OMG!!! (trying to shut him up)
You Go GREG!!!
Thank you, Greg! They didn't leave much time for phone folks, did they?
You Go GREG!!!
Thank you, Greg! They didn't leave much time for phone folks, did they?
Colorado to consider ban on Dissolvable Tobacco Products
- Thread starter Vocalek
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Is she the chairperson closing the meeting? Wonder if she was on the minutes as a presenter?
Definitely an ANTZ!!!
(Good, she admitted she was a "social smoker." She wasn't dedicated like me and most others here.)
Definitely an ANTZ!!!
(Good, she admitted she was a "social smoker." She wasn't dedicated like me and most others here.)
Last edited:
Finally, one voice of reason... Calling Prohibitionists Prohibitionists just by comparing flavored alcohol, etc.
Dr. Urbina thinks continued use of nicotine is dangerous.
Obviously, he doesn't understand how impaired some of us are without nicotine. I would be scared stiff to be on the same road as someone trying to drive a car who was as confused, inatttentive, and slow in physical response time as I was when abstinent from nicotine.
Obviously, he doesn't understand how impaired some of us are without nicotine. I would be scared stiff to be on the same road as someone trying to drive a car who was as confused, inatttentive, and slow in physical response time as I was when abstinent from nicotine.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
I sent the following to the CO Board of Health as testimony for today's hearing, and was told that it would be sent to all BOH members.
Colorado Board of Health Members:
According to extensive epidemiological research, cigarettes are 100 times more hazardous (i.e. morbidity/mortality risks) than smokeless tobacco products marketed in the US and Sweden.
HRJ | Full text | Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers
BioMed Central | Full text | Systematic review of the relation between smokeless tobacco and cancer in Europe and North America
http://www.aaphp.org/Resources/Documents/20081026HarmReductionResolutionAsPassedl.pdf
American Association of Public Health Physicians - Tobacco Update
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/pdf/1477-7517-8-19.pdf
http://download.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/0140-6736/PIIS0140673607615190.pdf
Tobacco smoking, harm reduction, and nicotine product regulation : The Lancet
http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publications/smokeless_tobacco.pdf
The daily inhalation of tobacco smoke causes more than 99% of tobacco attributable mortality in the US Annual Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Productivity Losses --- United States, 1997--2001 and more than 99% of all tobacco attributable healthcare costs. Meanwhile, the evidence indicates that the use of smokefree tobacco/nicotine products causes less than than .1% of tobacco attribatable mortality and healthcare costs.
Smokers who switch to smokeless tobacco products reduce their health risks nearly as much as if they quit all tobacco/nicotine use. During the past several decades, several million cigarette smokers in the US have switched to smokeless tobacco products, and more than 25% of male smokers in Sweden quit smoking by switching to smokeless tobacco (see attached Ramstrom-Foulds article). More male smokers in Norway have quit smoking by switching to smokeless tobacco than have quit by using NRT smoking cessation products. The use of snus for quitting smoking compared with medicinal products
Scientific research on one dissolvable tobacco product at http://www.starscientific.com/404/stepanov tsna in.pdf
and http://static.mgnetwork.com/rtd/pdfs/20090712_toba.pdf indicate that dissolvable tobacco products are virtually identical to dissolvable nicotine products like GlaxoSmithKline's Commit and Nicorette Nicorette Lozenge - Nicotine Lozenge | To Help You Quit, which are also marketed with flavorings.
According to US survey data, smokeless tobacco is not a gateway to cigarette smoking, as far more smokers have switched to smokeless tobacco than vice versa.
