| Our Purpose Is To Save Lives |
525 W Southern Ave. Suite #109 Mesa, AZ 85210 | ph: 480.733.5864 | fax: 480.733.1844 | ACASinc@msn.com
Calendar | ACAS Officers | Health Pioneer Biographies | Tobacco Cessation | Health Links | Contact Us
Smokefree Reports:
ACAS / Arizona News | USA / World News | Casinos | Fraternal / Service Clubs | In Cars w/ Kids | Multi-Unit Housing
Secondhand Smoke Kills!:
| June 02, 2010 | ARIZONA LIVING | azcentral.com | SmokeFree Society.org |
If not for you, stop smoking for pets
Legacy Foundation, a stop-smoking group, to spread the word to the pet lovers of the world.
Studies have shown that toxins in secondhand smoke can cause lung and nasal cancer in dogs and malignant lymphoma in cats.
"The evidence is striking," says Steven Hansen of the ASPCA's Animal Poison Control Center.
"Most veterinarians believe pretty strongly secondhand smoke presents a strong danger to dogs and cats with pre-existing
respiratory problems. And extrapolating, why would you expose a healthy animal?"
Although studies showing strong links between smoking and pets are limited to a few cancers, veterinary oncologist Aarti Sabhlok,
who treats 40 or more cancer patients a week at San Francisco Veterinary Specialists, believes an "animal in an environment with
constant exposure to a toxin, and that would include cigarette smoke, could be at greater risk of developing tumors."
Studies have shown that toxins in secondhand smoke can cause lung and nasal cancer in dogs and malignant lymphoma in cats.
"The evidence is striking," says Steven Hansen of the ASPCA's Animal Poison Control Center.
"Most veterinarians believe pretty strongly secondhand smoke presents a strong danger to dogs and cats with pre-existing
respiratory problems. And extrapolating, why would you expose a healthy animal?"
Although studies showing strong links between smoking and pets are limited to a few cancers, veterinary oncologist Aarti Sabhlok,
who treats 40 or more cancer patients a week at San Francisco Veterinary Specialists, believes an "animal in an environment with
constant exposure to a toxin, and that would include cigarette smoke, could be at greater risk of developing tumors."
Special for USA Today | http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/arizonaliving/articles/2010/05/24/20100524petsmoke0524.html
Amid growing evidence that secondhand smoke is
causing cancers and possibly a range of other health
problems in pets, many groups are intensifying efforts
to encourage people to stop smoking - if not for their
own sake, then for the sake of their animals.
Veterinarians are redoubling efforts to warn smokers
of the dangers to their pets, and smoking-cessation
programs, including smokefreesociety.org, Utah
Tobacco Prevention and Control, Breathe New
Hampshire, have posted fact sheets or printable fliers
on their websites. Some groups are sharing
information where animal aficionados gather,
including at last month's Dachshund Dash in
Oklahoma City, where the Oklahoma County Tobacco
Use Prevention Coalition warned of secondhand
smoke's dangers to dogs.
And the ASPCA last month linked up with American
| Would you give up smoking to help your dog? (Ozier Muhammad/The New York Times) |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is my tax deductible contribution to ACAS of: [ ]$25 [ ]$50 [ ]$100 [ ]$500 [ ]$1,000 [ ]Other $________________ Name _______________________________________________________________ Address_____________________________________________________________ City ______________________________ State ______ Zip ___________________ Make checks payable to: Arizonans Concerned About Smoking 525 W. Southern, Suite 109, Mesa, AZ, 85210 (480) 733-5864 E-mail: acasinc@msn.com www.acasinc.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| For technical issues or errors, please contact webmasterACAS@live.com | Philip Carpenter |
| ACAS / Arizona News | USA / World News | Casinos | Fraternal / Service Clubs | In Cars w/ Kids | Multi-Unit Housing |
| Calendar | ACAS Officers | Health Pioneer Biographies | Tobacco Cessation | Health Links | Contact Us |
Smoke-free air laws effective at protecting children from secondhand smoke
| June 7, 2010 | Provided by Harvard School of Public Health | PhysOrg.com |
| Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) have found that children and adolescents living in non-smoking homes in counties with laws promoting smoke-free public places have significantly lower levels of a common biomarker of secondhand smoke exposure than those living in counties with no smoke-free laws. |
The children living in non-smoking homes in U.S. counties with smoke-free laws had 39% lower prevalence of cotinine in their blood,
an indicator of tobacco smoke exposure, compared to those living in counties with no smoke-free laws. Children living in homes with
smokers exhibited little or no benefit from the smoke-free laws.
The study appears in the June 7, 2010 advance online edition of the journal Pediatrics.
"The findings suggest that smoke-free laws are an effective strategy to protect both children and adults from exposure to
secondhand smoke. In addition, interventions designed to reduce or prevent adults from smoking around children are needed," said
Melanie Dove, who received her doctorate in environmental health at HSPH in 2010 and led the study.
