Dana Reeve, now also dead

“Unfortunately her lung cancer won. I hope she's flying up there with her superman now.

http://robots.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/03/07/reeve.obit/index.html”

“I saw that.
Terrible.”

“I still get the urge to smoke.”

“You got to admire strong spouses.”

“I feel so sorry for their son. Both parents in two years time.”

“She never smoked but worked as singer when she was younger in smokey bars. Just this past week, I heard a doctor on tv say that just one cigarette can iniate cancer in a person.

Some people think they are untouchable from getting cancer after seeing people like Bette Davis smoke like a chimney until she died at an old age. If anything, you'll get emphasema. I'd hate to have one of those holes in my throat that you speak out of with one of those devices even if I didn't get cancer. Emphasema and a hole in your throat, both are not good!”

“so sad..... :(”

“I feel terrible for their 13 year old son. First, he has a father who can't hug him, and then his father dies. Then, his mother is diagnosed with lung cancer, and dies also.

Its too much for a young teenager to bear. I hope he's got someone strong to help him through this.”

“I know "deserve"has nothing to do with living or dying,but if anybody deserved to live ,it was Dana Reeve!!!”

“It's sad. She really sounds like a fine human being, which makes it sadder.”

“Tragic news. She was so young too. Hope their son is strong enough to get through this....
Another reason to ban smoking in any public place.”

“Actually second hand smoke dangers is a myth that has never been proven or even confirmed.”

“Actually there was a WHO report but if was not inline with the media HIT on big tobbacco.”

““Actually second hand smoke dangers is a myth that has never been proven or even confirmed.”
Nigal

Wrong:

"Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen)."


Source: http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422”

“You have been hoodwinked along with most of America Geo.

In 1994, a Congressional inquiry into the EPA and its methods, specifically as these related to the Agency's dealings with secondhand smoke, concluded:

"The process at every turn has been characterized by both scientific and procedural irregularities. Those irregularities include conflicts of interest by both Agency staff involved in the preparation of the risk assessment and members of the Science Advisory Board panel selected to provide a supposedly independent evaluation of the document."

The EPA, by this method (and others to be explored) had concluded ETS was a Class A Carcinogen. But when the matter got to court, an anti-tobacco federal judge, after interviewing a range of scientists for 4 years, called the EPA report that had reached this conclusion an outright "fraud" and overturned (invalidated, vacated) that conclusion and the report it rode in on.

Among things he said in his final judgment:

"The Agency disregarded information and made findings based on selective information... deviated from its own risk assessment guidelines; failed to disclose important (opposing) findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers."

Further, he added:

"Gathering all relevant information, researching and disseminating findings were subordinate to EPA's demonstrating ETS was a Group A carcinogen... In this case, EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun; adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the Agency's public conclusion, and aggressively utilized the Act's authority to disseminate findings to establish a de facto regulatory scheme... and to influence public opinion... While so doing, [it] produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes cancer."
- US Fed Court Decision #6:93CV00307, July

http://www.nycclash.com/CaseAgainstBans/EPA.html

http://www.pipes.org/Articles/Bliley.html”

“Yeah, I go to a court with a health issue and a doctor's office for legal advice.

Here's the full list of sources for that website, many of which are dated since that court case:

Sources:

1. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. September 1997.
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders. December 1992.
3. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. September 1997.
4. He, J.; Vupputuri, S.; Allen, K.; et al. Passive Smoking and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease-A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiologic Studies. New England Journal of Medicine 1999; 340: 920-6.
5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Report on Carcinogens, Tenth Edition 2002. National Toxicology Program.
6. Shopland, D. Smoke-Free Workplace Coverage. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2001; 43(8): 680-686.
7. Halpern, M.T.; Shikiar, R.; Rentz, A.M.; Khan, Z.M. Impact of Smoking Status on Workplace Absenteeism and Productivity. Tobacco Control 2001; 10: 233-238.
8. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. September 1997.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Schuster, MA, Franke T, Pham CB. Smoking Patterns of Household Members and Visitors in Homes with Children in United States. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. Vol. 156, 2002: 1094-1100.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. America's Children and the Environment: Measures of Contaminants, Body Burdens, and Illnesses. Second Edition. February 2003
13. Diethelm PA, Rielle JC, McKee M. The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth? The Research Philip Morris Did Not Want You to See. Lancet. Vol. 364 No. 9446, 2004”

“Noone else is going to say it, so I will.

Dana was bod-icious.

A great woman.”

“But isn't the EPA basically run by the present administration? For instance, the Administrator of the EPA in 1994 was appointed by Clinton, and the Congress majority was Republican (as was the person who wrote that statement). Don't you think it's possible that there's some partisan bickering going on there?

Anyway, just because ETS wasn't shown in this case to be a Class A carcinogen doesn't mean it isn't dangerous. I'm sure anyone out there could find a ton of studies to back their particular opinion, but aside from cancer, ETS has been shown to cause asthma, ear infections, heart disease and lung disease.”

“Dying from Lung Cancer really sucks.”

“You have to remember that many studies were based ON the EPA's bogus report which didn't come before the courts and get lambasted until like 2003.

The American Cancer Association did a 30+ study and found no connections.

http://www.data-yard.net/43/1057.pdf

A German study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology showed no connection.

http://www.data-yard.net/39/cabin.pdf

The Journal of the National Cancer Institute did a study concerning second hand smoke and children and found no connection.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9776409&dopt=Abstract

British Medical Journal found the risks to be slight.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/16/smoking030516”

“The judge in the case that threw out the '93 study was biased lyra. He was anti-tobacco. He still burned them.

Here's a funny yet sober video by penn and teller about the bullchit game. Rated R for language though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF2AlT2oAJQ&search=penn%20and%20teller
last edited: 3/08/06 1:42:09 PM”

“So smoking causes cancer, but sitting in a room full of smoke and breathing it in does not cause cancer.”

“I couldn't watch the video, my computer is tarding out on me! Well those studies are all about cancer or mortality. I'm sure general decrease in quality of life from second-hand smoke would be harder to prove, but I don't think the mass of toxic chemicals in it could possibly be good for you! No matter what any studies say, I will still always believe from the way I feel around second-hand smoke that it's not good for me.

Although, I know I have weird ideas about what's healthy and not...Tarpy was making fun of me the other day, saying I would put anything up my nose, but I wouldn't take some damn NyQuil for my cold b/c it's "unnatural"...LOL! I am just an enigma wrapped in bacon, coated in mystery sauce.”

“Go read folks! Don't take my damn word for it. :)”

“I have asthma. No one can tell me that second hand smoke is harmless.”

“Okay Nigal...so you are telling me that if you had a newborn baby (EEEEK!) you wouldn't have any problems with it being in a car with the windows up with someone who chain-smoked?”

““Okay Nigal...so you are telling me that if you had a newborn baby (EEEEK!) you wouldn't have any problems with it being in a car with the windows up with someone who chain-smoked?”

LOL! Jumping Jesus Christ on a cracker! I arguing the point that the link between second hand smoke and cancer is bullcrap. I’m not saying it’s good for you or that it is harmless. Hell NO I wouldn’t smoke in a car with my kids or even in my house. I’m not for smoking. I’m for truth.”

“Okay, it's just that in your first post on this thread, and on other threads I've seen, you've just said that you don't believe in "dangers" from second-hand smoke...so I didn't realize you specifically meant you didn't believe it causes cancer.”

“Cancer is the biggest claim but I do believe the other claims are inflated also.”

“90% of Lung Cancer patients have smoked.
Not all smokers get Lung Cancer.

Now I love to shoot from the hip, so........we've got 2 or more genes playing a roll in suceptibility.”

“Gee, let's not put too much taste into our thread titles...”