|
November 30, 2007
Q.
I was pleased to find the website and your insight on matters of second
hand smoke. As a young woman who just turned 21 I have some concerns. I
was struggling with college and tuition bills and managed to get a job
for an insurance agent at above minimum wage which is a feat for where I
live. My two employers were heavy chain smokers and already cancer
survivors from it but refused not to smoke around me. I have always had
big dreams about becoming a singer and was at the job to save money to
leave for a town with opportunity. I knew I shouldn't work in the
environment and kept the door open as much as possible to try to inhale
as little of the smoke as possible. After 8 months I finally left
because I couldn't handle it. I've done the math of working 8 hour days
for 8 months five days a week around second hand smoke and its not
pretty. I'm sulking as I write this and kicking myself. My throat has
been giving me lots of problems and I saw an ENT about a month ago who
said the swollen lumps on my neck were saliva glands from allergies. The
swelling hasn't subsided and I'm seeing another ENT in about a week for
a second opinion. I haven't noticed too much of a change in my singing
voice expect for my lung capacity (probably from the smoke and I need to
exercise to rebuild that) and it hurts to sing because of the swelling
on the side of my neck. It causes a lot of pressure. I haven't sang in
about 2 months like I used to to avoid permanent damage. Do you think
that the smoke is what caused this persistent swelling? Is it possible
to get cancer from the 8 months? Did you notice a change in your
speaking voice? I just need some input. I'm freaking out.
A.
I wish we all (including me) had learned to say no to working in
secondhand smoke in the first place. We are just now getting to the
point where we understand the dangers, and the government refuses to
provide the education needed to make the right choices before it is too
late. Here is a great news piece on CNN about the dangers of secondhand
smoke.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health/2007/11/26/cohen.secondhand.smoke.cnn
(Note
this link was posted 11/30/07 and may not be available at a later date.)
I do believe the damage to your throat
is from the heavy doses of smoke you were forced to inhale. Although it
is certainly possible to get cancer from the smoke after eight months of
breathing it, it is more likely you will not. It would depend on your
genetic makeup and whether your body is more or less prone to cancer. I
am glad you are going to another ENT for a second opinion since the
swelling is not subsiding. Hopefully they can find a solution, and get
the problem resolved.
My voice has been changed, but I
believe more due to the medications (inhalers) I have been forced to use
daily to continue breathing. I can no longer hold a tune as the alto I
used to be (some days are better than others).
f for some reason you should end up
with a serious problem as a result of the secondhand smoke, please let
me know. I know an attorney that might be interested in talking with
you.
*************************
November 25, 2007
Q.
I just returned this evening from visiting
someone who is a smoker (inside the house). I was in the room
approximately two hours while the smoking continued. This is my
husband's sister's house so I was not at liberty to tell them to go
outside and smoke. My husband is an ex-smoker so of course he was
enjoying the smoke and the horrific smell. My question is this, have I
suffered any damage to my lungs just for this short period of time (two
hours) while breathing second hand smoke? At the moment, my lungs fill
very "tight" and " heavy". Should I be concerned and will this go away?
I have decided that I cannot visit this person again. I had no idea that
she would smoke in front everybody. Thanks for your response.
A.
Long term damage is
not likely for such a short time, but it has been proven that 30 minutes
of secondhand smoke can cause a heart attack. It restricts the arteries.
I have copied below an article on a study that was just released. It has
been found that when smoke-free workplace laws go into effect the heart
attack rates drop dramatically, including for non-smokers. So, the
tightness and heaviness in your chest is a concern, and this experience
should not be repeated. It can also be an asthmatic reaction. If it does
not go away you should see a doctor. As long as you do not go where
people are smoking in the future you should be fine.
The big problem is
finding nice ways to explain to those who don't understand. I have found
for the heavy smokers, their families and friends, they rarely
truly understand. You just have to remember they are in the great
minority, your health is priority and be as nice as you can. Make a rule
that you do not go where smoking is permitted and ask everyone before
you go to their home or business, "Do you allow smoking?" and if they
say yes, just politely explain you will not be able to go there. I don't
know how your husband will react if you say you will not go to his
sister's house in the future if she is going to allow smoking. This
could actually require counseling.
