“Catmageddon” — The Truth Campaign’s latest cute campaign

March 9, 2016 Pepe Lepew

You’ve probably no doubt by now seen the Truth Campaign’s newest Catmageddon commercial.

Basically, the point is — something that doesn’t get talked a lot, not even by me — that secondhand smoke is not only bad for smokers’ kids, it’s bad for their pets. No cats, no more cute cat videos on YouTube.

Several studies have shown that secondhand smoke can cause lung and other cancers in dogs, cats and other pets. According to the Truth Campaign ads, cats and dogs are twice as likely to develop cancer if their owners are smokers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXJ8PSB_g5o

The Truth Campaign followed up the Catmageddon commercial with a commercial about secondhand smoke and dogs. The funniest commercial of them is all is about a bunch of cats that hold a wild party when their owner is away. That one is just on YouTube, I think. It’s too long of a commercial for TV. I just had to post something just to get this longer commercial out there.

Just part of the Truth Campaign’s continuing creative take on trying to get the message across to young people about the dangers of smoking. It’s working; in fact it’s successful beyond everyone’s wildest dreams. Teen smoking has plummeted from 30 percent in the 1990s to less than 10 percent today (the rise of e-cigarettes have a lot to do with that, too.)

Bridge of Spies, MPAA, smoking in movies

Period smoking in “Bridge of Spies”

March 9, 2016 Pepe Lepew

bridge of spies smoking 2 — Mark Ryland in “Bridge of Spies,” playing Soviet agent Rudolf Abel. Abel died of lung cancer in his 60s.

I wrote a few weeks ago how there was virtually no smoking whatsoever in “The Man from U.N.C.L.E,” which is set in 1963, an era in which the majority of males smoked.

“Bridge of Spies,” also a period piece taking place from 1957 to 1961, is a PG-13 rated film. In watching it this week, I noticed it did have smoking in it, though it wasn’t what I would call “pervasive” smoking. Was it more than necessary? Yeah, maybe.

Soviet spy Rudolf Abel and head of the CIA Allen Dulles are both depicted in the movie smoking. Abel, while he is in prison, asks for and receives a pack of cigarettes from his attorney, played by Tom Hanks. What is interesting about one scene between Hanks and Ryland, Ryland holds a cigarette the whole time, but never actually takes a smoke. He holds a burning cigarette and flicks ashes, but doesn’t actually smoke it.

Meanwhile Dulles spends a short scene smoking a pipe. (I think some KGB guy might have smoked in the movie, too. I can’t remember.)

bridge of spies smoking with inset — Mark Ryland, left, the real Rudolf Abel (inset).

The thing is, historically, both Abel and Dulles were smokers. In fact, the actor playing Abel (Mark Rylance, he won the award for Best Supporting Actor) actually did a remarkable job of mimicking exactly how Abel held his cigarette. Check out the photo I posted from the film, with the inset of the real Rudolph Abel. Dulles was also well-known for always smoking a pipe.

allen dulles — Allen Dulles in “Bridge of Spies,” at left, and in real life, at right.

Did seeing smoking in a PG-13 film bother me? A bit, I guess, but I have to concede that the movie was trying to be historically accurate, and in order to be historically accurate, it would be a bit awkward to have no smoking in the early 1960s. I give Steven Spielberg credit for not going overboard with the depictions of smoking. The truth of it is, in 1960, the majority of males did smoke. That’s a fact, and it’s certainly historically accurate to show people in that era smoking. I certainly didn’t think the smoking in the movie was what I would call “pervasive.” And the MPAA has loopholes for the R rating if smoking is shown in a historically accurate way and if it is not, in the MPAA’s words, “pervasive.” There’s also two “fucks” in “Bridge of Spies.” Like smoking, the F-bomb, as long as you’re not describing the sex act (A really silly rule, I know), will not trigger an R rating if it not “pervasive.”

Do I think it would have lessened the film if Spielberg had eliminated the smoking? Not really. People might have pointed out the inaccuracy of showing Dulles without a pipe. But, to be fair, despite, the PG-13 rating, it was a very adult film, slow, talky, no explosions or CGI and was definitely not marketed to teens.

