A New Cigarette Hazard - 'Third-Hand Smoke'

Whoa, i never knew this problem existed. Thanks for the enlightenment!

That sucks. Another reason to quit.

Like I need anymore.

* Puff *

Pardon me.

That sucks. Another reason to quit.

Like I need anymore.

The more reasons I have, the harder it gets.

I keep rationalizing to myself that I'll quit before I have kids. And I hope that's soon - I just turned 24 and I have baby fever already. Well, not as hardcore as these women... but, yeah.

ok, I smoke....but, it occurs to me that there is all sorts of cr ap released into our air by smokestacks, chemicals, exhaust etc.  alas, everyone is extremely fixated upon the dreaded 'cigarette smoke'.  Maybe you should do some research into the allowable portions of jet fuel in our drinking water or 'carbon credits'---I think then that you would see that 3rd or 2nd hand smoke looks to me like just another reason to give smokers s h i t and make us feel guilty.   just saying....

Yes, smoking is bad. But parents are tsk-tsk'ing at smokers while allowing their kids to turn into fatties with the arteries of a 60 year old man. 

Just shoot me now!  I am so sick of the anti-smoking faction.  I swallowed the no smoking at work thing.  I was able to accept that as long as I had an option to go and smoke away from the general population of the workplace on my breaks.  Now the workplace won't even let you smoke anywhere on the property and that includes in your own car.  That car is my property.  Then they jammed the non-smoking issue down my throat at my favorite restaurants and watering holes.  A beer and a cigarette goes together like peanut butter and jelly.  Okay, I've accepted that one too -- had no choice.

I can see it coming now.  You will be denied entrance to a restaurant or other public place because someone can smell the odor of smoking on you. 

I am not an unreasonable person.  I can understand that people have allergies to the smoke.  I never light up anymore without asking someone who might be next to me if it will bother them.  I try to be very considerate. 

I'm so considerate, that I do my drinking for the most part at home since I don't want a DUI.  And while I'm at home, I go upstairs and out onto the balcony or out behind the house to smoke a cigarette.  I normally smoke between 5 to 10 cigarettes per day.

My grandfather smoked all his life.  He died right before he turned 92 and it wasn't from cancer.  It was from Parkinson's and old age.

By the way, I don't have kids and do not spend my time around kids.  Tobacco is still a legal substance for now and while it is I intend to continue smoking.

While I don't smoke, I think that this kinda stuff is made up to give the anti-smoking people more ammo to use in lobbying.

If people want to smoke, I say let em. If you ever listened to P&T's Bullsh*t, they have a nice segment on secondhand smoke. It isn't my place to decide what other people can do with their lives, if they find enjoyment in smoking, then I shouldn't try and stop them.

I was a smoker and a passionate one in my younger days. I do understand the addiction and pleasure of smoking. In fact, after being smoke free from 20 years I started smoking again around 46 for about 9 months. I think if was the affects of menopause that grabbed me back in.

However, I do not like the smells and health concerns of smoking and am in a constant battle keeping smokers far enough away from the public building I am in charge of. The people I work around do not respect the laws and health concerns of smoking and get an attitude about the restrictions.

The NYT "report" did not list one finding to back up this new idea of 3rd hand smoke. It said they found it contains such and such and such - but how much? For example, your drinking water, whether it be tap or bottled, contains lead. Grilling any type of meat creates carcinogens on the surface of the meat. I could go on and on about how everybody runs into carcinogens everyday.

I'm not advocating smoking. I smoke and I hate it. I wish it would be illegalized. But this sounds like junk science to me. Show me numbers, scientists!

The article concerning "Third Hand Smoke" just played on the Today Show monday morning and I don't think they sighted the article or any crediable source.  It was presented almost verbatim to the New York Times article, by NBC News Chief Medical Editor, Dr. "not to concerned with plagerism" Nancy Snyderman. 

This topic of third hand smoke is another example of the media jumping on or generating the "latest story", "lastest public mania", "latest silliest concern".  This is done to capture an audience not for the concern of the health of their audience.  This type of behaviour is uderstandable but unacceptable and in my opinion should be just as punishable as shouting "fire" in a crowded theater.

First we have the orginal health warnings on tobacco products.  Next we had the warning about second hand smoke.  Now we have "Third hand smoke".  I guess well come up with another sequel to the "smoking is bad" argument just like we have with all the Rocky movies, what are we up to now Rocky six?

Knock it off!

Anti-Smoking groups have been using the very good arugument "...second hand smoke presents the same toxic hazards and harms non-smokers just as much as smoking and no one has the right to harm someone else, so let's ban or limit smoking." Well as a country we in the US do ban and limit smoking as a direct result of this generic anti smoking argument.