Smokeless Tobacco Use, Initiation, and Relationship to Cigarette Smoking: 2002 to 2007
Evidence against a gateway from smokeless tobacco use to smoking
Last year, an article Unintentional Child Poisonings Through Ingestion of Conventional and Novel Tobacco Products reported that calls to US Poison Control Centers in 2006-2008 included 10,573 calls for cigarettes, 1,768 calls for smokeless tobacco products, 167 calls for cigars, but no calls for dissolvable tobacco products. Unfortunately, the article's authors grossly misrepresented their own findings by alleging that many children are being poisoned by dissolvable tobacco products. Tobacco
Another researcher Tobacco Truth: Poisoning Public Health Issues who reviewed 2008 data provided by the American Association of Poison Control Centers http://www.aapcc.org/dnn/Portals/0/2008annualreport.pdf reported that tobacco products accounted for less than 1% (i.e. 7,310) of the 684,572 reported exposures (to youth under six years), that smokeless tobacco products accounted for just .15% (i.e. 1,105) of reported tobacco exposures, and that there were 589 reported exposures to NRT drugs. While all accidental ingestions by children are of concern, it is critically important to note that cosmetics and personal care products, household cleaners, pesticides, plants, alcohol, solvents, chemicals, paint, paint strippers, adhesives and glues all accounted for more accidental ingestions by children than tobacco products, and that there is no evidence that accidental ingestions of tobacco by children have actually caused injuries or harm.
Dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to adult tobacco consumers (primarily cigarette smokers), not to children. Federal and state laws already prohibit tobacco sales to minors, and the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between state AGs and tobacco companies explicity bans target marketing of tobacco products to youth.
If anyone who has alleged that dissolvable tobacco products (or any other tobacco products) are marketed to youth actually had any evidence indicating that dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to youth, they should/would have notified the US FDA, the Colorado Dept of Public Health and/or the Colorado Attorney General for law enforcment and/or prosecution of offenders. Unless and until allegations (that dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to youth) have been reported to federal and/or state officials for prosecution, all such allegations should be considered as unsubstantiated.
After campaigning since 1990 to sharply reduce tobacco marketing to youth, and after extensively evaluating the marketing of dissolvable and other new smokefree tobacco products during the past decade, I can only conclude that allegations accusing tobacco companies of marketing these products to minors are ALL false.
Organizations that have accused dissolvable tobacco product makers of marketing to youth (e.g. CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA, AAP) unsuccessfully petitioned the FDA to ban the sale of dissolvable tobacco products in 2002, and all of those organizations have adopted abstinence-only policies that oppose adult smokers reducing their health risks (by switching to far less hazardous smokefree alternatives). Ironically and hypocritically, none of those who advocate banning dissolvable tobacco products have yet to endorse banning far more hazardous cigarettes.
Cigarette smokers have a human right to be truthfully informed that smokeless tobacco products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, and public health officials have an ethical duty to provide truthful information about the comparable risks of different tobacco products.
If the CO Board of Health is truly interested in reducing tobacco attributable morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs, I encourage the Board to truthfully inform Colorado smokers that smokefree tobacco products (including dissolvables) are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, and to encourage smokers to consider switching.
Since 1990, Smokefree Pennsylvania has advocated policies and laws to reduce indoor tobacco smoke pollution, increase cigarette taxes, reduce tobacco marketing to youth, preserve civil justice remedies for those injured by cigarettes, expand smoking cessation services, and inform smokers that smokefree tobacco/nicotine products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes. In 2007, I encouraged Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to offer the amendment to the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act that will require graphic warnings on all cigarette packs sold in the US next year.
In 2010, I filed an amicus brief with the DC Court of Appeals in support of federal Judge Leon's ruling at https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv0771-54 that redefined and reclassified all products containing nicotine (including dissolvable nicotine products) that are intended for human consumption as "tobacco products" under the FSPTCA (as long as no therapeutic claims are made by manufacturers). The FDA has subsequently agreed Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products to comply with Judge Leon's ruling.
For disclosure, neither I nor Smokefree Pennsylvania have ever recieved any funding from a tobacco, drug or electronic cigarette company or trade association.
William T. Godshall, MPH
Founder and Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15218
412-351-5880
smokefree@compuserve.com
Colorado Board of Health Members:
According to extensive epidemiological research, cigarettes are 100 times more hazardous (i.e. morbidity/mortality risks) than smokeless tobacco products marketed in the US and Sweden.