Anyway, I was really struck how this movie differed from “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” in how it treated smoking in the early 1960s.

As an aside, Rudolf Abel died of lung cancer in 1971 at the age of 68. Allen Dulles died of pneumonia at the age of 75.

nicotine, Uncategorized

Nicotine listed by experts as among the most addictive substances

March 6, 2016 Pepe Lepew 1 Comment

… but not as one of the most damaging drugs on Earth, a big oversight on their part.

This is a story from the Conversation, based on a survey done with substance abuse experts about the most addictive substances on Earth … and nicotine makes the cut.

It’s important to always keep this in mind about while tobacco is so evil … the sheer physical addictiveness of nicotine. I’ve often said that it’s arguably as addictive as heroin … I can’t imagine there’s really a way to measure such a thing. I just base this on anecdotal information I gather from smokers about how incredibly grueling and physically difficult it is to quit smoking. People tell me it just wracks their bodies trying to quit.

I also believe, and some studies support this, that there is a genetic component to nicotine addiction, which could explain why some people are able to quit smoking while others simply … cannot … do … it. So, it’s not about willpower or that somehow some people are just stranger than others.

Anyway, the five most addictive substances mentioned int his article are:

Heroin
Alcohol
Cocaine
Barbiturates
Nicotine

Now this story doesn’t talk about meth, which is another incredibly addictive drug, but it does mention that meth is closely related to cocaine, so I suppose the author is bundling them together.

One thing I don’t agree with this story: It states that heroin is the second-most damaging drug in the world in terms of damage to users and society. Alcohol is listed as the most damaging with an estimated 3 million deaths caused worldwide in 2012. Cocaine is listed as the third-most damaging drug..

These experts claim that nicotine is the 12th most addictive drug on Earth — again, how that is measured, I don’t know. And I don’t have a clue what the other 11 substances would be; only four are mentioned in this story.

And they don’t even list it as the most damaging drugs, this is where I disagree … even though the current death toll from tobacco is 6 million people a year worldwide, double the death toll from the so-called No. 1 most damaging drug, alcohol. By 2030, an estimated 8 million people will die every year from tobacco-related diseases.

I won’t dismiss the staggering damage done by alcoholism, not only from alcohol-related diseases, but domestic violence, murders and DUI wrecks caused by drinking. But, I would argue that nicotine does more damage to society than cocaine, heroin and barbiturates combined. Here’s where I don’t agree with this story’s logic. In the U.S. at least, tobacco kills more people than alcohol, cocaine, heroin, barbiturates and other illegal drugs combined … like by a pretty sizable margin. Tobacco kills 440,000 people a year in the U.S., while alcohol kills about 110,000 people a year (and this includes DUIs) and Illegal drugs only kill about 20,000 people a year. So, we’re talking three times as many die as a result of tobacco than from alcohol and illegal drugs combined. I’m glad this article talked about nicotine, but I just can’t see how you can dismiss the damage done by nicotine and tobacco and this article did that a bit, in my opinion.

This doesn’t take into account other kinds of damage done to society, such as legal costs, incarceration, drug cartel violence, people losing their jobs and families, etc., from drug use and drinking. But, in terms of death and sheer health costs … nicotine and tobacco are No. 1, in my opinion.

Anyway, it was an interesting article even if i didn’t totally agree with it. Nicotine needs to be very much spoken in the same context as alcohol and illegal drugs as far as the damage done by it.

Department of Transportation, e-cigarettes, e-cigs

No more mother@#$%ing vapes on the mother@#$%ing plane

March 6, 2016 Pepe Lepew

Hee, I stole that headline joke from this graphic.

I was shocked to find out that until this week, you could apparently use an e-cigarette on commercial flights (depending on the airline’s policies).

Not anymore. As of now, vaping is strictly prohibited on commercial flights. The U.S. Department of Transportation announced the new rule Thursday. It will take effect within 30 days.

From The Hill:

Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said the final rule applies to all flights with both national and foreign airline carriers traveling to and from the United States.

