The Board of Health last week banned smoking or the use of any tobacco product at several marquee town properties.
The Town Hall, senior center, library, police and fire stations and DPW
garage are now tobacco-free zones, Health Agent Jamie Terry said,
enforceable by a $100 fine
The intent of the ban is to limit exposure to second-hand smoke, Terry
said. It is part of a larger effort to revise the board’s smoking rules
and regulations that went on for about 16 months.
"The board is extremely pleased to be able to move forward with these
regulations, given the fact that they view use and access to tobacco
products a major concern," said Terry.
As defined in the regulations, the ban covers not only cigarettes,
cigars and pipes, but tobacco in any form, including chewing tobacco and
snuff tobacco. Terry said the ban also extends to e-cigarettes.
Terry said those smoking in their cars on the properties would be
subject to the fine, as smoking anywhere on the covered premises is
prohibited. Pall Mall cigarettes.
However, Terry said she isn’t looking to scour the areas knocking on
windows. Though she and the police both have authority to issue fines,
she said she hopes to resolve most infractions verbally.
"The goal is to educate people, not to gain any revenue," she said.
The rules aren’t likely to affect many municipal workers. The town has
an extremely rare clause that bans workers hired to its municipal union
after 1994 from smoking, both at work and in their personal lives.
Any non-union employees – like department heads, for example – would
not be allowed to smoke on any of the banned properties, Terry said.
Also adopted as part of the new rules and regulations are stricter controls on businesses caught selling cigarettes to minors.
Under the old rules, such a business would be placed under a
probationary period of a year, during which time any new infraction
would be counted as a second offense and carry a more severe penalty.
Under the new rules, that probationary period has been extended to two years.
Also included in the regulations is a ban on smoking in outdoor seating
areas of restaurants. Smoking is prohibited within 25 feet of any
outdoor seating area where food is served, except for at private
function areas.
Terry said the board held a long discussion on banning smoking at the
town’s outdoor parks, but ultimately not all members could agree it was a
good idea. She said the board may pick up that discussion in the
future.
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Monday, December 16, 2013
Firm to hike local tobacco purchase
A tobacco manufacturer based here said it was increasing the volume of tobacco it would buy from local growers in 2014.
Mighty Corp., which carries cigarette brands aimed at the low-end market, has been gradually increasing its purchase of tobacco grown in the Ilocos and Cagayan Valley regions, according to a company executive. Mighty operates a manufacturing plant in the city.Lucky Strike cigarettes.
The company decided to raise its demand for tobacco because its domestic market share had improved from five percent last year to 20 percent this year, Oscar Barrientos, executive vice president, said in a statement.
“This year alone, we have bought even low-priced tobacco leaves. Had Mighty Corp. not done that, it would have created a great economic dislocation for tobacco farmers.”
According to the National Tobacco Administration’s website, Virginia tobacco is the most dominant variety grown in the country. Its average volume of production in 2009 was 34 million kilograms, which represents 59 percent of a total volume of 58 million kg grown that year in the provinces of Ilocos Norte, Ilocos Sur, Abra and La Union.
Mighty Corp., which carries cigarette brands aimed at the low-end market, has been gradually increasing its purchase of tobacco grown in the Ilocos and Cagayan Valley regions, according to a company executive. Mighty operates a manufacturing plant in the city.Lucky Strike cigarettes.
The company decided to raise its demand for tobacco because its domestic market share had improved from five percent last year to 20 percent this year, Oscar Barrientos, executive vice president, said in a statement.
“We
have earned our fair share of the market by making quality but
affordable cigarettes. That is the secret of our success,” said
Barrientos.
He added, “With a bigger share of Mighty Corp. in the market
today, we are giving tobacco farmers a fair share of our success by
offering competitive prices for their crops.”
“This year alone, we have bought even low-priced tobacco leaves. Had Mighty Corp. not done that, it would have created a great economic dislocation for tobacco farmers.”
According to the National Tobacco Administration’s website, Virginia tobacco is the most dominant variety grown in the country. Its average volume of production in 2009 was 34 million kilograms, which represents 59 percent of a total volume of 58 million kg grown that year in the provinces of Ilocos Norte, Ilocos Sur, Abra and La Union.
No-smoking policy on UI campus takes effect Jan. 1
For Illini tailgaters, some things are sacred.
The grill. The beer (shhh, don't tell). The orange and blue tent (or bus). And the right to enjoy an occasional — very occasional, of late — victory cigar.
