Senator Responds to CNN Hit Piece On Global Warming

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Every year, there are hundreds of thousands of deaths that can be directly, easily linked to smoking cigarettes.

There aren't. There is no way of knowing for sure that the person would not have died from the same disease if they hadn't smoked. There too statistical probabilities are used.

[billvon 3,119]

>Conversely, I've yet to see a study on ETS that produces
>actual deaths directly linked to to secondhand smoke.

From Larry King:

--------------------------
Larry King, CNN Host: Christopher Reeve's widow, Dana Reeve, lost her brave battle with lung cancer last night less than seven months after her shocking announcement that she was ill and a year and a half after her husband passed away. ...

Joining us from Cleveland is Dr. Derek Raghaven, the Director of the Cleveland Cancer Center. How did she have lung cancer without smoking?

Dr. Raghaven: Well, I think, unfortunately, Larry, I believe she was a passive smoker. You might remember that Dana Reeve was a singer early in her life. And my understanding is that she sang in places where smoking happened a lot.

One of the things that isn't very well known is that, in many ways, passive smoking is much more dangerous than regular smoking, in the sense that, when you inhale a cigarette, it's hot and uncomfortable, and makes you cough. When you're breathing in passive smoke, there isn't the same acute reaction. And so you, in fact, inhale more deeply.
----------------------------

Here's the surgeon general's report:

----------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona today issued a comprehensive scientific report which concludes that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Nonsmokers exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their risk of developing heart disease by 25 to 30 percent and lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent. The finding is of major public health concern due to the fact that nearly half of all nonsmoking Americans are still regularly exposed to secondhand smoke.

The report, The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke, finds that even brief secondhand smoke exposure can cause immediate harm. The report says the only way to protect nonsmokers from the dangerous chemicals in secondhand smoke is to eliminate smoking indoors.

“The report is a crucial warning sign to nonsmokers and smokers alike,” HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt said. "Smoking can sicken and kill, and even people who do not smoke can be harmed by smoke from those who do.”

Secondhand smoke exposure can cause heart disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and is a known cause of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), respiratory problems, ear infections, and asthma attacks in infants and children, the report finds.

“The health effects of secondhand smoke exposure are more pervasive than we previously thought,” said Surgeon General Carmona, vice admiral of the U.S. Public Health Service. “The scientific evidence is now indisputable: secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance. It is a serious health hazard that can lead to disease and premature death in children and nonsmoking adults.” Secondhand smoke contains more than 50 cancer-causing chemicals, and is itself a known human carcinogen. Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke inhale many of the same toxins as smokers. Even brief exposure to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and increases risk for heart disease and lung cancer, the report says. In addition, the report notes that because the bodies of infants and children are still developing, they are especially vulnerable to the poisons in secondhand smoke.

“The good news is that, unlike some public health hazards, secondhand smoke exposure is easily prevented,” Surgeon General Carmona said. “Smoke-free indoor environments are proven, simple approaches that prevent exposure and harm.” The report finds that even the most sophisticated ventilation systems cannot completely eliminate secondhand smoke exposure and that only smoke-free environments afford full protection.

Surgeon General Carmona noted that levels of cotinine -- a biological marker for secondhand smoke exposure -- measured in nonsmokers have fallen by 70 percent since the late 1980s, and the proportion of nonsmokers with detectable cotinine levels has been halved from 88 percent in 1988-91 to 43 percent in 2001-02.

“Our progress over the past 20 years in clearing the air of tobacco smoke is a major public health success story,” Surgeon General Carmona said. “We have averted many thousands of cases of disease and early death and saved millions of dollars in health care costs.” He emphasized, however, that sustained efforts are required to protect the more than 126 million Americans who continue to be regularly exposed to secondhand smoke in the home, at work, and in enclosed public spaces.

To help communicate the report findings as widely as possible, the Surgeon General unveiled an easy-to-read guide with practical information on the dangers of secondhand smoke and steps people can take to protect themselves.
---------------------------------

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Surgeon General Carmona noted that levels of cotinine -- a biological marker for secondhand smoke exposure -- measured in nonsmokers have fallen by 70 percent since the late 1980s, and the proportion of nonsmokers with detectable cotinine levels has been halved from 88 percent in 1988-91 to 43 percent in 2001-02.

“Our progress over the past 20 years in clearing the air of tobacco smoke is a major public health success story,” Surgeon General Carmona said. “We have averted many thousands of cases of disease and early death and saved millions of dollars in health care costs.” He emphasized, however, that sustained efforts are required to protect the more than 126 million Americans who continue to be regularly exposed to secondhand smoke in the home, at work, and in enclosed public spaces.