“This final rule is important because it protects airline passengers from unwanted exposure to aerosol fumes that occur when electronic cigarettes are used onboard airplanes,” Foxx said in a news release. “The Department took a practical approach to eliminate any confusion between tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes by applying the same restrictions to both.”

Not even getting into the unwanted aerosols issue and the fact that vapour has formaldehyde and diacetyl in it, these things do on rare occasion actually blow up and catch fire. I seriously would not want to be on an airplane with an e-cigarette suddenly erupting into flames. (Jesus, here’s another story about an exploding e-cigarette. There’s literally like one or two or these stories every week.) Just the potential of one of these things erupting on a plane is reason enough all by itself to ban them on airplanes.

California, e-cigarettes, e-cigs

California Assembly approves bills to raise smoking age to 21 and to regulate e-cigs

March 6, 2016 Pepe Lepew

The California State Assembly approved a bill this week to raise the state’s smoking age from 18 to 21. A number of cities and states have been doing this the past couple of years. I’ve on record as having a somewhat mixed view of this — 18-year-olds can vote, join the military and go to jail, but they can’t buy a pack of cigarettes? I get it that they can’t buy alcohol, but alcohol is an intoxicant.

Again, there is a big, big push going on to raise the smoking age to 21, and most of the tobacco control movement is behind it. Maybe I’m behind the times on this. Whether I’m fully on board or not, this movement is gaining steam. The bill would prohibit stores from selling cigarettes to young adults between 18 and 20, but there would be no penalties for young adults for possession or using tobacco. I’m cool with that.

From a San Jose Mercury News story:

Young Bay Area residents had mixed reactions to the legislation.

“I’ve been smoking ever since my mom put my first cigarette into my hands at age 13,” said Juan Parada, a hip hop musician taking a smoking break Thursday in downtown San Jose. Now, at 21, he declares, “I know that each time I take a puff, I am killing myself slowly.”

Yet Parada, who performs under the moniker “Young Manny,” said increasing the smoking age to 21 will have little effect.

“Kids will find a way to get what they want — like getting an older person to buy cigarettes for them,” he said. “That’s what I did. That’s what lots of young kids do, and it’s just not that difficult.”

I guess my response to that is … your mom was giving you cigarettes when you were 13? … no offense, dude, but your mom is an idiot.

E-cigarette bill

However, I was more intrigued by another bill that also passed the Assembly — regulating e-cigarettes. Much overdue, in my opinion. The bill would treat e-cigarettes as a tobacco product, it would ban e-cigarette use in all workplaces and would require people selling e-cigarettes to get a special licence. It also would make it a misdemeanor to sell or provide vaping products to people under the age of 21 (I like this part of it because vaping has absolutely skyrocketed among teens in the past three years.). It doesn’t sound that strict, but it’s a beginning. We’re all still waiting for the Food and Drug Administration federal regulations for e-cigarettes, so states are having to pass their own regulations.

These bills had been proposed in earlier years but got bogged down to a large degree because of lobbying from the tobacco industry. I found a couple of stories about just how powerful the tobacco lobby is in California. You’d be surprised to hear that California actually has one of the lowest tobacco taxes in the whole country — just 87 cents a pack. The Legislature simply will not pass a tobacco tax increase and tobacco industry lobbying is a reason why. California alone represents nearly 10 percent of the cigarette market in the entire country.

From a Sacramento Bee article:

Major tobacco companies Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds spent $1 million lobbying lawmakers in 2015. R.J. Reynolds also gave $240,000 to candidates and campaign committees last year, while Philip Morris contributed $1 million, including $200,000 to the California Republican Party.

Democrats who voted against or abstained on the tobacco measures received at least $26,000 from the two companies last year. In November and December, they gave a combined $35,000 to a ballot committee run by Assemblyman Adam Gray, a Merced Democrat who chairs the influential Governmental Organization Committee and voted against raising the smoking age to 21.

The two Republicans who voted for the bill, Catharine Baker of Dublin and David Hadley of Manhattan Beach, returned almost $11,000 in contributions from the tobacco companies over the summer.

In remarks to reporters after the vote, Assembly Speaker-elect Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood, called the tobacco industry “a strong force in this town” and alluded to “threats involving electoral efforts” against legislators.