During the topic discussion Dr. Snyderman said, "...these are the same toxins that come out of the tail pipe of a city bus!"  So finally someone on a main stream media outlet compared smoking to air pollution.  Some sources of air pollution are; the production of electricity, the car you drive, the production cell phones, and even the money you use and it is all killing me.  The irony is that we don't jump up and hysterically pursue the banning or limiting of these things.

I present the argument that since smoking is air pollution and air pollution in any form or from any source is harmful and no one has the right to harm someone else, let's ban or limit sources of air pollution. 

   I was surprised at the Today Show story this morning on thirdhand smoke.

   I looked up the "Study" on the Pediatric Journal site, and found that the "Study" is called, "Beliefs About the Health Effects of "Thirdhand Smoke" and Home Smoking Bans."

   The "Study" as it turns out, is a phone survey to see how many people would buy into the belief that hugging a child, the day after you smoke a cigarette, would cause irreparable damage. This does not even pretend to be a "scientific" study, but it was quoted as such on the Today Show this morning.

   The study surmises that if they can get enough people to BELIEVE this,  that they can next push to ostracize smokers from their own and other people's homes and vehicles for days. One of the authors of this report, is on a grant from the CDC, a HUGE recipient of J&J grant money.

   I have been trying to get ANY media outlet to tell the full story on this issue, to no avail.

   The REASON that NO ONE is trying to make the SELLING of tobacco products illegal is that IF SELLING were illegal, no one would buy Nicoderm, Nicorette, or Chantix. The largest contributor to this worldwide effort to humiliate smokers is Johnson and Johnson, makers of Nicoderm, Nicorette, and Chantix, through their partner, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Over $400,000,000.00 was paid out last year to media outlets for anti smoking ads, and for smoking cessation products.  Also, please look at the Robert Wood Johnson web site and see all the donations to "research" centers who are bound by their grants to present quasi "science" supporting the Johnson and Johnson agenda.

   TV, radio, newspaper, and magazines are getting lots of money to advertise J&J products. They also get a fortune to run ads to stop smoking. The governments, state and federal, are receiving huge amounts in taxes AND in grants from the pharmaceutical companies.

   It is not in anybody's interest to truly stop the selling of nicotine. But the harassment of small businesses and smokers fits in with the plan to try and get people to stop smoking repeatedly.

   So simple, and wonderfully executed.  Much more effective than simply advertising nicotine replacement products! The admen at J&J must be dying laughing.

   Some countries do not allow pharmaceutical advertising. These are the countries that can afford health care. They can afford medications because the millions spent here on advertising is not added on.

   I have noticed that the ads, put out by the pharma companies, supposedly to keep people from starting smoking, are just as cool and sexy looking to kids as the old tobacco company ads!

Hmmm. I am beginning to smell astroturf. Two brand new users with damn near identical opinions and writing styles.

Not that I am necessarily buying this third-hand smoke business, but the previous two post stink of a PR campaign.

   Hello AdipicAcid, I just found this site and added to it. No, I do not know Tom O. I am from Kansas, and I own a small tavern I have run for 27 years. My info comes from almost a year of watching our local County Employees (who received one of these grants) try to put small bars and restuarants out of business. These J&J grants are killing small businesses across the nation.  You are obviously internet savvy. My local paper is the Hutch News. Go there, I've been posting for almost a year.

   I have also sent this link to EVERYONE  I know to post on.

   If Tom O and I have similar styles and opinions, it could be that the truth doesn't change, and I can spell.

   I WISH someone was paying me to run a PR campaign . I'm getting too old to have to deal with this kind of unAmerican BS!

  Got to go open the Top Hat.

Arrggh, you idiots are strangling me. I can't afford medical insurance, and someone wants to study cigarrete smoke some more, Stop it!!!! Stop it!!! Look would someone pay attention to where our money is going!!!!!!

Marilyn,  I'm so glad you found this information. 

I have always had longer hair and found that my hair absorbs that 3rd hand smoke easily.  I have never smoked - and I find the lingering smells to be noxious (to me, anyway).  I recall several years ago I tried to get into bowling...but it seemed I could not go bowling and avoid the fact that someone was filling the whole place up with their smoke.  It seemed like bowling alleys were one of the few places all those smokers could go and have a good time.  It ruined it for me, though.  There's nothing to make you feel grungier than walking in to a place where someone had been smoking and carrying it out with you all over your skin, hair and clothing.   Come to think of it, I could also stand behind a bus and let the exhaust pour into my face...it's about the same smell.  A lovely fresh way to start the day :)