Why California Law Must Protect Our Kids From Secondhand Smoke

The study used when New Jersey banned hand held cell phones in cars showed that everything considered was a greater risk than smoking.That includes the children.I suppose that solves the manufactured problem.Children should be banned from being in cars.(Also wives,radios, cell phones,cd players,etc.,etc.)

The preponderance of the evidence shows that there isn't a statistical risk from second hand smoke (ets).The World Health Org. study released in 1998 not only confirms this but also states "There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood."
In another study (Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California-March 2006)it was found "Furthermore, there is no dose-response relationship and no elevated risk associated with the highest level of ETS exposure in males or females. An objective assessment of the available epidemiologic evidence indicates that the association of ETS with CHD death in U.S. never smokers is very weak. Previous assessments appear to have overestimated the strength of the association."

If you are concerned with asthma then stop doctors from giving antibiotics to children.This is supposed to be a "major" cause of it.Smoking is only one of about 20,000 plus supposed triggers of asthma attacks.Pollen/pollution is supposed to be the hardest on asthmatics.

Actually,the air is about 20 to 25 times as likely to kill you than any likelihood of death by ets,assuming that anyone actually does the science to show harm from ets.As you seem to like using the USSG,perhaps you are not aware that in USSG64-page 20 it states that you cannot show causation using statistical science.(among other sources)Your "evidence" of harm from ets is merely statistical.Even Sir Richard Doll stated (in 2001) "The effect of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me." He is considered by many to be the "father" of the anti-tobacco movement because his research linked smoking & lung cancer.

Actually the "preponderance of evidence" is quite the contrary regarding ETS and health effects. Anyone who doesn't believe that young children can be harmed by breathing high concentrations of a substance that contains over 60 carcinogenic compounds must be in severe denial. A recent study of 430,000 subjects by scientists from Oxford University found:

"...that exposure to secondhand smoke during childhood was associated with an almost 40 per cent increased risk of bladder cancer in later life compared to no exposure."

Get your facts straight!

Signed, Informed.

According to the FDA, the average person consumes about 2 grams, (2000mg) of natural carcinogens formed by the cooking process every day. Lets ban adults from giving kids cooked foods too. Actually the so-called carcinogens in cigarette smoke are the same ones present in the cooked foods. In both cases, thay are formed by the heating of the mix of amino acids, proteins, and peptides present in tobacco, vegetables, meat, etc.

Lets ban adults from taking kids to McDonalds, and allowing them to drink sodas too. Lets ban adults from allowing kids to watch too much TV, Play out in the sun too long, or participate in sports where countless injuries, and actually many deaths occur each year. All these are risk factors too, but they are not abuse.

The studies done of smoke concentrations in cars were either with the AC on MAX, where no fresh air was being drawn in, or with the ventilation system totally off, - in all cases with all windows closed. None were done with the heater on, which always draws in fresh air. This allowed the smoke to reach concentrations which never occur in real world conditions.

These studies were faked for the purpose on harassing smokers, and forcing them to use alternate nicotine replacement products. Indeed they have been successful in fooling Operaza and Ellison.

Note the legislation does not enhance fines when drivers are speeding with a child in a car, or even if the car has a leaky exhaust system.

This isn't about protecting kids, this is about harasing smokers.

What will our children be allowed to do, when you have finished taking all the choices away? The only thing our children need protecting from is fanatics like the antis.
We do not all want our children or ourselves to live off Big Pharma anti-depressants.

People shouldn't smoke around children. But if it's "child abuse," ban it in the home. And get a warrant.

Having known people who were really "abused" by parents, I find the senator's stance appalling.

Marie,My facts are straight.I've looked at that study that you referred to.It is just another statistical study (epidemiology).You "missed"(or tried to hide) this part;Commenting on the results, Professor John Toy, Cancer Research UK's medical director, said: "Although more research is needed to confirm the seeming effects of childhood exposure to second-hand smoke...."

Perhaps if you read this recent article you would become more aware of the folly of attributing too much credibility to epidemiology.
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-epidemiology17sep17,0,4034843.story?coll=la-home-middleright

stop the smoking in the vehicles with children. I don't want it around me while I am in a vehicle. I used to smoke and I did it around my children. I wish that it would have been forbidden to do that to them.

With any luck California will fall off into the ocean soon and all this liberal socialist nanny crap can fall off with you. That state is something else. We need a big earthquake out there to get your minds off telling people what they can do and can't do. Pave the streets, and mow the grass but get out of the publics bedrooms you freaks. Your state really is the land of fruits and nuts. Go after the fatties if you wanna go after something....freaks.

Bret: The best reply to your hateful over the top comment is that Governor Schwarzenegger, that Republican governor of this state, signed SB 7--Oropeza's smoking in cars with kids bill yesterday.

Stop it, stop it, stop it. Stop telling me how to keep my children healthy, especially when it involves perfectly legal items. Stay the hell out of my life.
I am not a smoker, never have been, but this is ridiculous.

It is absolutely amazing to me how we constantly yell about 'civil rights' for one group while constantly persecuting another. As a 'respectful' smoker, I am fed up with rinky dink politicians a faux researchers constantly 1)pegging me as a bad person for smoking, and 2) continuously reaching into my pocket to fund the next big 'fad' (i.e. illegal alien health care).

You folks need to understand something...you have no business in my house, in my car or at my job. It is none of your damn business what I do as long as I'm not hurting someone else. How I raise my kids is my business, how I think is my business.

If you folks spent as much time enforcing the laws on the books and fixing pressing problems, we wouldn't have out of control health costs because of illegal immigration, the forced 'acceptance' of homosexuality in our society and the continued nanny state mentality. Quit acting as if you are protecting us...we can't afford any more of it!

If you are going to ban smoking, then do it...oh, but you can't do that because then you won't have anyone steal more money from without angering those that don't smoke.

LEAVE ME AND MY FAMILY ALONE!

SMOKing in cars with kids should not be illegal!

It has been found that "Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of unintentional deaths to children." (National MCH Center for Child Death Review ) Clearly the use of proper child seats, restraints, etc. is ineffective in preventing many of these deaths.Since some people are so ban happy and to protect the children from real danger,children should be banned from riding in automobiles.

I am a second generation native California who would like to walk down a public street without having to inhale someone's cigarette smoke from a 1/2 block away. As considerate as many smokers think they are, they do not realize that their smoke travels or lingers for long distances and time. I also, I would like to go to a restaurant and have the choice to sit outside on a lovely day without being forced to endure cigarette smoke from someone who cannot go without a cigarette during a meal.

Not only am I concerned about children's health, I want to PROTECT my health! I want not only the laws on the books to be enforced, I want laws INSTITUTED to protect the majority of the public while on public property such as sidewalks, State Parks etc. (their are only about 20% of Californian's that still smoke)

Talk about people who only care about "me,me,me", if you won't think about my rights then think about the baby in the stroller 25 or 50 feet behind you on a public sidewalk having that smoke blow into their little faces.

Post a comment