“It’s exceptionally aggressive,” Rendon said.

Both bills go to the State Senate, where they are expected to pass.

A ballot measure to raise California’s cigarette tax by $2 a pack is being proposed. The last similar ballot measure (Again, the Legislature won’t approve a cigarette tax measure, so it keeps getting punted to the voters) in California failed by just a few thousand votes after Big Tobacco spent millions to defeat it. However, this ballot measure is being proposed for November, when voter turnout is expected to be very heavy, in part because there will be another ballot measure to legalize pot in California.

Chew in baseball, Chewing tobacco, Toronto

Toronto now considering a ban on chew at ballparks; MLB will send out nicotine patches to players and coaches

March 6, 2016 Pepe Lepew

Rogers_Centre_1280_unrlzfzj_4f480v2v — Rogers Centre

Toronto is the latest city considering a chewing tobacco ban at all baseball parks, including the Rogers Centre.

New York is considering a similar ban at Yankee Stadium and the Mets’ Citi Field. Meanwhile, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Boston have already banned chew by players, coaches, umpires and fans (though I have to believe most of these ballparks weren’t allowing fans to chew because of the clean-up issues.) It appears chew will also be banned soon by the state of California at ballparks in San Diego, Oakland and Anaheim.

In response to chew being banned at as many as six Major League ballparks this summer, Major League Baseball is actually sending out “nicotine therapy” packages to teams for free. These packages will contain nicotine gun, patches and lozenges. This is included in the bottom of this story here. I thought it was pretty funny and could’ve been the lead of its own story.

Getting back to Toronto, the city’s health board is supposed to decide by March 21. From an article on the topic:

“While chewing tobacco has long been part of the culture for many professional sports, especially baseball, research shows that it has very real and serious health consequences,” City Councilor Joe Mihevic said in a release. “We need to be at the forefront of the movement to restrict its use and join with major cities such as L.A., Boston, and New York.”

These proposals are getting some resistance from ballplayers. Roughly about 30 percent of baseball players are believed to be tobacco chewers (versus about 7 percent of adult men in general and less than 1 percent of adult women.).

From the article:

“For some guys, it’s part of their playing routine,” Chicago Cubs catcher David Ross told the Chicago Tribune. “It’s hard to tell somebody what tools they can take to their work.”

Should Major League Baseball ban chewing tobacco? PHOTO: THE ASSOCIATED PRESS — Is this Jonny Gomes? I’m not sure. That’s Mike Napoli behind him.

Josh Thole, Justin Smoak and Chris Colabello are counted among Toronto Blue Jays who regularly chew tobacco on the field.

Unofficial stats show that the number of players who still chew tobacco has decreased in recent years, from about one-half of players to one-third. Instead, ballparks have gotten into the habit of making chewing gum and sunflower seeds available as alternatives.

Blue Jays Manager John Gibbons quit two years ago, following the death of Hall of Famer Tony Gwynn of salivary gland cancer.

“I was a tobacco user for a lot of years. I’m not proud of that. I finally was able to quit. It’s a dirty, filthy habit,” Gibbons told the Toronto Star. “I wouldn’t want my kids doing it. You hope in some way, they can eliminate it and wipe it out.”

Chew being phased out; nicotine kits sent to teams

As Gibbons mentioned Tony Gwynn, it was Gwynn’s death a couple of years ago that provided much of the recent impetus to banning chew on the field. Gwynn was a longtime chewer who blamed his habit for his cancer.

Players were informed this week they will be facing chewing tobacco bans in as many as six stadiums this season and sent out the nicotine therapy packets to every team free of charge (Like guys making $15 million a year need freebies?)

From an AP story:

Washington Nationals manager Dusty Baker was a big dipper for a long time. He’s cut back over the years, but still might pop in a pinch when games get tight.

“It’s a bad influence for the kids. Big time. I’ll say that. But also they’re adults, too, at the same time,” Baker said.

“We’ll see,” he said. “My daughter used to put water in my can and put it back in my truck. Or my son, he has lip check — ‘Get it out, Dad!'”