The HSPH researchers examined data from the 1999-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a
cross-sectional survey designed to monitor the health and nutritional status of the U.S. population. They analyzed the cotinine levels
in 11,486 nonsmoking youngsters, aged 3-19 years, from 117 counties, both with and without exposure to secondhand smoke in the
home.
In addition to a 39% lower prevalence of detectable cotinine, the researchers also found that children in non-smoking homes had
43% lower mean cotinine levels.
Over the past decade the number of state and local smoke-free laws in the nation has grown significantly. For example, the number
of smoke-free laws in workplaces, restaurants and bars in the U.S. has increased from 0 in 1988 to 175 in 2006.
"These laws have been shown to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke among adults. Our results show a similar association in
children and adolescents not living with a smoker in the home," said Gregory Connolly, senior author of the paper and director of the
Tobacco Control Research Program at HSPH. Douglas Dockery, professor of environmental epidemiology and chair of the
Department of Environmental Health, also was a study author.
According to the 2006 Surgeon General's Report, there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Children are particularly
vulnerable to the toxic compounds in secondhand smoke because they have higher breathing rates and their lungs are still
developing, the authors write. Exposure to secondhand smoke in children can irritate the lungs, resulting in coughing or wheezing,
and can trigger an asthma attack in children with asthma. Secondhand smoke also has been associated with sudden infant death
syndrome, respiratory illnesses and middle ear disease.
For children, the home is the primary source of secondhand smoke exposure and most of the smoking is done by the parents.
Potential exposure sources for children outside the home include cars, private child care centers, restaurants, shopping malls and
parks.
Approximately 20 percent of the youth in the HSPH study lived with a smoker in the home. These children had the highest cotinine
levels and could benefit the most from an intervention to reduce exposure, regardless of smoke-free laws that might be in place, say
the researchers. "One way to reduce or prevent adults from smoking around children is for physicians to counsel parents to stop
smoking," said Connolly.
an indicator of tobacco smoke exposure, compared to those living in counties with no smoke-free laws. Children living in homes with
smokers exhibited little or no benefit from the smoke-free laws.
The study appears in the June 7, 2010 advance online edition of the journal Pediatrics.
"The findings suggest that smoke-free laws are an effective strategy to protect both children and adults from exposure to
secondhand smoke. In addition, interventions designed to reduce or prevent adults from smoking around children are needed," said
Melanie Dove, who received her doctorate in environmental health at HSPH in 2010 and led the study.
The HSPH researchers examined data from the 1999-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a
cross-sectional survey designed to monitor the health and nutritional status of the U.S. population. They analyzed the cotinine levels
in 11,486 nonsmoking youngsters, aged 3-19 years, from 117 counties, both with and without exposure to secondhand smoke in the
home.
In addition to a 39% lower prevalence of detectable cotinine, the researchers also found that children in non-smoking homes had
43% lower mean cotinine levels.
Over the past decade the number of state and local smoke-free laws in the nation has grown significantly. For example, the number
of smoke-free laws in workplaces, restaurants and bars in the U.S. has increased from 0 in 1988 to 175 in 2006.
"These laws have been shown to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke among adults. Our results show a similar association in
children and adolescents not living with a smoker in the home," said Gregory Connolly, senior author of the paper and director of the
Tobacco Control Research Program at HSPH. Douglas Dockery, professor of environmental epidemiology and chair of the
Department of Environmental Health, also was a study author.
According to the 2006 Surgeon General's Report, there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Children are particularly
vulnerable to the toxic compounds in secondhand smoke because they have higher breathing rates and their lungs are still
developing, the authors write. Exposure to secondhand smoke in children can irritate the lungs, resulting in coughing or wheezing,
and can trigger an asthma attack in children with asthma. Secondhand smoke also has been associated with sudden infant death
syndrome, respiratory illnesses and middle ear disease.
For children, the home is the primary source of secondhand smoke exposure and most of the smoking is done by the parents.
Potential exposure sources for children outside the home include cars, private child care centers, restaurants, shopping malls and
parks.
Approximately 20 percent of the youth in the HSPH study lived with a smoker in the home. These children had the highest cotinine
levels and could benefit the most from an intervention to reduce exposure, regardless of smoke-free laws that might be in place, say
the researchers. "One way to reduce or prevent adults from smoking around children is for physicians to counsel parents to stop
smoking," said Connolly.
| http://www.physorg.com/news194922975.html | Thanks to Tobacco.Org |
Cigarette Smoke Causes Harmful Changes in the Lungs Even at the Lowest Levels,
Study Finds
Study Finds
| ScienceDaily | Aug. 20, 2010 | NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center |
ScienceDaily (Aug. 20, 2010) — Casual smokers may think that smoking a few cigarettes a week is "no big deal." But according to
new research from physician-scientists at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center, having an infrequent smoke,
or being exposed to secondhand smoke, may be doing more harm than people may think. The findings may further support public
smoking bans, say the authors.
According to a new study published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, being exposed to even low-
levels of cigarette smoke may put people at risk for future lung disease, such as lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease (COPD).
Epidemiological studies have long shown that secondhand smoke is dangerous, but there have never been conclusive biological
tests demonstrating what it does to the body at a gene function level, until now.
"Even at the lowest detectable levels of exposure, we found direct effects on the functioning of genes within the cells lining the
airways," says Dr. Ronald Crystal, senior author of the study and chief of the division of pulmonary and critical care medicine at
NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell and chair of the department of genetic medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York
City.
Dr. Crystal explains that genes, commonly activated in the cells of heavy smokers, are also turned on or off in those with very low-
level exposure.
"The genetic effect is much lower than those who are regular smokers, but this does not mean that there are no health
consequences," says Dr. Crystal. "Certain genes within the cells lining the airways are very sensitive to tobacco smoke, and changes
in the function of these genes are the first evidence of 'biological disease' in the lungs or individuals."
To make their findings, Dr. Crystal and his collaborators tested 121 people from three different categories: "nonsmokers," "active
smokers" and "low exposure smokers." The researchers tested urine levels of nicotine and cotinine -- markers of cigarette smoking
within the body -- to determine each participant's category.
The research team then scanned each person's entire genome to determine which genes were either activated or deactivated in
cells lining the airways. They found that there was no level of nicotine or cotinine that did not also correlate with genetic abnormalities.
"This means that no level of smoking, or exposure to secondhand smoke, is safe," says Dr. Crystal. He goes on to say that these
genetic changes are like a "canary in a coal mine," warning of potential life-threatening disease, "but the canary is chirping for low-
level exposure patients, and screaming for active smokers."
Dr. Crystal says that this is further evidence supporting the banning of smoking in public places, where non-smokers, and employees
of businesses that allow smoking, are put at risk for future lung disease.
Co-authors of the study include Yael Strulovici-Barel, Dr. Michael O'Mahony, Dr. Cynthia Gordon, Dr. Charleen Hollmann, Dr. Ann
Tilley, Jacqueline Salit, Dr. Ben-Gary Harvey, all from NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell; Dr. Jason Mezey from Cornell University in
Ithaca, New York and Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City; and Dr. Larsson Omberg from Cornell University.
new research from physician-scientists at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center, having an infrequent smoke,
or being exposed to secondhand smoke, may be doing more harm than people may think. The findings may further support public
smoking bans, say the authors.
According to a new study published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, being exposed to even low-
levels of cigarette smoke may put people at risk for future lung disease, such as lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease (COPD).
Epidemiological studies have long shown that secondhand smoke is dangerous, but there have never been conclusive biological
tests demonstrating what it does to the body at a gene function level, until now.
"Even at the lowest detectable levels of exposure, we found direct effects on the functioning of genes within the cells lining the
airways," says Dr. Ronald Crystal, senior author of the study and chief of the division of pulmonary and critical care medicine at
NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell and chair of the department of genetic medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York
City.
Dr. Crystal explains that genes, commonly activated in the cells of heavy smokers, are also turned on or off in those with very low-
level exposure.
"The genetic effect is much lower than those who are regular smokers, but this does not mean that there are no health
consequences," says Dr. Crystal. "Certain genes within the cells lining the airways are very sensitive to tobacco smoke, and changes
in the function of these genes are the first evidence of 'biological disease' in the lungs or individuals."
To make their findings, Dr. Crystal and his collaborators tested 121 people from three different categories: "nonsmokers," "active
smokers" and "low exposure smokers." The researchers tested urine levels of nicotine and cotinine -- markers of cigarette smoking
within the body -- to determine each participant's category.
The research team then scanned each person's entire genome to determine which genes were either activated or deactivated in
cells lining the airways. They found that there was no level of nicotine or cotinine that did not also correlate with genetic abnormalities.
"This means that no level of smoking, or exposure to secondhand smoke, is safe," says Dr. Crystal. He goes on to say that these
genetic changes are like a "canary in a coal mine," warning of potential life-threatening disease, "but the canary is chirping for low-
level exposure patients, and screaming for active smokers."
Dr. Crystal says that this is further evidence supporting the banning of smoking in public places, where non-smokers, and employees
of businesses that allow smoking, are put at risk for future lung disease.
Co-authors of the study include Yael Strulovici-Barel, Dr. Michael O'Mahony, Dr. Cynthia Gordon, Dr. Charleen Hollmann, Dr. Ann
Tilley, Jacqueline Salit, Dr. Ben-Gary Harvey, all from NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell; Dr. Jason Mezey from Cornell University in
Ithaca, New York and Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City; and Dr. Larsson Omberg from Cornell University.
The above story is reprinted (with editorial adaptations by ScienceDaily staff) from materials provided by New York- Presbyterian
Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center/Weill Cornell Medical College, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
| Thanks to: Karen Zielaski, Project Director | Healthy Policies | 5950 N. 78th St. #221 | Scottsdale, AZ 85250 | Office: 480-970-9906 | Cell: 520-548-8692 | healthypolicies@earthlink.net |
| Arizona Smoke-Free History | additional Secondhand Smoke Kills! coverage | |