speakeasyforum.com
speakeasyforum.com
Picking the Mind of an Anti
new anti-smoking ad over polonium warning|
Go
![]() |
New
![]() |
Find
![]() |
Notify
![]() |
Tools
![]() |
Reply
![]() |
|
|
Administrator |
LONDON (AFP) - Britain's health ministry delayed the airing of an "inappropriate" anti-smoking advertisement because it warned viewers that cigarettes contained the radioactive isotope that killed ex Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko.
ADVERTISEMENT The advert, part of the "Smoke is Poison" campaign, was due to have been aired for the first time Sunday evening, but officials at the Department of Health decided against it. The series of radio and television commercials were designed to assert that most people know very little about what is actually in a cigarette, and claim that they contain a number of poisons. A spokeswoman for the Department of Health said the campaign had only been postponed and the decision "does not change the importance or influence of the campaign." "There are a number of poisonous chemicals in cigarette smoke and we have an excellent history of tackling smoking. "This advert is only being held in the short term." Litvinenko fell ill on November 1 and died about three weeks later with large quantities of the radioactive substance polonium-210 found in his urine. His friends and relatives have blamed the Kremlin, a charge Russia has repeatedly denied -------------------------- can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen --------------------------- If you're fed-up with government intrusion into our private lives (alcohol, tobacco, weight or so-called obesity, etc.) especially the nonsense and destruction surrounding smoking bans, then discuss/fight smoking bans at the FORCES tavern or go directly to their FORCES homepage. A UK-based group (forcing a Judicial Review of the English smoking ban) is Freedom to Choose, with another great forum for chatting and organizing here. |
||
|
Designed as still more hysteria to make those who choose not to smoke further despise us.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- I used to have compassion, but they legislated it and taxed it out of existence. |
||||
|
|
||||
|
TROLL ALERT!
|
||||
|
More Spam than Troll, I'd say.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- I used to have compassion, but they legislated it and taxed it out of existence. |
||||
|
Lest we forget!
Gary K. How many cigarettes must be smoked to create an ETS danger? ESTIMATING RELATIVE DOSES OF MSS AND ETS RSP Acronyms and abbreviations SS = Side Stream Smoke, the smoke of a smouldering cigarette in the ashtray. TLV = Threshold Limit Value. The TLV of a chemical substance is a level to which it is believed a worker can be exposed day after day for a working lifetime without adverse health effects. ESTIMATED NUMBER OF CIGARETTES REQUIRED TO REACH TLV LEVELS FROM SSS EMISSION OF SELECTED CHEMICALS IN A SEALED AND UNVENTILATED 100 M3 (3,531.46 Cu. Ft.) ENCLOSURE. 3,531.46 Cu.Ft = room 18ft x 18ft x 10.5ft. SSS component.............. Polonium 210 SSS output (mg/cigarette)...=0.4pCi TLV (mg/m3)................ =3pCi/liter Cigarettes required........=750,000 This message has been edited. Last edited by: gkayser30, |
||||
|
The math is easy.
There are 1,000 liters per cubic meter. 100 cubic meters = 100,000 liters. TLV= 3pCi/liter SSSoutput = .4pCi 3 divided by .4 equals 7.5 cigarettes/liter 7.5 x 100,000 = 750,000 cigarettes per day to reach the TLV. This message has been edited. Last edited by: gkayser30, |
||||
|
Just a little more.
Gary K. 18x18x10.5 is a rather small room,let's make this a 25x50x10 local bar. That is 12,500 ft3, or 3.54 times as big and you would have to have the SHS from about 2,655,000 cigarettes per day to reach the TLV. A bartender working an 8 hour shift would have to be exposed to the SHS from about 332,000 cigarettes per hour to reach OSHA's TLV for polonium-210. What about other health risks? Without Sufficient Evidence, At Least 25 Anti-Smoking Groups Claiming that Secondhand Smoke Causes Emphysema. In spite of the failure of every major scientific body that has reviewed the evidence to conclude that secondhand smoke causes pulmonary emphysema, at least 25 anti-smoking groups, headlined by the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, American Cancer Society, and SmokeFreeOhio, are making precisely such a claim. The California Environmental Protection Agency report on secondhand smoke, which is probably the most comprehensive review of the subject and which drew the controversial (even within the tobacco control community) conclusion that secondhand smoke causes breast cancer, did not even suggest that secondhand smoke causes pulmonary emphysema in nonsmokers. The Surgeon General(2006), in his comprehensive report on secondhand smoke, also fails to conclude that secondhand smoke is a cause of emphysema. He mentions that there is suggestive evidence, but it is not adequate enough to support a causal conclusion at this time: |
||||
|
| Previous Topic | Next Topic | powered by eve community |
| Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
speakeasyforum.com
speakeasyforum.com
Picking the Mind of an Anti
new anti-smoking ad over polonium warning