Local laws will prohibit the use of all tobacco products at Fenway Park, Dodger Stadium and AT&T Park this year, meaning players, team personnel, umpires and fans. The letter advises the same ban will take effect at every California ballpark in December.

“I support it,” new Dodgers manager Dave Roberts said. “I think that the intentions are there, and there’s obviously going to be some resistance with players.”

“Like it or not, players are role models, and we have a platform as coaches and players. So if that’s the law, then we definitely support it,” he said.

Major League Baseball actually wants to ban chew on the field, but needs the cooperation of the Major League Players’ Association, which has so far not given its OK. Chewing tobacco use is expected to be part of the next contract being negotiated between MLB and the players.

Cigarette taxes, West Virginia

West Virginia — smoking rate 29.9 percent — Senate passes cigarette tax

February 25, 2016 Pepe Lepew

I have no idea if this bill is going to pass, but this in itself is a pretty amazing development.

West Virginia, a solidly red Republican state (Obama got less than 30 percent of the vote in 2012) and either the No. 1- or No. 2-ranked smoking state in the nation (in the last survey, West Virginia was No. 2 at a staggering 29.9 percent smoking rate, just a tick behind Kentucky.), passed a pretty significant cigarette tax increase in the State Senate.

West Virginia’s cigarette tax is one of the lowest in the nation at 55 cents a pack, no surprise in such a conservative state with such a high smoking rate. The average state cigarette tax in the nation is about $1.50 a pack.

A bill was introduced in the W.Va. Legislature to raise the cigarette tax to $1 a pack, a pretty modest increase that would leave W.Va. still well below the national average tax. However, that bill, proposed by the governor, was amended to raise the tax by $1 a pack to $1.55 a pack, right around the national average.

In a Republican-dominated State Senate, the bill passed by a margin of 26-6. Wow. Republicans favoured the bill 12-6, joining 14 Democrats in favour. That blows me away.

m5935a3f2 — Smoking rates in the U.S. West Virginia is pitch black.

The tax increase would raise an estimated $115 million and would help West Virginia balance a severely strapped budget.

In my mind, more importantly, the tax increase would likely make a dent in West Virginia’s shockingly high smoking rate. Studies have shown that a $1 a pack cigarette tax effectively lowers the smoking rate by 10 percent. It actually does help encourage smokers to quit to hit them in the pocketbook.

From a Charleston, W.Va., Gazette article:

Sen. Tom Takubo, R-Kanawha, a physician, noted that 10 times as many West Virginians die from tobacco-related illness as die from narcotics overdoses and said the existing 55-cent-a-pack tax is not enough to motivate smokers to quit.

“You have to hit somebody hard enough in the pocketbook that they say, ‘Now, I’ll quit,’ ” Takubo said.

While tobacco taxes are sometimes seen as inordinately burdensome on the poor, Takubo said smokers spend an average of $4,700 a year on cigarettes, money he suggested would greatly benefit low-income families.

“That’s a big number that can help out a lot of people — that’s cash,” he said.

West Virginia also has one of the highest lung cancer rates in the U.S.

Not coincidentally, West Virginia also has one of the highest lung cancer death rates in the nation, (also partly because of the state’s coal industry.).

The governor is apparently on board with the cigarette tax increase, but I have no idea if the tax increase will pass in West Virginia’s State Assembly. As I pointed out before, the state’s budget is extremely tight and they’d be pissing away $115 million a year in revenue rejecting the tax.

I can’t keep track in every single state, but I know cigarette tax bills are making their ways through legislatures in several states, including Indiana, Louisiana and California. California plans a state ballot measure to raise its ridiculously low 87 cents a pack cigarette pack. A similar bill in California barely failed a couple of years ago, literally by a few thousand votes, after Big Tobacco poured millions of dollars into defeating it.

Philip Morris Interntional

Philip Morris International earnings, revenue down … big time

February 22, 2016 Pepe Lepew

Great story!

Philip Morris International’s earnings and revenue are dropping, dropping faster than forecast by the company.

Philip Morris is a spin-off from Altria, which handles Philip Morris’ domestic production of cigarettes.

