Thanks For The Boston Tobacco Ban

Boston Smoke Free
Advertisement

Probably not so much today, and maybe not for years, but someday many Bostonians will be thanking the Boston Public Health Commission's Board of Health for implementing the Boston tobacco ban that goes into effect on Monday, February 9th. With the new regulations, it's going to be harder to purchase tobacco and much more difficult to find a place to indulge in a smoke. With the numerous malignancies, respiratory ailments and cardiovascular events caused by tobacco products and second-hand smoke, it shouldn't be long before the health benefits afforded by these changes begin making the Boston headlines. Just ask the folks in Pueblo, Colorado where a ban on tobacco in workplaces led to a 41 percent drop in heart attacks within 3 years.

According to the Boston tobacco ban, tobacco products, including cigarettes, blunt wraps used to roll marijuana, cigars, and chewing tobacco, can't be sold in health institutions, pharmacies, drugs stores, grocery stores and in any business located on the property of educational institutions. In addition, smoking is prohibited in hotels, inns, lodging houses, motels, and bed and breakfast establishments in Boston. Smoking is also prohibited in outdoor workspaces that are located adjacent to indoor workspaces. No more stepping out into the parking lot at work or the restaurant's patio for a quick smoke break. Smoking is banned on loading docks, unenclosed floors of new construction sites and remodeling jobs, and in valet parking areas.

Advertisement

Taking no chances with those who can get around the rules, the Boston tobacco ban requires smoking bars to post signs warning patrons of the hazards of smoking and secondhand smoke. Existing smoking bars, including cigar bars and hookah bars can initially continue their operations for no more than 10 years. As for new smoking bar permits, don't expect the Boston Public Health Commission to be issuing any.

Since January 1964 when the Surgeon General Luther Terry published his famous report, Smoking and Health: Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General, the effects of smoking have been well publicized. For some people, the report, which showed an increased mortality of 70 percent for smokers compared to non-smokers, was shocking. For others the news came as no surprise. This and subsequent medical reports have acted as a deterrent for some people. For the citizens of and visitors to Boston, the Boston tobacco ban has the same intent. The ban serves as a reminder that public health officials have a duty to protect us from health hazards.

These same public health officials recognize, often first-hand, that quitting smoking isn't easy. As part of the Boston tobacco ban, the Boston Public Health Commission has been coordinating their efforts with Boston health centers and hospitals. Increased access to free nicotine patches, counseling and other smoking cessation resources is available. In the upcoming months, these services will be increasingly available through neighborhood pharmacies. For more information on smoking cessation resources, check with the Tobacco Prevention and Control Program website at bphc.org and click the link to "Quit Smoking Today" or call to speak to one of the program representatives at 617-534-4718. And when the Boston newspapers begin reporting a lower rate of heart attacks and cancer and improved infant mortality, be sure to thank the Boston Public Health Commission for its efforts.