I look forward to seeing studies that confirm the "success story" declared above.

[speedy 0]

Quote

One of the things that isn't very well known is that, in many ways, passive smoking is much more dangerous than regular smoking, in the sense that, when you inhale a cigarette, it's hot and uncomfortable, and makes you cough. When you're breathing in passive smoke, there isn't the same acute reaction. And so you, in fact, inhale more deeply.

That is the biggest load of codswallop I have ever heard. Obviously Dr. Derek Raghaven is not a smoker.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

One of the things that isn't very well known is that, in many ways, passive smoking is much more dangerous than regular smoking, in the sense that, when you inhale a cigarette, it's hot and uncomfortable, and makes you cough. When you're breathing in passive smoke, there isn't the same acute reaction. And so you, in fact, inhale more deeply.

That is the biggest load of codswallop I have ever heard. Obviously Dr. Derek Raghaven is not a smoker.

Aint' *that* the truth!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

when you inhale a cigarette, it's hot and uncomfortable, and makes you cough. When you're breathing in passive smoke, there isn't the same acute reaction. And so you, in fact, inhale more deeply.

That is the biggest load of codswallop I have ever heard.

Aint' *that* the truth!

yup, 2nd hand is still gross and you still get uncomfortable and cough when it gets in you space

I don't see the smokers uncomfortable or coughing at all - just blowing their shit and leaving the butts all over the place (and them claiming - "yeah, but I use the ashtray and NEVER throw the butts out the window")

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

Quote

In another thread you said:

>Open depbate is not encouraged with one side labeling the other with devicive names.

Your last post:

>Black helocopters and tin foil hats are the call for the day...........

You go Rush!

You think that is related huh......

There is a difference (at least in my mind) between calling names and catorgizing and pointing out that someone is constantly pointing to wild conspiracies don't you think?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

There is a difference (at least in my mind) between calling names and catorgizing and pointing out that someone is constantly pointing to wild conspiracies don't you think?

How does "stuck on stupid" fit into that? Is that name calling or just pointing something out?

[rushmc 23]

You don't see the irony in the complete sig line??

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Most scientists agree that it will.

Here is that bullshit blanket statment again.

Nice

Running the risk of a repost:


Senators to Exxon: Stop the Denial
Democrats and Republicans Say Stop Funding Global Warming Doubters
By CLAYTON SANDELL

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27, 2006 — - ExxonMobil should stop funding groups that have spread the idea that global warming is a myth and that try to influence policymakers to adopt that view, two senators said today in a letter to the oil company.

In their letter to ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Rex Tillerson, Sens. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, and Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., appealed to Exxon's sense of corporate responsibility, asking the company to "come clean about its past denial activities."

The two senators called on ExxonMobil to "end any further financial assistance" to groups "whose public advocacy has contributed to the small but unfortunately effective climate change denial myth."

Phone calls to ExxonMobil were not immediately returned to ABC News.

An upcoming study from the Union of Concerned Scientists reported that ExxonMobil funded 29 climate change denial groups in 2004 alone. Since 1990, the report said, the company has spent more than $19 million funding groups that promote their views through publications and Web sites that are not peer reviewed by the scientific community.

The senators singled out the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank, and the Tech Central Station Web site as beneficiaries of Exxon's efforts to sow doubt within the public about the scientific consensus behind global warming.

"We are convinced that ExxonMobil's long-standing support of a small cadre of global climate change skeptics, and those skeptics' access to and influence on government policymakers, have made it increasingly difficult for the United States to demonstrate the moral clarity it needs across all facets of its diplomacy," the letter said.

The letter said ExxonMobil's efforts to confuse haven't worked everywhere.

"It has failed miserably in confusing, much less convincing, the legitimate scientific community," the senators wrote.

The letter comes as dozens of major U.S. companies, including Wal-Mart, Citigroup and GE -- get set to gather in New York next week for the Corporate Climate Response conference. The conference provides a forum for companies to discuss their efforts to address global warming, a topic getting increased attention in boardrooms across the United States.

This week, investment bank Morgan Stanley announced it would invest $3 billion in carbon emission credits and other projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions over the next five years.

And last month, British mogul Richard Branson pledged $3 billion over 10 years -- profits from his airline and train companies -- to invest in energy sources that do not contribute to global warming.

Copyright © 2006 ABC News Internet Ventures

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/print?id=2612021

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Phone calls to ExxonMobil were not immediately returned to ABC News.

I expect they couldn't pay their phone bill.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

Hey, I get it I get it. Only the ideas put forth or supported by companies that oppose yours are corrupt and paid off.

Enough already.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Hey, I get it I get it. Only the ideas put forth or supported by companies that oppose yours are corrupt and paid off.

Enough already.....

I prefer to quote scientific conclusions that run the peer review gauntlet, not those which simply get approval from the marketing team. Call me kooky that way.

[billvon 3,119]

Update on the termite issue:

Good article in a recent SciAm about the various contributions to overall methane concentrations in the atmosphere, pre- and post-industrial civilization. (Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas.) Breakdown looks like: (all in MMT)

Preindustrial: 233 total

Wetlands 168
Biomass burning 20 (forest fires etc)
Termites 20
Ocean 15
Hydrate release 10


Postindustrial: 600 total

Wetlands 225 (including rice cultivation)
Ruminants 115 (domestic cattle)
Energy production 110 (i.e. leaks from oil wells)
Landfills 40
Waste treatment 25 (anaerobic treatement of wastes)
Biomass burning 40
Termites 20
Ocean 15
Hydrates 10

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

scientific conclusions that run the peer review gauntlet, not those which simply get approval from the marketing team. Call me kooky that way.

But, when you can get BOTH the review and the marketting approval - YEEEHAWWW, open up the research coffers

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gravitymaster 0]

“The Weather Channel” Mess
January 18, 2007, 5:45 pm | James Spann | Op/Ed

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:

*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.

If you don’t like to listen to me, find another meteorologist with no tie to grant money for research on the subject. I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue.

In fact, I encourage you to listen to WeatherBrains episode number 12, featuring Alabama State Climatologist John Christy, and WeatherBrains episode number 17, featuring Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University, one of the most brilliant minds in our science.

WeatherBrains, by the way, is our weekly 30 minute netcast.

I have nothing against “The Weather Channel”, but they have crossed the line into a political and cultural region where I simply won’t go.

http://www.jamesspann.com/wordpress/?p=650


-

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

Or respect for opposing positions.

One can appreciate your cynicism about the methods and motivations and hyposcrisy of some of your typical activists.

Still, it's one "expert" and not the entire establishment

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Well, well. Some “climate expert” on “The Weather Channel” wants to take away AMS certification from those of us who believe the recent “global warming” is a natural process. So much for “tolerance”, huh?

Or respect for opposing positions.

One can appreciate your cynicism about the methods and motivations and hyposcrisy of some of your typical activists.

Still, it's one "expert" and not the entire establishment

I still wonder about this alleged vault of money for research on global warming, and who is providing it.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

I still wonder about this alleged vault of money for research on global warming, and who is providing it.

Perhaps it was a metaphor.

[Remster 30]

Quote

Perhaps it was a metaphor.

Wow... Nice cop out. Almost as easy as saying stats provided are done so without knowing if they are true...

Remster

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Perhaps it was a metaphor.

Wow... Nice cop out. Almost as easy as saying stats provided are done so without knowing if they are true...

I expect the Right's next scapegoat for unexpected hurricanes (Europe) and blizzards (California, Texas) will be Ming the Merciless.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,150]

***"I would not listen to anyone that is a politician, a journalist, or someone in science who is generating revenue from this issue."


Sounds like he listens to those funded by Exxon.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[speedy 0]

Quote

unexpected hurricanes (Europe)

The last one we had was far from unexpected. The only unexpected part about the event was that the weather forecast was actually right.

Interesting how the Germans called it a hurricane and the British called the winds gales. We had a lot of days with gales when I was a kid living in England. That was at the time of the global cooling scare.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

unexpected hurricanes (Europe)

The last one we had was far from unexpected. The only unexpected part about the event was that the weather forecast was actually right.

Interesting how the Germans called it a hurricane and the British called the winds gales. We had a lot of days with gales when I was a kid living in England. That was at the time of the global cooling scare.

Hurricanes are unexpected in northern Europe. That one was forecast and happened does not mean that, climatologically, hurricanes are expected.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[speedy 0]

Quote

Hurricanes are unexpected in northern Europe.

Hurricanes, Gales, call em what you will , but 70 mph gusts are not that rare in northern europe.

Of course if you shove a T.V. crew on top of a mountian you might be able to show some gusts that are a tad higher. But from where I was sitting, apparently in one of the worst hit areas, it did not seem anything like what happened in New Orleans. On the contrary, it seemed like a bog standard windy day in lancashire, north west England.

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl