The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0013.200 2002-2004 Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2'50 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 P Ot Attention: Mr. Curtis Tyler Date: 6/ 17/03 Company: CoH Number of Pages: 2 Fax Number: 326-5697 Voice Number: 327-:3666 From: Keith King Company: Fax Number: 808-325-7935 Voice Number: 808-325-7935 Subject: Bi11260 Comments: CUrtIS, - I know from our prior discussions we are at odds on this issue. Please try and read the attachments with an open mind. The anti's are lying to you. As I testified last November the EPA 3,000 deaths were declared null and void by a federal district court- The 50,000 deaths fabricated by Stanton Glantz are non-existent. We don't need government harrassing small businesses, when in fact restaurant, bar and nightclub workers have some of the safest jobs in the country. Please vote to table this bill or put it on a ballot and let the the citizen's of this county make the decision. Mahalo, Keith i - - comm.- No. 1~ ~ ^ 00 Ref. Tos Irese~tee Ref. Uate Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:50 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 P02 Expoanes to second-hand mtolce baler dun 6dieved, ORNL study finds Uak Rid a National. laboratory Bringing Science to Life Home: Newsdesk: Headline News: Media Release h+1~JIA CONTACT: Ron Walli Comntnnieations Bi;Fublic Ail'a,rs (865) 576-02~b Exposures to second-hand smoke lower than thelieved, ORNL study finds OAK RIDGE, Tenn., Feb. 2, 2000 - Exposues m environmental tobacco smoke may be lower than earlier studies indicated for bartenders, waiters and waitresses, according to a study conducted by researchers at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Isboratnry (ORNL)_ While people who work as wait staff and bartenders may generally be considered to be more highly exposed to environmental tobacco mmoke, data from our study suggests that the situation is more complex," said Roger Jeeldns of tha Chemical and Analytical Chemistry Division. The study, which involved 173 people employed at restaurants or taverns of varying sizes in the Knoxville area, concluded that exposures to respirable suspended particulate matter (RSP), for example, were considerably below limits established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for the workplace. > ;Sutiiects, whn were;non-smokers, wore pumps that sampled the air - iHey were brealhing•whilo at work for a minimum of four hours. Researchers recorded a maximum RSP level of 7b8 micrograms per Roger Jenkins inspects Allele cubic meter. The OSHA standard for-RSP is 5,000 micrograms per designed to ~Iled parbctes of cubic meter over eight hours. Samples from the subject4 were environmental tobacco smoke. (ORNL photo by Curtis Boles) ~~Y~ for ultraviolet absorbing and fluorescing particulate matter, solaaesol, 3-ethenyl pyridine, nicotine and RSP. hltplAvxw.anlgov/Prees_Rehjayeslardiivymrl0000203-0O.htrM (t d 3I 07/01 G48:17 PMJ Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2.54 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 p.01 Expow~es m xm~d-Gmd mpoke lo.vv t6ao believed, ORNL spdy finds Other constituents of environmental tobacco smoke, sometimes called second-hand smoke, also were not present in the levels previously thought, Jenkins said For example, a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1993 concluded that average RSP levels were 117 and 348 micrograms per cubic meter for bars and restaurrnts, respectively, while the O1tNL study found those levels to be 67 and 135, respectively. While the higher estimates in earlier studies may be explained by the choice of the establishments in which the studies were conducted, another reason for the difference could be that today's ventilation systems are more efficient, Jenkins said. The;lSnoxville study also showed that for bartenders who live with smokers, the away-from-work ekpoarue is at least as important as the at-work exposure. And people who are highly exposed at home tend to be'mor+e higltly exposed at work, probably because they don't avoid it as much, Jenkins said. Jenkins' paper, "lktermination of F,xposuce`to Environmental Tobacco Smoke in Restaurants and Tavern Workers in One U.S. City," is scheduled to be publlsllbd in.this moth's issue of Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology. The "Restaurant and Tavern Workers" study builds upon findings of an earlier ORNL study involving ] 6 cities and more than 1,500 subjects nationwide. In that study, test subjects wore separate au sampling devices at work and away from work over a 24-hour period Results from this approach differ dramatically from stationary air sampling, which does not take into account the constantly changing conditions as people move from place to place throughout the day, Jenkins said "The fact is that while individuals may live or work in environments where tbere is smoke, stationary monitors cannot take into account changes in smoke exposure resulting from changes in a person's micro- environment," Jenkins said. "In these micro-environments, a person may be closer to or farther away from various sources of emirontnental tobacco smoke." Over the last six or seven years, more data on personal exposure to tobacco smoke bas become available and the methods for measurir?g and analyzing the smoke have become inert sophisticated. The 16-cities study, the largest of its kind ever conducted in a single country, found ttre highest levels of environmental tobacco smoke nicotine levels in workplaces where smoking is permitted to be between 9:~41'snd 14.9 micrstgratns per cubic meter, far lower than the numbers assumed by EPA and OSHA. "A wall-kaocvn toxicblogical.principie is that the poison is in the dose," Jenkins said "It's pretty clear that the environmental Wbawo smoke dose is pnKty law for most people." Extensive controls were employed in collecting and analyzing the au.samples collected by the 1,564 participants in the study, Jenkins said Test subjects also submitted to saliva tests that would reveal hepJ/www.oml.QovlPleae_Releases/archlvdmRpOpp2p3.pp,html (2 d3) (8/27Po16:4B:17 PMJ Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:54 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 P.02 F.apowRS to eeronGhed mdse lower thm believed, ORNL sWdy finds cotinine, a constituent of tobacco smoke. Smokers were excluded from the study. Cities used for the study were Baltimore; Boise, Idaho; Buffalo; Cohunbus, Ohio; Daytona Beach, Fla.; Fresno, Calif.; Grand Rapids, Mich.; Indianapolis; Knoxville; New Orleans; Philadelphia; Phcenix• Portland, Maine; San Antonio, Texas; Seattle and St. Louis. A book that delves into this work, "The Chemistry of Environmental Tobacco Smoke: Composition and Measurement: Second Edition," is expected to be released in March. Co-writers are Jenkins, Mike Guerin and Brace Tomkins of the Chemical and Analytical Sciences Division. Authors of the restaurants and tavern workers study are Jenkins, Mike Maskarinec and Amy Dindal of the Chemical and Analytical Sciences Division and Richard Counts of the Computer Science and Mathematics Division. The4esearch was funded by the Ceuta for Indoor Air Research. ORNL is a DOE muhiprogram researoh factilY mapaged;]~ysLockheed Mania Energy Research Corporation. ( Search ~ Index ~ Helo ~ Comments ~ Disclaimers ] T-_-__ A service oJ'the COrnl7nilrlp Lr ormation and Networkine Division Rev: Friday, 30-Jun-1000 09:13:3/ EDT h1grJ/www.cmt~vtPr6se_ .hhM (3 ~ 3) I8127/0r X48:17 PMQ Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:54 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 p 03 Gtreat Choice Network Posted On March 1, 2000 Is It Time To Roll Back Smok[ng Bans? Oakridge Study Relates Secondhand Smoke Information Hy: Guest Choice Staff California's much-reviled total smoking ban in bars and resta~vaau was based oa claims by anti-smok¢tg activists that the ante had a duty ro "protect" workers from exposure to secaodlramd smoke. But compsehensive new scientific data from the U.S. I)eparhrient of F.mrgy indicates California ~w has another duty: protecting its hosprtahty industry from junk science claims that have wreaked havoc on many 6usrtresses' bottom lines. On February 2 fhe Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Lalwratory (OItNL) released a new study showing that bartenders, servers and other staff are exposed tb far less secondhaal smoke than tbe public preamnea O1tAII,'s measurements arc considerably below air quality limits established forworkplaces by the Occupational Safety and Health Adminisaation (OSHA). In fact, less them one-sixth of OSAA's maximum allowable level was detected. "It's pretty clear that environmental tobacco smolre dose is pretty low for most people," said ORNL's Roger Jenkins, who oversaw the saidy. Taking advantage of sophisticated new air-sampling monitors, government scientists closely tracked 173non-smoking restaurant and bar employees in Knoxville:, TN