TexasCHLforum.com

http://health.yahoo.com/news/afp/health ... 02313.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Third-hand smoke also bad for you: study
WASHINGTON (AFP) - You know smoking is bad for you. You know inhaling someone else's smoke is bad for you. Now a US study says third-hand smoke -- tobacco residue clinging to surfaces -- is also bad for you.

When a cigarette burns, nicotine is released in the form of a vapor that collects and condenses on indoor surfaces such as walls, carpeting, drapes and furniture, where it can linger for months, said the study, which was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

"Our study shows that when this residual nicotine reacts with ambient nitrous acid it forms carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines, or TSNAs," said Hugo Destaillats, a corresponding author of th
TSNAs are among the most broadly acting and potent carcinogens present in unburned tobacco and tobacco smoke," he said.

The most likely human exposure to TSNAs is through either inhalation of dust or the contact of skin with carpet or clothes -- making third-hand smoke particularly dangerous to infants and toddlers.

Opening a window or turning on a fan to air out a room while a cigarette burns does not eliminate the hazard of third-hand smoke. Smoking outdoors doesn't help much either.

"Smoking outside is better than smoking indoors but nicotine residues will stick to a smoker's skin and clothing," said Lara Gundel, a co-author of the study.

"Those residues follow a smoker back inside and get spread everywhere. The biggest risk is to young children," she said.

"Dermal uptake of the nicotine through a child's skin is likely to occur when the smoker returns and if nitrous acid is in the air, which it usually is, then TSNAs will be formed."

Substantial levels of TSNAs were also found in the truck of a heavy smoker, the study says, adding that most vehicle engines emit some nitrous acid that can infiltrate the passenger compartment of a vehicle.

Researchers from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory led the study, which they say is the first to quantify the reactions of third-hand smoke with nitrous acid.

Beaumont has had a smoking ban for the last 2 or 3 years.

This will probably infuriate the true Libertarians here, but I'm all for smoking bans. Smoking is NOT a "lifestyle choice" that is harmless to others. I tell all the smokers I know, if you like that so much, why don't you wear a hazmat suit or astronaut helmet while you're doing it so you can enjoy all of it and we don't have to join you?

My grandmother died of lung cancer from smoking. I am seriously allergic to it (coughing fits from being around too much cigarette smoke). My mother in law smokes and I would not let her near our two children when they were infants until she changed her shirt or put on a jacket after smoking.

Smoking is not a right. Cancer kills 10 times more Texans than guns. You may have cigarette around me as long as you keep it "holstered". As soon as you light it up, you might as well be pulling a gun and pointing it at me (not literally, obviously, because there is not immediate threat that would justify use of deadly force against you; but it should be legal for me to slap you in the back of your head )

We were in Gardiner, Montana after the ENTIRE STATE went smoke free on 1 October 2009. The good folk apparently would step outside the bar to smoke between beers? Wierd!

BTW, "bofus" used to smoke but we quit for health reasons and took up dippin' n' chewin'.

I quit, and I am all for smoking bans (except places like cigar bars ). It is nice having a cleaner environment for work, commuting, eating and so on.

I imagine a lot of people on this forum don't know what it was like when smoking was prevalent everywhere, even in hospitals. I remember doctors smoking as they made their rounds. When buying clothes it was necessary to check for burn holes. There were cigarette butts and burn holes in carpets in every public establishment, or at least it seemed that way. And of course all of the health issues. A ban is good!

I regret the years I spent embracing the various smoking bans.

I despise the smell of cigarettes. I hate seeing one couple smoking in an otherwise empty smoking section of a restaurant while there is a 40-minute wait for a table in the non-smoking side. I can smell cigarettes from many cars away while my windows are UP, and quickly hit the "recirculate" button on my a/c to avoid the smell.

If these bans do pass, they should be no higher than a municipal level - since that essentially represents the local community. In general, I now wish that we'd just leave it alone to let the free market decide and allow private business owners the right to run their establishments as they see fit. Just like I choose not to patronize stores with 30.06 signs, people could choose to avoid establishments that allow smoking. I don't mind the regulations that require separate rooms and ventilation systems, but let the business see if they are better off with or without the smokers.