In future seasons, they'll have to do it on the sly.
The entire UI campus — indoors and out — is going smoke-free Jan. 1. And that means no more smoking at tailgates. Or in your car or anywhere else on UI property.
That news did not sit well with some fans at the final home game of the season Nov. 30.
"I think it's kind of silly, in an environment like this," said Chris Roegge of Urbana, puffing on his last legal tailgate cigar.
"I can understand in and around buildings, or central campus," said Roegge, who is also a UI employee. "But how do they enforce something like that?"
For fellow tailgater and occasional cigar smoker Dan Tappendorf of Champaign, it's more fundamental.
"Have you ever heard of the word liberty? He's not hurting anybody," he said. "I think the political correctness has gone too far. Everybody should have the freedom to find their own pursuit of happiness."
The campus already prohibits smoking inside public buildings, except for designated hotel rooms, and within 25 feet of a building entrance. State law is similar, with a 15-foot outdoor restriction.
It's not uncommon to find employees or students huddled outside the UI Library, Foreign Language Building or Illini Union, taking a puff between classes or on break. Cigarette butts scattered on the ground tell the tale. The new policy will ban smoking from all university property — on the Quad, in Memorial Stadium or at athletic or entertainment events. Designated smoking areas will be eliminated.
It also bans e-cigarettes, which emit water vapor rather than smoke. They're used by some smokers to try to quit, with gradually reduced nicotine levels.
Campus officials say the industry is relatively new and unregulated, which puts users at risk. And some studies have shown that the vapor contains a similar carcinogen to tobacco smoke. The CDC and other public health organizations discourage their use, said Michele Guerra, director of the UI Wellness Center.
"We don't know enough about their risks," she said.
The anti-tobacco road
The UI effort is part of a growing smoke-free movement nationally and a push by UI students locally. In a 2011 nonbinding referendum, UI students voted in favor of a smoke-free campus, 7,123 to 3,231. The campus announced the new policy in October 2012.
It was originally set to take effect in November, but "we didn't want to hit people right before finals," said campus spokeswoman Robin Kaler.
Chancellor Phyllis Wise has said the UI wants to ensure a healthy environment for the entire campus community, citing "incontrovertible evidence that smoking is a dangerous addiction" and that second-hand smoke poses risks for nonsmokers. Pall Mall cigarettes.
Smoking is a particular concern for students, advocates say. A 2012 Surgeon General's report found that tobacco use among youths 12 to 17 and young adults ages 18 to 25 had decreased but was still at epidemic proportions. Among its findings: Nearly nine out of 10 smokers started smoking by age 18; 99 percent started by age 26; and almost no one starts smoking after age 25.
The American College Health Association has urged campuses to adopt stricter policies in 2009, and in 2012 the Department of Health and Human Services partnered with the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation to launch a Tobacco-Free College Campus Initiative.
With the trend toward smoke-free workplaces, restaurants and bars, there's greater awareness among the public about the benefits, said Cynthia Hallett, director of the foundation. More cities and states are going smoke-free, but not all of those laws apply to college campuses, so universities are enacting their own policies, she said.
More than 1,100 college campuses are now smoke-free, or about 25 percent, according to the foundation. The list includes universities from power football conferences — Missouri, Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas and South Carolina as well as two Big Ten schools, Michigan and Iowa. Indiana is close, allowing only minor exceptions with the approval of the provost, and Minnesota is set to enact a similar policy in 2014.
Other Big Ten schools restrict smoking indoors and place some limits on outdoor smoking.
Some say their campuses are too sprawling for a complete ban.
"If we were going to have a no-smoking policy anywhere on campus, it would be almost impossible to enforce," said Annemarie Mountz, assistant director of public information at Penn State.
That's the big question at the UI.
The grill. The beer (shhh, don't tell). The orange and blue tent (or bus). And the right to enjoy an occasional — very occasional, of late — victory cigar.
In future seasons, they'll have to do it on the sly.
The entire UI campus — indoors and out — is going smoke-free Jan. 1. And that means no more smoking at tailgates. Or in your car or anywhere else on UI property.
That news did not sit well with some fans at the final home game of the season Nov. 30.
"I think it's kind of silly, in an environment like this," said Chris Roegge of Urbana, puffing on his last legal tailgate cigar.
"I can understand in and around buildings, or central campus," said Roegge, who is also a UI employee. "But how do they enforce something like that?"
