Just when I thought I heard it all the antis get even more rediculous. They can’t prove any deaths caused by second hand smoke and now they are going into the realm of third hand smoke.
January issue of Pediatrics, researchers at MassGeneral Hospital for Children (MGHfC) and colleagues across the country describe how tobacco smoke contamination lingers even after a cigarette is extinguished – a phenomenon they define as “third-hand” smoke. Their study is the first to examine adult attitudes about the health risks to children of third-hand smoke and how those beliefs may relate to rules about smoking in their homes.
And of course all of the same scare tactics that are used in second hand smoke.
While it is true that tobacco does contain polonium-210 one has to understand exactly how tobacco contains this radio active ingredient.
Being produced during the decay of naturally occurring uranium-238, polonium-210 is widely distributed in small amounts in the earth´s crust. Although it can be produced by the chemical processing of uranium ores or minerals, uranium ores contain less than 0.1 mg Po-210 per ton. Because Po-210 is produced from the decay of radon-222 gas, it can be found in the atmosphere from which it is deposited on the earth´s surface. Although direct root uptake by plants is generally small, Po-210 can be deposited on broad-leaved vegetables.
So as scary as they try to make it polonium-210 is part of nature, it is in the food we eat and deposited all over the world. It is not some toxic substance unique to tobacco smoke. The same can be said about all of the other so called toxic ingredients. These activists completely ignore the first rule of Toxicology and that is “Dose makes the poison” Will these activist ever have even a glimmer of scientific integrity?
Filed under: anti insanity, health issues, junk science, reality check | Tagged: anti insanity, Health, health issues, junk science, smoking, smoking ban
My cousin’s wife makes him wash his hands before touching their children after smoking, even though she occasionally smokes.
My wife works at a crisis pregnancy shelter. Some of the women have other children. They want the women to wear gloves and protective clothes when they smoke, to be disposed of after the cigarette is extinguished.
Pretty soon it we will all be walking around in space suits.
The legislation goes back to work Monday.
Time to start hammering them with emails.
Also, I have written numerous times with the idea to contact the WTL and organize a State wide rally at at least one bar per county on the same day to really send a loud message to the Gov.
No one has responded to me on this so I would appreciate SOMEONE’S feedback on this.
This study says:”Similar to low-level lead exposure, low levels of tobacco particulates have been associated with cognitive deficits among children, and the higher the exposure level, the lower the reading score.”
……………………….
More antis that seem to think the SG is full of crap or maybe they are full of crap.
SG’s 2006 Report
Chapter 1
Introduction, Summary, and Conclusions,page 13
Cognitive Development
8. The evidence is inadequate to infer the presence
or absence of a causal relationship between exposure to secondhand smoke and cognitive functioning among children.
Love the site. I was in Hudson 2 weeks ago for my b-day and the place was packed. Don’t know how much good it would do but I would like to voice my opinion.
With these people there is no integrity. Just dazzle with brilliance and baffle them with B.S. that’s how it got done here in MN
Michael J McFadden has a good on on P-210
http://cantiloper.tripod.com/cantirussian.html
Well, they’re certainly showing their insanity now. This is way “out there”.
Pretty soon they’ll be putting us all in a bubble and feeding us sprouts 3 x a day.
Soon, I suspect that a building that allowed a person to smoke a year ago will ba contaminated with eighth or ninth hand smoke.
The legislation goes back to work Monday.
Time to start hammering them with emails.
Also, I have written numerous times with the idea to contact the WTL and organize a State wide rally at at least one bar per county on the same day to really send a loud message to the Gov.
No one has responded to me on this so I would appreciate SOMEONE’S feedback on this.
Good grief, now HHS.gov is spreading this nonsense.
Thirdhand smoke and kids
They’re really out-doing themselves. They sound like raving lunatics now.
[...] Remember Third Hand Smoke? Well, HHS themselves hit the Internet with the very same claim in a Health Beat tidbit [...]
An interesting piece on this subject:
http://www.velvetgloveironfist.com/index.php?page_id=67”
Bits and pieces of it.
“The bedrooms of nonsmokers had nicotine concentrations of 0.09 mcg/m3 whilst the children of smokers had concentrations of 0.22 mcg/m3.
To provide some perspective, the legal limit of workplace exposure in the US is 500 mcg/m3, some 2,500 times more than was found in the smokers’ households.
The reality was that nicotine levels in the bedrooms of a completely nonsmoking family’s house are effectively zero and a doubling or trebling makes no real difference. It would take a paranoid hypochondriac to believe that such sub-microscopic traces pose a threat to health.”
” None of the six authors are chemists or toxicologists. Three of them are social psychologists, one has a master’s degree in English and the other two are pediatricians with a background in tobacco control.”
“This study breaks new ground by using the opinions and beliefs of random members of the public as a substitute for scientific evidence.”
” “To our knowledge, this is the first study to document that surfaces, dust, and air are contaminated in homes of smokers with infants. Infants of smokers are at risk of ETS exposure in their homes through dust, surfaces, and air.” ”
“Sheer speculation of course, but the fact that nicotine was detected in no fewer than 97% of the non-smoking households raises an interesting question.
In the study, nicotine is used as a marker for secondhand smoke. The fact that the homes of smokers had two or three times the level nicotine found in the non-smoking households (even when the smoking took place outside) is considered significant by the authors.
But the fact remains that even homes lived in entirely by nonsmokers have measurable levels of nicotine and, by Matt’s logic, of ETS. Are they also at risk? Is everyone at risk?
Presumably no anti-smoking advocate would claim that a home inhabited by nonsmokers poses a risk to health from firsthand, secondhand or thirdhand smoke.
To argue otherwise would be to suggest that risk is universal and inescapable.
And yet, 97% of non-smoking homes have measureable quantities of nicotine and the children of nonsmokers have measureable quantities of cotinine.
If a nicotine concentration of 0.32 mcg/m3 (ie. a third of a millionth of a gram per cubic metre) suggests the presence of “tobacco toxins”, then why should a concentration of 0.10 mcg/m3 be considered safe?”