Advertisement

Comments

The anti-smokers lie that smoking bans supposedly cause “immediate, dramatic” declines in the number of heart attack admissions. In the Pueblo study, what they didn’t tell you is that the death rates from acute myocardial infarction actually increased in the year after the ban, the same time they were boasting that the number of admissions declined! That suggests to any intelligent person that people were dying because they weren’t admitted to hospitals when they should have been! And in the Indiana study, they exploited an anomalous spike in acute MIs during the “before” section of the study, to make the “after” part look better! And in the Helena study, the actual death rates from acute myocardial infarction (as opposed to hospital admissions which were the endpoint of the study) were nearly identical in 2001 (before the ban) and 2002 (the year of the ban), and reached their lowest point in 2003, the year after the smoking ban was repealed. More than 50 studies have implicated human papillomaviruses as the cause of over 22% of non-small cell lung cancers. This would equal over 30,000 cases, which is more than they are claiming for radon. It's also ten times more lung cancers than the anti-smokers pretend are caused by secondhand smoke. Passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus, so the anti-smokers' studies, because they are all based on nothing but lifestyle questionnaires, have been cynically DESIGNED to falsely blame passive smoking for all those extra lung cancers that are really caused by HPV. And, it's obvious that a significant proportion of lung cancers blamed on active smoking are actually caused by HPV. Obviously, there is a corrupt, politically-motivated coverup of a far larger cause of lung cancer than radon or secondhand smoke! The EPA's own report says, "Between 1980 and 1995, the percentage of children with asthma doubled, from 3.6 percent in 1980 to 7.5 percent in 1995." And the CDC says, "Despite the plateau in asthma prevalence, ambulatory care use has continued to grow since 2000... Increased ambulatory care use for asthma has continued during an era when overall rate of ambulatory care use for children did not increase." If smoking or passive smoking were the real cause of asthma, the rates of asthma would have gone DOWN.
Since indoor smoking was already all but eliminated in Boston since 2003, I don't think adding patios and loading docks to the ban will result in a large drop in heart attacks. The Puebo (and all similar) studies talked about INDOOR smoking, not a whiff from a sidewalk. Also, Boston is not bannning smoking in parking lots. And the selective sales ban has never been shown to reduce consumption. I don't think it will be hard to find a gas station or 7-Eleven that smokers can buy cigarettes they used to pick up at CVS.
Hello Everyone, My wife was finally able to kick the habit before she got pregnant with our now first born beautiful baby girl, so I thought I'll share the resource that she has used to help her quit the smoking habit with as many people as I can. She was a heavy smoker for about ten years and just a couple of weeks after finding out about the program that I have researched online, she was able to quit smoking permanently and now can't stop telling people about how she had kicked the habit for good.
Any tax exempt political action committee (charity) that spends huge sums of money to hire lobbyists to make laws using THREATS, INTIMIDITATION, LAW ENFORCEMENT, and SNITCHING to FORCE people to OBEY their guidelines will get NO DONATIONS from me. Here are the rest of them, all fed by big pharma through their Robert J. Wood Foundation. www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Fundamentals.pdf
Speaking as a resident of Pueblo I voted against the city ban on smoking, both times because I felt it was too much government interference in private business. The first time the local residents got enough signatures to put it up for a revote and the smoking ban still passed. As a non-smoker I love being able to go to a restruant or bar and not have to take a bath afterwards from the stench of smoke. However the ban financially hurt our area. Many local bars lost customers and even went out of business due to the smoking bans. Many places have put in outdoor smoking areas that can still have alcohol but these areas are only in use in summer and fall. So for the comfort and health of those non-smokers the ban is great but financially it was a huge blow.
The article notes, "Existing smoking bars, including cigar bars and hookah bars can initially continue their operations for no more than 10 years." How many "Existing smoking bars" outside of cigar and hookah bars are there in Boston? The article implies that there are a number of them so as to magnify the "threat" that they pose to the good and decent citizens of the city. Those good and decent citizens of course will still be welcome to inhale enormous quantities of fumes from the cars in the parking lots where smoking will now be banned of course. The average smoker creates about 1/6th of a pound of carbon monoxide per year. The average car puts out over 360 pounds. Yet one is cited as a killer while the other roams the streets freely. Smoking bans are bad laws based upon lies. They're intended as tool of social engineering, a way to "denormalize" smokers, not as a means of "protecting" people. The article cites the dangers of secondary smoke and then in the next sentence holds up the example of the study done in Pueblo Colorado as evidence. There's only one thing wrong with that: the Pueblo study deliberately refused to separate heart attacks in smokers and nonsmokers. if the authors of this study were truly concerned about secondary smoke's effect on nonsmokers WHY DIDN"T THEY SEPARATE NONSMOKERS IN THEIR ANALYSIS? Think about it: When was the last time you ever saw a doctor for anything more serious than a hangnail where they didn't ask you if you smoked? The smoking status of these heart attack victims was clearly known and available. The *only* logical reason for it not to be included in the analysis was that it gave the "wrong" answer and would not have supported the production of smoking bans. That single omission waves the flag pointing to this being more a piece of propaganda than a piece of science... just like the rest of the studies used to promote these bans. Michael J. McFadden Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
LOL CDC says STD is on the rise! A friend of mine who works for STDslove.com told me that the new subscribers have increased 30% over 2007. Rising STD rate sparks online dating sites.
I'm on a mission. Beat the smoking bans. Bypass the tobacco taxes. Get familiar with electronic cigarettes. They are going to change everything. They deliver nicotine in a water vapor that doesn't contain the over 4000 chemicals that tobacco cigarettes contain. You can smoke these anywhere.They look/feel like cigarettes but change everything. No odor, no toxins. The water vapor looks/feels like smoke. Just take a chance and check it out. It will amaze you so much, that you might actually visit blogs and articles like me to get the message out. They save your health, others health and save you 75% of your money. It's a win-win situation.
having smoking banned is a big help to eliminate the smokers and help them quit. we should all take our responsibility in this serious matter. Smoking tobacco is dangerous to your health. People should be informed by the issues about smoking. To spread this information to a wider audience, a free e-book is being given away. The book is endorsed by prominent people, such as Dalai Lama. You can check out the e-book by going to this link http://www.tobaccobook.com/cdsguidebookspecial.html.