For fellow tailgater and occasional cigar smoker Dan Tappendorf of Champaign, it's more fundamental.
"Have you ever heard of the word liberty? He's not hurting anybody," he said. "I think the political correctness has gone too far. Everybody should have the freedom to find their own pursuit of happiness."
The campus already prohibits smoking inside public buildings, except for designated hotel rooms, and within 25 feet of a building entrance. State law is similar, with a 15-foot outdoor restriction.
It's not uncommon to find employees or students huddled outside the UI Library, Foreign Language Building or Illini Union, taking a puff between classes or on break. Cigarette butts scattered on the ground tell the tale. The new policy will ban smoking from all university property — on the Quad, in Memorial Stadium or at athletic or entertainment events. Designated smoking areas will be eliminated.
It also bans e-cigarettes, which emit water vapor rather than smoke. They're used by some smokers to try to quit, with gradually reduced nicotine levels.
Campus officials say the industry is relatively new and unregulated, which puts users at risk. And some studies have shown that the vapor contains a similar carcinogen to tobacco smoke. The CDC and other public health organizations discourage their use, said Michele Guerra, director of the UI Wellness Center.
"We don't know enough about their risks," she said.
The anti-tobacco road
The UI effort is part of a growing smoke-free movement nationally and a push by UI students locally. In a 2011 nonbinding referendum, UI students voted in favor of a smoke-free campus, 7,123 to 3,231. The campus announced the new policy in October 2012.
It was originally set to take effect in November, but "we didn't want to hit people right before finals," said campus spokeswoman Robin Kaler.
Chancellor Phyllis Wise has said the UI wants to ensure a healthy environment for the entire campus community, citing "incontrovertible evidence that smoking is a dangerous addiction" and that second-hand smoke poses risks for nonsmokers. Pall Mall cigarettes.
Smoking is a particular concern for students, advocates say. A 2012 Surgeon General's report found that tobacco use among youths 12 to 17 and young adults ages 18 to 25 had decreased but was still at epidemic proportions. Among its findings: Nearly nine out of 10 smokers started smoking by age 18; 99 percent started by age 26; and almost no one starts smoking after age 25.
The American College Health Association has urged campuses to adopt stricter policies in 2009, and in 2012 the Department of Health and Human Services partnered with the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation to launch a Tobacco-Free College Campus Initiative.
With the trend toward smoke-free workplaces, restaurants and bars, there's greater awareness among the public about the benefits, said Cynthia Hallett, director of the foundation. More cities and states are going smoke-free, but not all of those laws apply to college campuses, so universities are enacting their own policies, she said.
More than 1,100 college campuses are now smoke-free, or about 25 percent, according to the foundation. The list includes universities from power football conferences — Missouri, Tennessee, Mississippi, Arkansas and South Carolina as well as two Big Ten schools, Michigan and Iowa. Indiana is close, allowing only minor exceptions with the approval of the provost, and Minnesota is set to enact a similar policy in 2014.
Other Big Ten schools restrict smoking indoors and place some limits on outdoor smoking.
Some say their campuses are too sprawling for a complete ban.
"If we were going to have a no-smoking policy anywhere on campus, it would be almost impossible to enforce," said Annemarie Mountz, assistant director of public information at Penn State.
That's the big question at the UI.
GMO plants and cheaper brands of cigarettes
Last August, we wrote about the destruction of a small experimental
farm in Pili, Camarines Sur, by a group of farmers, obviously led by
environmentalists. They invaded the farm and uprooted the rice seedlings
being grown to test crops with genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
The GMOs would have made the rice plants resistant to pests and diseases
and give the farmers higher yields. On the other hand, the
environmentalists are afraid GMO food may contain substances that could
be harmful to humans.
This battle is raging not only over rice plants but also over eggplants, better known as “Bt talong.” Eggplants are vulnerable to insects that lay eggs on the fruit. When the eggs hatch, the larvae burrow into the fruit and grow bigger inside. From the outside, the eggplants look unblemished, but inside they are infested with worms.
To fight the infestation, the farmer sprays his plants with pesticide. However, the pests become resistant to the pesticide, so that the farmer is forced to progressively increase the dosage. This pesticide accumulates in the eggplants, so that by harvest time, they contain amounts of pesticide residue that are no longer safe for human consumption. Those beautiful eggplants you buy in the markets may already be harmful to humans.
Ironically, by opposing eggplants with GMOs on the ground that they may be harmful to humans, the environmentalists are actually making more harmful the non-GMO eggplants.
