Antis suddenly become Rehab Experts

[jamie]

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2008/07/22/2008-07-22_state_prohibits_smoking_in_rehab.html

State prohibits smoking in rehab

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Tuesday, July 22nd 2008, 1:01 PM

ALBANY, N.Y. - Drug addicts, gamblers and alcoholics trying to kick their habits in treatment facilities won't be allowed to use tobacco under a new regulation that goes into effect across New York state this week.

The change takes effect Thursday, making New York the strictest state in the country when it comes to prohibiting tobacco use among people under treatment for addiction.

Dianne Henk, a spokeswoman for the New York Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services, says people who enter treatment won't be able to use tobacco anywhere — or even give a ride to a friend who is smoking.

An $8 million grant from the New York Department of Health will help train employees to deal with treating nicotine dependence and provide free nicotine replacements.

© Copyright 2008 NYDailyNews.com

 

[Nazareth]

Swell, let's make it twice as impossible for addicts to give up not one drug cold turkey, but two at hte same time- What brilliant genious htought htis up? that person shoudl be deprived of food for a month- after all, food can be concidered a drug because it stimulates hormones in the brain!

 

[TropicalBob]

That's sad. Counterproductive, too.

When I was working on a magazine story in January, I exchanged e-mails with Dr. Brad Radu, the main U.S. proponent of harm reduction. He told me of cigarettes being banned in Colorado prisons. The result? A wild black market. Even guards found new money in smuggling cigarettes into the prisons and selling them to prisoners. Families didn't bring hacksaw blades; they brought cigarettes. Cigarettes became the New Currency of Convicts. Everyone lost, he said.

 

[NerdyCinderella]

Yeah, I see real problems developing here.
I wonder if they did any studies before changing these rules.

There are going to be many addicts who won't go into treatment when they are told they can't smoke.

They are ambivalent re going for treatment from the start anyhow. This will tip the scale to the negative.

 

[dnakr]

I agree, many addicts will not go into treatment because of this. I wonder how much money the facilities will have to lose before they again re-think the situation.

 

[Kate]

A case has recently been lost in the UK by some patients wanting to be able to smoke in psychiatric hospitals. It was ruled that because the hospital wasn't their home they were not entitled to smoke there. Residents in old peoples homes and in prisons can smoke in their rooms but if you have mental health problems and have to be in hospital you can't smoke anymore. That seems nightmarish to me, having a breakdown and being made to go cold turkey at the same time.

Apparently about seventy percent of psychotics smoke (Smoking and mental health). It's thought that there is something in nicotine that helps to maintain better mental health. The self medication of this condition with nicotine is what keeps many people with mental health problems from becoming ill. Somebody thought it was a good idea to ban smoking from the hospitals that are supposed to help ... makes my blood boil.

 

[Nazareth]

There is legislation right now in U.S congress to 'allow' states to regulate tobacco with apparent overwhelming support in both camps- While Tobacco can't be regulated, and nicotine can't be banned- other chemicals in cigarettes can be banned which essentially means that cigarettes will be banned, or that we'll be charged huge sums for them due ot hte chemicals in them apparently- I just read abotu htis htis morning. President Bush oppses the measure, but it appears that it will go through- Say what you want about President Bush but he has show time and time again that he is agaisnt extreme left liberal do-gooder legislations like htis piece of dog doo legislation up before congress now. Don't want to turn htis into political thread, but just wanted to give a heads up to U.S folks abotu hwat's goign on behind the scenes regardign tobacco

 

[CaSHMeRe]

Interesting Naz ... do you have a link to this Press Release?

 

[Nazareth]

I read it in 'the post star' which is also available online- I'll see if I can find the link

 

[Nazareth]

got it:

The bill would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate cigarettes and other tobacco products, to reduce the harm from smoking. Although the government would not be able to outlaw tobacco or ban nicotine, regulators could demand elimination of other hazardous ingredients in cigarettes. The bill represents a compromise between anti-tobacco activists and Philip Morris USA, the nation's largest tobacco company.

Bush administration opposes tobacco regulation - International Herald Tribune

 

[Lady Python]

This is a bit naughty of me as I've copied from another forum but it may go a long way to explain things.

Think Michael Bloomberg is a run-of-the-mill tobacco bigot? Think again!

This multi-millionaire and current Mayor of NYC has BOUGHT his own anti-tobacco "educational" network with a $125 Million dollar grant. (Nice tax shelter, Mikey!)

Having made a huge grant to Johns Hopkins University, they run a "school" to spread "anti" propaganda across the world. (Wonder if Bloomie gets an "international" tax break for this too??)

Among the paid staff (see "experts" tab) are these two carpetbaggers -

MATT MYERS of Tobacco Free Kids (supposedly "thwarts" INDUSTRY tactics. What tactics??? Big T signed away its right to organize with the MSA!). Tobacco Free Kids, as most of us know, is the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's tax shelter for pushing NICO REPLACEMENT products made by Johnson & Johnson!; He's a JD, which means he's a LAWYER, not a Doctor!

AND

Jonathan Samet, Bloomie's "Strategic Communications" planner
(read: Director of Propaganda);
whose former job it was to "oversee" the scientific evidence of the Surgeon General's Reports.


Global Tobacco Control - Learning from the Experts | Home

Tobacco Industry Tactics

Matt Myers, JD
Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids
Matt Myers currently serves as president and CEO of Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, an organization that focuses attention on curtailing youth tobacco use. Instrumental in establishing the organization he has been with the Campaign since its creation in 1996. In addition, Mr. Myers played an integral role in settling suits brought against Liggett Tobacco Company and in crafting domestic tobacco control policy. He has been awarded the Harvard School of Public Health’s highest honor, the Julius B. Richmond award, for his work on reducing the tobacco industry’s ability to market to children. As president of the Campaign, he focuses on decreasing the the tobacco industry’s influence over children and countering tobacco industry actions.


Introduction to Strategic Communication | Introduction to the Strategic Communication Planning Process

Jonathan Samet, MD, MS
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Dr. Samet chairs the Department of Epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and is director of the Institute for Global Tobacco Control. His research has addressed the effects of inhaled pollutants in the general environment and in the workplace. Dr. Samet is trained as a clinician in the specialty of internal medicine and in the subspecialty of pulmonary diseases. From 1978 through 1994, he was a member of the Department of Medicine at the University of New Mexico School of Medicine where he was professor and chief of the Pulmonary and Critical Care Division. He has written widely on the health effects of active and passive smoking and served as consultant editor and senior scientific editor for Reports of the Surgeon General on Smoking and Health. He is the recipient of the 2004 Prince Mahidol Award for public health and the Surgeon General's medal in 1999 and 2006.

Nasty Very nasty and underhand

 

[Kit]

very very naughty !

 

[Lady Python]

Who? Me or Bloomie???

but it does throw a bit of light on things.

 

[leaford]

Sorry, LP, I fail to see anything nasty or underhanded. We may disagree with their views, but it's neither nasty nor underhanded to set up a foundation to promote them. Or to hire experts with proven work in the field. It's what I would do if I had a cause and millions of dollars to promote it with.