I hope this helps.
SMOKEFREE WORKPLACE LAW
REDUCES HEART ATTACKS 59% AMONG NONSMOKERS, NEW RESEARCH SHOWS
BERKELEY, CA (November 19, 2007) – A new study released by Indiana
University researchers shows that comprehensive smokefree workplace laws
result in immediate and significant improvements in heart health,
particularly in nonsmokers. The study found a 59% net decrease in
hospital admissions for heart attacks, also known as acute myocardial
infarctions (AMIs), in nonsmokers with no prior cardiac history in
Monroe County, Indiana versus the control county during the study period
which tracked 22 months prior to and following the implementation of a
comprehensive smokefree workplace law.
According to Cynthia Hallett, Executive Director of Americans for
Nonsmokers’ Rights, “The Monroe County, Indiana study proves that 100%
smokefree workplace laws improve the heart health of workers and
residents, particularly nonsmokers. This adds to the ever-growing body
of literature showing that smokefree workplace laws save lives, in the
short term and the long term.”
The study, “Reduced Admission for Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated
with a Public Smoking Ban: Matched Controlled Study,” conducted by Dong-Chul
Seo, Ph.D. and Mohammad Torabi, Ph.D. will be published in the coming
month’s Journal of Drug Education. It measured whether or not
there was a change in admissions for acute myocardial infarctions in
patients with no history of previous cardiac events or key risk factors
for cardiac events [hypertension and/or high cholesterol] during the
study period – the 22 months prior to and 22 months since the
implementation of a comprehensive smokefree law that covers workplaces,
restaurants, bars and clubs in Monroe County, Indiana vs. the control
county, Delaware County, Indiana, which had no smokefree law during the
study.
The Monroe County study is groundbreaking because it is the first to
examine the impact of a smokefree workplace law on the heart health of
nonsmokers, rather than the general population.
“This study, which goes deeper than earlier heart studies in Helena, MT
and elsewhere, validates that there are important and immediate health
benefits to smokefree workplace policies, particularly in preventing
heart disease in nonsmokers,” Hallett said. “The bottom line is simple:
secondhand smoke kills. Everyone deserves to breathe smokefree air in
enclosed workplaces and public places.”
The new study is further evidence that strong 100% smokefree ordinances
covering all workplaces reduce exposure to known carcinogens and
immediately improve short term health outcomes. This reaffirms the
conclusions of the landmark 2006 U.S. Surgeon General’s Report, The
Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Exposure,
which states that secondhand smoke exposure may have immediate effects
on the cardiovascular systems of nonsmokers and also validates a 2004
warning issued by the U.S. Centers of Disease Control and Prevention,
cautioning that individuals at increased risk of coronary heart disease
or with known coronary artery disease should avoid all indoor
environments that permit smoking .
Previous studies in Helena, Montana and Pueblo, Colorado showed a 40%
and a 27% overall drop in acute myocardial infarctions following the
implementation of comprehensive smokefree workplace laws in those
cities. A 2006 study of the effect of a smokefree law in Piedmont,
Italy similarly found an overall reduction in heart attacks following
implementation of a smokefree law in that region of Italy.
“Smokefree indoor air is a mainstream idea whose time has come,” said
Hallett. “As the public has learned more about the health dangers
associated with secondhand smoke, public support for smokefree polices
has taken off across the country. It’s no longer a question of who will
be next to go smokefree, but who will be last.”
More than 655 U.S. local communities and 25 states have enacted local
laws providing for smokefree air in all enclosed workplaces, including
restaurants and bars, according to the ANR Foundation Local Ordinance
Database (see smokefree map at
http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/100Map.pdf).
Nearly 60% of the US population is protected by a smokefree law, but
gaps remain in some regions and job sectors.