HRJ | Full text | Tobacco harm reduction: an alternative cessation strategy for inveterate smokers
BioMed Central | Full text | Systematic review of the relation between smokeless tobacco and cancer in Europe and North America
http://www.aaphp.org/Resources/Documents/20081026HarmReductionResolutionAsPassedl.pdf
American Association of Public Health Physicians - Tobacco Update
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/pdf/1477-7517-8-19.pdf
http://download.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/0140-6736/PIIS0140673607615190.pdf
Tobacco smoking, harm reduction, and nicotine product regulation : The Lancet
http://nzhta.chmeds.ac.nz/publications/smokeless_tobacco.pdf
The daily inhalation of tobacco smoke causes more than 99% of tobacco attributable mortality in the US Annual Smoking-Attributable Mortality, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Productivity Losses --- United States, 1997--2001 and more than 99% of all tobacco attributable healthcare costs. Meanwhile, the evidence indicates that the use of smokefree tobacco/nicotine products causes less than than .1% of tobacco attribatable mortality and healthcare costs.
Smokers who switch to smokeless tobacco products reduce their health risks nearly as much as if they quit all tobacco/nicotine use. During the past several decades, several million cigarette smokers in the US have switched to smokeless tobacco products, and more than 25% of male smokers in Sweden quit smoking by switching to smokeless tobacco (see attached Ramstrom-Foulds article). More male smokers in Norway have quit smoking by switching to smokeless tobacco than have quit by using NRT smoking cessation products. The use of snus for quitting smoking compared with medicinal products
Scientific research on one dissolvable tobacco product at http://www.starscientific.com/404/stepanov tsna in.pdf
and http://static.mgnetwork.com/rtd/pdfs/20090712_toba.pdf indicate that dissolvable tobacco products are virtually identical to dissolvable nicotine products like GlaxoSmithKline's Commit and Nicorette Nicorette Lozenge - Nicotine Lozenge | To Help You Quit, which are also marketed with flavorings.
According to US survey data, smokeless tobacco is not a gateway to cigarette smoking, as far more smokers have switched to smokeless tobacco than vice versa.
Smokeless Tobacco Use, Initiation, and Relationship to Cigarette Smoking: 2002 to 2007
Evidence against a gateway from smokeless tobacco use to smoking
Last year, an article Unintentional Child Poisonings Through Ingestion of Conventional and Novel Tobacco Products reported that calls to US Poison Control Centers in 2006-2008 included 10,573 calls for cigarettes, 1,768 calls for smokeless tobacco products, 167 calls for cigars, but no calls for dissolvable tobacco products. Unfortunately, the article's authors grossly misrepresented their own findings by alleging that many children are being poisoned by dissolvable tobacco products. Tobacco
Another researcher Tobacco Truth: Poisoning Public Health Issues who reviewed 2008 data provided by the American Association of Poison Control Centers http://www.aapcc.org/dnn/Portals/0/2008annualreport.pdf reported that tobacco products accounted for less than 1% (i.e. 7,310) of the 684,572 reported exposures (to youth under six years), that smokeless tobacco products accounted for just .15% (i.e. 1,105) of reported tobacco exposures, and that there were 589 reported exposures to NRT drugs. While all accidental ingestions by children are of concern, it is critically important to note that cosmetics and personal care products, household cleaners, pesticides, plants, alcohol, solvents, chemicals, paint, paint strippers, adhesives and glues all accounted for more accidental ingestions by children than tobacco products, and that there is no evidence that accidental ingestions of tobacco by children have actually caused injuries or harm.
Dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to adult tobacco consumers (primarily cigarette smokers), not to children. Federal and state laws already prohibit tobacco sales to minors, and the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between state AGs and tobacco companies explicity bans target marketing of tobacco products to youth.
If anyone who has alleged that dissolvable tobacco products (or any other tobacco products) are marketed to youth actually had any evidence indicating that dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to youth, they should/would have notified the US FDA, the Colorado Dept of Public Health and/or the Colorado Attorney General for law enforcment and/or prosecution of offenders. Unless and until allegations (that dissolvable tobacco products are marketed to youth) have been reported to federal and/or state officials for prosecution, all such allegations should be considered as unsubstantiated.
After campaigning since 1990 to sharply reduce tobacco marketing to youth, and after extensively evaluating the marketing of dissolvable and other new smokefree tobacco products during the past decade, I can only conclude that allegations accusing tobacco companies of marketing these products to minors are ALL false.
Organizations that have accused dissolvable tobacco product makers of marketing to youth (e.g. CTFK, ACS, AHA, ALA, AAP) unsuccessfully petitioned the FDA to ban the sale of dissolvable tobacco products in 2002, and all of those organizations have adopted abstinence-only policies that oppose adult smokers reducing their health risks (by switching to far less hazardous smokefree alternatives). Ironically and hypocritically, none of those who advocate banning dissolvable tobacco products have yet to endorse banning far more hazardous cigarettes.
