Tobacco.org

EPA Proposes New Cancer Risk Guidelines 

The guidelines, when made final after a review by the Environmental Protection Agency's science advisory board, would dramatically alter current agency policy, which assumes cancer risks to a fetus or an infant are no greater than for a similarly exposed adult.

For the time being, the increased scrutiny would be limited to assessing a group of chemicals that damage a person's genes by causing them to mutate so that cancer may form more easily later in life. . .

These findings were based mainly on animal studies involving five mutagenic compounds and from data collected in studies of survivors of atomic bomb blasts in Japan at the end of World War II, said James Cogliano, an EPA scientist.

Most of the chemicals that were studied involve industrial applications, ones to which infants would not likely be easily exposed, said Farland.

Still, one of them, benzopyrene, is a carcinogen found in cigarette smoke and auto exhausts [This graph only]

Jump to full article »

ARMENTRANO: The Second-Hand Smoke Charade 

It now turns out that the influential 1993 EPA report "Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders" was as phony as a three-dollar bill. State officials and private businesses that believed that ETS was a public health danger (and not just a nuisance) were completely misled by the EPA. And, of course, so was main street American public opinion.

Are those the views of a vast right-wing conspiracy? Hardly. They are the sober conclusions of a gutsy federal district court judge in North Carolina named William Osteen, whose recent ruling invalidated the very foundation of the EPA report. . .

You don't have to be a fan of smoking to agree that the EPA is a regulatory renegade spinning wildly out of control on this issue. Even several veteran career employees of the agency have gone public recently to protest its "junk science" and its irrational environmental zealotry. Congress should pull the plug on any EPA regulation that cannot be justified by evidence that is demonstrable, compelling, unequivocal and significant. None yet exists with respect to passive smoking.

Jump to full article »

EPA Issues Second Report On Trends In Protecting Children's Health 

The "America's Children and the Environment" report contains good news for children including the continued decline in the number of children with elevated blood lead levels and a reduction in children's exposure to secondhand smoke. Despite these findings, issues of concern remain. . .

* There has been a decrease in the children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, as indicated through direct measurements of markers for exposure in children's blood and through surveys of smoking habits in children's homes.

Jump to full article »

Smoke and Mirrors: The EPA's Flawed Study of Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer 

Gary L. Huber is a professor of medicine at University of Texas Health Center in Tyler, Texas.

Robert E. Brockie is at the Presbyterian and Doctors Hospital in Dallas, Texas.

Vijay K. Mahajan is a professor of medicine at St. Vincent's Hospital in Toledo, Ohio.

Jump to full article »

US Kids Less Exposed to Lead, Second-Hand Smoke 

A new nationwide report released Monday reveals that children in the US are now exposed to less lead and second-hand smoke than in years past, but remain plagued by asthma and in danger of exposure to toxins in the womb.

About 8% of women of reproductive age have potentially dangerous levels of mercury in their bodies, according to the report published by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The report is the second by the agency to track trends in environmental factors that can influence the health of children.

EPA Administrator Christie Whitman said in a statement that the findings of the current report will help tailor the agency's efforts to meet the most crucial health needs of the nation's children.

Jump to full article »

Lead and secondhand smoke risk for children drops, but asthma doubles 

Far fewer children are showing high levels of lead in their blood or the effects of secondhand smoke, a government report has found -- but childhood asthma rates are doubling.

The Environmental Protection Agency report published Monday also found that one of every dozen women of childbearing age has blood mercury levels that could hinder brain development in a fetus.

The EPA report is the agency's second comprehensive look at the environmental hazards to children's health.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco group can't quash EPA report 

In what it called a case raising "substantial" questions about a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report on secondhand cigarette smoke, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 11 held that the agency's issuance of the report, which labeled the smoke a carcinogen, was not a final, court-reviewable, action.

As a result, the 4th Circuit concluded that a North Carolina federal court erred when it vacated the parts of the report containing that finding. . .

As part of its two-pronged analysis, the court held that to be final and reviewable, the agency action must be one "from which legal consequences will flow." The court held that the EPA's report created no legal rights or obligations and had no direct regulatory effect on the tobacco interests. Gregory Foote, the senior EPA attorney on the case, agreed: "The test under finality law requires a direct legal impact, not just a real-world impact."

Jump to full article »

Philip Morris pulls out of secondhand-smoke case 

"While we believe that the issues raised in the case continue to be important, we do not believe that continued litigation is the best approach to pursue at this time," said Tom Ryan, a Philip Morris spokesman. . .

The report has no legal or regulatory effect, but anti-tobacco groups have used it to support their calls for stricter laws against public smoking. . .

Edward L. Sweda, senior attorney for the Tobacco Products Liability Project at Northeastern University, said he is not surprised that Philip Morris decided against taking the case to the Supreme Court.

"They filed this lawsuit not to get compensation for a real grievance . . . but to use smoke and mirrors to confuse the public about how dangerous secondhand smoke is, and to delay additional regulation," Sweda said.

Jump to full article »

• Philip Morris says it won't appeal ruling on EPA secondhand smoke report 

Philip Morris Cos. Inc. will not appeal a federal court ruling that let stand a 1993 Environmental Protection Agency report that said secondhand smoke causes cancer.

A spokesman for the nation's largest cigarette company said Tuesday the company has decided not to appeal a recent ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond.

A three-judge panel of the appeals court ruled unanimously Dec. 11 that the EPA report on secondhand smoke was not a final agency action subject to court review. . .

Tom Ryan, a spokesman for the New York-based company, said Philip Morris ''has decided that continued litigation is not the best course to pursue at this time.'' . .

Ryan noted that the court's decision ''was based on the limited legal question of whether the courts have the power to review an agency finding,'' and did not address the actual content of the report.

Jump to full article »

Tobacco Smoke is an Agravating Trigger [Source: HealthNewsDigest.com] 

For the nation's 17 million asthma sufferer's, tobacco smoke is a particularly aggravating trigger that can worsen asthma symptoms. That's why the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology suggest people who have asthma, or whose children have asthma, add "stop smoking" to the top of their list of New Year's resolutions.

"Tobacco smoke is one of the worst triggers of asthma symptoms. If you are a smoker and have asthma, you must quit as soon as possible." said Andrew Weinstein, MD, FAAAAI, and Chair of the AAAAI's Quality of Care for Asthma Committee. "If someone in your family has asthma, it is vital that you make strides to maintain a smoke free home at all times." . .

The AAAAI and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have come together to increase awareness about the dangers of second hand smoke through the Smoke Free Home Campaign.

Jump to full article »

Second-hand tobacco smoke ruling overturned 

The federal appeals court in Richmond yesterday reversed a lower court that invalidated the 1993 EPA report saying second-hand tobacco smoke causes cancer. . .

Philip Morris spokesman Brendan McCormick said last night the company had made no decision on a next move. But he said the reason Philip Morris is still involved in the appeal is because requiring government agencies to follow proper procedures is important.

Currently, he said, the company advises people to follow the advice of public health officials when it comes to the second-hand tobacco smoke issue.

Jump to full article »

Federal Court Ruling Upholding EPA Finding that Secondhand Smoke is a Carcinogen Is a Triumph of Public Health Over Big Tobacco's Special Interests 

Yesterday's unanimous decision by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold a 1993 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report on the dangers of secondhand smoke is a triumph of sound science and public health over the special interests of the tobacco industry. The ruling decisively affirms the EPA's authority to make scientific judgments and issue them without political, legal, or industry interference. The same science that led EPA to conclude that secondhand tobacco smoke is a carcinogen responsible for more than 3,000 lung cancer deaths a year should spur local and state governments to protect the public's right to breathe clean air by enacting comprehensive smoke-free policies in all indoor workplaces. . .

Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence about the health hazards posed by secondhand smoke, the tobacco industry has aggressively sought to discredit this science and opposed smoke-free policies across the country. If the tobacco companies are serious about wanting to reduce the harm caused by smoking, they should immediately stop these efforts, including dropping any appeals to the ruling in the EPA case. Philip Morris last month spent millions of dollars to place an insert in major metropolitan newspapers that, among other things, states, "The public should be guided by the conclusions of public health officials regarding the health effects of secondhand smoke." Philip Morris and the other tobacco companies should stop challenging these conclusions.

Jump to full article »

MISTAKEN RULING, UNMISTAKABLE FACTS 

Tobacco Control advocates and plaintiffs attorneys need to keep in mind that 1) the EPA's risk assessment for respiratory illnesses in children remains intact; 2) Judge Osteen vacated the EPA's classification of secondhand smoke as a Known Human (Group A) Carcinogen for reasons that are now the subject of heated debate and will, in all likelihood, form the basis for the EPA's appeal of Osteen's decision; 3) many analysts believe that Osteen, a former lobbyist for tobacco farmers, should have recused himself from the case; 4) many analysts also contend that Osteen may have overstepped his bounds in substituting his scientific judgment for that of the EPA; 5) many commentators assert that the science behind the EPA's report is solid (in stark contrast to the obviously-biased research on secondhand smoke funded by the tobacco industry); 6) scores of other studies confirm the EPA's findings; 7) Osteen's ruling does not affect the validity of state and local clean indoor air laws; and 8) in another case a federal judge in New York recently declared that, "[I]t is beyond dispute that second-hand smoke is a carcinogen."

Jump to full article »

Second-hand Smoke Ruling Overturned 

The federal appeals court in Richmond today reversed a lower court that invalidated the 1993 EPA report saying second-hand tobacco smoke causes cancer.

But the three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that made today's ruling in the long-running case gave the Big Tobacco plaintiffs 30 days to file an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Paul Kamenar, senior executive counsel for the Washington Legal Foundation, which filed a brief on the side of the tobacco companies, said the opinion finds that the EPA report was not the type of government agency action that any court can review.

Other agencies have imposed restrictions on indoor smoking based in part on the report, Kamenar said, but "the report itself does not impose any legal obligations on anyone." If it did, the courts might have standing to review it in a legal action.

"I think the decision is erroneous," said Kamenar, "and I don't know why it took 3 years to render a decision." . .

Judge William L. Osteen of the Middle District of North Carolina ruled that the EPA had violated the Radon Act requirements, chiefly by not having a tobacco-industry representative on an advisory committee during the report process. The court vacated six chapters and the appendices to the report.

EPA appealed. The case was argued before the panel in June 1999.

Jump to full article »

Secondhand-Smoke Challenge Rejected 

A federal appeals court threw out the tobacco industry's lawsuit challenging the landmark 1993 government finding that secondhand tobacco smoke increases the risk of cancer.

The U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency's report on secondhand smoke was not subject to court review because it was advisory and not a final agency action.

The tobacco companies are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Jump to full article »