Cities and states without a strong smokefree law in all workplaces
should take heed and pursue a smokefree law before more workers and
residents are unnecessarily placed at risk for disease and possibly
death as a result of exposure to secondhand smoke.
##
Americans for Nonsmokers’
Rights is a national, member-based, not-for-profit organization based in
Berkeley, CA that is dedicated to helping nonsmokers breathe smokefree
air in enclosed public places and workplaces.
For more information:
Indiana University Press Release:
http://newsinfo.iu.edu/news/page/print/5610.html
Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights (ANR):
www.no-smoke.org
Bronson Frick
Associate Director
Americans for Nonsmokers Rights/ ANR Foundation
2530 San Pablo Ave., Ste. J
Berkeley, CA 94702
(510) 841-3032 phone
(510) 841-3071 fax
bronson.frick@no-smoke.org
www.no-smoke.org
To search the localets-talk archives, go to:
http://www.smokefree.net/localets-talk/messages/
*************************
Q.
I live in a small Georgia town and was
wondering if it is a law for all restaurants to be smoke free? I
ate at one today - I mean a small one, and the smell alone was horrific.
I had my grandsons (both preemies with lung problems) with me. At first
I thought it was just the building and old smells until I saw one of the
ladies there light up. Can you tell me what the law is and why this
person can do that when all others in town cannot?
A.
My understanding
of the law In Georgia is they can only allow smoking if no one under 18
is allowed in that business. I believe they were in violation and need
to be reported to the health department or police department. Until the
Georgia laws are stronger you should ask before entering a restaurant if
they are "completely" smoke-free. Be careful how you ask that question
as some think if they have a non-smoking section they are smoke-free,
which, as you know, is not the case.
*************************
Q.
Yesterday, I was in a rehearsal for three
hours in a medium size closed window room, with about 10 people smoking
cigarettes simultaneously, the entire time. Can this one rehearsal
affect or damage my singing or vocal health in any way? (I'm an opera
singer) J.
A.
For most of us I would normally
say it was probably not enough to cause noticeable permanent damage
unless an illness resulting from the smoke, or medications taken for
such an illness, affects the vocal cords. But, because you have special
training, and even a minor injury could be a problem, I would say it
might be possible. If this is happening on even an occasional basis it
can definitely cause permanent harm. If you believe there has been
damage you need to find a throat specialist - one that understands the
dangers of secondhand smoke - and make an appointment. Never let any
doctor intimidate you into believing your concerns are not valid. Many
doctors are still ignorant about tobacco smoke and its dangers. I know
singers who have permanent damage from ongoing secondhand smoke exposure
and can no longer sing at all.
It is very hard to be the one who says
I will not risk my health or my voice because people do not wish to be
inconvenienced and go outside to smoke. It has been a learning
experience for all of us. We have to learn to be strong and take the
humiliation when they make fun of us until they get it.
I do want to mention that being in a
room full of people who come back inside immediately after smoking
outside can also do harm on a regular basis as well. The chemicals
"outgas" and can affect the throat, and cause asthma attacks or other
health problems.
=============================================
Blog: December 18, 2007
A few years ago I began printing out
articles across the United States on fires in apartments and condos. I
very quickly filled a three-ring binder, and decided enough was enough.
There are at least three to five major
fires in multi-unit housing every week. This includes death, injury and
displacement of families who have lost everything they own. It is very
rare that only the smoking individual is the ONLY victim.
Laws requiring fire safe cigarettes
are rapidly becoming the norm, but until more is done cigarette-related
fires will destroy lives and property.
I do not believe that smoking should
be permitted in any apartment or condo building, hotel or nursing home,
and especially not in hospitals (yes, some hospitals still allow
smoking, and often it is the mentally ill they are accommodating).
It is time to stop this insanity of
believing that it is scandalous to tell someone they can't smoke inside
their own home, hotel or hospital room. Lives and property are at stake
just because they don't want to be inconvenienced to go outside.