According to several stories I came across, Philip Morris’ revenues dropped 11 percent at the end of 2015, dropping faster than projected. Cigarette shipping volume also dropped 2.4 percent, excluding acquisitions.

What this tells me, surprisingly, is that even internationally, the tobacco industry is hurting. Now, by “hurting,” I mean, they aren’t raking in the kinds of billions there were raking in 20 and 30 years ago. The biggest declines were in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa, where revenues were down 19 percent — that is interesting.

Here is an interesting paragraph from the the MySA Website:

International tobacco company Philip Morris International has been an attractive stock ever since it split off from domestic peer and former parent Altria Group , combining growth prospects from foreign markets with solid dividend income. But 2015 has been a tough year for Philip Morris, and between foreign currency weakness and new regulatory threats that, in some cases, are even worse than what Altria has had to face in the U.S., the global tobacco giant has seen its financials under pressure. Coming into Philip Morris International’s fourth-quarter financial report Thursday, investors were prepared for declining fundamentals, but worse-than-expected results and gloomy guidance went beyond those initial expectations.

There’s the important sentence: “new regulatory threats that, in some cases, are even worse than what Altria has had to face in the U.S.” What this is referring to are small countries around the world attempting to pass restrictions on marketing and packaging of tobacco. Philip Morris International has been in a massive legal battle for years with Australia over that country’s plain packaging laws, and they’re battling a bunch of other countries like Uruguay and New Zealand over marketing and plain packaging laws.

John Oliver’s “Jeff the Diseased Lung” was a giant “screw you” to Philip Morris International for its tactics bullying small countries around the world.

And here we go … I’ve talked about this extensively, that the tobacco industry absolutely is looking to take over the e-cig industry. From this Investor’s Business Daily article:

Chief Executive Andre Calantzopoulos said efforts to develop electronic cigarettes and other cigarette alternatives picked up steam.

“We continued to make exciting progress on the development, assessment and commercialization of our Reduced-Risk Products,” he said. “We significantly expanded the roll-out of iQOS (smokeless cigarette) in Japan and introduced it into several new markets.”

Yup, they’re absolutely going to be looking for e-cigs to help save their skins.

Anyway, I thought this was great news. Big Tobacco is slowly shrinking, not fast enough for my taste, but make no mistake, an 11 percent drop in revenue is a real hurt. I look for Big Tobacco to respond by diversifying more into e-cigs and possibly one day, marijuana.

e-cigarettes, e-cigs

Yet more stories of exploding e-cigs burning people

February 22, 2016 Pepe Lepew

Damn, there were at least a dozen stories today on the tobacco news about exploding e-cigarettes. I posted something about this some time ago.

In a story I found all over the place, some guy in Utah was badly burned by his e-cigarette battery exploding in his pants while he was driving. He ended up in the hospital with second- and third-degree burns on his hands and legs. Sounds awful. Don’t watch the video unless you have a strong stomach. The fire was so bad, it literally melted his pants to his car seat.

Well, these are probably still a bit rare, but according to this story from Seattle, it’s a growing problem. Harborview Medical Center in Seattle reported that it treated four people in the past three months alone for severe burns caused by exploding e-cigarettes

From a Yakima Herald article:

National fire experts say the Harborview cases are part of a small but disturbing trend linked to battery failures in the popular devices often touted as a safer substitute for tobacco cigarettes.

“I realized that this was something that was happening more frequently than we had previously recognized,” said Dr. Elisha Brownson, the Harborview trauma and burn critical-care fellow who’s tracking the problem.

“I just think that if people really knew this could explode in your face, they would consider twice putting a device like this to their mouth.”

Remember, these things are cheaply made and are often made in China where safety standards are pretty lax. According to the U.S. Fire Administration, there were 25 injuries in the U.S. caused by e-cigarette explosions between 2009 and 2014. Well, heck, e-cig use has exploded (no pun intended) since 2014, so I bet that number has gone up quite a bit. The number of nicotine poisonings from e-cig vials has gone up exponentially in the past two years, mostly because many more people are using them than ever before.

In a couple of cases cited in this article, one person lost 12 teeth when an e-cig blew up in his mouth. Another woman had injuries to her nose when an e-cig explosion ripped out her nose ring.

