on businesses. The worst offense is the offense against the American People and the Scientific Community. People will no longer be able to trust the word of the person holding the Surgeon General title. The damage to the science of Epidemiology is irreversible. The good news is many ethical doctors and scientists can no longer remain silent about the abuses of Epidemiology and are starting to speak out. "Because they've committed a huge fraud on the American public. And because they should be held accountable for that. They should be held accountable to the same rules of corporate and individual behavior as everybody else. It's very simple." This is a quote by Stanton Glantz during a PBS interview about Big Tobacco. Shouldn't the same apply to the Surgeon General?
Related Web site: www.opponentsofohiobans.com
SOURCE Opponents of Ohio Bans
http://tinyurl.com/4vx6m6


Fired-up Obama still smokes a cigarette now and then.


Tackle obesity like smoking, says researcher Michael Kahn Reuters Tackling the global obesity epidemic will require governments to take similar action to that many have used to curb smoking, a top researcher said Wednesday.This could include regulations that restrict how companies market junk food to children and requirements for schools to serve healthy meals, said Professor Boyd Swinburn, a public health researcher who works with the World Health Organization."The brakes on the obesity epidemic need to be policy-led and governments need to take centre stage," Swinburn, a researcher at Deakin University in Australia, said at the 2008 European Congress on Obesity."Governments have to lead the way they did with the tobacco epidemic. We need hard-hitting messages."Action is urgent because, aside from sub-Saharan Africa, nearly every country has suffered a dramatic rise in the number of obese people in the past 30 years. That increase has likely been a tripling in many industrialized nations, he said.The WHO classifies about 400 million people around the world as obese, 20 million of them children under the age of five.Obesity raises the risk of diseases such as Type 2 diabetes and heart problems, and is piling pressure on already overburdened national health systems.Swinburn said the food industry has largely driven the epidemic with a stream of processed products that are cheaper and better-tasting but filled with unhealthy ingredients.Lack of physical fitness and exercise, while important, have played only a small role in explaining why the number of obese people has soared in recent decades, he said."Commercial drivers around food have been the biggest influence over the past 30 years," he said. "The product, the price, the promotion and the placement have changed dramatically.Swinburn urged governments to introduce policies similar to those taken against smoking. These have included tightly controlled marketing to children and regulations warning of the dangers of smoking on cigarette packages.Obesity is persistent despite people being increasingly aware of the risks of being overweight, demonstrating the problem requires direct government intervention, he said."Governments have a number of ways to influence the behaviours of a population," Swinburn said.Among anti-obesity measures taken, New York has banned artery-clogging trans fats from city restaurants and is forcing fast-food chains to display calorie counts on their menu boards.Britain plans to spend $145 million on a campaign encouraging healthy lifestyles as part of a wider anti-obesity strategy, including compulsory cooking lessons for children and the promotion of exercise.Other measures are being considered here in Alberta.To encourage healthy living Calgary-Lougheed MLA Dave Rodney proposed a private member's bill earlier this week that would give active Albertans up to $1,500 in fitness tax credits.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/health/story.html?id=ea886eb9-f48d-41b9-a60d-10509abebafe