who worsted at least four hours per day. A previous ORNL sandy measured socaidhand mtoke in hers and restaurants by tracking 1500 people in 16 cities, who wore high-tech devices 24-hrnus a day; at work, at have and everywhere in-bohveen. Thaz swdyalso determined eirgoality levels inestabliahments where smoldngwas allowed was far below OSHA maximum allowable level. The new Oak Midge study resultshould change the course of future bar and restaurant smtokirig ban legislation. It could even help rescind heavy-handed laws like California's thatwere rushed arrto the books soon after America's great tobactw debate ignited But it wont. Even though the Department of Energy's best efforts indicate there's no need or basis for banning smoking in bans in bars or restaurants, the current public mindset in California is tainted against tolerance - at least for right now. Ironically, the case against public smoking bans continues to strengthen. The Oek Ridge study comes on tlx heels of a U.S. federal court invalidating the tmecientific cla®s made in U.S. F.nviromnental Protection Agencys (EPA) now infamous secondhand smoke study. The federal Judge who ruled the EPA study "null and void,. stated in his decision that EPA "acted illegally and corupted science m engage in a campaign of misinformation." Tuesday, June 17, 2003 2:54 PM Keith King 808-325-7935 p 04 To a less politically corrcct world, this indisputable:, ceiealifically verified "one-two pond[" would leYallykoocJaotR the smoking bons that have done nothingbtrtcholoe atF business. A KPMG Pat Marrrtck stady txsadnt:ted (or the Amerkata Bevenge Lsstlttde (Dead Ikat after CalBeraia's datewkle taoldog bna took eRect ttn Juuary 1,198, ban a:perieaced as average sales decliee of 26X. O(tbose serveyed, 81X of 5eaiandin= ban and gveras rcpor'leda decrease br buslaess, vrhBe 66X of t~tdnhs and 44X of hotel twd restaurant bare abo saw a decrease. Abaat 3eX gave bad a lay tr8 empbyaa a nt warring roars and shills. California's smoldog ban even proved b be inhospitable to overall business operations and custtnner comfort Mom limn half of the beta mspo~og reported as increase in tatatomer complaints. A tevit:w of nightly tips proved that. A wkopp!ag 59X reported : bw o(grataitbs for We bar sad ttervlag staff - all bcause of abrarlay begas aetlvbt elalms now andadktad by bard ttelentl6c data. California legislators' twain justification for imposing the ban - m protect workers fromriak- is complctcly without foundation. Unless youte hermetically sealed in a Plexiglas bubble, m on onrarth can live orwork risk-&ee, nor should sae expedto. Every job poses some risk. The U.S. government's most ream [Isla shows many outdoor jobs, like flmberixutingasdflshing, actuallyinvolve s gtratdeal ofrisk, with approximately 140 fatalitiesper 100,000 employed. Airlirte pilots and navigators also aeatme very high risk, at 80 fatalities per 100,000. Farm workers, construction workers, oil riggers and taxi drivers all assume fatality risks that exceeds 40 deaths per 100,000. Government data shows bars and restaurants am one ofibc safestphttxs to work with I .ti fatalities par 100,000 forthe folks waAmg tableo ar behind the bar and k:ss than one fatality per 100,000 ifyou're m the kitclmn. Only in the etrotionalty charged political chaos within California's attack on tobacco could so unrealistic an argi®ms as total risk-avoidance possibly taf¢ hold. Why was law applied in California so unfairly? Can yon imagine Lwmakas banning farming in the Imperial Vallaybeosuse ~e riakofdeatb is 40 times higher dtanwaitirtg tables? Now [bertha Oakltidge dam confirming air quality conditions inbars and restamattts to be well below OSIiA's maximumallowable levels, ahouklnY lawmakers move to protect these businesses with at least om-seventh of the speed they applied to "presetting" d~ businesses' workers? No doubt some bars and restaurants in the Golden State will choose to mmain smoke-flee, law or ro law. That's fine! They Imow their cliemek a~ the ambiance thetbeatauits their business. Onthe otherhaod, there arc mmy hers and restauranm up anti doav the California ~ arucious to return >o business-as-usual, with stroking customers spending and Epping in numbers rotsan since the ~kingban clobbered them in January, 1998. It's time to repeal an unjustified smoking bas Copyright ®1997-2001. Guest Choice Neiwork All rights reserved. 1775 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 1200 ~ Waehingtan, DC 20006 Tet• 202-4ti3-7112