This brings up the fact that sticking anything that generates heat into your mouth is going to have an inherent danger. One issue with cigarettes was the number of fires — both home and wildland — caused by cigarettes. At one time, it was estimated that over 1,000 people a year were being killed in the U.S. in cigarette fires (Obviously, that number has dropped largely because the smoking rate has dropped … and it still pales by comparison to the 400,000 who die from tobacco-related illnesses, I know). I’m amazed my dad never burned down the house. His smoking habit left burns in all of the furniture in the house, including his bed and linens.

Salt Lake City, Smoking rooms

Utah Senate votes to keep airport smoking rooms because of concerns over state’s “image”

February 22, 2016 Pepe Lepew 6 Comments

OK, initially, I thought this was a bit of a humourous story until I actually read it, and now I’m left feeling like, “WTF?”

The Utah State Senate voted 15-14 last week to keep smoking rooms in the Salt Lake City Airport. Two of the reasons cited were personal freedom and worries about Utah’s “image.” Wut? What do smoking rooms at the airport have to do with Utah’s image?

Here’s the quote from the Desert News:

Sen. Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, said Salt Lake City carries a “different brand” and has to be careful about how people view it. He told a story about a Catholic nun from Utah who on a flight years ago had a passenger ask her if she minded him smoking. When she said yes, he replied, “You damn Mormons are all alike.”

“I’m very nervous about giving Salt Lake City a different image because people already have an image of Salt Lake City that we damn Mormons are all alike,” Hillyard said.

Also from the Deseret News, the bill sponsor’s response, which is pretty funny:

But Sen. Evan Vickers, R-Cedar City, said he intends to talk to some of his colleagues about reconsidering SB61 after they voted it down 15-14.

“The image thing kind of threw me off guard. I didn’t see that coming,” he said after the Senate debate.

Vickers said during the Senate debate he could understand the argument that Utah would look “weird” if it were the first state to ban smoking in airports. He told his colleagues to travel to other states if they think it’s a perception issue.

“This is a not a new, revolutionary idea. This is something that has happened across the country. The traveling public is very much used to it,” he said. “If we’re the only ones standing at the end of the day, then the perception is going to be there. But it’s not going to be the perception you want.”

To the dillweed from Logan, if you’re concerned about Salt Lake City’s “image,” then why don’t you allow the bars at the airport to serve alcohol on Sundays? Salt Lake City is the only airport I’ve ever been in that shuts down alcohol sales on Sunday. I’ve flown through Salt Lake City countless times and spent many hours stuck in that airport. I’m very familiar with the smoking rooms in the airport; it’s the only airport I’ve seen that has them. (In fact, according to the Deseret News, only seven airports in the U.S. have smoking rooms. If it’s only seven then how does getting rid of them in Salt Lake somehow hurt Utah’s image again?)

I’m not that dogmatic that the smoking rooms have to be banned, it was just that part about Utah’s “image” that kind of threw me for a loop.

These smoking rooms are a trip and I’m convinced they’re purposely set up to discourage people from smoking. They’re glass-walled, so everyone can see the people in there smoking. There’s absolutely no privacy, and I can just imagine that it must feel embarrassing for the smokers sitting in there, as everyone walking through the airport watches them smoking.

As an aside, one of the many times I flew through Salt Lake City, my head ABSOLUTELY exploded on this one trip. I kid you not, I actually saw a woman sitting in the smoking room with a baby carriage. Oh .. my … God. So not only was that nitwit exposing her baby to her cigarette smoke, she was exposing her to the cigarette smoke from half a dozen other smokers … in an enclosed room with negative air pressure so the smoke wouldn’t leave the room. It was one of the most mind-blowing things I’ve ever seen.

As I’ve talked about in the past on the Lounge, something that makes me absolutely crazy is seeing people smoke around children. Fortunately, I see it less and less. In fact, I bet it’s been at least a couple of years since I’ve seen someone smoking in a car with kids.

Also mentioned in this story is the fact that Salt Lake City has a new mayor who is in favour of a smoking ban, and the mayor could simply shut down smoking at the city’s airport if the Legislature fails to do so.