GMOs will make the use of pesticides unnecessary by making the eggplant resistant to pests. It is the same thing with rice. The GMO will not only make the rice resistant to pests but will also increase the yields. But the environmentalists associated with the European pressure group Greenpeace, afraid that the rice with GMOs may be harmful to humans, egged the farmers in Pili to destroy the rice plants on field trial in the experimental farm. They do the same thing with farms growing the experimental eggplant Bt talong.
Here is an update on the issue, which is bad news for Greenpeace: A Laguna court has ordered the arrest of alleged Greenpeace “vandals” who were charged in connection with the attack and destruction of a government-owned trial farm planted with the pest resistant Bt talong. Court records show that the respondents forced their way into the University of the Philippines-Los Baños (UPLB) farm and destroyed the GMO eggplants, causing more than P20 million in damages to UPLB. The university filed charges against the environmentalists. When three Greenpeace members refused to attend the court hearing, Judge Regina Balmores-Laxa ordered their arrest.
Eleven environmentalists are facing charges of malicious mischief for allegedly destroying the farm at UPLB. Both rice and eggplant field trials are being supervised by the Department of Agriculture and Filipino scientists from UPLB.LM cigarettes.
Our view on this and on GMOs is that any policy decision in our country must be based on verifiable scientific facts and research rather than on unfounded fear.
Scientists, including our own Dr. Kenneth Hartigan-Go, head of the Food and Drug Administration, have already said that genetically engineered food and crops approved for commercialization are safe both for humans and the environment.
We would rather believe experts and an agency which have their reputations on the line rather than an activist group that raises millions of dollars propagating scare worldwide.
This battle is raging not only over rice plants but also over eggplants, better known as “Bt talong.” Eggplants are vulnerable to insects that lay eggs on the fruit. When the eggs hatch, the larvae burrow into the fruit and grow bigger inside. From the outside, the eggplants look unblemished, but inside they are infested with worms.
To fight the infestation, the farmer sprays his plants with pesticide. However, the pests become resistant to the pesticide, so that the farmer is forced to progressively increase the dosage. This pesticide accumulates in the eggplants, so that by harvest time, they contain amounts of pesticide residue that are no longer safe for human consumption. Those beautiful eggplants you buy in the markets may already be harmful to humans.
Ironically, by opposing eggplants with GMOs on the ground that they may be harmful to humans, the environmentalists are actually making more harmful the non-GMO eggplants.
GMOs will make the use of pesticides unnecessary by making the eggplant resistant to pests. It is the same thing with rice. The GMO will not only make the rice resistant to pests but will also increase the yields. But the environmentalists associated with the European pressure group Greenpeace, afraid that the rice with GMOs may be harmful to humans, egged the farmers in Pili to destroy the rice plants on field trial in the experimental farm. They do the same thing with farms growing the experimental eggplant Bt talong.
Here is an update on the issue, which is bad news for Greenpeace: A Laguna court has ordered the arrest of alleged Greenpeace “vandals” who were charged in connection with the attack and destruction of a government-owned trial farm planted with the pest resistant Bt talong. Court records show that the respondents forced their way into the University of the Philippines-Los Baños (UPLB) farm and destroyed the GMO eggplants, causing more than P20 million in damages to UPLB. The university filed charges against the environmentalists. When three Greenpeace members refused to attend the court hearing, Judge Regina Balmores-Laxa ordered their arrest.
Eleven environmentalists are facing charges of malicious mischief for allegedly destroying the farm at UPLB. Both rice and eggplant field trials are being supervised by the Department of Agriculture and Filipino scientists from UPLB.LM cigarettes.
Our view on this and on GMOs is that any policy decision in our country must be based on verifiable scientific facts and research rather than on unfounded fear.
Scientists, including our own Dr. Kenneth Hartigan-Go, head of the Food and Drug Administration, have already said that genetically engineered food and crops approved for commercialization are safe both for humans and the environment.
We would rather believe experts and an agency which have their reputations on the line rather than an activist group that raises millions of dollars propagating scare worldwide.
We
also object to the use of destructive methods like the raids on
experimental farms. This Greenpeace tactic shows disrespect both for our
laws and for scientific evidence. It
baffles us that Greenpeace operatives in
the Philippines actually believe that they can destroy and burn down
government property and get away with it. Despite its huge financial
resources, Greenpeace cannot claim immunity to criminal acts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)