My motivation is as selfish as it is ideological.

I've never smoked cigarettes, but I did used to enjoy 2-4 cigars a year. Last year I purchased a nice briar pipe and have enjoyed less than a smoke a month, but would like to be able to continue to find businesses that cater to pipe smokers and allow me to light up. Oddly enough, while many people still find cigars to be pungent, I've received dozens of compliments on the smell of my pipe tobacco. It's not healthy, but done in moderation (and without addiction), is like enjoying a hamburger, beer, or piece of pizza. . . or anything else that en masse will kill us.

It seems that most of the outrage is directed at cigarette smokers (although most cigar / pipe guys will tell you that they are not allowed in most places that allow cigarettes). I've become more and more bothered by the push to control others behaviors. . . like the campaign of hatred toward SUV and truck owners we've seen in the last decade - when for a true reduction of vehicle emissions, they should have been focused on increasing our utilization of the rail in lieu of interstate trucking. Many times, these are social movements more than they are public health or environmental concerns which aim to control and coerce the behavior of others.

I quit smoking about 7 years ago I can agree it stinks but no more then body odor, over dose of perfume or aftershave or even a fart. My son gives himself a short burst of axe and my nose burns at the other end of the house. When I did smoke I did outside away so the family.

suthdj wrote:I quit smoking about 7 years ago I can agree it stinks but no more then body odor, over dose of perfume or aftershave or even a fart. My son gives himself a short burst of axe and my nose burns at the other end of the house. When I did smoke I did outside away so the family.

Having had all of these olifactory abuses inflicted upon me at one time or another, I think cigarette smoke is the most offensive and certainly the longest lasting.

No problem with smoking bans. I think it is one of those things where the question of "when your rights enfrienge on my rights" comes into play. I have a right not to have smoke blown in my face. Of course I avoid places that encourage smoking, but it wasn't that many yrs ago that I had a chain smoker working within a few feet of me. Glad those days are over.

Austin has a restaurant smoking ban, I love it. Food tastes better, its nice to eat outside or with a place the will open the doors.

Boston had a smoking ban, its gotten so crazy there though they closed down Cigar Bars! A place that sells nothing but cigars and you cant smoke! Crazy.

But yeah, look for smoking in restaurants in Bars to go away if more research shows the residue from cigs can kill people.

Oldgringo wrote:We were in Gardiner, Montana after the ENTIRE STATE went smoke free on 1 October 2009. The good folk apparently would step outside the bar to smoke between beers? Wierd!

BTW, "bofus" used to smoke but we quit for health reasons and took up dippin' n' chewin'.

I'd think it would be a tad chilly to step outside in Montana to smoke this time of year! It only took a reward of a Minnestoa fishing trip with my Dad and 3 brothers to get me to quit 13 years ago!

So you don't like smoking and your neighbor that smokes feels threatened by you owning firearms now your both up the creek. Get the point?

suthdj wrote:So you don't like smoking and your neighbor that smokes feels threatened by you owning firearms now your both up the creek. Get the point?

totally different. Apples and oranges.

jmra wrote:

suthdj wrote:So you don't like smoking and your neighbor that smokes feels threatened by you owning firearms now your both up the creek. Get the point?

totally different. Apples and oranges.

Cigarette smoke is a noxious fume whereas cordite has a pleasant bouquet.

suthdj wrote:So you don't like smoking and your neighbor that smokes feels threatened by you owning firearms now your both up the creek. Get the point?

Statistically speaking, my neighbor's cigarettes will kill more people than my guns. And he can "try" not to hurt me with his cigarettes and I can "try" not to get hurt, but they can and will still hurt me, him and others. Unless I or someone else points one of my guns at him (accurately I might add) and pulls trigger, my guns will never hurt him.

Of course, running my infernal combustion engine will hurt him and me too. But as soon as he gives me a lift to work on his cigarette, I'll shut about it.