Cigarette smokers have a human right to be truthfully informed that smokeless tobacco products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, and public health officials have an ethical duty to provide truthful information about the comparable risks of different tobacco products.
If the CO Board of Health is truly interested in reducing tobacco attributable morbidity, mortality and healthcare costs, I encourage the Board to truthfully inform Colorado smokers that smokefree tobacco products (including dissolvables) are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes, and to encourage smokers to consider switching.
Since 1990, Smokefree Pennsylvania has advocated policies and laws to reduce indoor tobacco smoke pollution, increase cigarette taxes, reduce tobacco marketing to youth, preserve civil justice remedies for those injured by cigarettes, expand smoking cessation services, and inform smokers that smokefree tobacco/nicotine products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes. In 2007, I encouraged Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) to offer the amendment to the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act that will require graphic warnings on all cigarette packs sold in the US next year.
In 2010, I filed an amicus brief with the DC Court of Appeals in support of federal Judge Leon's ruling at https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv0771-54 that redefined and reclassified all products containing nicotine (including dissolvable nicotine products) that are intended for human consumption as "tobacco products" under the FSPTCA (as long as no therapeutic claims are made by manufacturers). The FDA has subsequently agreed Regulation of E-Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products to comply with Judge Leon's ruling.
For disclosure, neither I nor Smokefree Pennsylvania have ever recieved any funding from a tobacco, drug or electronic cigarette company or trade association.
William T. Godshall, MPH
Founder and Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15218
412-351-5880
smokefree@compuserve.com
Listen to today's Colorado BOH meeting:
Dr. Brad Rodu's testimony (6.5 MB) -- Colorado Dissolvable Meeting Dr Rodu 8-17-2011.mp3
Full meeting (190 MB) -- Colorado Dissolvable meeting 8-17-2011.mp3
Dr. Brad Rodu's testimony (6.5 MB) -- Colorado Dissolvable Meeting Dr Rodu 8-17-2011.mp3
Full meeting (190 MB) -- Colorado Dissolvable meeting 8-17-2011.mp3
Bill, that was an awesome letter. Every member of congress should get that included with constituent "anecdotal" testimony on how the various smokeless products have changed their lives. Perhaps they'd start to get it.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Yesterday's Denver Post article about the CO BOH hearing is at
Colorado health board hears complaints that new tobacco marketed to kids - The Denver Post
Another article was posted on Time's blog at
How Safe Is Tobacco That Melts In Your Mouth? – TIME Healthland
Colorado health board hears complaints that new tobacco marketed to kids - The Denver Post
Another article was posted on Time's blog at
How Safe Is Tobacco That Melts In Your Mouth? – TIME Healthland
Bill,
I cannot thank you enough!! Ironically I was listening to the Vaporcast episode (I'm catching up from the beginning) where the guys met you.
I will contact my representatives and make my voice heard as a constituent. The local media is blasting nicotine and, of course, thriving on fear as usual.
Thank you all for this amazing support!
-Doc
I cannot thank you enough!! Ironically I was listening to the Vaporcast episode (I'm catching up from the beginning) where the guys met you.
I will contact my representatives and make my voice heard as a constituent. The local media is blasting nicotine and, of course, thriving on fear as usual.
Thank you all for this amazing support!
-Doc
So I am assuming that they did not make a decision, or am I wrong about that? I would love to hear where they are at on the subject if anyone knows. I am from Colorado originally and unfortunately they are becoming one of the worst with government intrusions.
The worst they can do is pass a resolution, which may or may not have an effect on the future actions of lawmakers. They have no governing authority. They did not come to consensus by the end of the afternoon on whether to pass a resultion at all, much less what to say.
That being said, I predict that we have not heard the last from them.
That being said, I predict that we have not heard the last from them.
Vocaltek,
I realized all too late that I forgot to thank you in this thread. Please accept my humble apologies.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention out here, and raising attention to a topic that needs to be addressed. I am not a fan of minors using nicotine, in fact, I'm not a fan of introducing people to nicotine. The best part about what we do in the vaping community is support a group of addicts and focus on harm reduction... including psychological harm.
