Kenora hospital hopes to snuff out smoking on property

The Northwest's second biggest acute-care hospital has a plan to become smoke-free.

The Lake of the Woods Hospital in Kenora will start by designating one smoking spot outside each of its four buildings later this month.

The locations will be beyond the 9-metre buffer mandated by the Smoke-Free Ontario Act for building entrances.

Brock Chisholm, Manager of Rehabilitation and spokesperson for the hospital, said the designated smoking spots will be about 15 metres from any entrance.
“We were getting a lot of complaints from both our staff and from our visitors and patients that they had to run the smoking gauntlet with patients smoking at the 9-metre mark,” Chisholm said.

He noted that at some point in the future, the hospital will ban smoking everywhere on its property.

In the interim, a smoking cessation program is being developed for in-patients and staff.

In Thunder Bay, the Health Sciences Centre has a property-wide smoking ban, but patients and visitors routinely ignore it. A hospital spokesperson said the organization is still working on a plan to implement the ban, but the problem is difficult to solve because the hospital complex is located a considerable distance from the entryways from public roads.

Chisholm said the Kenora hospital is aware of the situation in Thunder Bay.

“Certainly it's a very complex solution to that problem, and we certainly are looking at what's happening at Thunder Bay Regional,” he said. “So we are approaching that next phase a little cautiously.”

Teachers call for designated smoking areas

THE HEAD of secondary school teachers’ union OELMEK yesterday called for designated smoking areas in schools, after an indecisive circular from the Education Ministry failed to offer a proper solution.
In February, the Attorney-general’s office ruled that it was not against the law for teachers to smoke in the schoolyard.

The AG’s advice came after a circular letter by the ministry, calling on teachers “to faithfully follow the law’s provisions, according to which smoking is banned in all school areas, including offices, hallways, stairwells, toilets, yards and canteens”.
The ministry followed up with a second circular, informing teachers on the AG’s ruling and basically saying that it was not against the law to smoke in the schoolyard, but it was “wrong” to smoke in front of pupils.

But OELMEK head Demetris Taliadoros yesterday said the ministry’s second letter offered no solution to the problem. He said it felt like the ministry was “sermonising” to avoid revealing the real issue, which was lack of funds to create designated smoking areas in schools.
“We say it is indeed unacceptable for teachers to smoke on the pavement or schoolard in full view of the pupils,” said Taliadoros.
“But the 2010 smoking ban law says that in the workplace, workers have the right to request their employers build a special area for smokers,” he added. “OELMEK requested it and the ministry refused. We don’t know the reasons; maybe they aren’t just pedagogical and health-related, but have to do with the fact that we would have to install special airing systems and so on, so it may also be down to economic reasons.”

Taliadoros said the ministry was using the moral aspect as an excuse to avoid creating the areas. “This is the obligation of the employer, who in this case is the education ministry.”
He added: “I feel the majority of the circular letter’s contents were of a sermonising nature, saying ‘it is bad to smoke so you won’t smoke’. I don’t smoke and don’t like the smell of smoke, but I understand the reactions of those who do”.
According to Taliadoros, before the ban, teachers had two meeting rooms, one of which was for smokers, within the school buildings. He said he didn’t remember there being any problems with smoke drifting into the rest of the building.

“These are big rooms with many windows, so I feel this wasn’t an issue,” he said. “Is it better to see smokers in the yard smoking? It is better they are restricted away. This is where the pedagogical angle comes in; they shouldn’t be seen by the pupils.”
The AG ruled that secondary school yards were exempt from the smoking ban, as not only did the law not ban it, it wasn’t banned by school regulations either.
“Regarding the pedagogical side of the smoking ban for workers, inside as well as outside an educational institution, I am of the opinion that any circular directive should be supported by the relevant educational law, the violation of which is a criminal offence,” said the AG.

In its second letter, the ministry told teachers that health lessons on the dangers of smoking were not enough, if teachers failed to lead by example. “Teachers can’t teach about a society free of smoke in the classroom if they can’t see their school as a public area free of smoke,” said the ministry.
Furthermore, it added, Cyprus’ teen smokers’ figures are much higher than most other EU states, with the average age of first-time smokers being 14. “The absence of smoke within the school area and areas where youths meet, considerably contributes to reducing the number of teenage smokers.”
The ministry also pointed out that the majority of secondary school teachers were in favour of the full ban.
EFI Gavriel has two teenage sons. She believes her sons are more influenced by their schoolmates and friends than their teachers, though she is not 100 per cent okay with teachers smoking in the yard.

“In my eldest son’s school, the headmaster himself smokes and plays backgammon in the yard,” said Gavriel. “I don’t think the pupils are affected by the teachers smoking, but their friends and schoolmates. But it definitely doesn’t help to see their teachers, some children look up to them as role models.”
A smoker herself, Gavriel admits she is against the full ban. “I think teachers should maybe have a designated area.”

She added, “As for my youngest; he sees the sixth and seventh graders smoking and is affected more by that. He has never mentioned his teachers smoking.”
Maria Avraam, however, is not as accepting. “I think it is an outright disgrace for teachers to smoke in the schoolyard, right in front of their impressionable pupils. I admit they can be more influenced by their friends, but do we really need to worry about the teachers now as well?”

You smoke cigarettes? Than buy marlboro cigarettes online for cheap price.

Smoking in Public Places to Be Banned Fully

Bulgaria's Parliament adopted at first reading legislative amendments that would ban smoking in open public spaces. A total of 99 MPs voted in favor of the amendments, while 4 were against and 10 abstained from voting. The smoking ban will come into force as of June 1 2012. Health Minister Desislava Atanasova pointed out that the amendments passed on Wednesday also ban energy drinks for individuals under 18. +

The full smoking ban in closed public spaces was to be enforced in 2010, but was postponed by the government with the argument that it might harm the country's tourism. According to the latest data, approximately 39% of Bulgarians are smokers. Some 60% are said to be in favor of the introduction of a full smoking ban in closed public spaces.

Smoking issue about loss of rights

Brandon Harris' letter (April 5) explains the ill effects people suffer if they smoke. We get it, smoking is hazardous to your health. Shouldn't citizens have the freedom to choose a smoke-free or smoking environment? Let the small business owner and individual decide.

This is really about government intrusion into the rights of private clubs, bar owners and their customers.

Might the government also deny us other rights? For example: restricting salt in our diet, reducing our intake of fat, eliminating sugary treats such as doughnuts or Twinkies. Or, heaven forbid, should the government have the right to tell our children they cannot say the word God in our schools?

Appeals court hears case on tobacco ads

The U.S. government on Tuesday defended graphic tobacco labels and advertising that use pictures of rotting teeth and diseased lungs as accurate and necessary to warn consumers about the risks of smoking.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday asked a U.S. appeals court to undo a lower court ruling that said such labels were unconstitutional, violating tobacco companies' free-speech rights.

Mark Stern, a lawyer from the U.S. Justice Department representing the FDA, said the labels showing, for example, a man smoking through a hole in his throat were necessary to show the true risks of smoking, including addiction.

"Adolescents notoriously underestimate their ability to resist addiction," he told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

"Do (these labels) accurately and realistically depict the message that this is really addictive? Yes, (they) do."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates some 45 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes, which are the leading cause of preventable deaths in the United States.

Congress passed a law in 2009 that gave the FDA broad powers to regulate the tobacco industry, including imposing the label regulation. The law requires colour warning labels big enough to cover the top 50% of a cigarette pack's front and back panels, and the top 20% of print advertisements.

The FDA released nine new warnings in June 2011 to go into effect in September 2012, the first change in U.S. cigarette warning labels in 25 years. Cigarette packs already carry text warnings from the U.S. Surgeon General.

Reynolds American Inc's R.J. Reynolds unit, Lorillard Inc, Liggett Group LLC, Commonwealth Brands Inc, which is owned by Britain's Imperial Tobacco Group Plc, and Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. Inc. challenged the rule, arguing it would force them to engage in anti-smoking advocacy against their own legal products.

"You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes . . . to figure out what the government is doing here: telling people, 'Quit smoking now,"' said Noel Francisco, a lawyer with Jones Day in Washington, D.C., who represents the tobacco companies.

He said the labels went beyond simple facts about smoking, instead trying to disgust or revolt people about cigarettes.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon sided with the tobacco companies in a February ruling, saying the warning labels were too big and the government could use other tools to deter smoking, such as raising taxes or using factual information on the labels rather than gruesome images.

One of three appeals court judges who heard the case on Tuesday also appeared to question whether the government was going too far in trying to warn people about smoking.

"Could you have a text that says, 'Stop, if you buy this, you are a moron'?" asked Judge Janice Rogers Brown.

Judge A. Raymond Randolph disagreed with the tobacco companies, saying there is no case that shows commercial disclosure should only provide information, not deter use of a product.

Teens take tobacco message on the road to Sacramento

Local teens Dharby Dillon, GraceAnn Reyes and Michael Warren from the Tobacco Free Ninjas recently traveled to Sacramento to take part in Youth Quest 2012, a teen conference and rally focusing on the negative impact of tobacco use and production on the environment. The Tobacco Free Ninjas is a group of teens facilitated by the Human Response Network who conduct activities to promote a tobacco-free community.
The youth participated in a march and a rally on the Capitol steps to raise awareness about the environmental impact of tobacco production and cigarette-butt waste.

Following the rally, the youth met with staff from Assemblyman Wes Chesbro’s office to discuss their concerns about tobacco use and what they have been doing in Trinity County to reduce tobacco use and educate the community.
At the conference, the youth learned that growing and curing tobacco causes deforestation, soil erosion, loss of habitat and air pollution. They also learned that cigarette-butt waste is a problem not only in Trinity County, but worldwide. Cigarette butts are the most littered item in the world.

The Tobacco Free Ninjas have firsthand experience with the problem of cigarette-butt litter. Last fall, the youth picked up more than 1,700 cigarette butts at Lowden Park in just one afternoon.
Cigarette butts aren’t just gross, they are also dangerous. The toxins they contain contaminate the water and soil and are dangerous to children and animals if they eat them.