I plead for all lawmakers to make it
so.
Jacque Petterson
=============================================
Blog: November 30, 2007
I heard this morning on one of the
national morning shows that Austin, Texas continues to be the number
one, hottest place to live and work in the U.S..
Austin has been a completely
smoke-free city, including most bars, for over a year. What does that
say about smoke-free workplace laws? It says it is a positive not a
negative.
It is time all cities and states
recognized that smoking in public is dangerous for everyone who has to
breathe the smoke. Smoking is simply a convenience - not a right, and it
is time we protected the innocent lungs of all.
=============================================
Blog: November 14, 2007
My lung disease is advancing now to
the point where when someone who has smoked comes near me my rescue
inhaler is no longer affective. The chemicals from their clothes, hair
and breath enter my lungs and my problems begin. My breathing becomes
labored, I have spasms in my lungs, and it lasts for up to 24 hours. I
have passed asthma, and believe that COPD is taking over.
I think back to my last job working
with a chain smoking agent at ICM. That is International Creative
Management, in Beverly Hills, California. This is one of the largest
talent agencies in the world. You have to be very famous to even talk to
one of their agents.
I started working in the accounting
department in 1988, about seven years before the smoke-free workplace
laws began. There was a lot of smoking in that building.
One young woman in our department, a
very bookish lady, about 23, with long blonde hair and large glasses,
announced one day that she had developed asthma. Her doctor advised her
to use her inhaler and wear a mask at work. I know everyone thought she
was just a bit weird, and exaggerating her problems.
Another young woman, about the same
age, also developed breathing problems. When I last saw her she had
ballooned in size and explained the doctor had put her on steroids to
help her breath, and that was why she looked so heavy.
I eventually worked with that chain
smoking agent in a small room for a year and a half. It was just a few
years after I left that job that my asthma kicked in. Who knew back then
what the smoke was doing to us? But, we know it now, and there is just
no excuse for working in secondhand tobacco smoke. If you do, I hope you
will start looking for another job tomorrow. And be sure to let your
employer know why. And, please,
email me when you do.
Jacque Petterson
=============================================
Blog: March 7, 2007
I strongly oppose the current proposed FDA
bill for control of tobacco. This bill has been designed by Philip
Morris to make their lives easier and does not allow the real problems
to be addressed. Below is a letter I sent in opposition, which states
many of the reasons.
Dear Senator Enzi, c/o Amy Muhlberg:
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD Re: S.625 - FDA Regulation of
Tobacco Products
Ref. 2/27/07 Committee Hearing
By Jacque Petterson, Individual, Citizen, Voter and Family member
I oppose the above S.625 - FDA Regulation of Tobacco Products "as
written".
I received a copy of the letter to you by my friend
Laurie
Comstock and wish to express to you my reasons for believing
this bill "as written" must be changed or defeated.
My first husband smoked and died of cancer at the early age of 39
(just like Laurie Comstock's dad). I have lost numerous aunts,
uncles and my step-mom to either lung cancer or emphysema from
smoking. My current husband has lost relatives to smoking.
Yes, we need to address the problem of teen smoking, but we also
need to find ways to help the adults that have been addicted all of
their lives to stop as well.
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (I believe
S. 625 and H.R. 1108) AS WRITTEN is a bad bill unless the following
items are changed.
This bill:
1) will stop local government from regulating or banning
tobacco at their discretion,
2) will make it appear the FDA approves tobacco as safe,
3) will limit future litigation for deaths from tobacco,
4) will allow Philip Morris to market their products with
different standards than others,
5) does not allow the FDA to eliminate the toxic gases and
cancer causing ingredients, and many other problems.
I respectfully request that you NOT support this bill as is.
If these problems are addressed this could be a good bill.
I have four Web sites dedicated to education on secondhand
smoke:
http://smokinghurts.com/
http://www.smoke-freerestaurants.com/
http://www.smoke-freehotels.com/
http://s-fhc.com/
Jacque Petterson
Previous blogs |