Your focus and diligence can help us attend each battle of this war against the e-cig industry. You lose 100% of the battles you don't attend. I only hope that the efforts of citizens and our input carries enough weight to shed light on the truth and drown out the lies.
Again, for all that you do, Thank You!
I realized all too late that I forgot to thank you in this thread. Please accept my humble apologies.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention out here, and raising attention to a topic that needs to be addressed. I am not a fan of minors using nicotine, in fact, I'm not a fan of introducing people to nicotine. The best part about what we do in the vaping community is support a group of addicts and focus on harm reduction... including psychological harm.
Your focus and diligence can help us attend each battle of this war against the e-cig industry. You lose 100% of the battles you don't attend. I only hope that the efforts of citizens and our input carries enough weight to shed light on the truth and drown out the lies.
Again, for all that you do, Thank You!
You're quite welcome, and thank you for your words of praise.
But the war is bigger than the e-cig industry. Their battle is against all forms of tobacco, without regard to the continuum of harm that is reduced to 1% or possibly 0% with products such as e-cigarettes, dissolvable orbs, and snus.
Even switching to a cigar or pipe (without inhaling) reduces disease risks by 50%. If you inhale the smoke, though, it doesn't reduce your risks at all.
We need to fight them whenever they are tryhing to ban a less hazardous product, because smokers are not 100% identical. We need as many reduced-risk alternatives as possible, to meet a diverse set of needs and preferences.
Notice that the same arguments that were used against the dissolvable tobacco products, are the same (false) arguments used against e-cigarettes.
Nicotine causes cancer.
Nicotine causes heart attacks.
These products don't help smokers quit.
The flavors are designed to attract children.
The non-smoked products are a "gateway" to smoking.
Kids will be poisoned by these products.
All of the above are false.
What really disturbed me was the remarks by the head of the Colorado Board of Health at the very end of the meeting. He said that his idea of Tobacco Harm Reduction is using nicotine replacement therapy products to wean down and off nicotine. He sounded so smug when he said it. (And how's that been working out for you, eh?)
I'd like to challenge him and any other "expert" who believes that 100% of smokers are healthier if they totally give up nicotine to experience what I feel like without nicotine. They would need to take a drug that causes cognitive impairment and increase the dosage until they feel groggy, confused, forgetful, inattentive, and sad. They would know they have the dosage high enough when they forget what they were doing a dozen times and day and begin making numerous mistakes, despite their best efforts to be vigilent.
Here is a list: IDND :: AnticholienrgicCognitiveBurdenScale
They could start taking an antidepressant if they needed to, but that would only take care of the "sad" part. There are no really good treatments for the cognitive problems.
I am guessing that none of these "experts" would make it past three days before they began to panic about making too many mistakes at work or having problems safely driving their car. I'm positive that none of them would last the six months that I waited for my cognitive impairments to magically cure themselves.
"Everyone is healthier without nicotine" is only true as long as all you care about is physical health, and you don't consider cognitive deficits or impaired mood to be unhealthy.
But the war is bigger than the e-cig industry. Their battle is against all forms of tobacco, without regard to the continuum of harm that is reduced to 1% or possibly 0% with products such as e-cigarettes, dissolvable orbs, and snus.
Even switching to a cigar or pipe (without inhaling) reduces disease risks by 50%. If you inhale the smoke, though, it doesn't reduce your risks at all.
We need to fight them whenever they are tryhing to ban a less hazardous product, because smokers are not 100% identical. We need as many reduced-risk alternatives as possible, to meet a diverse set of needs and preferences.
Notice that the same arguments that were used against the dissolvable tobacco products, are the same (false) arguments used against e-cigarettes.
Nicotine causes cancer.
Nicotine causes heart attacks.
These products don't help smokers quit.
The flavors are designed to attract children.
The non-smoked products are a "gateway" to smoking.
Kids will be poisoned by these products.
All of the above are false.
What really disturbed me was the remarks by the head of the Colorado Board of Health at the very end of the meeting. He said that his idea of Tobacco Harm Reduction is using nicotine replacement therapy products to wean down and off nicotine. He sounded so smug when he said it. (And how's that been working out for you, eh?)
I'd like to challenge him and any other "expert" who believes that 100% of smokers are healthier if they totally give up nicotine to experience what I feel like without nicotine. They would need to take a drug that causes cognitive impairment and increase the dosage until they feel groggy, confused, forgetful, inattentive, and sad. They would know they have the dosage high enough when they forget what they were doing a dozen times and day and begin making numerous mistakes, despite their best efforts to be vigilent.
Here is a list: IDND :: AnticholienrgicCognitiveBurdenScale
They could start taking an antidepressant if they needed to, but that would only take care of the "sad" part. There are no really good treatments for the cognitive problems.
I am guessing that none of these "experts" would make it past three days before they began to panic about making too many mistakes at work or having problems safely driving their car. I'm positive that none of them would last the six months that I waited for my cognitive impairments to magically cure themselves.
"Everyone is healthier without nicotine" is only true as long as all you care about is physical health, and you don't consider cognitive deficits or impaired mood to be unhealthy.
Well, if Nicotine is the problem then why all the research in to nicotine as a preventative for early onset alzheimer's? What about cauliflower, mushrooms?
And if our little anti-depressants work so well, why the suicides? I've taken Paxil, don't know if anyone else has altered their brain chemistry this way... I know it works for some and if that is you I am very glad that you aren't in that dark place anymore. I was driven crazy by paxil... so I can see why Chantix is so dangerous.
Love it.
And if our little anti-depressants work so well, why the suicides? I've taken Paxil, don't know if anyone else has altered their brain chemistry this way... I know it works for some and if that is you I am very glad that you aren't in that dark place anymore. I was driven crazy by paxil... so I can see why Chantix is so dangerous.
Love it.
Just found this on the Colorado BOH web site:
I left a comment.
COPrevent: Colorado Board of Health - Dissolvable Tobacco Products Hearing
It appears that Dr. Urbina has taken an oath to "First do no harm" to the profit margins of GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.
I left a comment.
COPrevent: Colorado Board of Health - Dissolvable Tobacco Products Hearing
It appears that Dr. Urbina has taken an oath to "First do no harm" to the profit margins of GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
All testimony submitted to the Colorado Board of Health on Dissolvable Tobacco Products is available at:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B9...N2E3Mi00NDQzLWEyZWUtNjJmMDc2MDMzZmU0&cindex=8
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B9...N2E3Mi00NDQzLWEyZWUtNjJmMDc2MDMzZmU0&cindex=8
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
Don't know who owns the blog entitled COPrevent, but the following appeared on a link provided by COPrevent entitled "PSD Listservs" at
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=1lu...NmNjMi00OWNmLWJjMWItNjEyNjcwZDQ0ZmI5&cindex=2
"PSD information also posts to COPrevent, which has an email function. It is a feedburner system of the posts to the site, although it also contains non-PSD info"
PSD is the abbreviation for Prevention Services Division of the Colorado Dept. of Public Health and Environment.
It should also be noted that Brandon Williams (who posted the info at http://www.coprevent.org/2011/08/colorado-board-of-health-dissolvable.html) is an employee of the PSD of the CODPHE.
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=1lu...NmNjMi00OWNmLWJjMWItNjEyNjcwZDQ0ZmI5&cindex=2
"PSD information also posts to COPrevent, which has an email function. It is a feedburner system of the posts to the site, although it also contains non-PSD info"
PSD is the abbreviation for Prevention Services Division of the Colorado Dept. of Public Health and Environment.
It should also be noted that Brandon Williams (who posted the info at http://www.coprevent.org/2011/08/colorado-board-of-health-dissolvable.html) is an employee of the PSD of the CODPHE.
Last edited:
Looks as if RJ Reynolds will not take this lying down.
R.J. Reynolds rejects request to stop testing "dissolvable" tobacco in Colorado - The Denver Post
R.J. Reynolds rejects request to stop testing "dissolvable" tobacco in Colorado - The Denver Post
"Looks as if RJ Reynolds will not take this lying down."
As they shouldn't. These absurd, non-scientific, "protect the children" attempts are driving me crazy. As if the SHS BS hadn't already gotten me there.
As they shouldn't. These absurd, non-scientific, "protect the children" attempts are driving me crazy. As if the SHS BS hadn't already gotten me there.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked