Report this comment
  • "Smoking is extremely dangerous for your health, with tobacco smoke containing over 4,000 toxic chemicals including arsenic and polonium.

    Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence: Third Edition

    nap.edu

    This sorta says it all

    These limits generally are based on assessments of health risk and calculations of concentrations that are associated with what the regulators believe to be negligibly small risks. The calculations are made after first identifying the total dose of a chemical that is safe (poses a negligible risk) and then determining the concentration of that chemical in the medium of concern that should not be exceeded if exposed individuals (typically those at the high end of media contact) are not to incur a dose greater than the safe one.

    So OSHA standards are what is the guideline for what is acceptable ''SAFE LEVELS''

    OSHA SAFE LEVELS

    All this is in a small sealed room 9x20 and must occur in ONE HOUR.

    For Benzopyrene, 222,000 cigarettes.

    "For Acetone, 118,000 cigarettes.

    "Toluene would require 50,000 packs of simultaneously smoldering cigarettes.

    Acetaldehyde or Hydrazine, more than 14,000 smokers would need to light up.

    "For Hydroquinone, "only" 1250 cigarettes.

    For arsenic 2 million 500,000 smokers at one time.

    The same number of cigarettes required for the other so called chemicals in shs/ets will have the same outcomes.

    So, OSHA finally makes a statement on shs/ets :

    Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA.

    Why are their any smoking bans at all they have absolutely no validity to the courts or to science!"
  • This field is mandatory
  • This field is mandatory
  • Please note we will not accept reports with HTML tags or URLs in them.


  • Enter the above word in the box below

Dramatic anti-tobacco street performance takes place in Carlisle

Dramatic anti-tobacco street performance takes place in Carlisle

Dramatic anti-tobacco street performance takes place in Carlisle

Dramatic anti-tobacco street performance takes place in Carlisle

First published in News

AN anti-tobacco street performance took place in the centre of Carlisle yesterday.

Four performances – featuring 12 dancers and a street poet who delivered an anti-tobacco rap titled ‘Last Man Standing’ – finished with a sinister twist: half the performers ‘died’ during the piece, falling to the ground.

Each performance, was filmed, and will be promoted to young people online in Cumbria as part of a 60 second viral campaign.

Other performances took place across the North West.

Andrea Crossfield, Chief Executive of Tobacco Free Futures, the anti-tobacco social enterprise who organised the performance, said: “At Tobacco Free Futures we do everything we can to turn off this tap of new smokers in Cumbria.

“This street performance will not only be seen by people on the day, but by thousands of young people online.”

Patricia Bell, Cabinet Member for Public Health and Community Services said: “In Cumbria, we are committed to doing everything we can to educate young and old alike about the dangers of smoking.

“Smoking is extremely dangerous for your health, with tobacco smoke containing over 4,000 toxic chemicals including arsenic and polonium.

“However, often this message can get lost. That’s why it’s great to communicate this in an inventive and exciting way that will hopefully help young people understand, before they are tempted to enter into a lifetime addiction.”

Local Businesses

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree